By far, the big story so far at the Australian Open has got to be Jelena Dokic. Yes, she screwed up my draw a bit, but what a story! At the risk of going all Afterschool-Special here, it really is unfortunate that a father could take total advantage of his kid's talent and status to completely derail her career and make her hate the thing she should love doing. But big props to Jelena. For her to win her first round match against Tamira Paszek, who's an up-and-comer, is a bit more than what most would have expected (which would be nothing). To follow that up with beating Anna Chakvetadze is just cake. It would be great to see Dokic have another semifinal run, to overcome all the family angst to start over and be rewarded. Next up for her is Caroline Wozniacki. Should be interesting ...
The magician strikes again: First Phil Kohlschreiber beats Sam Querrey. Then Fabrice Santoro beats Kohlschreiber. The old man's still got it, I guess. He's going to need some more of "it" for his next match, against Andy Roddick. Last time those two played, I seem to remember Santoro nearly in tears because he thought Roddick was trying to kill him with his hard serves. Well, two rounds ain't bad ...
Oh, yeah, and David Nalbandian. You know, being a fan of Nalbandian is like being a woman with a boyfriend who keeps acting up, and you swear him off. Then he comes back with flowers and promises to do better, and you take him back. He cleans up after himself, stops flirting, wins a couple tournaments, whatever. Then he's back to his old loser self, and the cycle begins ... again and again and again. Sheesh. Would it kill Nalbandian to show some consistency?
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Thursday, January 15, 2009
The Aussie Open preview
Let's do this!
MEN:
1. Rafael Nadal: Very suspect preparation for this tournament (three matches), especially considering that he ended '08 with an injury. The draw won't be altogether helpful if he's feeling any rust. There's Dmitry Tursunov, Richard Gasquet -- and the guy who just beat Nadal a week or so ago, Gael Monfils. However, Nadal is basically awesome. There is that factor.
2. Roger Federer: Here's something I didn't know: Apparently, having previously been world No. 1 gives you the ability the determine who can win a major. Federer seems amazed that anyone would pick Andy Murray as the favorite. There seems some hesitance on his part to let Murray into the club. Could he be a bit touchy about his own tenuous membership of that club?
Federer, of course, is always a strong competitor. He saved his season last year by winning the U.S. Open, but he comes to Australia still with a lot to prove. He mainly needs to prove he can hang with everyone else in the club. The ones will full privileges, that is. Such as Novak Djokovic, who he might face in the semifinals. If he's not careful, Fed's going to have to count all the way to three to get to his ranking come French Open time. (Which would be just what he needs for that tournament.)
3. Novak Djokovic: The reigning champion seems to have been rewarded with a sweet draw. Looks like the second best player in his quarter would be David Nalbandian. To defend his title, though, he'd probably have to beat Federer in the semifinals. As we discussed, Fed might have a slight chip on his shoulder. Plus, no mono.
4. Andy Murray: I wish Murray would lose again in the first round of this tournament. Because that would mean you'd have to lose to Andrei Pavel. Pavel's no slouch, but he's not really Jo-Jo Tsonga, either. It'd be hard for Murray not to find some confidence in his 2008, even though it took some time for him to warm up.
You know, George W. Bush once said, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice ... eh, heh, heh ... y'can't fool me twice!" Wise words indeed. I only mention this because I chose Murray to make the semis last year, and this year, I've gone a bit further. Read on.
5. Jo-Jo Tsonga: Tsonga might return to the site of his coming-out party with confidence, but his draw wouldn't be an easy one. He could meet Murray in the quarters this time. Or he might not show up. Looks like he's tweaked his back and is unsure about playing. It'd be a shame if he couldn't compete.
6. Gilles Simon: Is that right? Ranked sixth at a Slam?? Seriously, Simon's got a great game. He's like a backboard for the most part, but he has the ability to change the direction and add some pace. He deserves his ranking, but he sure doesn't deserve having to play consistent wild card Ivo Karlovic in the third round. Or Monfils in the fourth round. Or Nadal in the quarters. Crikey.
7. Andy Roddick: God bless Andy Roddick for keeping the hope alive, but this is about where he belongs in the rankings right now. This might actually be a bit kind. After all, if Nikolay Davydenko were here (out with injury), he'd be eighth. Whatever. In filling out the draw, I hesitated when I got to Roddick v. Querrey. And again with Roddick v. Nalbandian. In a nutshell, I'm not holding out much hope for Roddick to meet Djokovic in the quarterfinals.
8. Juan Martin del Potro: Del Potro was on a roll last summer, and even into the fall, where he was widely expected to take Argentina past Spain. We all know by now that didn't work out. It'll be interesting to see if he can get back on the horse. A rematch with Feliciano Lopez in the third round might be the motivation he needs.
9. James Blake: Ernests Gulbis in round three. This would be a good time for Blake to beat Gulbis for the first time, and I suppose anything could happen. Sure. James Blake could win the Australian Open. And Andy Roddick could win the French. I could quit my job to become the tooth fairy. See where I'm going here?
10. David Nalbandian: Well, it's only January, so it's hard to know what to expect from Nalbandian. Doesn't seem like he really gets going until somewhere around September (after the Open), but if he was on his game, he could handle his draw until Djokovic in the quarters.
The stragglers:
Gael Monfils (12): Nice win against Nadal this month. Make it happen in a major.
The Fernandos (13 and 14): Pretty boy Lopez and F. Verdasco should still be riding high after their Davis Cup win. Lopez in particular was impressive then, coming up with the big win against del Potro and in doubles. Verdasco, who is not exactly known for his consistency, finished off Jose Acasuso. Who knows?
Marat Safin (26): For old times sake. And because he allegedly shows up to a tournament with his pretty face bruised from a fight. Sounds like a hell of a story to bring to a tournament, but not really boding well for someone already talking retirement. Will he make it to Wimbledon? The French? Yeah, if someone doesn't piss him off, I guess.
I can't believe they're still seeded!
Rainer Schuettler (30): Kicking it old school. Emphasis on old.
First round matches to watch:
Lleyton Hewitt v. Fernando Gonzalez: Here's my question: What good is it to be a home boy like Hewitt only to get a draw like this? Good luck, Lleyton.
The way it'll go down:
Quarterfinals: Nadal v. Monfils, Murray v. Gulbis, Nalbandian v. Djokovic and del Potro v. Federer
Semifinals: Nadal v. Murray, Djokovic v. Federer
Final: Murray v. Djokovic
He is the champion, my friend!: Andy Murray. Prize money should be just enough for those braces.
WOMEN:
1. Jelena Jankovic: I've decided that Jankovic deserves to be number one -- in a way. She's played more than the other top contenders, and manages to stay fairly consistent. Realistically, though, if she wants a Slam and wants to stay numero uno, she's gonna have to ease off on that frenetic schedule.
As far as that other, small matter of winning her first major title, Jankovic can work with this draw. Nathalie Dechy and "Candy" Bartoli will be good warmup matches. The quarters could bring Vera Zvonareva and Dinara Safina in the semis.
2. Serena Williams: Well, we all know Serena's general policy about dominance -- "Never say No. 2!" Unless she's adressing a baby. Along with wanting to be No. 1, she also has what looks to be an easy draw .... that could suddenly become a brick wall in the form of her sister.
3. Dinara Safina: Here's one thing that can happen that will automatically make women's tennis more interesting. Dinara Safina could start to believe in herself. Last year, it was understandable that she blinked in the French finals. And in the U.S. Open semis. 6-3, 6-2 in a semifinal of a Grand Slam? Blinked. More like trying to play tennis with your hands around your throat.
Regardless, it'd sure be nice to see Safina live up to her potential. She certainly has the ability to advance to the semifinals and beat Jankovic. But will she?
4. Elena Dementieva: For all the jokes made here at TWA at Dementieva's expense, let's show some appreciation (so we can get back to the slow-serve jokes) for how she makes the most of what she has. Not that she doesn't have a lot. Some of the most solid groundstrokes in women's tennis, and the ability to make things tough for those in the top 10, regardless of where she's ranked. She could face Venus Williams in the quarters, and give her a tough match. And if she loses, at least we'll all have her post-match conference to look forward to, where she waxes philosphically about the Williams sisters fixing their face-offs.
5. Ana Ivanovic: Toss-up. After winning the French last year, she was waylaid by a thumb injury, which appeared to wreck her confidence. She managed to win a title at the end of the season to end on a positive-ish note. Having said that, she could draw Caroline Wozniacki in the fourth round. That'd be the same Wozniacki (is there another one?) who almost beat Serena Williams last week. Then maybe Safina in the quarters, and Jankovic in the semis. It just depends on the state of her game.
6. Venus Williams: I'm not really a morning person. I start really waking up starting at around noon. By three, four o'clock, I'm on fire. You sort of get the same idea about Venus in the scope of the yearlong schedule. She generally poops out in the early tournaments of the year, but by Wimbledon, she's kickin' butt. She did end the '08 season on a roll, and it could help her that the offseason's only about 18 minutes. She should be able to take advantage in a draw that includes Flavia Pennetta, Patty Schnyder and Dementieva. Looming in the semifinals would be her very own sister, and their latest matches have been hard-fought, high-quality battles.
7. Vera Zvonareva: So, the last time anyone questioned whether Zvonareva belonged in the top 10, it was the year-end championships in November. She beat everyone there except Venus. Lesson: Don't mess with VERA! Anyway, she's the player with the hottest streak in her quarter of the draw. She's taken down some big names at majors, including Venus in '03. But if she doesn't want to be discounted again, she might want to update that Slam resume.
8. Svetlana Kuznetsova: Yikes. How can someone like Kuznetsova have so much game with such an unsteady hand? To be fair, a lot of people would have been glad to have had the year she had in '08 -- fairly consistent appearances in late stages in tournaments, but with no titles. But those people probably don't have her bag of tricks, either. Being in the same quarter with Aggie Radwanska and Serena Willliams isn't really going to help her confidence problems.
9. Aggie Radwanska: I believe this is only Radwanska's second appearance in the top 10 for a major, and she's been rewarded nicely for it. The biggest obstacle for her (before the quarters) is the aforementioned Kuznetsova. Her issue is that she can easily overpowered, so basically, to win a major, she needs some face time with a hamburger.
10. Nadia Petrova: With Petrova, I always wonder 'What if?' What if she hadn't gotten injured before the French Open in 2005, where she was the huge favorite going in? Would she have gotten her first major and run with that confidence for years? Well, all we know now is she'll have a heck of a time getting past Zvonareva in the fourth round.
The stragglers:
None worth mentioning. Now, of course, Daniela Hantuchova's going to make a semifinal run because I said that.
I can't believe they're still seeded!:
Kuznetsova: Although I guess you get points for being a bridesmaid and never a bride ...
Petrova
Marion Bartoli (16)
Amelie Mauresmo (20): This is what I mean about the wading pool that is women's tennis. Amelie Mauresmo made two semifinals last year. In one of them, she lost to Nathalie Dechy. Unh-huh. She's been struggling in mediocrity for ... well, since she won two majors. But ... she did beat Ivanovic last week. So who knows, right?
Having said that, I read a quote from Mauresmo a while back that really made me feel her pain. Last February, she admitted that: "I sometimes ask myself what the hell I am doing there, in front of half-empty stands."
And at the risk of going off on a rant (especially one I've been on before), that should never happen. With all the storylines and characters on women's tennis, they shouldn't be playing in mostly-empty stadiums. I'm not saying tennis could be as big as, say, football, but it deserves to attract a bigger audience than it does. "Gee, how do we get someone to watch two hard-hitting, history-making sisters play for a Grand Slam title? Hunh. I'm stumped."
Seriously.
OK, that was a rant. Back to the program.
First round matches to watch:
Sania Mirza v. Marta Domachowska
Hantuchova v. Casey Dellacqua: I'm thinking Dellacqua, actually.
Jelena Dokic v. Tamira Paszek: Talk about "Whatever happened to ..." Hopefully, Paszek won't beat her too badly.
The way it'll go down:
Quarters: Jankovic v. Zvonareva, Safina v. Wozniacki, Venus v. Dementieva, Radwanska v. Serena
Semifinals: Jankovic v. Safina, Venus v. Serena
Final: Jankovic v. Venus (I think)
She is the champion, my friend!: One of the above, although I'm giving Venus the edge on experience.
MEN:
1. Rafael Nadal: Very suspect preparation for this tournament (three matches), especially considering that he ended '08 with an injury. The draw won't be altogether helpful if he's feeling any rust. There's Dmitry Tursunov, Richard Gasquet -- and the guy who just beat Nadal a week or so ago, Gael Monfils. However, Nadal is basically awesome. There is that factor.
2. Roger Federer: Here's something I didn't know: Apparently, having previously been world No. 1 gives you the ability the determine who can win a major. Federer seems amazed that anyone would pick Andy Murray as the favorite. There seems some hesitance on his part to let Murray into the club. Could he be a bit touchy about his own tenuous membership of that club?
Federer, of course, is always a strong competitor. He saved his season last year by winning the U.S. Open, but he comes to Australia still with a lot to prove. He mainly needs to prove he can hang with everyone else in the club. The ones will full privileges, that is. Such as Novak Djokovic, who he might face in the semifinals. If he's not careful, Fed's going to have to count all the way to three to get to his ranking come French Open time. (Which would be just what he needs for that tournament.)
3. Novak Djokovic: The reigning champion seems to have been rewarded with a sweet draw. Looks like the second best player in his quarter would be David Nalbandian. To defend his title, though, he'd probably have to beat Federer in the semifinals. As we discussed, Fed might have a slight chip on his shoulder. Plus, no mono.
4. Andy Murray: I wish Murray would lose again in the first round of this tournament. Because that would mean you'd have to lose to Andrei Pavel. Pavel's no slouch, but he's not really Jo-Jo Tsonga, either. It'd be hard for Murray not to find some confidence in his 2008, even though it took some time for him to warm up.
You know, George W. Bush once said, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice ... eh, heh, heh ... y'can't fool me twice!" Wise words indeed. I only mention this because I chose Murray to make the semis last year, and this year, I've gone a bit further. Read on.
5. Jo-Jo Tsonga: Tsonga might return to the site of his coming-out party with confidence, but his draw wouldn't be an easy one. He could meet Murray in the quarters this time. Or he might not show up. Looks like he's tweaked his back and is unsure about playing. It'd be a shame if he couldn't compete.
6. Gilles Simon: Is that right? Ranked sixth at a Slam?? Seriously, Simon's got a great game. He's like a backboard for the most part, but he has the ability to change the direction and add some pace. He deserves his ranking, but he sure doesn't deserve having to play consistent wild card Ivo Karlovic in the third round. Or Monfils in the fourth round. Or Nadal in the quarters. Crikey.
7. Andy Roddick: God bless Andy Roddick for keeping the hope alive, but this is about where he belongs in the rankings right now. This might actually be a bit kind. After all, if Nikolay Davydenko were here (out with injury), he'd be eighth. Whatever. In filling out the draw, I hesitated when I got to Roddick v. Querrey. And again with Roddick v. Nalbandian. In a nutshell, I'm not holding out much hope for Roddick to meet Djokovic in the quarterfinals.
8. Juan Martin del Potro: Del Potro was on a roll last summer, and even into the fall, where he was widely expected to take Argentina past Spain. We all know by now that didn't work out. It'll be interesting to see if he can get back on the horse. A rematch with Feliciano Lopez in the third round might be the motivation he needs.
9. James Blake: Ernests Gulbis in round three. This would be a good time for Blake to beat Gulbis for the first time, and I suppose anything could happen. Sure. James Blake could win the Australian Open. And Andy Roddick could win the French. I could quit my job to become the tooth fairy. See where I'm going here?
10. David Nalbandian: Well, it's only January, so it's hard to know what to expect from Nalbandian. Doesn't seem like he really gets going until somewhere around September (after the Open), but if he was on his game, he could handle his draw until Djokovic in the quarters.
The stragglers:
Gael Monfils (12): Nice win against Nadal this month. Make it happen in a major.
The Fernandos (13 and 14): Pretty boy Lopez and F. Verdasco should still be riding high after their Davis Cup win. Lopez in particular was impressive then, coming up with the big win against del Potro and in doubles. Verdasco, who is not exactly known for his consistency, finished off Jose Acasuso. Who knows?
Marat Safin (26): For old times sake. And because he allegedly shows up to a tournament with his pretty face bruised from a fight. Sounds like a hell of a story to bring to a tournament, but not really boding well for someone already talking retirement. Will he make it to Wimbledon? The French? Yeah, if someone doesn't piss him off, I guess.
I can't believe they're still seeded!
Rainer Schuettler (30): Kicking it old school. Emphasis on old.
First round matches to watch:
Lleyton Hewitt v. Fernando Gonzalez: Here's my question: What good is it to be a home boy like Hewitt only to get a draw like this? Good luck, Lleyton.
The way it'll go down:
Quarterfinals: Nadal v. Monfils, Murray v. Gulbis, Nalbandian v. Djokovic and del Potro v. Federer
Semifinals: Nadal v. Murray, Djokovic v. Federer
Final: Murray v. Djokovic
He is the champion, my friend!: Andy Murray. Prize money should be just enough for those braces.
WOMEN:
1. Jelena Jankovic: I've decided that Jankovic deserves to be number one -- in a way. She's played more than the other top contenders, and manages to stay fairly consistent. Realistically, though, if she wants a Slam and wants to stay numero uno, she's gonna have to ease off on that frenetic schedule.
As far as that other, small matter of winning her first major title, Jankovic can work with this draw. Nathalie Dechy and "Candy" Bartoli will be good warmup matches. The quarters could bring Vera Zvonareva and Dinara Safina in the semis.
2. Serena Williams: Well, we all know Serena's general policy about dominance -- "Never say No. 2!" Unless she's adressing a baby. Along with wanting to be No. 1, she also has what looks to be an easy draw .... that could suddenly become a brick wall in the form of her sister.
3. Dinara Safina: Here's one thing that can happen that will automatically make women's tennis more interesting. Dinara Safina could start to believe in herself. Last year, it was understandable that she blinked in the French finals. And in the U.S. Open semis. 6-3, 6-2 in a semifinal of a Grand Slam? Blinked. More like trying to play tennis with your hands around your throat.
Regardless, it'd sure be nice to see Safina live up to her potential. She certainly has the ability to advance to the semifinals and beat Jankovic. But will she?
4. Elena Dementieva: For all the jokes made here at TWA at Dementieva's expense, let's show some appreciation (so we can get back to the slow-serve jokes) for how she makes the most of what she has. Not that she doesn't have a lot. Some of the most solid groundstrokes in women's tennis, and the ability to make things tough for those in the top 10, regardless of where she's ranked. She could face Venus Williams in the quarters, and give her a tough match. And if she loses, at least we'll all have her post-match conference to look forward to, where she waxes philosphically about the Williams sisters fixing their face-offs.
5. Ana Ivanovic: Toss-up. After winning the French last year, she was waylaid by a thumb injury, which appeared to wreck her confidence. She managed to win a title at the end of the season to end on a positive-ish note. Having said that, she could draw Caroline Wozniacki in the fourth round. That'd be the same Wozniacki (is there another one?) who almost beat Serena Williams last week. Then maybe Safina in the quarters, and Jankovic in the semis. It just depends on the state of her game.
6. Venus Williams: I'm not really a morning person. I start really waking up starting at around noon. By three, four o'clock, I'm on fire. You sort of get the same idea about Venus in the scope of the yearlong schedule. She generally poops out in the early tournaments of the year, but by Wimbledon, she's kickin' butt. She did end the '08 season on a roll, and it could help her that the offseason's only about 18 minutes. She should be able to take advantage in a draw that includes Flavia Pennetta, Patty Schnyder and Dementieva. Looming in the semifinals would be her very own sister, and their latest matches have been hard-fought, high-quality battles.
7. Vera Zvonareva: So, the last time anyone questioned whether Zvonareva belonged in the top 10, it was the year-end championships in November. She beat everyone there except Venus. Lesson: Don't mess with VERA! Anyway, she's the player with the hottest streak in her quarter of the draw. She's taken down some big names at majors, including Venus in '03. But if she doesn't want to be discounted again, she might want to update that Slam resume.
8. Svetlana Kuznetsova: Yikes. How can someone like Kuznetsova have so much game with such an unsteady hand? To be fair, a lot of people would have been glad to have had the year she had in '08 -- fairly consistent appearances in late stages in tournaments, but with no titles. But those people probably don't have her bag of tricks, either. Being in the same quarter with Aggie Radwanska and Serena Willliams isn't really going to help her confidence problems.
9. Aggie Radwanska: I believe this is only Radwanska's second appearance in the top 10 for a major, and she's been rewarded nicely for it. The biggest obstacle for her (before the quarters) is the aforementioned Kuznetsova. Her issue is that she can easily overpowered, so basically, to win a major, she needs some face time with a hamburger.
10. Nadia Petrova: With Petrova, I always wonder 'What if?' What if she hadn't gotten injured before the French Open in 2005, where she was the huge favorite going in? Would she have gotten her first major and run with that confidence for years? Well, all we know now is she'll have a heck of a time getting past Zvonareva in the fourth round.
The stragglers:
None worth mentioning. Now, of course, Daniela Hantuchova's going to make a semifinal run because I said that.
I can't believe they're still seeded!:
Kuznetsova: Although I guess you get points for being a bridesmaid and never a bride ...
Petrova
Marion Bartoli (16)
Amelie Mauresmo (20): This is what I mean about the wading pool that is women's tennis. Amelie Mauresmo made two semifinals last year. In one of them, she lost to Nathalie Dechy. Unh-huh. She's been struggling in mediocrity for ... well, since she won two majors. But ... she did beat Ivanovic last week. So who knows, right?
Having said that, I read a quote from Mauresmo a while back that really made me feel her pain. Last February, she admitted that: "I sometimes ask myself what the hell I am doing there, in front of half-empty stands."
And at the risk of going off on a rant (especially one I've been on before), that should never happen. With all the storylines and characters on women's tennis, they shouldn't be playing in mostly-empty stadiums. I'm not saying tennis could be as big as, say, football, but it deserves to attract a bigger audience than it does. "Gee, how do we get someone to watch two hard-hitting, history-making sisters play for a Grand Slam title? Hunh. I'm stumped."
Seriously.
OK, that was a rant. Back to the program.
First round matches to watch:
Sania Mirza v. Marta Domachowska
Hantuchova v. Casey Dellacqua: I'm thinking Dellacqua, actually.
Jelena Dokic v. Tamira Paszek: Talk about "Whatever happened to ..." Hopefully, Paszek won't beat her too badly.
The way it'll go down:
Quarters: Jankovic v. Zvonareva, Safina v. Wozniacki, Venus v. Dementieva, Radwanska v. Serena
Semifinals: Jankovic v. Safina, Venus v. Serena
Final: Jankovic v. Venus (I think)
She is the champion, my friend!: One of the above, although I'm giving Venus the edge on experience.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
TWA '09, or The dog ate my laptop
Happy New Year! A moment of silence, though, please, for my ill laptop, which has kept me from ringing in the year a tad sooner. Resolution: get a new computer without the old one finding out about it.
Anyway, let's get right to it. Let's talk sportsmanship.
cheat: the fraudulent obtaining of another's property by a pretense or trick (from Random House dictionary)
So, Serena Williams is playing a warm-up tournament in Sydney (which in itself is surprising) against Samantha Stosur, and she hits a serve that is clearly a net cord, but is not called. So Stosur returns it, and gets the point because the umpire is sleeping on the job. Williams ended up winning the match.
Fine, umpires make mistakes. But whatever happened to the old soccer mom adage? The one that goes something like "It doesn't matter if you win, it's how you play the game?" How does Sam Stosur take that point with no qualms? Just because it's a clear error by the umpire doesn't mean you act like you have to go with it, even when you know he's wrong. Last I checked, that was called cheating. I've seen pro matches on big stages when opponents overruled an obvious umpire error and awarding their opponents a point, or a new serve. Players are not bound to the call -- especially if they think it's wrong. So, a very firm shake of the finger to you, Sam Stosur. Grow up.
Moving on, just read that Maria Sharapova is out of the Australian Open. Boy, this just makes for an interesting start for the women's tour, doesn't it? Bleech.
Anyway, let's get right to it. Let's talk sportsmanship.
cheat: the fraudulent obtaining of another's property by a pretense or trick (from Random House dictionary)
So, Serena Williams is playing a warm-up tournament in Sydney (which in itself is surprising) against Samantha Stosur, and she hits a serve that is clearly a net cord, but is not called. So Stosur returns it, and gets the point because the umpire is sleeping on the job. Williams ended up winning the match.
Fine, umpires make mistakes. But whatever happened to the old soccer mom adage? The one that goes something like "It doesn't matter if you win, it's how you play the game?" How does Sam Stosur take that point with no qualms? Just because it's a clear error by the umpire doesn't mean you act like you have to go with it, even when you know he's wrong. Last I checked, that was called cheating. I've seen pro matches on big stages when opponents overruled an obvious umpire error and awarding their opponents a point, or a new serve. Players are not bound to the call -- especially if they think it's wrong. So, a very firm shake of the finger to you, Sam Stosur. Grow up.
Moving on, just read that Maria Sharapova is out of the Australian Open. Boy, this just makes for an interesting start for the women's tour, doesn't it? Bleech.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
As if on cue ...
So, last week, Lindsay Davenport was gearing up for the Aussie Open, and some of her fans (Vicki, Van and myself) were wondering what the eff she was thinking.
Today, nature intervened, and Davenport announced she was pulling out of the major with the ol' nine-month virus.
Whew! Talk about dodging a bullet. Look, the Australian Open wasn't going to turn out well for Davenport anyway, but 'lil Ringo will, in all likelihood, be just fine. Although he probably won't be lucky enough to get that name.
Today, nature intervened, and Davenport announced she was pulling out of the major with the ol' nine-month virus.
Whew! Talk about dodging a bullet. Look, the Australian Open wasn't going to turn out well for Davenport anyway, but 'lil Ringo will, in all likelihood, be just fine. Although he probably won't be lucky enough to get that name.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
What, does she get senior parking rates?
I'm at odds with myself over whether Lindsay Davenport's decision to enter the Aussie Open is good news. Here's the good, the great part: Davenport is still looking to pursue a professional and competitive tennis career at the ripe old age of 32 -- and as the mother of a toddler. Her intentions are inspiring, and if you've ever thought to yourself that it's too late -- for anything -- it certainly shouldn't have anything to do with your age. (As though 32 is old. But I'm sure it feels old for Davenport when she walks onto the court to play some 14-year-old hotshot.)
How-EVAH. Let's just be unflinchingly honest here. Lindsay Davenport would need to have gotten a speed transplant in the offseason to have a sniff at the Aussie Open third round. Or those Maria Sharapova-type draws. You can't play competitive tennis these days by hoping you hit enough winners that you don't have to rally. Even in the wading pool of women's tennis these days, Davenport hasn't made any major waves. Losing to Marion "Candy" Bartoli at the U.S. Open? Yikes.
Which begs the question: Is it enough (especially for a great champ like Lindsay) to just go out and give it the old university try? If you can't win, is it worth hitting the gym? It's one thing when you're coming up and getting better. When you're obviously on the downslope of your career, and you can't even stay in tournaments long enough to face the big players, it's another thing.
Seriously, I'm conflicted. Lindsay Davenport's return: Thumbs up or thumbs down?
How-EVAH. Let's just be unflinchingly honest here. Lindsay Davenport would need to have gotten a speed transplant in the offseason to have a sniff at the Aussie Open third round. Or those Maria Sharapova-type draws. You can't play competitive tennis these days by hoping you hit enough winners that you don't have to rally. Even in the wading pool of women's tennis these days, Davenport hasn't made any major waves. Losing to Marion "Candy" Bartoli at the U.S. Open? Yikes.
Which begs the question: Is it enough (especially for a great champ like Lindsay) to just go out and give it the old university try? If you can't win, is it worth hitting the gym? It's one thing when you're coming up and getting better. When you're obviously on the downslope of your career, and you can't even stay in tournaments long enough to face the big players, it's another thing.
Seriously, I'm conflicted. Lindsay Davenport's return: Thumbs up or thumbs down?
Thursday, December 04, 2008
Sneak peak
Roger Federer's 2009 schedule (which starts about six weeks after his 2008 season wrapped) includes two fewer clay court tournaments.
I know, I know ... what does it all mean? His agent says Fed's trying to cut down on all tournaments and peak for the important ones -- the majors. It stands to reason, too, that because he can't seal the deal at the French, he should be playing more clay matches. However, Fed's been to three straight French Open finals. He's lost to the same dominant clay-courter every time. (Although the 2008 whomping had to be demoralizing.)
The other way to look at this: Maybe he's put too much pressure on himself to win at Roland Garros. He is still playing the Masters clay tournaments, so he will get quality opponents -- just not as many matches.
So, does Federer need more clay court play to win the French? And another twist: If he loses it again this year, will he stop trying? I open the floor.
I know, I know ... what does it all mean? His agent says Fed's trying to cut down on all tournaments and peak for the important ones -- the majors. It stands to reason, too, that because he can't seal the deal at the French, he should be playing more clay matches. However, Fed's been to three straight French Open finals. He's lost to the same dominant clay-courter every time. (Although the 2008 whomping had to be demoralizing.)
The other way to look at this: Maybe he's put too much pressure on himself to win at Roland Garros. He is still playing the Masters clay tournaments, so he will get quality opponents -- just not as many matches.
So, does Federer need more clay court play to win the French? And another twist: If he loses it again this year, will he stop trying? I open the floor.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Davis Cup musings, or "Ohhhh-ohhhh-ohhhh"
For the most part, I am a purist, but today, the zoo in Argentina gave me a major revelation about tennis.
First off, wow! Great doubles between Argentina's Agustin Calleri and David Nalbandian and Spain's Feliciano Lopez and Fernando Verdasco! It's not often that you can squander a 5-1 lead in any set. Nope, that only happens when it counts, and you really want to win.
But this is where my revelation comes in, the second off. In the third set, when the Argentinians came back to force the tiebreaker, and were leading 5-1, something happened that seemed to change the course of the set. Someone in the crowd shouted out just as Nalbandian was serving -- and he double-faulted. After that, the Spaniards ran away with it, and set point was played with the crowd going berserk, banging drums, playing trombones, hitting whatever was around.
In theory, Davis Cup is a chance for teams to play for their country. I believe they even invite tennis fans to attend. And they do. With band accessories. Anyway, that's what makes Davis Cup great. (What makes Davis Cup suck is the way it's organized. But I digress. For today. With great hesitance.) Yet, the umpires are shushing the fans like they're in fifth grade again. Sorry, but isn't that what tennis is missing -- excitement? So my question is, "Why is tennis the last sport that needs to be played in utter silence?"
Answer: It doesn't. For the four thousandth time, tennis is 99.921842% mental. That means that if some drunk fans want to scream bloody murder during your service motion, that shouldn't mean you drop your serve. For those of us who don't play in clubs every week, how many times has a car alarm begun blaring during your tennis game? Or a kid started crying? Or a cell phone began ringing? Or a flock of seagulls took flight overhead? And how many times has your foursome just stopped playing until there was complete silence? (If you guys did, I am wagging a severely punishing finger at you right now. Shame.)
The point is, it's time to stop insisting on silence in order to play tennis. It's the last sport to hold on to such an archaic standard. Can you imagine a football game being played as long as the fans keep their pieholes full of beer and hot dogs? In fact, attempts at breaking concentration in football is a common strategy among coaches. How about trying to "ice" a kicker just before he kicks a key field goal? It's sport, people. Not tea and crumpets.
The great thing about not playing the silence game during tennis is that it becomes more of a crowd event, which is one thing tennis needs to gain traction. Note: tennis does not need to change the way it plays tiebreaks or the doubles game in order to gain traction. It needs the little things -- letting Andy Roddick throw his racket if he's a little irritated about that missed volley. We know that for Andy, there will be many.
Point is, this is a small factor that could change the culture of tennis -- for good. Watch the Davis Cup matches this weekend. There is excitement that you don't see in Grand Slams. That should be encouraged. And as for players, it's time they learned to play through fan noise, as Lopez and Verdasco did.
So, what do you think? What could possibly be the downfalls of letting fans be more of an active part of tennis?
First off, wow! Great doubles between Argentina's Agustin Calleri and David Nalbandian and Spain's Feliciano Lopez and Fernando Verdasco! It's not often that you can squander a 5-1 lead in any set. Nope, that only happens when it counts, and you really want to win.
But this is where my revelation comes in, the second off. In the third set, when the Argentinians came back to force the tiebreaker, and were leading 5-1, something happened that seemed to change the course of the set. Someone in the crowd shouted out just as Nalbandian was serving -- and he double-faulted. After that, the Spaniards ran away with it, and set point was played with the crowd going berserk, banging drums, playing trombones, hitting whatever was around.
In theory, Davis Cup is a chance for teams to play for their country. I believe they even invite tennis fans to attend. And they do. With band accessories. Anyway, that's what makes Davis Cup great. (What makes Davis Cup suck is the way it's organized. But I digress. For today. With great hesitance.) Yet, the umpires are shushing the fans like they're in fifth grade again. Sorry, but isn't that what tennis is missing -- excitement? So my question is, "Why is tennis the last sport that needs to be played in utter silence?"
Answer: It doesn't. For the four thousandth time, tennis is 99.921842% mental. That means that if some drunk fans want to scream bloody murder during your service motion, that shouldn't mean you drop your serve. For those of us who don't play in clubs every week, how many times has a car alarm begun blaring during your tennis game? Or a kid started crying? Or a cell phone began ringing? Or a flock of seagulls took flight overhead? And how many times has your foursome just stopped playing until there was complete silence? (If you guys did, I am wagging a severely punishing finger at you right now. Shame.)
The point is, it's time to stop insisting on silence in order to play tennis. It's the last sport to hold on to such an archaic standard. Can you imagine a football game being played as long as the fans keep their pieholes full of beer and hot dogs? In fact, attempts at breaking concentration in football is a common strategy among coaches. How about trying to "ice" a kicker just before he kicks a key field goal? It's sport, people. Not tea and crumpets.
The great thing about not playing the silence game during tennis is that it becomes more of a crowd event, which is one thing tennis needs to gain traction. Note: tennis does not need to change the way it plays tiebreaks or the doubles game in order to gain traction. It needs the little things -- letting Andy Roddick throw his racket if he's a little irritated about that missed volley. We know that for Andy, there will be many.
Point is, this is a small factor that could change the culture of tennis -- for good. Watch the Davis Cup matches this weekend. There is excitement that you don't see in Grand Slams. That should be encouraged. And as for players, it's time they learned to play through fan noise, as Lopez and Verdasco did.
So, what do you think? What could possibly be the downfalls of letting fans be more of an active part of tennis?
Saturday, November 15, 2008
The week (or so) that was
Just noticing that a Mariah Carey lyrics blog has been updated before mine. Wow.
Anyway:
1. A belated congratulations to Venus Williams for winning the women's year-end event. There were a lot of good things going on for ol' girl this tournament. She dominated matches that could have been tight. Venus actually changed the pace on a few balls, too. (I really thought the first two were mishits.) She also didn't wilt in the third set, which she's done all season. Her forehand was on point, but her serve was not. I really don't understand how you have a first serve that'll break someone's wrist, and a second serve that strongly resembles Elena Dementieva's first serve. Especially after all these years, you'd think Venus would have developed a stronger weapon with it. However, we know that forehand of hers wasn't built in a day.
Plus, it was nice to see Serena Williams stick around to watch her sister, if that's what she wants to call it. Seems she didn't stop texting rap lyrics to Common until the end of the tournament.
2. Also nice to see Tracy Austin still with a job. Did she really say that the women's field had just seven players -- singling out Vera Zvonareva, who made the final? I'm not sure if that's worse than her saying Kim Clijsters had nothing to hurt Jennifer Capriati with just before the French Open final in 2001, which ended with a 12-10 tiebreaker.
I'm just going to make a quick suggestion for Tracy. If you've never heard of someone (and I don't know how you could not know who Zvonareva is after all these years -- and after her really solid season), refrain from speaking. Just ride the camels in Doha and shriek until I have to turn the television off and count to 60.
3. And on to the men. First, has anyone seen the promo shots for the Shanghai tournament compared to the Doha event? Not only do the men look totally hot, but the ATP appears to have planned the shoot in advance. Notice the similar clothing and controlled environment. It looks like it was organized.
The women? Seriously. What the hell is that? It's just a microcosm of what is wrong with women's tennis.
4. Anyway, put on your blindfolds and stick your hand into the hat. Pick the two men's finalists. That's how random it seems to have Novak Djokovic and Nikolay Davydenko as the last men standing. I thought it was kind of lame for Davydenko to admit he'd rather play Andy Murray than Roger Federer because he had a better record against Murray. (Sure, they all think that way, but actually says it?) I'm like, "Yeah, like you'd beat either of them." But Davydenko looked good this week, dumping water on red-hot Jo-Jo Tsonga and Juan Del Potro. Of course, the only person he didn't beat in his group was Djokovic. Their first match was tight, so we'll see.
Of course, all eyes were on Roger Federer, who went 1-2 in this event, losing to Andy Murray and Gilles Simon. Poor guy. You win one Slam and finish the year at No. 2 in the world, and everyone thinks you're washed up. See, this is why you don't establish a record of excellence. You miss a step, and you're a failure. Now, if you wade in mediocrity, and win a major every now and again (ahemMaratSafinahem), everyone thinks you're doing well ... for you. You decide which is better.
5. A lot of great doubles on this week in Shanghai. Three doubles matches only in Doha. Wow. Now that's suspense.
Oh, I feel a rant coming.
Yup. That's definitely a rant.
Look, WTA, tennis fans love doubles. Four teams in Doha? Are you people out of your tree? It's bad enough that we have "deciding points" and ridiculous "champions tiebreakers" instead of a third set. The powers that be at the WTA must think their singles lineup is waay too stellar to have doubles get in the way. That would be wrong. Doubles would have helped. How disrespectful to the players who concentrate on doubles to delegate them to "whenever we have time." Hopefully, they watched the men's tournament to see what they could have had.
6. Sigh. Let's try again about the men's doubles. It's great stuff! Despite the deciding points crap and everything designed to take the suspense out of doubles. I am suppressing the rant. How about the teams of Luis Hornas and Pablo Cuevas and Mariusz Fyrstenberg and Marcin Matkowski (hell, yes, I cut and pasted those names. Are you kidding me?) making a deep run against the more established teams out there? When you think about it, it makes sense. Looks like some of those other teams didn't know what to do against new-ish teams that don't really play the run-o'-the-mill doubles. The final match is down to the Bryan brothers and Danny Nestor (so does not look like a Danny) and Nenad Zimonjic. Should be a good one.
One more thing on doubles: There's positive reinforcement between partners, and then there's "OH MY GOD, WOULD YOU GET PLEASE YOUR HAND OFF OF ME?" What is the deal with all the hand slapping after every single point? Regardless, by the way, of who won the point! What do these pros know that rec players don't? I don't even talk to my husband after every point, let alone some random person. What cracks me up the most is that even teams not used to playing together fall right into this. Is the confidence really that thin? Yikes.
Well, at least we know we won't be seeing that kind of behavior from the Bryan brothers.
Anyway:
1. A belated congratulations to Venus Williams for winning the women's year-end event. There were a lot of good things going on for ol' girl this tournament. She dominated matches that could have been tight. Venus actually changed the pace on a few balls, too. (I really thought the first two were mishits.) She also didn't wilt in the third set, which she's done all season. Her forehand was on point, but her serve was not. I really don't understand how you have a first serve that'll break someone's wrist, and a second serve that strongly resembles Elena Dementieva's first serve. Especially after all these years, you'd think Venus would have developed a stronger weapon with it. However, we know that forehand of hers wasn't built in a day.
Plus, it was nice to see Serena Williams stick around to watch her sister, if that's what she wants to call it. Seems she didn't stop texting rap lyrics to Common until the end of the tournament.
2. Also nice to see Tracy Austin still with a job. Did she really say that the women's field had just seven players -- singling out Vera Zvonareva, who made the final? I'm not sure if that's worse than her saying Kim Clijsters had nothing to hurt Jennifer Capriati with just before the French Open final in 2001, which ended with a 12-10 tiebreaker.
I'm just going to make a quick suggestion for Tracy. If you've never heard of someone (and I don't know how you could not know who Zvonareva is after all these years -- and after her really solid season), refrain from speaking. Just ride the camels in Doha and shriek until I have to turn the television off and count to 60.
3. And on to the men. First, has anyone seen the promo shots for the Shanghai tournament compared to the Doha event? Not only do the men look totally hot, but the ATP appears to have planned the shoot in advance. Notice the similar clothing and controlled environment. It looks like it was organized.
The women? Seriously. What the hell is that? It's just a microcosm of what is wrong with women's tennis.
4. Anyway, put on your blindfolds and stick your hand into the hat. Pick the two men's finalists. That's how random it seems to have Novak Djokovic and Nikolay Davydenko as the last men standing. I thought it was kind of lame for Davydenko to admit he'd rather play Andy Murray than Roger Federer because he had a better record against Murray. (Sure, they all think that way, but actually says it?) I'm like, "Yeah, like you'd beat either of them." But Davydenko looked good this week, dumping water on red-hot Jo-Jo Tsonga and Juan Del Potro. Of course, the only person he didn't beat in his group was Djokovic. Their first match was tight, so we'll see.
Of course, all eyes were on Roger Federer, who went 1-2 in this event, losing to Andy Murray and Gilles Simon. Poor guy. You win one Slam and finish the year at No. 2 in the world, and everyone thinks you're washed up. See, this is why you don't establish a record of excellence. You miss a step, and you're a failure. Now, if you wade in mediocrity, and win a major every now and again (ahemMaratSafinahem), everyone thinks you're doing well ... for you. You decide which is better.
5. A lot of great doubles on this week in Shanghai. Three doubles matches only in Doha. Wow. Now that's suspense.
Oh, I feel a rant coming.
Yup. That's definitely a rant.
Look, WTA, tennis fans love doubles. Four teams in Doha? Are you people out of your tree? It's bad enough that we have "deciding points" and ridiculous "champions tiebreakers" instead of a third set. The powers that be at the WTA must think their singles lineup is waay too stellar to have doubles get in the way. That would be wrong. Doubles would have helped. How disrespectful to the players who concentrate on doubles to delegate them to "whenever we have time." Hopefully, they watched the men's tournament to see what they could have had.
6. Sigh. Let's try again about the men's doubles. It's great stuff! Despite the deciding points crap and everything designed to take the suspense out of doubles. I am suppressing the rant. How about the teams of Luis Hornas and Pablo Cuevas and Mariusz Fyrstenberg and Marcin Matkowski (hell, yes, I cut and pasted those names. Are you kidding me?) making a deep run against the more established teams out there? When you think about it, it makes sense. Looks like some of those other teams didn't know what to do against new-ish teams that don't really play the run-o'-the-mill doubles. The final match is down to the Bryan brothers and Danny Nestor (so does not look like a Danny) and Nenad Zimonjic. Should be a good one.
One more thing on doubles: There's positive reinforcement between partners, and then there's "OH MY GOD, WOULD YOU GET PLEASE YOUR HAND OFF OF ME?" What is the deal with all the hand slapping after every single point? Regardless, by the way, of who won the point! What do these pros know that rec players don't? I don't even talk to my husband after every point, let alone some random person. What cracks me up the most is that even teams not used to playing together fall right into this. Is the confidence really that thin? Yikes.
Well, at least we know we won't be seeing that kind of behavior from the Bryan brothers.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Doha -- Day Two
Due to Election Day obligations and work deadlines, I found myself unable to watch the matches today. But Jankovic over Ivanovic, 6-3, 6-4? That was my match of the day!? So with that as prologue, a look at tomorrow's matches:
Ana Ivanovic v. Vera Zvonareva: Yikes. I'm actually going to go with Zvonareva here. If I'm wrong, a match might ensue.
Elena Dementieva v. Venus Williams: Despite the serve, Dementieva is always a threat. And rightfully so. Everyone has a weakness in their game, and hers is considerable. Although it's interesting that she can hit her serve all right until a match gets tight. Then it's back to that weak slice serve heading to the forehand. Anyway, Venus has been the opposite lately: Her serve is working, even when nothing else is. So this should be interesting.
Dinara Safina v. Serena Williams: Serena. Sorry. Obama just became president of the United States. Gotta fly!
Ana Ivanovic v. Vera Zvonareva: Yikes. I'm actually going to go with Zvonareva here. If I'm wrong, a match might ensue.
Elena Dementieva v. Venus Williams: Despite the serve, Dementieva is always a threat. And rightfully so. Everyone has a weakness in their game, and hers is considerable. Although it's interesting that she can hit her serve all right until a match gets tight. Then it's back to that weak slice serve heading to the forehand. Anyway, Venus has been the opposite lately: Her serve is working, even when nothing else is. So this should be interesting.
Dinara Safina v. Serena Williams: Serena. Sorry. Obama just became president of the United States. Gotta fly!
Monday, November 03, 2008
No pressure, ladies, but ...
Tomorrow begins the end for the women's season, and let's be honest: It should have happened right after the U.S. Open. The fact that five women have held the No. 1 slot this season might suggest a high level of competition to some.
Well, only two guys held No. 1 on the ATP tour. So I'm gonna nix that theory.
The women's tour has lacked any real rivalries, few really good matches, and about as much depth as my bathroom sink. If this season's to be saved, this year-end event in Doha is going to have to be a classic.
It's almost like the organizers knew it, too. The Serbians are together in one group. The Williams girls are in the other. A look at the first day in the desert:
Svetlana Kuznetsova v. Vera Zvonareva: This is going to sound terrible, but has anyone else wondered if Zvonareva's wearing that much eye makeup as a preventive measure against crying? Anyway, there's a big-time head case in this match-up, and it's not Zvonareva. Kuznetsova's had a good year, but has come up short in the big matches. Although Kuznetsova owns Zvonareva big-time in career meetings, that goes out of the window until Kuzzy proves she can close.
Jelena Jankovic v. Ana Ivanovic: Ooh. My interest is piqued. Right after I questioned whether Ivanovic is a one-Slam wonder, she stepped up, playing Venus Williams tough in Zurich and then won in Austria. (I'm gonna go ahead and take credit for that.) So Ivanovic is warming up just as her countrywoman's getting ready to shut it down for the season, after this, her 73rd tournament of the year. I don't think Jankovic's got enough left in the tank to get out of the round-robin, um, round.
Has anyone seen those "Looking for a Hero" commercials with Jankovic, by the way? While she's becoming a "superhero" by going through those revolving doors, I can't help but think that in real life, she would have definitely injured herself doing that stunt.
Dinara Safina v. Venus Williams: A match-up between the Jan Bradys of their families. I think that next year, this match will be more competitive, but Venus will probably steamroll Safina until she believes she belongs in the upper echelon. It's all in Safina's head right now.
Quick note about Shanghai: Rafa Nadal is OUT! We can blame the schedule or Nadal's wildly successful year, but the year-end championships should have THE best, so this is bad news! So this means Gilles Simon is in. I'm already way more excited about Shanghai without Nadal than a "full" field in Doha. Sad.
Well, only two guys held No. 1 on the ATP tour. So I'm gonna nix that theory.
The women's tour has lacked any real rivalries, few really good matches, and about as much depth as my bathroom sink. If this season's to be saved, this year-end event in Doha is going to have to be a classic.
It's almost like the organizers knew it, too. The Serbians are together in one group. The Williams girls are in the other. A look at the first day in the desert:
Svetlana Kuznetsova v. Vera Zvonareva: This is going to sound terrible, but has anyone else wondered if Zvonareva's wearing that much eye makeup as a preventive measure against crying? Anyway, there's a big-time head case in this match-up, and it's not Zvonareva. Kuznetsova's had a good year, but has come up short in the big matches. Although Kuznetsova owns Zvonareva big-time in career meetings, that goes out of the window until Kuzzy proves she can close.
Jelena Jankovic v. Ana Ivanovic: Ooh. My interest is piqued. Right after I questioned whether Ivanovic is a one-Slam wonder, she stepped up, playing Venus Williams tough in Zurich and then won in Austria. (I'm gonna go ahead and take credit for that.) So Ivanovic is warming up just as her countrywoman's getting ready to shut it down for the season, after this, her 73rd tournament of the year. I don't think Jankovic's got enough left in the tank to get out of the round-robin, um, round.
Has anyone seen those "Looking for a Hero" commercials with Jankovic, by the way? While she's becoming a "superhero" by going through those revolving doors, I can't help but think that in real life, she would have definitely injured herself doing that stunt.
Dinara Safina v. Venus Williams: A match-up between the Jan Bradys of their families. I think that next year, this match will be more competitive, but Venus will probably steamroll Safina until she believes she belongs in the upper echelon. It's all in Safina's head right now.
Quick note about Shanghai: Rafa Nadal is OUT! We can blame the schedule or Nadal's wildly successful year, but the year-end championships should have THE best, so this is bad news! So this means Gilles Simon is in. I'm already way more excited about Shanghai without Nadal than a "full" field in Doha. Sad.
Saturday, November 01, 2008
Freaky Friday (or Jo-Jo Tsonga, Your Life is Calling)
Now you know things in Paris are officially on the flip side when Andy Roddick is blocking serves back.
Sorry, but that's more shocking (but barely) than Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal begging out of their quarterfinals. Federer never got on court because of a bad back. ("Who cares anymore?" he's thinking. "I'm only number two.") Meaning, of course, that James Blake advances to the semis, because he would have beaten Fed anyway. (...)
Then Nadal lost his first set against Nikolay Davydenko and pulled out after complaining of pain in his right knee. With the kind of year Nadal has had, going deep in every tournament, this late-season injury is no surprise. But how about this exchange in the locker room between Fed and Nadal:
Nadal said: "I saw him in the locker room five minutes before my match and he told me he had a pain in the back.
I said, maybe we are both going to be going home tonight."
Hopefully, their injuries are nothing a little time off can't heal, because if Fed and Nadal aren't in Shanghai, it's got to be cancelled. It just wouldn't be right not to have two of main characters of the drama that's been men's tennis there. When they're out of a tournament early these days, the vacuum they leave behind is definitely felt.
But that's not to say the remaining cast of characters in Paris aren't interesting.
For example, registering high on the weird-o-meter was David Nalbandian beating Andy Murray in straight sets. Murray's been hot stuff this season, no doubt. But can anyone derail Nalbandian's annual end-of-season run? What is up with that? That man owns the month of October. How about getting warm a wee bit earlier, David? Like, when Grand Slams are being contested?
Then there was Roddick and Jo-Jo Tsonga, the other two players to actually get on court and complete their matches. And it was very Halloween-ny. I wouldn't have believed it unless I had seen it myself, but Roddick finished several points at the net. And it wasn't because he lost his string dampener. He was actually trying to volley. Emphasis on trying.
Then there was the bizarre half-hour conference over whether Roddick had any challenges left. The scoreboard said there were none. The ref said there was one. Chaos ensued. Seriously, if there's no disagreement between the players, why the delay in game? And I thought I was mathematically challenged.
Eventually, Tsonga came out on top in a third-set tiebreak. Looks like Tsonga's looking to salvage the rest of his season, and he's been impressive here. He wasn't at his best against Roddick, but he kept his head just a bit longer. As for Roddick, I'm just starting to feel sorry for him. What does this guy have to do to catch a break?
Hopefully, the answer isn't getting on a plane.
Sorry, but that's more shocking (but barely) than Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal begging out of their quarterfinals. Federer never got on court because of a bad back. ("Who cares anymore?" he's thinking. "I'm only number two.") Meaning, of course, that James Blake advances to the semis, because he would have beaten Fed anyway. (...)
Then Nadal lost his first set against Nikolay Davydenko and pulled out after complaining of pain in his right knee. With the kind of year Nadal has had, going deep in every tournament, this late-season injury is no surprise. But how about this exchange in the locker room between Fed and Nadal:
Nadal said: "I saw him in the locker room five minutes before my match and he told me he had a pain in the back.
I said, maybe we are both going to be going home tonight."
Hopefully, their injuries are nothing a little time off can't heal, because if Fed and Nadal aren't in Shanghai, it's got to be cancelled. It just wouldn't be right not to have two of main characters of the drama that's been men's tennis there. When they're out of a tournament early these days, the vacuum they leave behind is definitely felt.
But that's not to say the remaining cast of characters in Paris aren't interesting.
For example, registering high on the weird-o-meter was David Nalbandian beating Andy Murray in straight sets. Murray's been hot stuff this season, no doubt. But can anyone derail Nalbandian's annual end-of-season run? What is up with that? That man owns the month of October. How about getting warm a wee bit earlier, David? Like, when Grand Slams are being contested?
Then there was Roddick and Jo-Jo Tsonga, the other two players to actually get on court and complete their matches. And it was very Halloween-ny. I wouldn't have believed it unless I had seen it myself, but Roddick finished several points at the net. And it wasn't because he lost his string dampener. He was actually trying to volley. Emphasis on trying.
Then there was the bizarre half-hour conference over whether Roddick had any challenges left. The scoreboard said there were none. The ref said there was one. Chaos ensued. Seriously, if there's no disagreement between the players, why the delay in game? And I thought I was mathematically challenged.
Eventually, Tsonga came out on top in a third-set tiebreak. Looks like Tsonga's looking to salvage the rest of his season, and he's been impressive here. He wasn't at his best against Roddick, but he kept his head just a bit longer. As for Roddick, I'm just starting to feel sorry for him. What does this guy have to do to catch a break?
Hopefully, the answer isn't getting on a plane.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Black Monday (or Thanks so much, Juan Monaco)
Screw the stock market.
This is serious.
Marat Safin, after getting waxed by Juan Monaco, 6-0, 7-6, today in Paris, said the dreaded "R" word. No, not recession. Safin's talking retirement!
"I’ve been struggling throughout my career with injuries left and right. It’s a little bit uncomfortable to find yourself in the top 10 for many years and to find yourself ranked 70 and 30 and 50 ... It’s not really a comfortable position," he said.
He's going to take some time off, try to figure out how a two-time Grand Slam winner (should've been three, Thomas Johansson) finds himself with a record of only 24-24 this season. Or how someone with so much natural ability can lose to the likes of Philipp Petzschner (yes, THE Philipp Petzschner) or Andrey Golubev, a household name.
In Kazakstan.
This is a huge decision for Safin, with far-reaching implications. In his deliberations, he has to consider what could happen to him if he should hang up his racquet:
1. Safin could take the Andre Agassi route: He makes one last push, wins a few more Slams, shave his head and open a school for groupies in St. Petersburg.
2. Or, he could quit right now and film a reality show, a la Mark Philippoussis, called The Color of Love. Safin is presented with two groups of women -- the Blondes and the Brunettes -- and must decide which group is his true love(s).
3. Then there's the Roscoe Tanner road. Safin's mug shows up on The Smoking Gun's Web site after he's busting passing bad checks for million-dollar cars. Prison is no place for such a cute face, Marat.
Hopefully, though, Safin is inspired by the success of his sister, Dinara -- who, by the way, is nowhere near as naturally gifted and has done more with less -- and comes back with a fire under his cute tush.
This is serious.
Marat Safin, after getting waxed by Juan Monaco, 6-0, 7-6, today in Paris, said the dreaded "R" word. No, not recession. Safin's talking retirement!
"I’ve been struggling throughout my career with injuries left and right. It’s a little bit uncomfortable to find yourself in the top 10 for many years and to find yourself ranked 70 and 30 and 50 ... It’s not really a comfortable position," he said.
He's going to take some time off, try to figure out how a two-time Grand Slam winner (should've been three, Thomas Johansson) finds himself with a record of only 24-24 this season. Or how someone with so much natural ability can lose to the likes of Philipp Petzschner (yes, THE Philipp Petzschner) or Andrey Golubev, a household name.
In Kazakstan.
This is a huge decision for Safin, with far-reaching implications. In his deliberations, he has to consider what could happen to him if he should hang up his racquet:
1. Safin could take the Andre Agassi route: He makes one last push, wins a few more Slams, shave his head and open a school for groupies in St. Petersburg.
2. Or, he could quit right now and film a reality show, a la Mark Philippoussis, called The Color of Love. Safin is presented with two groups of women -- the Blondes and the Brunettes -- and must decide which group is his true love(s).
3. Then there's the Roscoe Tanner road. Safin's mug shows up on The Smoking Gun's Web site after he's busting passing bad checks for million-dollar cars. Prison is no place for such a cute face, Marat.
Hopefully, though, Safin is inspired by the success of his sister, Dinara -- who, by the way, is nowhere near as naturally gifted and has done more with less -- and comes back with a fire under his cute tush.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
The week in review
A brief recap of the week in tennis:
1. Venus Williams did something she hasn't done since Wimbledon -- close out a match. She won her second (yes, that's it) tournament of the year at the Zurich Open, beating her nemesis Flavia Pennetta in the final. In the semis, she played Ana Ivanovic. Judging from previous performances from both of them recently, it could have been an ugly match, but both played well. Ivanovic showed this week she's still got game, but it remains to be seen whether she can get -- and keep -- her mind right.
I have to admit to agreeing with Corina Morariu on the Tennis Channel, which is rare only because I can't stand her voice. I can't explain why. Anyway, as Morariu says, Venus insists on standing inside the baseline to receive serve, no matter how hard it is. Because nothing is as intimidating as standing just inches behind the service line and screwing up every single return. Imagine what would happen, Venus, if you *gasp* stepped back a foot or three? You might have room to, oh, I don't know, SWING!
2. Speaking of intelligence, I gotta give it up to Gilles Simon. He fought off something like twenty-eight match points during the week and played a great match against Rafael Nadal in the semis. And here I thought he was just a pusher. That's some pusher, changing spin, direction and speed whenever he wants. He finally encountered a match point he couldn't shake, though. And how about that Andy Murray? (I gotta ask: What is that gigantic blotch on the back of Murray's leg?) Looks like his U.S. Open run was no flash in the pan. Just when you thought things were heating up at the top of the men's game, you've got to make room for more. A Scot, no less. I'm going to guess that one day, Murray will do a little better than Tim Henman at Wimbledon. And the Open. All of them.
3. Roger Federer is relegated to world No. 2 for the rest of the year. Can we agree that he might be the second-best world No. 2 EV-ER?
1. Venus Williams did something she hasn't done since Wimbledon -- close out a match. She won her second (yes, that's it) tournament of the year at the Zurich Open, beating her nemesis Flavia Pennetta in the final. In the semis, she played Ana Ivanovic. Judging from previous performances from both of them recently, it could have been an ugly match, but both played well. Ivanovic showed this week she's still got game, but it remains to be seen whether she can get -- and keep -- her mind right.
I have to admit to agreeing with Corina Morariu on the Tennis Channel, which is rare only because I can't stand her voice. I can't explain why. Anyway, as Morariu says, Venus insists on standing inside the baseline to receive serve, no matter how hard it is. Because nothing is as intimidating as standing just inches behind the service line and screwing up every single return. Imagine what would happen, Venus, if you *gasp* stepped back a foot or three? You might have room to, oh, I don't know, SWING!
2. Speaking of intelligence, I gotta give it up to Gilles Simon. He fought off something like twenty-eight match points during the week and played a great match against Rafael Nadal in the semis. And here I thought he was just a pusher. That's some pusher, changing spin, direction and speed whenever he wants. He finally encountered a match point he couldn't shake, though. And how about that Andy Murray? (I gotta ask: What is that gigantic blotch on the back of Murray's leg?) Looks like his U.S. Open run was no flash in the pan. Just when you thought things were heating up at the top of the men's game, you've got to make room for more. A Scot, no less. I'm going to guess that one day, Murray will do a little better than Tim Henman at Wimbledon. And the Open. All of them.
3. Roger Federer is relegated to world No. 2 for the rest of the year. Can we agree that he might be the second-best world No. 2 EV-ER?
Monday, October 13, 2008
Tired yet?
I don't often suggest this to players (especially not women players, given the lack of depth), but really, Jelena Jankovic, take a week off. Or three.
Jankovic's run this fall has been impressive. She's been great all year, actually. But, who wants to bet that by the year-end championship, she'll have nothing left?
A better question: Who wants to guess how many tournaments Jankovic has played this year? And compare it, to say, Serena Williams?
Here's someone who does what no one else does -- play a full schedule -- and yet comes up empty at every Slam. It's almost not fair, but part of being a consistent pro has to do with taking care of yourself, pacing yourself. If Jankovic has a deep run this week in Zurich, that'll give her about two weeks to recover from playing nonstop for a month.
The word is not "cast". It's "balance". We've seen the opposite happen (ahemVenusWilliamsahem) where certain players take weeks off at a time, then falter in early rounds. Even Williams, though, manages a Grand Slam with her scheduling. It's next to impossible for Jankovic to play every tournament, and still be tough enough to win a major. Kudos to her coaches and mom for making her the world's best. Now they just have to make sure she can stay that way for a long time.
No takers on how many tournaments she and Williams have played this year? No cheating. I already did that.
Jankovic's run this fall has been impressive. She's been great all year, actually. But, who wants to bet that by the year-end championship, she'll have nothing left?
A better question: Who wants to guess how many tournaments Jankovic has played this year? And compare it, to say, Serena Williams?
Here's someone who does what no one else does -- play a full schedule -- and yet comes up empty at every Slam. It's almost not fair, but part of being a consistent pro has to do with taking care of yourself, pacing yourself. If Jankovic has a deep run this week in Zurich, that'll give her about two weeks to recover from playing nonstop for a month.
The word is not "cast". It's "balance". We've seen the opposite happen (ahemVenusWilliamsahem) where certain players take weeks off at a time, then falter in early rounds. Even Williams, though, manages a Grand Slam with her scheduling. It's next to impossible for Jankovic to play every tournament, and still be tough enough to win a major. Kudos to her coaches and mom for making her the world's best. Now they just have to make sure she can stay that way for a long time.
No takers on how many tournaments she and Williams have played this year? No cheating. I already did that.
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
One-hit wonder?
I remember watching Anastasia Myskina win the French Open in 2004, and thinking right away, "Now here's someone who'll never win a Grand Slam again." And where's Myskina now? Burping her 5-month-old.
It took a little longer, but I'm starting to have that one-hit wonder feeling about Ana Ivanovic. She lost today in the second round in Moscow -- against a talent, Dominika Cibulkova, but for those counting, she has played eleven matches since she won the French Open. She has lost six of them. To lesser players -- at bigger events. Let's not forget Julie Coin, who took her out at the U.S. Open. Or Nathalie Dechy at Wimbledon, which Ivanovic won, after about a year and a half.
I know, I know, she's just a kid. And, yes, she's been dealing with injury. Now that she's better, what's the problem? Tennis is 99.234% mental. Clearly, this is Ivanovic's hang-up right now. But why? Is it a lack of confidence? (After winning a Grand Slam? She must be hanging out with Amelie Mauresmo, also a loser today in Moscow ...) And if so, how do you get that back without winning matches? How do you win matches if you aren't mentally tough?
Ivanovic's got the game, there's no question. Lord knows she's no pusher like Myskina was. But where's her head at?
Anyone else wondering if Ivanovic's a one-Slam wonder? Or is she having a tough time handling the pressure?
It took a little longer, but I'm starting to have that one-hit wonder feeling about Ana Ivanovic. She lost today in the second round in Moscow -- against a talent, Dominika Cibulkova, but for those counting, she has played eleven matches since she won the French Open. She has lost six of them. To lesser players -- at bigger events. Let's not forget Julie Coin, who took her out at the U.S. Open. Or Nathalie Dechy at Wimbledon, which Ivanovic won, after about a year and a half.
I know, I know, she's just a kid. And, yes, she's been dealing with injury. Now that she's better, what's the problem? Tennis is 99.234% mental. Clearly, this is Ivanovic's hang-up right now. But why? Is it a lack of confidence? (After winning a Grand Slam? She must be hanging out with Amelie Mauresmo, also a loser today in Moscow ...) And if so, how do you get that back without winning matches? How do you win matches if you aren't mentally tough?
Ivanovic's got the game, there's no question. Lord knows she's no pusher like Myskina was. But where's her head at?
Anyone else wondering if Ivanovic's a one-Slam wonder? Or is she having a tough time handling the pressure?
Saturday, October 04, 2008
Thursday, October 02, 2008
Is this fair?
So, the ITF has penalized Croatia for having hard courts that were too fast during their Davis Cup tie against Brazil.
First, yeah. It was obviously the court that allowed the Croats to win, 4-1. As I recall, Gustavo Kuerten is no longer playing tennis. So, is there any surface Brazil could beat the Croatians upon? Ice? No, it's freakin' hot in Brazil.
Second, here's what really bugs me about this punishment. I'm just going to "borrow" this from the story:
Marina Mihelic, the head of Croatian Tennis Federation, said the ITF checked the court three days before the matches started on Sept. 19 and concluded that the speed of surface was indeed above the maximum, but only minimally. Mihelic said she consulted ITF again and it suggested that the court surface didn’t need another layer because it would postpone the matches.
Riight. So, the ITF knew the courts were too fast, and says, "Hey, don't worry about it. Not enough time to worry about it now." At the end of the tie, they take 2,000 points away from them -- after they told them not to fix the "problem?"
I'm not a huge Davis Cup fan, so I'm already slightly biased, I guess. But does anyone else think this punishment is a little wrong? Or a lot wrong?
First, yeah. It was obviously the court that allowed the Croats to win, 4-1. As I recall, Gustavo Kuerten is no longer playing tennis. So, is there any surface Brazil could beat the Croatians upon? Ice? No, it's freakin' hot in Brazil.
Second, here's what really bugs me about this punishment. I'm just going to "borrow" this from the story:
Marina Mihelic, the head of Croatian Tennis Federation, said the ITF checked the court three days before the matches started on Sept. 19 and concluded that the speed of surface was indeed above the maximum, but only minimally. Mihelic said she consulted ITF again and it suggested that the court surface didn’t need another layer because it would postpone the matches.
Riight. So, the ITF knew the courts were too fast, and says, "Hey, don't worry about it. Not enough time to worry about it now." At the end of the tie, they take 2,000 points away from them -- after they told them not to fix the "problem?"
I'm not a huge Davis Cup fan, so I'm already slightly biased, I guess. But does anyone else think this punishment is a little wrong? Or a lot wrong?
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Seen on my Yahoo page this morning ...
Jankovic, Sela to meet in Beijing finals
Hm. Is that Jelena Jankovic and Dudi Sela? What's going on in that tournament?
Hm. Is that Jelena Jankovic and Dudi Sela? What's going on in that tournament?
Thursday, September 25, 2008
The TWA Bestseller List
Twenty-six-year-old Serena Williams is working on her autobiography, which will focus on her inspirational rise, fall and re-rise (don't use that word at home) in the rankings.
Not that Serena's story isn't interesting. It almost seems like she got back to No. 1 just to tack an ending onto that story, though, doesn't it? And really, isn't she kind of young for a book? I know James Blake has a book out already, but Blake also had a life- and career-threatening injury. It's hard for me to think Serena's going to have an uneventful rest of her life.
Regardless, her announcement came with the usual copycat flurry of book deals. A few to put on that library list:
1. My Meteoric Rise to No. 1 ... from No. 2 by Roger Federer
2. The Three Faces of Nole by Novak Djokovic
3. Serena, Serena, Serena! by Venus Williams
4. .... And All I Got Is This Lousy T-Shirt by Andy Roddick
5. Calm Under Pressure by Marat Safin
6. Yes, There's a Cast for That by Jelena Jankovic
7. Make Mine a Double ... Fault by Elena Dementieva
8. "No?" Means "Yes." by Rafael Nadal
Not that Serena's story isn't interesting. It almost seems like she got back to No. 1 just to tack an ending onto that story, though, doesn't it? And really, isn't she kind of young for a book? I know James Blake has a book out already, but Blake also had a life- and career-threatening injury. It's hard for me to think Serena's going to have an uneventful rest of her life.
Regardless, her announcement came with the usual copycat flurry of book deals. A few to put on that library list:
1. My Meteoric Rise to No. 1 ... from No. 2 by Roger Federer
2. The Three Faces of Nole by Novak Djokovic
3. Serena, Serena, Serena! by Venus Williams
4. .... And All I Got Is This Lousy T-Shirt by Andy Roddick
5. Calm Under Pressure by Marat Safin
6. Yes, There's a Cast for That by Jelena Jankovic
7. Make Mine a Double ... Fault by Elena Dementieva
8. "No?" Means "Yes." by Rafael Nadal
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
TournamentWatch: End of an era
The last tournament of my summer was the Highland Park Wrap-Up.
OK, so here’s the deal with Highland Park, because it’s probably the one thing I’ve never written at length about. I can’t believe I managed to gloss over Highland Park. Especially because HP players bring the ‘A’ to TWA -- big time.
My husband and I began to come to Highland Park a few years back, and our first event was the “Celebrity Mixed Doubles tournament, always held on Labor Day. The first team we went up against was Dwayne and Joy Woodruff. If you’re a man and a sports fan, yes, that Dwayne Woodruff. If you’re a woman, I’ll tell you who Dwayne Woodruff is as though I knew when I first met him. He used to be a cornerback for the Pittsburgh Steelers in the 1980s (DUH!), and anyone who used to be a Pittsburgh Steeler is royalty in Pittsburgh, even backup quarterbacks and even if they’re now working at the Taco Bell. Except Kordell Stewart. But I digress.
We warmed up with the Woodruffs, and Joy made an offhand comment about how young we both looked, to which her husband replied, “She is, but he ain’t.” Being that my husband’s just a tad older than I am, he took offense and the pissing contest begun. So here’s how our match went. Let’s say Dwayne serves. I return to Joy. Joy hits to Jerry. Jerry tries to blast a hole through Dwayne’s midsection. The whole match was Jerry and Dwayne trying to blast each other into next week. Joy and I just gave each other that “boys will be boys” smile, and we were probably both praying they didn’t actually connect on any of these shots.
Fortunately, Dwayne Woodruff is better at football than tennis, and we won that match. Apparently, guys do that kind of thing for giggles, and Dwayne and Jerry shook amiably at the end.
We found that Highland Park was the only place in the ‘Burgh where you could pick up tennis matches. You’ve still got one foot in your car, and someone on the court’s asking you to be their fourth. This is city tennis at its best. There is: trash-talking, blatant attempts to hit net players with overheads, steady conversations between players and those sitting on the bench during play, and various other goings-on that would get you drop-kicked out of Wimbledon. So naturally, we love it.
But it has its blemishes, namely two courts with cracks big enough to lose a can of balls. That’s why, as I tap, construction crews are removing the fences and resurfacing all nine courts. Which is great, but it’s like replacing your old couch. Yes, the springs are popping up out of the upholstery, but it’s your old couch.
This year’s wrap-up, then, would be the last time to note with annoyance the teeny bump along the baseline of the slow court nearest the street. Personally, I wanted to do well there to mark a high note to a nice season. When I saw the draw, I could see I got some help in that mission. I was seeded first in singles. Then I looked at the bottom half of the draw to find my nemesis, the girl who’s beaten me the last three times I’ve played her. AND she was unseeded. I had to laugh. Apparently, the organizers didn’t know who she was, or she would have been seeded first. Sigh. At least I’d make the final there. My partner and I were seeded second in the women’s doubles and half of the top team was my other nemesis. I have a lot of nemesi – meaning the people who beat me. Anyway, I cruised through the singles draw, and ran smack dab into Nemisis No. 1 in the final.
You know what’s frustrating? To know why you lose to someone and to still find yourself incapable of doing anything about it. I have had a different strategy for each time I’ve played this chick, and this time was no different. I thought deep topspin would make it more difficult to hit her push-y groundstrokes. We would see.
The first game of the match was on her serve and it lasted about ten minutes. When I won it, I thought to myself, “Woo! First strike!” Then I dropped my serve in about three seconds. Yeah. That kind of day. I won a lot of my matches just by running everything down and making my opponent hit one more shot. It was not cool to have it happen to me. Not cool. I played well and valiantly, and even held a 4-2 lead in the second set, but it wasn’t to be. I lost, 6-3, 6-4, but I left with some hope. I thought it was our most competitive match yet.
In the women’s doubles, my partner and I also cruised, but we had one of those “Court of Appeals” (you know, the advice column in Tennis magazine)- moments. So, we’re in a rally in the semis and my partner charges in and hits a volley behind the net person for a winner. We’re like “Awesome!” Then our opponent clears her throat and says politely, “Excuse me (yes, she said ‘Excuse me’) but I’d like to call a let. There’s a ball behind you.” We turn, and sure enough, there is a ball a touch behind the baseline. The four of us, on the other hand, are at the net. Also, the ball, I would imagine, didn’t just drop down from Mars. It had probably been there for a minute or so, and was of no consequence – until that volley skimmed her backside. We argued, not assertively, that you can’t call a let after a point is over – specifically, after you’ve already lost the point. But we were in control, and let it slide. A few games later, we had a date with Nemesis No. 2.
Nemesis No. 2 is basically the queen of Highland Park. She wins just about every tournament she’s in, and although I hadn’t played against her in more than a year, she’s beaten me twice. Naturally, all of us women (heck, even the men – she beats them, too) want to beat her. My partner and I felt this was a match we could win, but we didn’t sweat it too much, either. I’ve been playing with Mavis all summer, and win or lose, we’ve basically laughed our way through every match. We have so much fun, and even when we lost the first set 6-2, we were in good spirits. The spirits were better when we opened up a 3-0 lead in the second set. That set turned out to be quite a tussle. I was serving at 4-3, thinking that if I lost this game, we’d be tied, and then, we’d be just as good as dead. Despite my positive mindset, I pulled that game out, and we won the second set, 7-5.
Have you ever felt a sense of foreshadowing during a match? Even though the score is tied? Well, I had that feeling, and it was after we won a very nervous first game of the second set. I felt like we were barely hanging on, which I guess is what separates the champions from the second-place finishers. We lost the third set, 6-2, but I learned a lesson, I think. First, Nemesis No. 2 didn’t miss a single shot in the third set. She got focused and didn’t let up. Her mind’s like a steel trap, and I want to be like that when I grow up.
So, the last tournament on our old courts was not a complete wash. Got two (runner-up) trophies out of it. But that’s not it for me, although I’ve been ready to shut it down for some time. Winter mixed league is coming up. Can the Hubster and I make it to sectionals? Will we join one league or two? And who will we play for? Tune in next time … (cue Batman music) …
OK, so here’s the deal with Highland Park, because it’s probably the one thing I’ve never written at length about. I can’t believe I managed to gloss over Highland Park. Especially because HP players bring the ‘A’ to TWA -- big time.
My husband and I began to come to Highland Park a few years back, and our first event was the “Celebrity Mixed Doubles tournament, always held on Labor Day. The first team we went up against was Dwayne and Joy Woodruff. If you’re a man and a sports fan, yes, that Dwayne Woodruff. If you’re a woman, I’ll tell you who Dwayne Woodruff is as though I knew when I first met him. He used to be a cornerback for the Pittsburgh Steelers in the 1980s (DUH!), and anyone who used to be a Pittsburgh Steeler is royalty in Pittsburgh, even backup quarterbacks and even if they’re now working at the Taco Bell. Except Kordell Stewart. But I digress.
We warmed up with the Woodruffs, and Joy made an offhand comment about how young we both looked, to which her husband replied, “She is, but he ain’t.” Being that my husband’s just a tad older than I am, he took offense and the pissing contest begun. So here’s how our match went. Let’s say Dwayne serves. I return to Joy. Joy hits to Jerry. Jerry tries to blast a hole through Dwayne’s midsection. The whole match was Jerry and Dwayne trying to blast each other into next week. Joy and I just gave each other that “boys will be boys” smile, and we were probably both praying they didn’t actually connect on any of these shots.
Fortunately, Dwayne Woodruff is better at football than tennis, and we won that match. Apparently, guys do that kind of thing for giggles, and Dwayne and Jerry shook amiably at the end.
We found that Highland Park was the only place in the ‘Burgh where you could pick up tennis matches. You’ve still got one foot in your car, and someone on the court’s asking you to be their fourth. This is city tennis at its best. There is: trash-talking, blatant attempts to hit net players with overheads, steady conversations between players and those sitting on the bench during play, and various other goings-on that would get you drop-kicked out of Wimbledon. So naturally, we love it.
But it has its blemishes, namely two courts with cracks big enough to lose a can of balls. That’s why, as I tap, construction crews are removing the fences and resurfacing all nine courts. Which is great, but it’s like replacing your old couch. Yes, the springs are popping up out of the upholstery, but it’s your old couch.
This year’s wrap-up, then, would be the last time to note with annoyance the teeny bump along the baseline of the slow court nearest the street. Personally, I wanted to do well there to mark a high note to a nice season. When I saw the draw, I could see I got some help in that mission. I was seeded first in singles. Then I looked at the bottom half of the draw to find my nemesis, the girl who’s beaten me the last three times I’ve played her. AND she was unseeded. I had to laugh. Apparently, the organizers didn’t know who she was, or she would have been seeded first. Sigh. At least I’d make the final there. My partner and I were seeded second in the women’s doubles and half of the top team was my other nemesis. I have a lot of nemesi – meaning the people who beat me. Anyway, I cruised through the singles draw, and ran smack dab into Nemisis No. 1 in the final.
You know what’s frustrating? To know why you lose to someone and to still find yourself incapable of doing anything about it. I have had a different strategy for each time I’ve played this chick, and this time was no different. I thought deep topspin would make it more difficult to hit her push-y groundstrokes. We would see.
The first game of the match was on her serve and it lasted about ten minutes. When I won it, I thought to myself, “Woo! First strike!” Then I dropped my serve in about three seconds. Yeah. That kind of day. I won a lot of my matches just by running everything down and making my opponent hit one more shot. It was not cool to have it happen to me. Not cool. I played well and valiantly, and even held a 4-2 lead in the second set, but it wasn’t to be. I lost, 6-3, 6-4, but I left with some hope. I thought it was our most competitive match yet.
In the women’s doubles, my partner and I also cruised, but we had one of those “Court of Appeals” (you know, the advice column in Tennis magazine)- moments. So, we’re in a rally in the semis and my partner charges in and hits a volley behind the net person for a winner. We’re like “Awesome!” Then our opponent clears her throat and says politely, “Excuse me (yes, she said ‘Excuse me’) but I’d like to call a let. There’s a ball behind you.” We turn, and sure enough, there is a ball a touch behind the baseline. The four of us, on the other hand, are at the net. Also, the ball, I would imagine, didn’t just drop down from Mars. It had probably been there for a minute or so, and was of no consequence – until that volley skimmed her backside. We argued, not assertively, that you can’t call a let after a point is over – specifically, after you’ve already lost the point. But we were in control, and let it slide. A few games later, we had a date with Nemesis No. 2.
Nemesis No. 2 is basically the queen of Highland Park. She wins just about every tournament she’s in, and although I hadn’t played against her in more than a year, she’s beaten me twice. Naturally, all of us women (heck, even the men – she beats them, too) want to beat her. My partner and I felt this was a match we could win, but we didn’t sweat it too much, either. I’ve been playing with Mavis all summer, and win or lose, we’ve basically laughed our way through every match. We have so much fun, and even when we lost the first set 6-2, we were in good spirits. The spirits were better when we opened up a 3-0 lead in the second set. That set turned out to be quite a tussle. I was serving at 4-3, thinking that if I lost this game, we’d be tied, and then, we’d be just as good as dead. Despite my positive mindset, I pulled that game out, and we won the second set, 7-5.
Have you ever felt a sense of foreshadowing during a match? Even though the score is tied? Well, I had that feeling, and it was after we won a very nervous first game of the second set. I felt like we were barely hanging on, which I guess is what separates the champions from the second-place finishers. We lost the third set, 6-2, but I learned a lesson, I think. First, Nemesis No. 2 didn’t miss a single shot in the third set. She got focused and didn’t let up. Her mind’s like a steel trap, and I want to be like that when I grow up.
So, the last tournament on our old courts was not a complete wash. Got two (runner-up) trophies out of it. But that’s not it for me, although I’ve been ready to shut it down for some time. Winter mixed league is coming up. Can the Hubster and I make it to sectionals? Will we join one league or two? And who will we play for? Tune in next time … (cue Batman music) …
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)