Passing Shots

2011 U.S. Open Predictions

2011-08-28T17:32:00.003-04:00

Women's Quarterfinals:

Li Na def. Svetlana Kuznetsova

Serena Williams def. Francesca Schiavone

Agnieszka Radwanska def. Maria Sharapova

Vera Zvonareva def. Marion Bartoli

Women's Semifinals:

Serena def. Li

Zvonarenva def. Radwanksa

Women's Final:

Serena def. Zvonareva

Men's Quarterfinals:

Tomas Berdych will go up a set and a break against Novak Djokovic before losing the second set in a tiebreaker and winning only one more game in the next two sets.

Roger Federer will play an ugly match and just barely manage to eke out a win against Mardy Fish in four sets.

Juan Martin Del Potro will lumber around between points like he has no energy, and Andy Murray will grab his back/leg/wrist/shoulder as if in terrible pain between points, but Murray will struggle through in five sets.

Rafael Nadal will have looked extremely vulnerable in his first four rounds, and many people will expect David Ferrer to take advantage of Nadal in his weakened state. Nadal will come out and win in three routine sets.

Men's Semifinals:

Federer will take the first set off of Djokovic and look like the better player for most of the second set but will play an awful game to lose his serve at the end of the set. He will win the third set in a tiebreaker and will seem to have the momentum early in the fourth, but Djokovic will break first and eventually win the fourth set. Federer will win only two games in the fifth set.

Unlike at Wimbledon, Murray will validate my prediction by upsetting Nadal in the semifinals. Four sets.

Men's Final:

Murray will win his first set in a Grand Slam final, but he unless Djokovic decides to complete the retirement Grand Slam, it won't be enough. Djokovic in four sets

Wimbledon 2011 Predictions

2011-06-19T22:17:00.003-04:00

Let's get straight down to business:

Lasses' Quarterfinals:

Caroline Wozniacki vs. Maria Sharapova - Last week Wozniacki won an indoor hard court title in Copenhagen (don't ask me why there is an indoor hard court tournament between the French Open and Wimbledon). So clearly her confidence wasn't shaken too much after her rather embarrassing loss to Daniela Hantuchova at the French. Given that she doesn't have a particularly difficult draw to the quarters, I don't see another early upset (although another Slovakian, Dominika Cibulkova, could be a tricky opponent if she makes it to the fourth round). Sharapova, unfortunately, seems to have some of her confidence back, and I don't see her losing to anyone in her eighth of the draw.

Result: Sharapova def. Wozniacki in three sets.

Li Na vs. Marion Bartoli - Unlike Francesca Schiavone, who seemed to check out for several months after winning the French last year, I suspect Li will build on her success by making the quarterfinals at Wimbledon. Her opponent in the quarters will either be Serena Williams or Marion Bartoli. Serena was on the cover of Tennis magazine this month, and I have to say that she looked astonishingly thin (however, my television painted a different picture--it's too bad for Serena that live TV can't be Photoshopped). Granted, Serena has won majors before while being light on practice and heavy on...well, just heavy. But I'm not feeling it this time. So I'll pick Bartoli, who herself is not exactly a stick figure but who proved just this past week that she's fit enough to win grass court tournaments.

Result: Bartoli def. Li in three sets.

Andrea Petkovic vs. Daniela Hantuchova - My brother has picked Andrea Petkovic to win the whole tournament. He tells me that she is his new favorite player because she is both "hot" and "quirky." I'm not sure that's enough to win a Grand Slam title, but maybe it's enough to get her to the quarterfinals (especially considering her draw). I'm picking Hantuchova as her opponent because she's been on a little bit of a roll recently, and because she deserves another chance at a deep run at a major.

Result: Hantuchova def. Petkovic in three sets (11-9 in the third because Hantuchova loves to make things interesting).

Petra Kvitova vs. Vera Zvonareva - I just read that Kvitova got to the semifinals of Wimbledon last year. I don't remember that at all. But I guess that's a good enough reason to project her in to the quarterfinals. Zvonareva seems to have lost a little bit of the mojo she had last year, but last week she did just get some revenge over Serena for last year's Wimbledon final, so that should boost her confidence somewhat. I'll pick her to make it to the quarterfinals in this section.

Result: Zvonareva def. Kvitova in three sets.

Lasses' Semifinals:

Sharapova v. Bartoli - Rolly Bartoli in two sets!

Hantuchova v. Zvonareva - Zvonareva in two sets!

Lasses' Final:

Bartoli def. Zvonareva in three sets.

Chaps' Quarterfinals:

Rafael Nadal vs. Tomas Berdych - Nadal. Ugh. He he's only lost twice before the quarterfinals since 2006. I don't expect him to add to that number. Berdych crashed out in the first round of the French Open this year and was upset by Philip Petzschner in Halle last week. But his draw to the quarterfinals looks do-able, so I'll pick him to get back to the second week of Wimbledon.

Result: Nadal def. Berdych in three routine sets.

Andy Murray vs. Gael Monfils - I'm looking forward to/dreading a potential Murray-Gasquet match in the fourth round which I expect Murray will win after being down two sets and two breaks in the third. Monfils could just as easily lose in the first round as get to the quarterfinals, but I'm picking him because I'm counting on him to beat Andy Roddick in the fourth round (I don't see anyone doing the job before then).

Result: Murray def. Monfils in four sets chock full of passive rallies, ill-advised drop shots, and unnecessary dives.

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga vs. Roger Federer - Based on his performance at Queen's Club last week, I'll pick Tsonga to get to emerge from his section of the draw. Roger Federer, despite losing the French Open final, played about as well as I've seen him play since the World Tour Finals last year. So I don't see an early (relatively speaking) upset like we saw last year.

Result: Federer def. Tsonga in three sets.

Robin Soderling vs. Novak Djokovic - Soderling has been pretty good at living up to but not exceeding his seeding recently, and I expect him to continue that trend. It will be interesting to see if having his streak broken will have shaken Djokovic at all or if he'll just go back to serving up bagels to lesser players in early rounds. I'm afraid it will be the latter.

Result: Djokovic def. Soderling in three sets.

Chaps' Semifinals:

Murray def. Nadal in four sets (what?!)

Federer def. Djokovic in five sets

Chaps' Final:

Federer def. Murray in four sets!

FYI: In 2003, none of the tennis pundits picked Roger Federer to win Wimbledon, but Pete Sampras did. In 2011, none of the tennis pundits are picking Roger Federer to win Wimbledon, but Pete Sampras is. Go against Federer and Sampras at Wimbledon at your own risk!

2011 French Open Predictions

2011-05-22T00:47:00.003-04:00

I care so little about the results of women's tennis these days that I barely watch at all anymore. And I care so much about the results of men's tennis that I can barely stand to watch anymore. I don't know which is worse.

With that enthusiastic introduction, here are my French Open picks:

Women's Quarterfinals:

Caroline Wozniacki v. Samantha Stosur - Little known fact: Caroline Wozniacki is the first player to obtain the number one ranking without ever having hit a winner. Wozniacki wins in two sets.

Vera Zvonareva v. Francesca Schiavone - Little known fact: Francesca Schiavone moonlights as a bodyguard for several male Spanish tennis players. Schiavone in three sets.

Li Na v. Victoria Azarenka - Little known fact: So that she can communicate with all of her opponents, Victoria Azarenka has learned how to swear in eight different languages, including International Sign Language. Azarenka in three sets.

Kim Clijsters v. Maria Sharapova - Little known fact: Kim Clijsters is a inveterate misanthrope, and her congenial attitude is all part of an elaborate inside joke that she will explain during the next appearance of Halley's comet. Clijsters in three sets.

Women's Semifinals:

Wozniacki v. Schiavone - Did you know...that Don King is still trying to set up a real fight between Wozniacki and a baby kangaroo? Wozniacki in three sets.

Azarenka v. Clijsters - Did you know...that Azarenka has a secret twitter account which she is using to post the entire text of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged 140 characters at a time? Azarenka by retirement.

Women's Finals:

Wozniacki def. Azarenka in straight sets.

Men's Quarterfinals:

Rafael Nadal def. Robin Soderling in four sets.

Andy Murray def. Jurgen Melzer in five sets.

Roger Federer def. David Ferrer in five sets.

Novak Djokovic def. Tomas Berdych in straight sets.

Men's Semifinals:

Nadal def. Murray in four sets.

Djokovic def. Federer in four sets.

Men's Finals:

Nadal def. Djokovic in five sets...

...unless, of course, everything that has happened in the last four months has been part of Roger Federer's master plan. Did he let Rafa and Nole duke it out in the finals of four Masters 1000s, knowing that they would wear each other out both physically and emotionally before the majors? Did he duck out in the quarters and semis of the Masters 1000s so that he could rest and prepare for the French Open and Wimbledon? Is Roger Federer really an ingenious mastermind?

Tune in in two weeks to find out!

Australian Open 2011 Predictions

2011-01-16T18:14:00.004-05:00

Yes, I'm still alive. No, I'm not doing a very good job keeping this blog updated.

But I am making predictions for the Australian Open:

Sheilas:

Quaterfinals:

Yanina Wickmayer v. Justine Henin – Everybody’s favorite no-slam number one has a tricky first week ahead. If Gisella Dulko doesn’t beat her in the first round and Dominika Cibulkova doesn’t beat her (for a second time this year) in the third round, Wickmayer will get her the fourth round. As for Henin, one might have worried about a potential Svetlana Kuznetsova clash in the third round, but sadly Kuznetsova has not been any sort of factor since she won the French Open in 2009. And outside of that matchup, I don’t see anyone else who should prove an insurmountable challenge for JH.

Result: Henin def. Wickmayer in two sets

Maria Sharapova v. Li Na – Neither Sharapova nor Venus Williams have done anything recently that would make me think either has a chance to go deep in the tournament, but I have to pick one of them to make the quarters, so I’ll go with Sharapova. I should probably pick Victoria Azarenka make the quarterfinals, but since Li just won a tournament and was in the semifinals of the Australian Open last year, I’m going to take a chance and go with her.

Result: Li def. Sharapova in three sets (!)

Alisa Kleybanova v. Kim Clijsters – Kleybanova has some of the most bizarre, painful-to-watch strokes in the world, but they seem to work for her. And since her biggest competition in this quarter might be someone who says that spending money is her motivation to play tennis (Jelena Jankovic) and a quadragenarian (Kimiko Date Krumm), I suppose I’ll pick her to make the quarterfinals. Kim Clijsters is good (did you see her trading forehands with Nadal yesterday? Maybe she should be the one playing Nadal in all of these exhibition matches). So unless she has a walkabout (like she did last year against Nadia Petrova), I don’t see her having any trouble getting to the quarterfinals.

Result: Clijsters def. Kleybanova in straight sets.

Samantha Stosur v. Vera Zvonareva – I don’t feel like justifying my picks in this quarter.

Result: Zvonareva def. Stosur in three sets.

Semifinals:

Henin v. Li – Henin wins in straight sets.

Clijsters v. Zvonareva – Clijsters wins in straight sets.

Final:

Clijsters v. Henin – Clijsters wins in three sets (tiebreaker in the third!)

Blokes:

Quarterfinals:

Rafael Nadal v. David Ferrer – Nadal. Ugh. Ferrer will already be dead tired by the time he takes on his countryman, because he’ll have a five set match against Hewitt or Nalbandian in the third round and will play at least four sets against Youzhny in the fourth round.

Result: Nadal def. Ferrer in straight sets

Robin Soderling v. Andy Murray – Soderling has only won two matches in Melbourne, but that will change this year. His fourth round match against Tsonga could be tough…or Tsonga could get injured. Either way, I’ll pick Soderling. Murray doesn’t have anyone in his way who he shouldn’t be able to handle.

Result: Murray def. Soderling in four sets

Nikolay Davydenko v. Novak Djokovic – Davydenko started off the year with a win over Nadal on his way to the final of Doha. Nadal said he had the flu, which I would be perfectly inclined to believe…except that he went out and won the doubles final a few hours later. Anyway, I’m picking Davydenko to get through to the quarterfinal to face Djokovic, who has a pretty easy draw to this point

Result: Davydenko def. Djokovic in five sets (!)

Gael Monfils v. Roger Federer – Any one of Monfils, Stanislas Wawrinka, or Andy Roddick could make the quarterfinals in this section. But I refuse to pick Roddick for purely personal reasons. So it comes down to a touch choice between Wawrinka and Monfils, but I’ll pick Monfils. And Federer shouldn’t have too much trouble getting to the quarterfinals (Simon scare in the second round? Nah).

Result: Federer def. Monfils in straight sets (Monfils dives at least four times)

Semifinals:

Nadal v. Murray – Nadal. Ugh.

Davydenko v. Federer – Federer wins in three.

Final:

Nadal v. Federer – Federer in five sets (!)

G’fortnight, mates.

2010 U.S Open Days 2, 3, 4, and 5: Better Late Than Never

2010-09-04T00:44:00.004-04:00

Day 2:

Other than the disappointing upset of Marcos Baghdatis, who probably over-played in the weeks leading up to the U.S. Open, and the close escape of Novak Djokovic, Day 2 at the U.S. Open was fairly uneventful. So we’ll move on…

Day 3:

The day started out with Victoria Azarenka wobbling around the Grandstand court during her second round match against Gisella Dulko. I had been rooting for Dulko to win the match, so naturally I was delighted to see Dulko take a commanding lead in the first set. However, when Azarenka collapsed to the ground and didn’t get up, I began to entertain the possibility that perhaps Azarenka was not feeling her best. My suspicion was confirmed when the tournament doctors wheeled her off the court in a near unconscious state.

At this point, despite my dislike of her game, I did become concerned for her health. I suppose most human beings would have a similar reaction—though not all. For example, had Vika been playing Maria Sharapova when she fainted, I imagine Maria would simply have turned her back and done some shuffle steps to keep her footwork sharp. But being a more compassionate soul, I kept an ear open for any updates on her condition. Originally, the TV commentators speculated that she was struggling with the heat. But as more news came in throughout the day, they were able to inform worried viewers that, fortunately, it was NOT heat related illness that had taken Azarenka down—it was just a concussion. Of course, that news put my mind at ease.

So I shifted my focus to sending positive vibes to Janko Tipsarevic for his night match against Andy Roddick. It must have taken a while for this energy to travel the 500 miles to New York, since Tipsarevic didn’t seem to have it in the first set. But sure enough, by the second set he was playing exactly how I had hoped he would: smacking winners right and left off of Roddick’s passive ground strokes. Still, I was a little puzzled by what I was seeing from Roddick. After going down a break in the third set, he was uncharacteristically composed. But just as I was wondering aloud when he would start berating the umpire for some minor infraction, Mount Roddick erupted. A few points about the “My Right Foot” incident (which, by the way, might make a good title for a Roddick biopic):

Since it is impossible (as Roddick made sure to tell the lineswoman) for him to foot fault with his right foot, why did he even need to ask the lineswoman which of his feet crossed the line? Perhaps because he wanted to find any excuse to start abusing an official?
Although Roddick did not pull a Serena and threaten the lineswoman with physical violence, he was intent on humiliating her in front of thousands of people. He should have gotten a warning. To me, Roddick seems like the guy in high school who bullies the kids he knows won’t fight back. No one really thinks he’s cool or funny, but they (reporters, officials, etc.) are too afraid to stand up to him for fear they’ll get harassed too. Take Jon Wertheim’s response to Roddick’s tantrum. I don’t know how many times he’s written something like “Roddick’s behavior was really poor, but let’s forgive him because he’s such a great guy!” But maybe one of these days maybe he’ll start to realize that routinely mistreating one’s coworkers with is not a characteristic of a great guy.
Even if the officials aren’t going to warn Roddick for unsportsmanlike conduct, they should at least recognize that his tirades are disruptive to his opponents and often constitute time violations.

But in the end, justice was prevailed. Roddick deserved to lose early in the tournament not only because he’s a petulant brat, but because he’s a pusher from the baseline. Of course, he's known for having amusing press conferences, and I’ll admit I did get a laugh out of this statement:

“On my little cheat sheet that Larry and I put together, I wanted to keep my unforced errors down, which I did. You know, he's going to take big swings and pot shots at the ball. I wanted to make him do that from stretch positions, maybe on the move; I did that. I wanted to get a very high percentage of returns in play; I did that.”

So basically you were hoping that he would beat himself? Well congratulations, Andy. You successfully executed a losing game plan.

And to send Roddick off, I thought I’d revive a classic ad campaign from five years ago, with a minor adjustment given current events:

Day 4:

When Richard Gasquet won the first two sets against Nikolay Davydenko, my immediate thought was that it was a perfect opportunity for Gasquet to complete the Lose-After-Being-Up-Two-Set-to-None career Grand Slam. But the nice thing about having the lowest possible expectations for a player is that you can only be pleasantly surprised when he wins. And next round when he loses to Kevin Anderson, I won’t feel let down in the least!

Day 5:

Friday went about as predictably as it possibly could have…except for Venus Williams’ outfit. I don’t think anyone foresaw that number. To think I used to think Venus Williams was the more conservative sister. I'd post a picture, but still photos just won't do it justice.

And that’s all I got for now.

2010 U.S Open Day 1: Why We Still Love Federer

2010-08-31T09:40:00.003-04:00

It hasn't been an easy year for Federer Fans. Over the past seven seasons, they've grown accustomed to seeing Federer win pretty much everything. More importantly, they've gotten used to seeing him do it in the most spectacular fashion: hitting winners from every corner of the court, pulling off shots that seem to defy the laws of nature. But recently these moments of magic have become more and more infrequent, as Federer has been allowing bigger players like Del Potro, Soderling, and Berdych to assume the role of aggressor in their matches. Certain Federer Fans have responded to this decline in form by threatening to tear down their shrines to Roger and switch allegiance to likes of Davydenko or Wawrinka.

But they never will. Even if Federer isn't quite as good as he was four years ago, there's still no one on tour who can replace him. And Federer Fans were reminded of this on Monday night. If you weren't watching his first round match against Brian Dabul (and shame on you if that's the case), have a look-see at the highlight on the night.

Not many players could pull off the shot, period (Federer has now made it twice in his last three matches on Arthur Ashe Stadium). But how many of them would have reacted the way Federer did: with an irrepressible grin on his face? Federer and Nadal both love to win. But whereas Nadal seems equally content to win a match off of his opponent's errors as he does to win by virtue of his own great shots, clearly Federer prefers to triumph in style.

No doubt Roger went home last night and watched his 'tweener a few times before he turned in for the night. That's because he's isn't just a great player, he's a tennis fan. And he loves making those jaw-dropping shots just as much as we love watching them. That makes him unique among the best players of all time.

So no, I guess I won't be tearing down my Federer shrine and putting up posters of Nikolay Davydenko any time soon. Besides, do they even make Nikolay Davydenko posters?

2010 U.S. Open Predictions

2010-08-29T14:23:00.002-04:00

It may have been a while since I last checked in at Passing Shots, but that’s only because I’m lazy and because I found Wimbledon to be totally uninspiring. I have, however, continued to follow the summer hard court results steadfastly, and I have high hopes for an exciting U.S. Open. In fact, it’s already off to a good start: we’re guaranteed not to have Serena Williams as the champion. Of course, we won’t see Justine Henin or Juan Martin Del Potro there either. But life’s a compromise.

Anyways, without further ado, I present my 2010 U.S. Open Predictions:

Gals’ Quarterfinals:
First Quarter
I thought one of the perks of being the top seed was getting a favorable draw. If that’s the case, Caroline Wozniacki should complain to the tournament director. She’ll definitely have a challenge against Maria Sharapova in the fourth round, but I’m siding with Wozniacki to win that match because (1) she should have loads of confidence after winning three tournaments this summer, (2) Sharapova, despite being a point away from taking the title in Cincinnati, still isn’t at her best, and (3) I’m trying out the wishful-thinking approach to my predictions.

I would also wish for Kuznetsova to make the quarterfinals. Ta-da! She’s the other quarterfinalist in this section!

Result: Kuzy def.Wozy in three sets.

Second Quarter
Jelena Jankovic is seeded to make the quarterfinals in this section, but her 2-4 record since Wimbledon doesn’t inspire much confidence. So we’ll go with last year’s semifinalist Yanina Wickmayer.

It’s a tough choice between Agnieszka Radwanska, Nadia Petrova, and Vera Zvonareva for the other quarterfinalist in this section, but I’ll give Zvonareva the edge based on her success at the last Grand Slam tournament.

Result: Zvonareva def. Wickmayer in two sets.

Third Quarter
There’s not much standing between Victoria Azarenka and the quarterfinals (maybe Pavlyuchenkova? Probably not). But who knows what’s going on with Venus Williams these days. We haven’t seen her since she lost to Tsvetana Pirnonkova at Wimbledon…and guess who she could play in the third round here. Should she survive her Bulgarian nemesis this time, I suppose she’ll probably win her fourth round match to make the quarterfinals.

Result: Azarenka def. Venus in straight sets.

Fourth Quarter
Elena Dementieva is back in business, and she should be happy with her draw. Kim Clijsters should also be happy with her draw, but of course, why shouldn’t she be? She made it.

Result: Clijsters def. Dementieva in a back and forth three set match.
(By the way, if you’d like to see some emotional collapses, this is the quarter for you. Between Hantuchova, Ivanovic, and Safina, there are sure to be some spectacular meltdowns)

Gals’ Semifinals:
Kuznetsova def. Zvonareva in three sets.

Clijsters def. Azarenka in three sets.

Gals’ Finals:
Clijsters def. Kuznetsova in three sets.

Dudes’ Quarterfinals:
First Quarter
If I were Nadal, I wouldn’t be particularly please with my draw. Gabashvili (his first round) could be a little tricky, Istomin (second round) has been playing well recently, Kohlschreiber (third round) came close to beating Nadal in Toronto, and Ljubicic (fourth round) did beat Nadal in Indian Wells this spring. Should he make it through these rounds (he will), he could be a little worn out in the second week.

His quarterfinal opponent will be Ferrer, Gulbis, or Nalbandian. I’m a little hesitant about picking Nalbandian, as the Slams don’t seem to be a high priority for him anymore, but I’ll take the risk.

Result: Nadal def. Nalbandian in four sets.

Second Quarter
Now that Murray has dumped Miles Maclagan and is getting tennis advice from his mom (that’s dangerous territory—I know from experience), he seems to have gotten his game back together. He should have no trouble getting to the quarterfinals, where he’ll most likely meet Tomas Berdych.

Result: Murray def. Berdych in four sets.

Third Quarter
This could be an interesting quarterfinal if Davydenko, Monfils, Baghdatis, and Fish play well. If they don’t, it could be a really, really boring quarterfinal with Djokovic hobbling around the court while Roddick embarrasses him yet again.

Result: Baghdatis def. Davydenko (wishful thinking picks) in five sets.

Fourth Quarter
Federer has been playing betterer this summer, and he should be looking forward to avenging his loss to Soderling in the French Open quarterfinals.

Result: Federer def. Soderling in four sets.

Dudes’ Semifinals:
Murray def. Nadal in four sets

Federer def. Baghdatis in four sets.

Dudes’ Final:
Federer def. Murray in four sets.

Wimbledon 2010: Week 1 Recap

2010-06-27T20:17:00.003-04:00

The most notable first round match at Wimbledon was an encounter between John Isner and Nicolas Mahut. But despite what you might have heard, there was other tennis going on as well. I'll recap the Isner-Mahut match, but because it was so long, I'll take a few breaks to fill you in on the other action at Wimbledon in the first week.

As is the case with most Isner matches, the result of the match was always going to be dependent on who could get the rare break of serve. Isner succeed at this in the first set, but Mahut managed the elusive break in the second…

Roger Federer, who made his 2010 Wimbledon debut sans blazer or gold patent leather bag, apparently decided he hadn’t played enough suspenseful five set matches at Wimbledon in the last three years. After going down two sets to Alejandro Falla, Federer was mere points away from losing it in both the third and fourth sets. Not until Roger got a double break in the fifth set did Federer fans breathe a sigh of relief. But they were back on edge when they remembered it was only the first round.

…Neither Isner nor Mahut could figure out what they did to break each other in the first and second sets, so the third and fourth sets went to tiebreakers, which were also split between the two of them before the match was suspended due to darkness…

Novak Djokovic had a struggle in the first round against Olivier Rochus. Rochus has had some of his best results on grass, probably because, as the shortest player on tour, low bounces are no problem for him. Rochus got the two-sets-to-one lead, but Djokovic regrouped and took the fourth and fifth.

…Isner and Mahut continued the next day where they left off—trading service holds. They got to 6-6, but there is no tiebreaker in the fifth set of Wimbledon, so they played on…

Despite some shaky performances from a few of the top players, the first round matches ended (except Isner-Mahut) without too many upsets. The most notable (but not terribly surprising) upsets included French Open finalists Francesca Schiavone and Samantha Stosur, slumping Marin Cilic, and burned-out Fernando Verdasco.

...At 10-all in the fifth set, it was getting to be a long match. John Isner is great at serving, but even with his near seven-foot wingspan, his return game is severely lacking. Mahut returns a little better than Isner, but his serve isn’t quite as good. With such discrepancy between serves and returns, people were starting to realize this match could go on for a while…

Federer did little to prove that his first round near-disaster wasn’t a fluke. I didn’t get to see much of this match, since a certain lengthy contest on Court 12 was dominating ESPN2’s coverage, but I imagine it was another case of Federer’s opponent going for broke, and Federer getting annoyed that he wasn't getting any rhythm.

…At 25-24, the Isner-Mahut match became the longest match ever in terms of games played…

The Queen popped in at Andy Murray’s second round match to put even more pressure on the guy. As much as excited as they get about the prospect of a local champion, the British secretly don’t want Murray to win Wimbledon. Why? Because if a Brit ever actually managed to win Wimbledon, they would have nothing left to complain about. And then what would they do with their time?

…At 32-31, the Isner-Mahut match became the longest in terms of time on court…

While the likes of Federer, Djokovic, Roddick, and the Williams sisters were lunching with royalty, Rafael Nadal politely declined the invitation. Not even the Queen of England is allowed to disrupt Rafa’s routine. And it’s probably a good thing that he skipped out on the meeting, since he needed to focus all his efforts on beating Robin Haase in five sets.

…36-35: Mahut was serving to get to 36-36 all and—surprise!---he held…

After the second round finished, another handful of seeds were gone. They included a bunch of Russians (Nikolay Davydenko, Mikhail Youzhny, and Svetlana Kuznetsova), and my quarterfinal pick Aravane Rezai.

…Another one for the record books: the first time in tennis history that 40-40 did not mean “deuce”…

While things finally got easier for Federer in the third round (Arnaud Clement was just the kind of non-threatening opponent he needed), life got even tougher for Nadal. Philipp Petzschner (who, by the way, has way too many consecutive consonants in his name) pushed Nadal into another fifth set. During the match, a trainer came out to look at both Nadal’s elbow and knee, which has to be a very bad sign. Then again, if anyone can win Wimbledon on crutches and in a cast, it’s Nadal.

…Mahut was seen by the trainer at 58-57. Now that’s impressive. Novak Djokovic would have called for an ambulance by 14-all…

While many of the top “gentlemen” have struggled, one man has been totally untroubled through the first three rounds: Robin Soderling. Not only has he not lost a set, Soderling has only faced five break points (and saved them all). He’s making me feel a little better about my moment of madness when I picked him to win the tournament.

…At 9:10pm (59-all) Mahut realized that his favorite TV show was about to start, so he insisted that the match be suspended again. Isner doesn’t watch anything on Wednesday nights, so he wanted to continue. Mahut won the argument…

The only real upset in the third round was Victoria Azarenka’s (whom I picked to make the semifinals) meltdown against Petra Kvitova. But the most anticipated fourth round matches are still on: Serena vs. Sharapova, Clijsters vs. Henin, and Djokovic vs. Hewitt. Should be interesting.

…The Isner-Mahut match started up again on Thursday, and after only twenty more games, it was over. John Isner prevailed 70-68.

It started out a match between two mediocre players who couldn’t break each other’s serves. Then it became a record-breaking epic. And at some point it went back to being a match between two players who were spectacularly bad a breaking serve (although I’ll admit they deserve some credit for hanging in for so long both physically and mentally—no doubt many other players would have quit by hour eight).

But what was it all for? The next day Isner had no energy left, and Thiemo De Bakker did in the first five minutes what Nicolas Mahut couldn’t do in eight hours: break Isner's serve.

Will a match like this ever happen again? John Isner says never. The commentators say never. But as long as there are guys like Isner who have huge serves and terrible returns, a match like this could happen. Let’s just hope it never does again.

Wimbledon 2010 Predictions

2010-06-20T12:58:00.002-04:00

Since no one is playing especially well right now, making picks this year has been a challenge. At one point I thought of basing my predictions on how well the players’ World Cup teams are doing. But I’m not so sure I believe Gisella Dulko and Robin Haase will go deep in the tournament. And I definitely don’t see another Switzerland over Spain victory happening at this point. So I just made my picks the old-fashioned way: with a little help from the internet and a Magic Eight Ball.

Ladies' Singles
1st Quarter
Serena Williams and Maria Sharapova both ended up in the top eighth of the draw, which happily means that one of them won’t make the quarterfinals. And since Serena has lost before the quarterfinals only twice in ten appearances at Wimbledon, it’s safe to predict she’ll be the one who progresses.

Her opponent could be Svetlana Kuznetsova, Agnieszka Radwanska, or Li Na. Kuznetsova has been to the quarterfinals of Wimbledon three times but hasn’t made it to a quarterfinal of any tournament this year, so I’m not putting any money on her making the second week. Radwanska was in the quarterfinals of Wimbledon the last two years and lost to a Williams sister both times. Li was a quarterfinalist at Wimbledon in 2006 and beat Maria Sharapova in the final of Birmingham last week. I’m giving Radwanska the edge because she has the advantage in the head-to-head against Li (including winning two grass court matches last year).

Quarterfinal 1 result: Serena Williams beats Agnieszka Radwanska in straight sets.

2nd Quarter
This quarter includes Zheng Jie, Caroline Wozniacki, and Victoria Azarenka. Zheng is a former Wimbledon semifinalist, but her results have been mostly disappointing since the Australian Open earlier in the year. Wozniacki proved that she could play on grass when she won Eastbourne last year, but as defending champion, she lost first round this year. Azarenka, who struggled during the clay season, regained some form by making the Eastbourne final this week. Based on current form, I have to pick Azarenka to make it through to the quarterfinals.

Azarenka could face Samantha Stosur or Aravane Rezai next. What kind of Australian is Stosur that she can make the French Open final but has such a mediocre record on grass? Rezai got to the semifinals of Birmingham last week and then took out Wozniacki in Eastbourne this week. I expect that Rezai to progress through this one.

Quarterfinal 2 result: Victoria Azarenka beats Aravane Rezai in three ball-bashing sets.

3rd Quarter
Justine Henin should be a little happier with her Wimbledon draw than her French Open one, but not too much. She could play Nadia Petrova, a two-time Wimbledon quarterfinalist, in the third round and Kim Clijsters, who has been to the semifinals of Wimbledon twice but is just coming back from the injury that kept her out of the French Open, in the fourth round. But of course Henin herself has been in the Wimbledon final twice and the semis three other times and is coming off a victory in ‘s-Hertogenbosch this week. I suspect Henin will fight her way into the quarterfinals this time.

The other quarterfinalist in this section will most likely be one of Yanina Wickmayer, Vera Zvonareva, or Jelena Jankovic. Wickmayer has had good results on grass outside of Wimbledon, but has never won a match at the All-England Club. Similarly, Zvonareva won a grass-court tournament in 2006, but hasn’t had great results at Wimbledon. Jankovic has never gotten past the fourth round at Wimbledon, but since she seems to be the most in-form of these players at the moment, I’ll pick her.

Quarterfinal 3 result: Justine Henin continues her unbeaten streak against Jankovic in straight sets.

4th Quarter
Francesca Schiavone is seeded to make the quarterfinals here, but I'm guessing she’s still celebrating her out-of-nowhere French Open win. I expect former Wimbledon finalist Marion Bartoli to take advantage of her relatively open draw…until she meets up with five-time champion Venus Williams again.

Quarterfinal 4 result: Venus Williams over Marion Bartoli in two sets.

Semifinals
Serena def. Azarenka in three sets. Make sure you have your earplugs handy.

Venus def. Henin in two sets. I don’t think Justine is playing as well in her “second career” as she did in her first. Guts alone won’t get it done against Venus on grass.

Final
Serena def. Venus in who cares. Another all Williams final? Yawn.

Gentlemen's Singles
1st Quarter
From 2004 to 2006, Roger Federer was practically invincible. Between 2007 and 2009, he started to lose more matches in non-Slam events, but was still a near-permanent fixture in major finals. Now that he has lost before a Grand Slam semifinal for the first time in six years, I’m beginning to wonder whether that will become his new trend. It’s even more concerning that he’s now losing to guys he used to completely dominate (like Nikolay Davydenko, Robin Soderling, and Lleyton Hewitt). But despite his recent struggles, I guess we still need to give him the benefit of the doubt at Wimbledon. He'll make the second week.

Federer’s quarter isn’t that difficult. He’s seeded to meet Davydenko in the quarterfinals, but Davydenko’s results at Wimbledon resemble Roddick’s at the French Open. More likely, the player to emerge from this group will be Tomas Berdych.

Quarterfinal 1 result: Federer wins the first set but forgets how to hit a forehand midway through the second set and loses to Berdych in four.

2nd Quarter
Novak Djokovic’s first opponent is Olivier Rochus, who beat him in the first round of Miami this year. Djokovic may get revenge in this match, but based on his mediocre results this year, including an early loss at the warm-up event in London, I’m picking the 2010 Halle champion Lleyton Hewitt to emerge in the quarterfinals from this section.

Andy Roddick doesn’t have the easiest path to the quarterfinals: he could face Eastbourne champion Michael Llodra in the second round, and Philipp Kohlschreiber and Marin Cilic (both of whom have beaten in majors before) in the third and fourth round respectively. As much as I’d like to think that Roddick’s surprise loss to Dudi Sela in London last week is a sign of how well he’ll do at Wimbledon, I suspect Roddick will recover to make the quarterfinals.

Quarterfinal 2 result: Lleyton Hewitt upsets Andy Roddick in four sets.

3rd Quarter
Fernando Verdasco and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga will probably vie for a quarterfinal spot in this section. Verdasco has been to the fourth round of Wimbledon in three of the last four years. Tsonga has only played Wimbledon twice, but as long as he stays healthy, I see no reason why his game shouldn’t translate well onto grass. So I’ll pick Tsonga to advance to his first Wimbledon quarterfinal here.

Andy Murray still hasn’t seemed to recover from his Australian Open loss, but if he’s going to get his confidence back, it should be here in front of his home crowd. He may have to be wary of London winner Sam Querrey as a potential fourth round opponent. Querrey, however, isn't guaranteed to make it that far since he hasn’t won a match at a Grand Slam this year and plays ‘s-Hertogenbosch champion Sergiy Stakhovsky in the first round. So I’ll go with Murray to make the quarterfinals.

Quarterfinal 3 result: Jo-Wilfried Tsonga defeats Andy Murray in a dramatic five set match.

4th Quarter
I suspect Robin Soderling will be looking forward to a grass court rematch against Rafael Nadal in the quarterfinals. Soderling should be able to make it to that round without too much trouble, although I could see Marcos Baghdatis, a former Wimbledon semifinalist, taking a set off of him in the fourth round.

Rafael Nadal’s draw appeared to be the toughest of the top seeds when it first came out, but with the late withdrawal of Ernests Gulbis, who could have been Nadal’s third round opponent, it has gotten a little easier. Nadal will still probably have to contend with the monsters serves from John Isner in the fourth round, but he’ll find a way to win that one and make the quarterfinals.

Quarterfinal 4 result: Robin Soderling overpowers Nadal in four sets.

Semifinals
Tomas Berdych def. Lleyton Hewitt in four sets.

Robin Soderling def. Jo Wilfried-Tsonga in four sets.

Final
Robin Soderling def. Tomas Berdych in three sets.

How’s that for some bold predictions?

French Open Final Thoughts

2010-06-10T15:37:00.002-04:00

More proof that life isn’t fair: Sam Stosur did all the hard work during the French Open (by beating Justine Henin, Serena Williams, and Jelena Jankovic in consecutive matches), and Francesca Schiavone reaped the reward.

In her post-match interview, Stosur credited Schiavone with playing a great match (which is the truth), and claimed that she herself wasn’t especially effected by the big occasion (which is a lie). I don’t care how well Schiavone was playing, if Stosur had served and hit her forehand the way she had in her three previous matches, she would have won the title. But she played somewhat tentatively from the baseline, was out-aced by Schiavone, and, for someone so accomplished in doubles, seemed surprisingly uncomfortable coming forward. I can only attribute her disappointing performance to nerves.

For Schiavone’s part, she had poor record in finals (3-10) coming into the match, but she took advantage of this golden opportunity. I can’t imagine she’ll ever have another chance at winning a major…

…and now that I’ve said that, she’ll probably win Wimbledon.

As for the men’s final, it went as expected. I don’t know that there was much Robin Soderling could have done to beat Rafael Nadal. No matter how big Soderling hit the ball, it always seemed to come back. After Soderling let a couple of chances to break Nadal in the second set slip away, it was pretty clear he was already mentally boarding a flight out of Paris.

I really do like awkwardly polite off-court Rafael Nadal, but he’s a whole different animal as soon as he gets on court. It’s nearly as exhausting watching him muscle his forehand cross-court as it must be facing that shot. Okay, not really. But you get what I’m saying. It’s not fun watching Nadal frustrate his opponents to death.

That concludeth my thoughts on the weirdest French Open since 2004. But check back soon. The change of surface can be tricky, so I’m already practicing for grass court blogging.

Stupid Statements Brought to You by Passing Shots

2010-06-04T11:06:00.003-04:00

From my French Open predictions from two weeks ago:

“Poor Sam Stosur, by the way. She’s playing well enough to make the semifinals for the second year in a row, but there’s no way she’s getting out of the Serena-Justine quarter alive.”

Well, not only made it through the Serena-Justine quarter, but it looks highly likely that she’ll win the title. And as far as I can tell, she’s alive. Whoops.

From my Australian Open first week recap:

“Robin Soderling: How do you say ‘flash in the pan’ in Swedish?”

I still haven’t gotten the translation, but it looks like I won’t need it. Soderling doesn’t have the most complete game (I never thought Roddick would relinquish the this title, but Robin Soderling is officially the worst volleyer in the top 10), but it’s hard to criticize him given his results at Roland Garros in the last two years.

So, in summary, don’t listen to anything I say. I don’t know what I’m talking about.

Update from the 2010 French Open

2010-06-02T01:32:00.002-04:00

After several rather harrowing days of tennis viewing, I’m back to report. The news from Roland Garros is not great.

Justine Henin went out in the fourth round. Even though I picked her to win the tournament, I knew it would be a tough ask for Henin to get through her terrible draw. And in the end, the big kick-serve and heavy forehands of Samantha Stosur proved too much for the Belgian. The one bright note is that Henin did manage to claim Maria Sharapova as a victim before exiting the tournament.

And Roger Federer, for the first time in six years, did not make a Grand Slam semifinal. His conqueror was Robin Soderling, who played the best match of his life…or at least his best match since he beat Rafael Nadal last year. I would have liked to see the semifinal streak continue for Federer, but it was about time for it to end. The French Open is not his favorite tournament and his opponent was playing near perfect tennis. In addition, Roger has achieved practically everything there is to achieve in tennis, he has more going on in his life off the court, and he’s not as young as he once was. I’m not saying he couldn’t win another five or six majors before he calls it quits—he certainly could—but I think the days of him winning three majors a year or making the finals of every Grand Slam event are over.

So now that my two favorite players are out of the tournament, who am I rooting for? As much as I’m happy to see Francesca Schiavone still representing the one-handed backhand, I have to back Elena Dementieva. This is a golden opportunity for Dementieva to win that elusive major title at last, and given everything else she has achieved in her career, she deserves it. As far as the men’s tournament goes, if Robin Soderling can beat both Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal on the terre battu, he’s earned the trophy.

But who will win? I’m still backing Nadal (I just can’t see Soderling maintaining such a high level for six more sets). But the winner on the women’s side will be…drum roll, please…Elena Dementieva. You heard it here first.

Letter to ESPN2

2010-05-28T23:45:00.004-04:00

Dear ESPN2,

I know we’ve had our differences in the past. You like showing the Williams sisters, Maria Sharapova, and Andy Roddick; I enjoy watching players like Justine Henin, Svetlana Kuznetsova, and Stanislas Wawrinka. You think of commentators as talk-show hosts; I prefer commentators to remain quiet unless they have something worthwhile to say. You believe dramatic montages are essential to a good broadcast; I use montages as a time to check my e-mail and get something to eat.

Despite our disagreements, lately I have felt that we’re beginning to develop more mutual respect. For example, I don’t remember you showing any tape-delayed matches while there was still live tennis going on during this year’s Australian Open, which I greatly appreciated. Likewise, I find myself better able to tolerate your commentary teams. Since Andy Roddick’s restraining order against Cliff Drysdale, Cliffy has been doing mostly women’s tennis, which is fine by me. And Darren Cahill, who has a lot of technical expertise, has been a good addition to the group. I still can’t stand Dick Enberg and Mary Carillo, but I’m willing to use the mute button when I have to do so.

But after the recent progress we’ve made in our relationship, I feel like you set us back several years this afternoon. I got up very early to watch Tennis Channel’s coverage of the French Open, which included Serena Williams, Rafael Nadal, and Roger Federer’s lopsided matches. None of these matches were especially exciting, but things started to get more competitive later in the day, around the time coverage of the tournament switched from Tennis Channel to ESPN2.

Now, for most of the week, the transition from Tennis Channel to ESPN2 has gone smoothly: TC wraps up at noon, I grab the remote and switch channels, and you resume showing whichever match was on TC. But today, to my dismay, instead of seeing Jo-Wilfried Tsonga trying to close out Thiemo De Bakker, I beheld Serena Williams warming up in her gigantic blue windbreaker. For a moment I thought I was having déjà vu, but I quickly realized what was going on. Instead of showing one of the many live matches still happening, you decided to roll the tape and show Serena Williams' 6-1, 6-1 blowout of Julia Goerges. I have to say I felt hurt, angry, and let down. I thought we were past this.

I understand that I might not be the average ESPN2 viewer in that I follow more obscure players than Serena Williams and Rafael Nadal. But I’m not asking you to show a match from Court 16 between two players outside the top 50. While you were airing recorded matches, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Svetlana Kuznetsova, Elena Dementieva, Marin Cilic, and Robin Soderling were involved in competitive encounters. All of these players are inside or near the top 10, and I would guess that even some of your more casual viewers might have heard of them.

I don’t take betrayal lightly, and it’s going to take a lot of time and effort on your part before I can find it in my heart to forgive you. But I suggest you make an effort to show only live matches in the coming week and definitely don’t let Dick Enberg out of the retirement home for a field trip to Paris. That would be a solid start, and we can see what happens from there.

Sincerely,
Callie

P.S. For more tips on how to mend our relationship, I suggest you watch what NBC does with its coverage this weekend…and do the exact opposite.

Does the World Hate Richard Gasquet or Does Richard Gasquet Hate the World?

2010-05-24T22:42:00.004-04:00

4th round Wimbledon 2008: Andy Murray def. Richard Gasquet 7-5, 6-3, 6-7(3), 2-6, 4-6.
1st round U.S. Open 2008: Tommy Haas def. Richard Gasquet 7-6(3), 4-6, 7-5, 5-7, 2-6
3rd round Australian Open 2009: Fernando Gonzalez def. Richard Gasquet 6-3, 6-3, 6-7(10), 2-6, 10-12.
1st round Australian Open 2010: Mikhail Youzhny def. Richard Gasquet 7-6(9), 6-4, 6-7(2), 6-7(4), 4-6.
1st round French Open 2010: Andy Murray def. Richard Gasquet 6-4, 7-6(5), 6-4, 6-2, 6-1.

One might look at these results and conclude that someone or something doesn’t want Richard Gasquet to succeed. Not only does he get some terrible draws, but he loses matches in the most painful of ways. Does this make him tennis’s Tantalus, coming agonizingly close to tasting victory before it is cruelly snatched away from him? Is the world punishing Richard Gasquet?

Or is it the other way around?

Richard Gasquet is genuinely gifted—arguably as gifted as any of the current top ten players, and certainly more entertaining to watch than ninety percent of them. If Gasquet could finally harness his talent to win a major title, he would delight tennis fans not only in France but everywhere. But he never does. If not injured or fatigued, he’s being suspended for cocaine-contaminated kissing. Is Richard Gasquet the Mozart of the sport, capable of providing the world with works of genius but never living up to his promise? Is Richard Gasquet punishing the world?

I don’t know the answers to these questions. All I know is that if Richard Gasquet blows another huge lead in a Grand Slam match, I may ask the "Pennsylvania Man" to push me off the Eiffel Tower, too.

Roland Garros 2010 Predictions

2010-05-22T13:27:00.002-04:00

Les Femmes
Quarterfinals:
Serena Williams vs. Justine Henin – According to most, these two are the top contenders for the title. This match-up should probably be the final, but thanks to Roger Federer, it’s just a quarterfinal match. Henin will win in three sets.
(Poor Sam Stosur, by the way. She’s playing well enough to make the semifinals for the second year in a row, but there’s no way she’s getting out of the Serena-Justine quarter alive.)

Jelena Jankovic vs. Vera Zvonareva – Dinara Safina? Ana Ivanovic? They both know what it’s like to be in the final—neither has recovered from it. Agnieszka Radwanska? Haven’t heard much from her recently. Yanina Wickmayer? Recovering from surgery. Jankovic and Zvonareva are the best of a lot of bad choices. Jankovic in three sets.

Li Na vs. Caroline Wozniacki – I don’t know what’s going on with Svetlana Kuznetsova these days, but the odds of her defending her title are looking pretty bleak. The next highest seed in that section is Li Na, so I guess I’m picking her by default. Caroline Wozniacki (a.k.a. “Jankovic 2.0”) was clearly absent the day they were handing out common sense, seeing as she has played practically every week since the beginning of March. But assuming she can hold up physically, she’s got a pretty good draw. Wozniacki over Li in two sets.

Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez vs. Aravane Rezai – Elena Dementieva has gone off the tracks and Venus Williams hasn’t made it past the third round in the last three years. So I’ll go with the in-form players. Rezai over Maria “I have too many names” Jose Martinez Sanchez in two sets.

Semifinals:
Henin vs. Jankovic – Justine extends her head-to-head advantage against Jankovic to 11-0. Three sets.

Wozniacki vs. Rezai – The Wizard of Woz wins in three sets.

Final:
Henin vs. Wozniacki – Wozniacki’s Grand Slam title hopes foiled by a Belgian again. Henin in two sets.

Les Hommes
Quarterfinals:
Roger Federer vs. Ernests Gulbis – Federer doesn’t have the easiest draw (why does it seem like Stanislas Wawrinka always seem to get stuck near Federer in every tournament?) but it’s Roger Federer and it’s a Grand Slam tournament. Enough said. Picking the other quarterfinalist from this section is tougher. I could make a good argument for Marin Cilic, Robin Soderling, or Albert Montanes making it to the quarters, but I’ll make the case for Gulbis: by winning his first tournament, beating Federer, and taking a set off of Nadal on clay, Ernests is finally starting to live up to his potential. And let’s not forget, he has been to the quarterfinals of Roland Garros once before (2008). Federer wins the (re-)rematch in four sets.

Marcos Baghdatis vs. Mikhail Youzhny – It’s either a very bad first round for Andy Murray or for Richard Gasquet. Gasquet, having won a challenger in Bordeaux last week and the title in Nice this week, is on a ten match win streak. Ultimately it doesn’t matter, though, because Marcos Baghdatis is getting to the quarterfinals in this part of the draw. He will then lose to Mikhail Youzhny in four sets.

Novak Djokovic vs. David Ferrer – Djokovic has been struggling with allergies recently (is Benadryl a banned substance on the ATP Tour?), so who knows how long he’s going to make it. But let’s assume he can fight through his sniffles to get to the quarters. There he will meet David Ferrer (who will have just done the world a favor by dispatching of Andy Roddick). Ferrer and a sore throat beat Djokovic in three sets.

Rafael Nadal vs. Fernando Verdasco – If Verdasco doesn’t burn out early (he played a lot of matches during the clay season), he’ll just get embarrassed by Nadal again. Maybe he ought to let Almagro win their fourth round match instead.

Semifinals
Federer vs. Youzhny – Federer in straight sets.

Nadal vs. Ferrer – Nadal in three and a half sets.

Final
Federer vs. Nadal – Nadal in 3.25 sets.

Report from Madrid

2010-05-17T18:21:00.005-04:00

Another clay Masters event, another trophy devoured by Rafael Nadal.

“Mmmmm…trophies!”

By decisively winning all three Masters 1000s on clay this year, Nadal has put a definite kibosh on any thought of another early loss at the French Open. Or late at the French Open. Or ever again. And by making the final, he secured a position as the second seed at Roland Garros (meaning no chance of a Federer-Nadal semifinal), which may be the only good result from Madrid for Roger Federer and his fans.

“Wait…where’s the ball?”

Actually, that’s not quite true. Ignoring the air-ball on match point, I’d say Roger Federer acquitted himself fairly well in the Madrid. He got his revenge against Ernests Gulbis for their match in Rome and then extended his unbeaten streak against David Ferrer to ten matches. And in the final, Federer responded relatively well to Nadal’s super-topspin shots to his backhand, his unforced error count was acceptable, and he was aggressive at the right moments. Nadal actually only won one more point than Federer in the match. So, considering the spastic tennis he had been playing since the Australian Open, it wasn’t a terrible loss for Roger.

On the other hand, the fact that I consider a straight-sets loss to be a satisfactory result just goes to show how low my expectations have sunk for Federer when he plays Nadal.

Meanwhile, there was also a women’s tournament going on in Madrid. But after Kim Clijsters pulled out and Justine Henin, Svetlana Kuznetsova, and Dinara Safina each lost in the first round, I strategically decided to sleep through all of the other women’s matches so that I could focus all my energy on the men’s tournament. Turns out Aravane Rezai won the tournament, beating Henin, Jelena Jankovic, and Venus Williams on the way. I don’t know much about Rezai except that Dinara Safina once said that she was the hardest hitter on tour, and that her father once punched another tennis dad over a double-booked practice court. I’m not one to rush to judgment (okay, that’s probably not true), but I’m not sure Rezai is ever going to be my favorite player.

Strong Contenders for the French Open Title

Unlike on the men’s tour, where Nadal has been hogging all the big clay tournaments and is the clear favorite for Roland Garros, each of the “premiere” clay events have gone to a different player outside of the top 10: Samantha Stosur (Charleston), Henin (Stuttgart), Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez (Rome), and Rezai (Madrid). Add to the equation that Kim Clijsters has pulled out of the French Open with an injured foot, the defending champion Kuznetsova is a headcase, and that numero uno Serena Williams has only played six matches since the Australian Open and hasn’t ever really been that comfortable on clay, and I have no idea who’s going to win RG.

But I’ll have it all worked out once the draw comes out later this week, so check back on Saturday for my Roland Garros predictions.

Important Things I Learned While I Was Gone

2010-05-11T12:37:00.003-04:00

I haven’t posted since February 7th, but today I return older and wiser. Just because I finished school and am unemployed doesn’t mean I haven’t continued learning—quite the contrary. The following are ten life lessons that tennis has taught me in recent months:

Lesson 1: It’s okay to hold a grudge against someone who’s a class above you—just don’t air your feelings in front of 16,000+ people.
It’s understandable that Andre Agassi might be a little bitter about his past. He had one of those crazy tennis fathers, who saw his son as a ticket to success and wealth. It was all work and no play for young Andre, who, if all went according to plan, was to become the greatest tennis player of all time. But after all those long hours in his childhood devoted to mastering the sport, he didn’t become the greatest of all time. He didn’t become the greatest of his generation. He didn’t even become the greatest American of his generation. Those titles were bestowed upon Pete Sampras, a guy whose parents weren’t even involved in his tennis, let alone monitoring every step he took both on and off the court. How unfair.

On the other hand, by the time he reached the end of his career, Agassi had millions of dollars, status as a global icon, and a wife and children—all thanks to tennis. Sure, maybe it wasn’t the path he would have chosen for himself, but in the end, tennis had treated him pretty well. It now was time to step away from the game gracefully. He could devote more time to his charity, play the occasional hit-and-giggle exhibition match, and maybe, a few years down the road, he might even pen some innocuous, cliché sports autobiography, as all sports legends feel the need to do.

And that’s what he did—almost. But one doesn’t get to be one of the most recognized tennis players of all time by adhering to convention. Andre Agassi had always made a point of being outlandish and outspoken, and it would have been a disservice to his career if Open: An Autobiography and been any less outrageous. So he threw in plenty of scandalous information about himself: how he had worn a wig during the 1990 French Open, how he had used meth and lied about it to the ATP, etc. And then he went on television and cried and pleaded for our sympathy and compassion because he’s a troubled individual, and he’s had a hard life, and so on. (Meanwhile, he was raking in the dough from “compassionate” book readers).

Of course, it’s his business if he wants to tarnish his image to sell books. But a certain Pete Sampras, who, it should be noted, had never expressed anything but respect and support for Andre Agassi, was a little less than thrilled to find out that Agassi had trashed him in the book, calling him dull, robotic, and worst of all, a cheapskate. At the time, Sampras didn’t have much of a retort. But that was never his style anyway; unlike Agassi, Sampras always let his racquet do the talking.

A few months passed and the hullabaloo over Agassi’s book began to die down (no doubt to Agassi’s secret chagrin). But then there came an opportunity to stir things up again: the Hit for Haiti exhibition in Indian Wells, a doubles match pairing Agassi and Rafael Nadal against Roger Federer and Pete Sampras. That night, the only thing more “open” than Agassi’s autobiography was his mouth. Mostly he made feeble but inoffensive jokes about the others, but when he egged Sampras into showing some humor, and Sampras obliged by mimicking Agassi’s pigeon-toed walk, the atmosphere changed dramatically. Agassi thought an appropriate response was to do an impersonation of Sampras. But not the usual slouched-shoulders-tongue-hanging-out-of-the-mouth-service-motion bit he sometimes does. Instead, Agassi pulled out his pockets and said, “I don’t have any money!” Sampras finally got a chance to let his racquet do the talking and strategically aimed his next serve at Agassi’s head.

The next day, articles about the feud were not only all over tennis websites, but even made the front page of mainstream sites like Yahoo! And for the most part, the consensus was that Agassi was out-of-line. Agassi was then forced to make a public apology, acknowledging that it was a poor attempt at humor, but that Pete “didn't really let me get past it. He didn't really roll with it.” He also announced that he had sent a text message (ah, the wonders of modern-day contrition!) to Sampras to say sorry. But he couldn’t help himself from adding that he still hadn’t heard back from Pete (i.e. “See? I am the better man!”).

Anyway, after that lengthy exposition, what’s the moral of the story? Andre Agassi has always been and will continue to be a bitter, desperate egomaniac. To some extent, it’s understandable why he resents Sampras, who not only achieved more than Agassi did, but actually enjoyed playing tennis and competing, and who seems content in his retirement. So if Agassi wants to spend his days and nights inside his own home, bemoaning Sampras’ stinginess to Steffi, no one will deny him that. But when he’s taking part in a charity match in front of thousands of people, he needs to just shut up and play.

Lesson 2: There is justice in the world.
I like Ivan Ljubicic—not so much for his old-school playing style (or his old-school headband), but for his old-school personality. He has always worked hard to make the most of his (somewhat limited) abilities, he took on the responsibility of being ATP Player Council President, and now, as his tennis career has begun to wind down, he has gotten married and started a family. He’s something uncommon among sport figures: a grown-up.

I also like him for his subtle sense of humor. Take for example his “Bag Check” on the Tennis Channel. At one point he pulls a Croatian book out of his bag and tells the audience that the author, Ante Tomic, is “a really funny guy.” As if to prove this, he then reads a sentence in Croatian, turns to the camera, and says with a straight face, “Like I said: funny guy.” Of course, he knows we non-Croatian-speakers still have no idea whether Ante Tomic is really such a wit, but we now get the impression that Ivan Ljubicic might be joking around with us.

And the fact that there’s no love lost between him and Andy Roddick? Well, it certainly doesn’t hurt my opinion of him.

Naturally, I was happy for Ljubicic when he made it to number three in the world back in 2006. But to be fair, Ivan Ljubicic has been, for the most part, an overachiever. He has a great serve and a pretty decent backhand, but he’s not the swiftest mover, and there’s certainly nothing flashy about his game. Even at his peak, he was never a real contender for the Grand Slams. But he did lose some heartbreaking Masters Series finals, and I always felt it would be a shame if he retired without a Masters title. After all, if Albert Portas and Andre Pavel could each win one, why not Ljubicic?

When Ljubicic slipped out of the top 20, though, it seemed certain he would never get the chance to hoist a Masters trophy. But then, out of nowhere, a miracle! Ljubicic came through the Indian Wells draw, beating Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, and Andy Roddick to win the tournament and cross off the last item on his career checklist. It was a well deserved win, and for a few days, it made me believe that life actually is fair.

Lesson 3: There isn't justice in the world.
And then Andy Roddick won Miami.

Do I really need to enumerate all the reasons that this is an outrage to tennis, America, and basically all of humanity? In case you need a refresher, let me send you on a trip way down memory lane: Andy Roddick is the Antichrist.

This is ample proof that there is no justice in the world.

Lesson 4: Sometimes a change of scene is the best way to get out of a rut.
Rafael Nadal was on top of the tennis world this time last year. Little did he know he would go almost twelve full months without winning a singles title. At times during the past year, he’s looked totally out of sorts, which is totally un-Nadal. He didn’t put up any fight against Juan Martin Del Potro at the U.S. Open, he lost all three of his matches in straight sets at the Masters Cup, and against Roddick in Miami, he was the closest he’s ever been to throwing his racquet (that I can recall).

But then April came and he felt the soft crunch of clay beneath his feet once again. The pain in his knees is gone (for now), and the bad memories from the last twelve months have been erased. In fact, Nadal may be more indestructible on clay this year than ever. His opponents are openly admitting that they aren’t thinking about winning matches against him; their goal is just to get a respectable number of games. Most aren’t even accomplishing that.

Lesson 5: God gave humans two hands so that if one gets damaged, we can use the other one.
Juan Martin Del Potro and Nikolay Davydenko, who are out with sore wrists, have been sorely missed. Had they been there, they might have stopped the calamity in Miami, and it would be interesting to know if they one of them (especially Del Potro) could halt Nadal’s clay assault.

On the other hand (no pun intended), this is what they get for having two-handed backhands. You don’t see players with one-handed backhands getting off-hand wrist injuries, do you? And look at Justine Henin. She broke a finger on her left-hand, and week-and-a-half later she was holding up the winner’s trophy in Stuttgart. If she had a two-handed backhand, she would have been out for months.

Lesson 6: When traveling by air, always carry your most important belongings with you.
In January, Roger Federer defeated Andy Murray for the Australian Open title. Since then Federer’s record is five wins and four losses. Murray’s record is five wins and five losses. After such a promising start to the year for both guys, what happened? My hypothesis is that they both packed their A-games in the luggage that they checked at the Melbourne airport. The airline lost their stuff and now they’re out of luck.

Lesson 7: Forgiveness is for the weak.
Everyone from Lance Armstrong to Friedrich Nietzsche says it’s important to be strong. And how many people are stronger, both physically and mentally, than Serena Williams? Not many. Therefore, we should all try to model ourselves after Serena. And Serena does not believe in forgiveness.

How do I know? During her match against Jankovic in Rome, Serena held her hand up to stop play while Jankovic hit a serve. Jankovic claimed not to see Serena’s hand and insisted that the point should be hers. A minor argument ensued. After the match (which Jankovic won), Serena apologized for the incident, saying “I would never cheat you like that. I’m not Justine.”

Here’s the video proof.

Of course, she was referencing the infamous hand incident from the French Open semifinal in 2003. It was seven years ago and practically a different career for Justine, but Serena has neither forgiven nor forgotten.

Lesson 8: It’s easier to get to the top than to stay there.
Twenty-three WTA tournaments have taken place this year, with twenty different winners. There have been twenty-eight ATP tournaments and twenty-two different winners. For the first time in years, there is no one dominating either of the men’s or women’s tours.

Lesson 9: No amount of makeup can hide your flaws from a High Definition television.
While hanging out with a golden retriever friend of mine, I got the opportunity to experience tennis in high definition. The bad news is that I got hooked. The good news is that I made enough money pet-sitting to procure an HD TV all of my own.

While watching tennis on my new HD TV, it dawned on me why Maria Sharapova has avoided getting to the televised end of tournaments recently. If you’ve seen Maria Sharapova close-up in high def, you know what I mean.

By the way, if you’re in Ann Arbor and are in need of pet-sitter, I’m available. I can provide references from the aforementioned golden retriever, a pit bull, two poodles, three cats, and a demon masquerading as a cat.

Lesson 10: If you leave a blog unattended for months, the comments section will get inundated with spam.
Can anyone translate Russian? Where's my brother when I need him?

The Rules of Tennis Commentary: Parts of Speech

2010-02-07T16:04:00.002-05:00

After suffering through two weeks of ESPN2’s commentary team, it is my usual practice to vent my frustration in this blog. But my complaining is not accomplishing anything; the time has come for me to be proactive. So, in order to improve my own tennis viewing experience, I am going to start giving advice, free of charge, to tennis commentators on how they can improve their performances. We’ll start by discussing the usage of the different parts of speech:

Adverbs have no place in sports’ broadcasts. Don’t say “he hit that shot masterfully;” instead simply say “that was a great shot.” Or better yet, don’t say anything since the viewers saw the shot and don’t need to be told it how good it was.

Adjectives should be used sparingly and only insofar as they make literal sense. Goat cheese, tomato, and basil sandwiches can be (and usually are) delicious; match-ups are not edible and therefore cannot be delicious. Also, refrain from making up adjectives. No matter how inconsistent it is, a player’s serve cannot be described as “disrhythmic.”

Verbs and nouns can very useful. In fact, you might be able to go through an entire match using only verbs and nouns. You could say, “Player A serves, player B returns, player A volleys.” But since you can assume most of your audience isn’t blind, this type of commentary is redundant. So choose your verbs and nouns carefully.

Pronouns are nifty. Sometimes you’re talking about a particular player and you find yourself trying to find synonyms for his name: Federer, Roger, the stylish Swiss, the genius from Basel, the maestro, etc. Try using a pronoun in place of his name instead. It’s much more efficient.

Articles, prepositions, and conjunctions can add another dimension to your sentences. You could say, “If [conjunction] the [article] line judge calls another foot fault, then [conjunction] the [article] player will stuff a [article] ball in [preposition] her throat.” Now your broadcasts are getting more interesting.

Finally, anyone who uses interjections should have to stand blindfolded at the net while Ivo Karlovic practices his serve. This goes double for people who use the interjection “oh my!”

Check back periodically for more advice.

Australian Open 2010: Closing Thoughts

2010-02-02T17:46:00.002-05:00

I used to think the Murray was a bad match-up for Federer. No, he doesn’t have the ability to overpower Federer like Juan Martin Del Potro. He can’t hammer ridiculously heavy topspin shots to Federer’s backhand, à la Rafael Nadal. It isn’t even as if he tries to take a page out of Nikolay Davydenko’s book by hitting the ball right off the bounce to take away time from Federer. But he is really, really good—maybe the best in the world at the moment—at retrieving would-be winners and frustrating the heck out of most opponents. Back at the tail end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009, when Federer’s movement and timing were somewhat suspect, Murray’s defensive tactics worked successfully against him.

But the Federer that Murray faced in the Australian Open final was a different player than the one he defeated in Indian Wells last spring. Federer made it clear that he wasn’t going to beat himself this time, and Murray should have realized early on that patiently rallying from several feet behind the baseline wasn’t going to get the job done. But Murray never made any major adjustments (or if he did, it was too little and too late).

Both commentators and fans seem to be criticizing Murray for not playing more aggressively. Yes, Murray needed to play more aggressively, but I’m beginning to wonder, could Murray have played more aggressively?

Sure, Murray can hit winners. If you watched his match against John Isner in the fourth round, you probably saw some stunners from fifteen feet behind the baseline. But that seems to be the only time Murray wants to pull the trigger: when he’s in a totally defensive position. Is Murray just being stubborn because he believes that his defense alone is good enough to beat anyone in the world? Or is this a flaw in his game? Is he unable to play aggressively from closer to the baseline because he needs time to be able set up for his big shots?

Murray addressed this topic in his post-match interview when he was asked to compare his quarterfinal match against Nadal with the final against Federer: “It's a different match against Roger. With Rafa, he can hit the ball short. He plays a lot of topspin. Roger hits the ball a lot flatter. The ball comes onto you a lot quicker, so it's harder to go for huge shots against him.”

And he did play more aggressively against Nadal. So maybe we’re wrong to criticize Murray’s tactics in the final. Maybe he knew what to do, but he simply could not execute a more offensive strategy because Federer’s deep, flat ground strokes and ability to take the ball early prevented him from doing so. Roger doesn’t have sixteen majors for nothing, you know.

So I think I was wrong about Andy Murray before. It turns out Murray isn’t a bad match-up for Federer; Federer is a bad match-up for Murray—and for that matter, almost everyone else on the tour.

And by the way, congratulations are in order not only for Roger Federer for winning Grand Slam title number sixteen, but for Mike in Etters, Kathy in Ann Arbor, and yours truly for picking Roger to win the 2010 Australian Open when almost none of the so-called “experts” predicted that he would take the title. You’d think being the greatest player ever would earn him a little more respect.

The women’s final was, in some ways, the opposite of the men’s final. Justine Henin came out playing ultra-aggressively, determined not to let Serena Williams dictate the match. On the one hand, it seems like the right idea because once Serena gets control over a match, she can be hard to stop. But it’s not really Henin’s style to attack every ball. What made her so great and so unique was that she was able to play defense and use her variety to keep her opponents off-balance. Then, when she had maneuvered herself into an advantageous position, she would strike.

But against Serena she tried to hit aggressive shots too early in the point. I know that as part of her preparation for Wimbledon she wants to come into net more. But you can’t expect to hit great approach shots off of the best serve in women’s tennis. Not to mention Henin insisted on hitting many of her shots into the middle of the court. People say the Williams Sisters are at their best on the run, but considering that Serena had to play a lot of tennis in the days leading up to the final and that she had strapping all over her legs, I think testing Serena’s movement might have been a good idea.

I don’t know. I guess I’m a little concerned about Henin’s obsession with winning Wimbledon. She seems to be building her whole comeback around that tournament. But in the meantime she might be sacrificing some of her best assets in order to become more of an attacking player. And what happens if she doesn’t do well at Wimbledon? Will she these changes to her game have been for nothing?

Or maybe I’m being too hard on her. She did, after all, get to the final of her first Grand Slam tournament in two years. And she lost in three sets to the most successful players of the last decade and the only player who is more mentally tough than she is.

So I’ll stop complaining now. Roger Federer is back to top form and Justine Henin is just back. 2010 is already shaping up to be a good year.

Australian Open Halftime Report

2010-01-25T18:35:00.004-05:00

First Week Recap
Who’s left:

Roger Federer: Despite what some tennis pundits might be saying, Roger is still the man to beat at the slams. Guys like Igor Andreev might be able challenge Federer by playing crazy go-for-broke tennis for a couple of sets, but it’s impossible for them to maintain that level for the entirety of a best-of-five set match. And as for guys like Hanescu, Montanes, and Hewitt, even their best isn’t good enough to take a set off an in-form Federer.
Nikolay Davydenko: He cruised though the opening three rounds, but he looked uncharacteristically unsettled against Fernando Verdasco. He’s going to have to pull himself together to pull off an upset of Federer next round.
Novak Djokovic: The 2008 champion has had a ridiculously easy draw, which is lucky for him because I still don’t think he’s playing that well.
Jo-Wilfried Tsonga: Yeah, he blew a two set lead and ended up going 9-7 in the fifth against Almagro in the fourth round. But on the bright side, he’s now got a one-hundred percent winning record in fifth sets.
Marin Cilic: A little revenge against Del Potro for beating him in the last two hard court majors. Will he be the obligatory Australian Open surprise finalist this year?
Andy Roddick: Given the quality of Fernando Gonzalez’s play for most of their fourth round match, Roddick should be out. But of course, Gonzo went Gonzo after a controversial decision by the umpire at the end of the fourth set, and pretty much ended the match.
Andy Murray: He’s gotten this far with his great defensive skills, but I agree with Mike in Etters: there’s no way he’s beating a healthy Nadal and Federer in a best-of-five set match purely by playing defense.
Rafael Nadal: He’s starting to look more and more like the guy from the first half of 2009 and not the pushover we saw at the end of last year. Bad news for everyone in the draw.

The Williams sisters: Venus has looked vulnerable at times; Serena…not so much.
Zheng and Li: Sometimes they like to show up in the second weeks of majors. I guess they decided it was time to do it again.
Nadia Petrova: Petrova has taken it upon herself to defeat my favorite players. Thanks for nothing, Nadia.
Justine Henin: She’s been a little up and down throughout her matches, but just like old times, she’s able to raise her level at the crucial moments.
Maria Kirilenko: She’s been a mediocre player most of her career, but she took out Sharapova in the first round and hasn’t looked back. Stella McCartney might be regretting swapping Kirilenko for Wozniacki last year.

Who’s out:

Juan Martin Del Potro: Not this time, big guy. Better rest that wrist.
Robin Soderling: How do you say “flash in the pan” in Swedish?
Kim Clijsters: She was most people’s pick to win the title, but she only won one game against Petrova in the third round. Not even she knows what the heck happened.
Svetlana Kuznetsova: Another major, another disappointing result. I really hope it doesn’t take her another five years to win her next Grand Slam title.
Dinara Safina: Just when it looked like she might be getting back on track, her back injury flares up again. I hope this problem doesn’t become chronic—she already has chronic brain problems.

Second Week Predictions:
As the owner, head writer, and editor of this blog, I reserve the right to revise my original predictions for the tournament.

Quaterfinals:

Federer def. Davydenko – Davydenko may have won the last two meetings, but that doesn’t nullify the first twelve won by Federer (including all four meetings at the majors).
Tsonga def. Djokovic – I’m sticking by my original pick for this one. Certainly Djokovic is the fresher of the two, but the fact that he hasn’t really been challenged all tournament may end up hurting him.
Cilic def. Roddick – Cilic is the kind of powerful, flat hitter that can punish Roddick for his passive tennis from ten feet behind the baseline…I hope.
Nadal def. Murray – There’s a reason that Nadal has a 7-2 record against Murray. I’m not entirely sure what it is, but I figure it’s the same reason that Nadal will beat Murray tomorrow.

Azarenka def. Serena – Azarenka has been quietly (although probably not literally) tearing through the draw. And since Serena only wins the Australian open inodd years, Azarenka has a great chance to get the upset.
Li def. Venus – Somebody needs to take Venus out. I do not need to see the flesh colored underwear again.
Henin def. Petrova – I’m definitely wavering on this one. On the one hand, Henin has to be getting tired after three tight matches in a row. On the other hand, she already has two decisive wins over Petrova in the last month (one was in an exhibition match). Nadia claims to be a calmer, gentler version of herself now, but I’m just hoping that negative Nadia comes back for this match.
Kirilenko def. Zheng – Big “who cares?”

Semifinals:

Federer def. Tsonga
Nadal def. Cilic

Azarenka def. Li
Henin def. Kirilenko

Finals:

Federer def. Nadal (Revenge!)
Azarenka def. Henin (Garbage!)

That's all she wrote.

2010 Australian Open Predictions

2010-01-17T18:05:00.003-05:00

Let's get straight to it:

Women's Quarterfinals:
Serena Williams vs. Vera Zvonareva - Serena has a relatively easy draw to the quarterfinals, and unless she's totally off her game in the quarterfinals (which is always possible), I don't see Zvonareva posing much of a problem for the defending champion. Serena in straight sets.

Caroline Wozniacki vs. Agnieszka Radwanska - That's right, I'm picking Radwanska the Elder to upset Venus in the fourth round. Wozzy has a nice draw to the quarters and she'll thank Radwanska for knocking out Venus after she beats A. Rad in two close sets.

Justine Henin vs. Kim Clijsters - This is a nasty, nasty quarter. Almost all the players I'd like to see go deep ended up in this section. Both Dementieva and Henin have been very impressive in their preparation for the AO: Henin for nearly beating Clijsters in the final of the first tournament of her comeback, and Dementieva for brushing aside Serena in the Sydney final. Unfortunately, they could play each other in the second round. It's a tough choice, but my loyalties still lie with Henin, so I'm picking her to make it through that match and into the quarterfinals. Clijsters will likely have to play Kuznetsova in the fourth round, which, depending on what version of Kuznetsova shows up, could be tricky. But I'll stick with Clijsters, and predict her to beat Henin in another tight three setter in the quarterfinals.

Alona Bondarenko vs. Dinara Safina - This is probably the weakest quarter of the women's draw. Jankovic is seeded to make it through, but I'm feeling an upset coming. So I'll go with Bondarenko the First to make it through. I'm hesitant to pick poor Dinara Safina given her mental state in the last few months. But I've already picked one Bondarenko sister and I refuse to pick Maria Sharapova. So I'm choosing Safina and hoping she gets her stuff together to beat Bondarenko in three sets.

Women's Semifinals:
Serena vs. Wozniacki - Serena struggles, comes within a game of defeat, fights back, wins in three sets.

Clijsters vs. Safina - Clijsters, two routine sets.

Women's Final:
Clijsters vs. Serena - Kim gets a legit win in two sets (no default of her opponent this time).

Men's Final:
Roger Federer vs. Nikolay Davydenko - Two months ago, I would have picked Federer to beat Davydenko in a heartbeat. But given that the little guy has beaten Roger the last two times they've met, I have reason to pause. On the other hand, Davydenko has assured everyone that despite his recent hot streak, he can't win best-of-five matches against the big boys. So I'll take Davydenko's word for it and pick Federer in four sets in this one.

Novak Djokovic vs. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga - I'm not sure what to make of Djokovic's most recent appearances. He didn't play any official tournaments leading up to the AO, but he did play a few matches in the Kooyong Exhibition. He lost miserably to Fernando Verdasco, and then narrowly lost to the Australian wildcard Bernard Tomic. Was he just goofing around in these matches? Probably. But could the lack of intensity in his preparation hurt him? I think so. As Roger Federer could testify to last summer, you don't want to start goofing around while playing Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (who by the way will upset Robin Soderling in round four). Tsonga gets payback for the AO final in 2008 and upsets the Djoker in four sets.

Andy Roddick vs. Juan Martin Del Potro - I'm hoping Sam Querrey has recovered well from his freak injury last fall, because last time he played Roddick he beat him. But realistically, I don't see a repeat happening. Nor do I see Fernando Gonzalez besting Roddick in the fourth round, as much as I would enjoy that. But we'll be wishing Roddick farewell in the quarterfinals because Juan Martin Del Potro (as long as the injury that caused him to pull out of Kooyong isn't serious) is going to thrash him in straight sets.

Andy Murray vs. Rafael Nadal - Sure, Rafa hasn't won a title since April of last year and he has looked unusually vulnerable recently. But I think we've all watch Rafa long enough to realize that you should never ever underestimate him. The opposite seems to be true of Murray: the more hype he gets, the less successful he is. Nadal will help Murray exit the tournament (four sets) and Murray can get back to working on achieving tennis glory on his Xbox (he plays as Federer on it).

Men's Semis:
Federer vs. Tsonga - Federer in four.

Nadal vs. Del Potro - DelPo in four.

Men's Final:
Federer vs. Del Potro - Roger gets revenge in five sets!

Hmm. I'm not feeling too confident about these...

75 Things More Likely to Happen in 2010 Than Andy Roddick Winning a Grand Slam Title

2009-12-29T22:00:00.004-05:00

Welcome to the Passing Shots Quarterly Report, formerly known as Passing Shots Weekly and later as Passing Shots: Month in Review.

It’s that time of the year again. Every December, people* around the world feel compelled to summarize the year’s events by making “best/worst of” lists. In the last two days I’ve read about the 20 Best Movies of 2009, the 7 Worst Fashion Disasters of 2009, the 10 Most Shocking Reality TV moments of 2009, and of course National Geographic’s essential Best Adventure Gear of 2009.

Now, I do love a good list. But if there’s anything I love more than a good list, it’s being a contrarian. I would be entirely dissatisfied with myself if all I did here was compile a list of the best tennis moments of 2009. My devoted followers would surely find this neither original nor particularly interesting. So instead I will combine my love of lists with the one thing that I love even more than being a contrarian: making fun of Andy Roddick.

Behold, 75 events more likely to happen in 2010 than Andy Roddick winning a second Grand Slam title (in order of most to least likely):

Rafael Nadal wins the French Open
Novak Djokovic disrobes after a match
Juan Martin Del Potro wins his first Masters title
Roger Federer wins at least one major
Novak Djokovic disrobes during a players’ party
Someone compares Jo-Wilfried Tsonga to Mohammed Ali
Patrick McEnroe predicts that Andy Roddick will win a Grand Slam title in 2010
Rafael Nadal wins a major other than the French Open
Andy Murray wins the calendar Grand Slam on his Xbox
Roger Federer retains the number one ranking
Gael Monfils injures himself during a post-match break-dance celebration
Novak Djokovic disrobes during his stint in a Serbian television miniseries
Nikolay Davydenko makes a Grand Slam final
Justine Henin completes the career Grand Slam
Juan Martin Del Potro’s eyebrows converge
Svetlana Kuznetsova makes a major final without playing a match on a show court
Novak Djokovic disrobes while meeting Prince Albert of Monaco
Gilles Simon discovers that Gap Kids sells clothes that fit him
Fabrice Santoro un-retires
Elena Dementieva finally wins her first major
Fernando Verdasco invents an entirely new hairstyle
David Nalbandian beats every player in the top ten but still doesn’t win a major
Andy Roddick fires Larry Stefanki but then realizes that he has run out of coaches to work with, so he unsuccessfully attempts to hire Roger Federer
Martina Navratilova returns to professional tennis to win two more mixed doubles Slam titles
Richard Gasquet symbolically starts wearing his hat forwards (but no one knows what it symbolizes)
Mikhail Youzhny is revealed to be a KGB agent
Venus Williams begins wearing an eye patch purely as an accessory
Jelena Jankovic elects to bring a stylist with her on court instead of a coach
Marcos Baghdatis starts a match clean shaven and finishes the match with a full beard
Kim Clijsters wins two more majors, including the U.S. Open while six month pregnant with her second child
Novak Djokovic disrobes while attending the Moscow Ballet’s production of Peter and the Wolf
Maria Sharapova plays an entire match without screaming (invalid if she finally bursts one of her vocal chords and is rendered permanently mute)
Marat Safin gets a wildcard into the Kremlin Cup but is defaulted from his first match after smashing two racquets, mooning the crowd, and insulting the umpire’s mother
Ivo Karlovic goes an entire match without hitting an ace
Patty Schnyder appears on an infomercial extolling the virtues of orange juice
Boris Becker gets married again in 2010
Chris Evert gets married again in 2010
Boris Becker marries Chris Evert in 2010
Daniel Nestor switches nationalities to Serbian so that he can play with Nenad Zimonjic in Davis Cup while Zimonjic, oblivious to Nestor’s defection, becomes Canadian
Roger Federer switches to a two-handed backhand
Ana Ivanovic’s comeback is successful until she accidentally swallows her fist after winning a point
Martina Hingis returns to tennis while Radek Stepanek simultaneously starts to slip down the rankings and Nicole Vaidisova climbs back up
Kei Nishikori appears on the Japanese game show Ninja Warrior but falls victim to the treacherous Cliff Hanger obstacle
Marion Bartoli quits tennis to start a dried pasta company
Rafael Nadal and Robin Soderling appear together on Spain’s version of Sesame Street to sing a duet entitled “Los Mejores Amigos Para Siempre”
Nikolay Davydenko’s hair spontaneously grows back overnight
The Italian Fed Cup team forms a female gang and terrorizes the tour by leaving severed racquet heads in the beds of their rivals
Fernando Gonzalez transforms into a werewolf during a night match at the U.S. Open
Serena Williams issues a full apology for her outburst at the U.S. Open
Serena Williams carries through on her threat towards the lineswoman at the U.S. Open
Novak Djokovic disrobes while on Celebrity Jeopardy!
Maria Sharapova’s arm falls off during a match, revealing that she is a cyborg
The WTA continues to allow Maria Sharapova to play, despite the revelation that she is a cyborg
Caroline Wozniacki comes out with a Grammy-nominated hip-hop album
An Englishman wins Wimbledon
Novak Djokovic disrobes while giving a speech to the United Nations
Serena Williams appears on a Mexican soap opera as an assassin with split personality disorder
The Australian Open is cancelled when New Zealand launches an attack on Australia
Victoria Azarenka legally changes her name to Esmeralda Panini
James Blake completely retools his game to become the new Fabrice Santoro
Lleyton Hewitt’s acquires bionic legs and wins the Australian Open
Vera Zvonareva wakes up one morning to discover that she is fluent in Portuguese
A pack of dingoes is set loose on the Australian Open grounds and Mary Carillo is eaten
One of the Bryan twins is believed to have gone missing until it is discovered that there was really only one Bryan the whole time and that the second brother was just an illusion created by mirrors placed strategically on court
Dinara Safina wins three of the four Grand Slams but doesn’t end the year as number one
John Isner goes into a sauna in Finland and emerges 4 ¾ inches shorter
John Isner’s missing inches are enigmatically added to Arnaud Clement’s height (but Clement still isn’t tall enough to go on all the rides at Euro Disney)
Andre Agassi atones for his illicit drug use by returning all of his prize money to the ATP
Billie Jean King and Elton John reveal that they are in fact the same person
Sam Querrey is named People magazine’s "Sexiest Man Alive"
Dijana Djokovic admits that Novak isn’t as good as Roger Federer
John McEnroe goes the entire year without uttering the phrase “You cannot be serious!”
Pete Sampras comes out with a new autobiography revealing that during his career he frequently partied with the artist formerly known as the Artist Formerly Known as Prince (when he was still known as Prince), Tim Burners-Lee (inventor of the World Wide Web), and a Katherine Hepburn impersonator (or possibly the real Katherine Hepburn)
Dick Enberg says something intelligent
Novak Djokovic enters a night club in Poland and doesn’t disrobe

*This excludes the following cultures who celebrate the New Year at different times: the Chinese (Jan. 21-Feb. 21), Australian Aboriginals (Oct. 30), and the Babylonians (March).

U.S. Open 2009: A Dream Finish?

2009-09-22T19:08:00.002-04:00

Since the U.S. Open men's final, I’ve been struggling to summarize my feelings about the match. But the other night I had a strange dream, which I suspect was my brain’s way of helping me to organize my thoughts about the match, among other things. It was narrated by Dick Enberg and I will recount it in his words:

Hello and welcome to another spectacular inside the subconscious mind of Callie, the composer of that famed tennis blog known as Passing Shots! What a wonderful treat this is. We have a magnificent lineup tonight, which will commence with an expedition to the office of a certain Dr. Weidenbaum who, you might observe, looks remarkably like a combination of Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freud and Zach Braff, the portrayer of the absolutely delightful Doctor JD Dorian from the program Scrubs which lit up the small screen for eight seasons, but is now no longer on the air in its original form, although you can watch a new incarnation of it on ABC in the fall on Tuesdays after Dancing With the Stars, which is an enchanting show that I make sure to tune in for every week if I’m still awake.

Callie is tardy for her appointment to see Dr. Weidenbaum, hence her rapid movement towards her desired destination. Now she is entering her old middle school, which peculiarly is the locality of her engagement with the esteemed expert medical professional. She approaches her 7^th grade Latin classroom and hastily clutches her fingers around the door knob. Now she advances towards a chair and positions herself so that she is facing the doctor. There’s a delicious suspense in the air!

“Did you watch the U.S. Open Final?” Dr. Weidenbaum inquires, as he delicately applies gel to his dark tresses.

Callie replies hesitantly, “Yes, but I don’t want to discuss it. I was very disappointed.”

The doctor attempts to press Callie further on the subject, but to no avail; she refuses to engage in a dialogue with him. Suddenly, his assistant, who has been furtively taking notes in a shadowy corner of the room, makes this comment:

“I’m glad Federer lost. I’m so sick of seeing him win all the time.”

This observation is too much and Callie feels compelled to challenge the call.

“He’s been the best player since May! I’d much rather see him win than see some other, less deserving player.”

“Are you suggesting that Del Potro was undeserving?” the mysterious assistant beguilingly asks.

“No, no. Despite DelPo’s slow start, he played very well, especially in the tight moments. I can’t say as much for Federer. And I’m glad it was DelPo who beat Federer, and not a tool like Roddick, a whinger like Murray or heaven forbid Nadal, as that could have been the last straw for Roger. Still, I think Federer played some of his best tennis of the year at the U.S. Open—better than at either the French Open or Wimbledon. Yet he didn’t win. As his fan, I found it very frustrating to see him squander the match like he did,” is Callie’s protracted response.

Dr. Weidenbaum and the assistant grunt their acknowledgement in unison. Dr. Weidenbaum, now well coiffed, reaches for a cigar from an ornate container on the table which exists next to his chair.

He asks, “What do you think the consequences of this match will be?”

“Well, I definitely don’t think Del Potro is a one-slam-wonder. He’s got a huge game and this summer he has proven himself to be very mentally tough. I particularly think he’s going to be a problem for Nadal as he tries to win more hard court slams. As for Federer, I think he’ll shake this one off. As I said before, he played very well during the tournament, and overall, he's had a great season. And I don’t think Del Potro’s game is necessarily going to give Federer trouble on a regular basis; he tends to struggle against scrappy players, not big hitters. I’d be surprised if Federer didn’t win at least one Slam title next year.”

Callie takes a brief moment to pause and reflect. "I suppose now that I think about it, it wasn't such a terrible tournament."

But no one seems to have heard her. The enigmatic assistant has vanished into the shadows once more and Dr. Weidenbaum now seems to be caught in his own fantasy world. Callie politely clears her throat so that she can once again own his attention.

“We would need a lot of thumbtacks and linoleum…” the doctor says to himself quite distractedly, before returning his awareness to his patient. “Right. So was there anything else you wanted to talk about?”

“Actually, I’ve been hearing the voice of an old man in my head all day. It’s really annoying. He narrates my every move and does so in the most long-winded way possible,” she seeks to explain to the doctor of medicine and psychology as she sits and gently taps her finger on the arm of her chair while glancing out the window and furrowing her brow ever so slightly in thought, or perhaps unwarranted irritation. “I just can’t get him to shut up. He—”

The Dr. Weidenbaum appropriately interjects to inform her that the time allotted for the appointment has expired and that she indeed must exit the room so that he can convene with other patients.

As she departs the location of her appointment, she encounters none other than celebrated tennis star Marat Safin, who appears to be waiting to be seen by Dr. Weidenbaum. She of course wants to take this opportunity to make her acquaintance with the mercurial Russian, so she begins to move towards him.

Oh my! She is no longer in the doctor’s office/middle school, but in the Fire Swamp, famously seen in the movie The Princess Bride. And to her horror, not only must she find a way to navigate the perils of the Fire Swamp, but she must also do so while trying to define the term cross-price elasticity for a prospective employer!

U.S. Open 2009: Closing Thoughts

2009-09-15T00:22:00.000-04:00

Ugh.

(More to come later)

U.S. Open 2009: Day 14 Impressions

2009-09-14T01:41:00.003-04:00

- I knew Juan Martin Del Potro would be a bad match-up for Rafael Nadal, particularly on a fast hard court. I just didn't think it would be that bad a match-up. Yeah, maybe Nadal wasn't at his physical best, but the way JMDP was playing, I rather doubt Rafa would have won anyway. Still, Nadal shouldn't be too disappointed with the tournament as a whole: He regained his no. 2 ranking, he defended his points from last year, and he played pretty well considering his recent struggles with injury. But knowing Nadal, he's inwardly livid that he didn't win the tournament. So watch out Australia--he's a man with a mission and he's coming for you.

- Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic hadn't played since Wednesday, and it showed in the first set. The quality of the second set was a little better, and of course, the third set ended with one of those I-can't-believe-he-tried-that-let-alone-hit-it-for-a-winner shots from Federer. At that point, Djokovic couldn't do much but stare across the net in disbelief. But even when the match was still up for grabs, Djokovic seemed resigned to losing. He gesturing after losing points and his prayers for help could only have added to Federer's confidence. Not that I particularly miss him, but what happened to the arrogant, strutting Djokovic?

- Kim Clijsters, two-time U.S. Open Champion. I can't decide what the most amazing part of Clijsters' comeback is. Is it that she's the first mother in close to thirty years to win a Grand Slam title? Is it that she beat both Williams sisters on the way to winning? Is it that she's back in the top 20 after only a couple of months? Or how about this: In the first part of her career, she lost four Grand Slam finals before finally getting her first major; in her comeback, she won the first Grand Slam she played. Crazy.

- By the way, this was such a different sort of women's final than we've been used to watching recently. It wasn't all about ball bashing. There were no huge meltdowns. Both players were under 5'10". And happily there were no death threats today. Kim Clijsters and Caroline Wozniacki seem like thoroughly pleasant people. Hopefully we'll see more of them (and less of certain other players) in the Slams to come.

Men's Final Predictions:
Do I dare pick against Federer? No. But Del Potro will win the first set before succumbing to "The Federer" in four.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 13 Bewilderments

2009-09-13T02:19:00.006-04:00

Play finally resumed today after a long, long rain delay. When we last saw tennis, things were looking dire for Rafael Nadal. He was struggling with an abdominal injury, Fernando Gonzalez was giving him about all that he could handle, and with the rain delaying the completion of his quarterfinal match with Gonzo, it appeared that he would have to play three consecutive days in order to win the tournament. Fortunately for him, the rain completely washed out Friday's matches, so Rafa got a chance to rest his injury. And when play finally resumed, it was clear that Gonzalez, while physically present, had already shipped his brain back to Chile. So Nadal moved onto the semifinals without too much strain on his body. Now he gets to play Juan Martin Del Potro first thing tomorrow, while his potential final opponent, Federer or Djokovic, will have to play in the late afternoon. If I didn't know better, I would think some higher power was looking out for Rafa. (Would that be God or tournament director Brian Earley?)

Caroline Wozniacki beat Yannina Wickmayer to make the women's final of the U.S. Open. Of course, the only people who saw it were the sparse spattering of fans in Louis Armstrong Stadium and the crazy people who watch Tennis Channel at 2:45am...like yours truly.

But nobody cares about these matches after what happened with Kim Clijsters and Serena Williams tonight. It was definitely the strangest end to a match I've ever seen. Clijsters, it must be said, was playing a very smart match. She was running Serena around, mixing up her shots, and generally doing an excellent job of keeping Serena off-balance (although I'm not sure Serena is ever actually balanced). Clijsters won the first set and was up 6-5 with Serena serving at 15-30 when things got interesting. I'm sure everyone knows what happened at this point but I'll summarize anyway. Serena got called for a foot fault on a second serve, which gave Clijsters double match point. Serena blew a fuse and went over to the offending lineswoman, shaking her racquet at her and yelling. The umpire then called the lineswoman over to hear what Serena had said.

Apparently it was some pretty scary stuff. It prompted Brian Earley to come onto court and conference with the umpire, the lineswoman, and Serena. The only thing I could make out was Serena exclaiming, "I didn't say I was going to kill you!" Well, replays clearly showed Serena yelling at the lineswoman, "I'm [expletive] going to take this [expletive] ball and shove it down your [expletive] throat." Seeing as I'm pretty sure having a tennis ball shoved down one's throat would be fatal, I think the argument could be made that Serena did threaten to kill her.

Anyway, Serena had already gotten a warning for racquet abuse at the end of the first set. The expletives probably would have been enough to get her a second code violation, but the threat definitely sealed the deal. She got a point penalty, Clijsters won the match, and that was that.

In the press conference, Serena didn't own up to threatening the woman or admit that she owed her an apology, but she also didn't seem at all upset about what happened. I'm sure she knew she completely crossed the line with her words. And I'm sure she wasn't actually going to shove a ball down the poor woman's throat--although if she had wanted to, she probably could have, seeing as security at the U.S. Open seems to be a joke. Either way, she had played herself into a losing position and would probably have lost the match anyway.

Aside from feeling sorry for the lineswoman (I imagine her life flashed before her eyes as Serena was waving the racquet at her), I do feel sorry for Clijsters. It was such a strange ending to the match that it didn't seem like she was really able to enjoy the win. But she earned it. It's only her third event back and she's poised to win a Grand Slam tournament. Pretty crazy, this U.S. Open.

Predictions for tomorrow:
I'm still going with a Federer/Del Potro final.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 11 Words

2009-09-11T00:17:00.001-04:00

Passing Shots is currently in a rain delay. We hope to resume commentary soon.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 10 Commentary

2009-09-10T01:11:00.003-04:00

- So now I know who Yannina Wickmayer is. I can't say that I'm unduly impressed by her game, but she won five matches to get to the semifinals, so you have to giver her credit for that. Unless you're Pam Shriver. Not cool, Pam.

- Wickmayer will play Caroline Wozniacki in her semifinal match. Wozniacki put a quick end to Oudin-mania tonight. After the match, Oudin looked to be on the verge of tears and hoping to get off the court quickly. But the on-court microphones captured Pam Shriver insisting that Oudin stay to be interviewed. Not cool, Pam.

- I'm very disappointed in Fernando Verdasco. I really thought he had an excellent chance to beat Djokovic, who really hasn't looked that good tournament. Yes, I understand that Verdasco has an abdominal injury (this must be the in style injury right now--patella tendinitis was last month) and some foot problems. But his issues during this match were as much mental as they were physical.

- Federer was at his merciless best during the first two sets of his match against Robin Soderling. During the third set Soderling clearly realized that he was going to have to go for broke in order to have any chance of winning the match. It worked for a while, but it's nearly impossible to keep up that level of play for three sets against Roger Federer. A few loose shots in the fourth set tiebreaker and it was all over. Soderling must be pretty sick of seeing Federer at the Grand Slams. Perhaps he might qualify for that special wing of the Tennis Hall of Fame that Mike in Etters mentioned.

If rain doesn't wash play out, tomorrow's predictions:
- Juan Martin Del Potro over Marin Cilic: JMDP is just too good right now.
- Rafael Nadal over Fernando Gonzalez: I give Gonzalez a small chance, but if he's going to win he'd better be prepared to hit a lot of backhands or do a lot of running around that wing.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 9 Opinions

2009-09-09T02:24:00.002-04:00

- For the sake of the players, can we do away with pre-match interviews? Players clearly don't want to talk before their matches, and even when the do, they all say the same things: "I'm just going to have to go out there and play my game," "Even though I've beaten player Y the last X times, I know it's going to be a tough match." It's like pulling teeth to get any more out of them, and it's about as painful to watch.

- No big surprises on the women's side today. I had just the slightest hope that Flavia Pennetta might be able to catch Serena Williams on a bad day and get an upset. No such luck. Serena should have her hands full with Kim Clijsters on Thursday, though.

- The big upset of the day was Marin Cilic's win over Andy Murray. Considering the way Cilic's summer had been going (early round losses to Devvarman, Youzhny, and Ferrer coming into the U.S. Open), I expected a total blow out in favor of Murray. I was half right: It was a total blow out. Murray never quite found his game during the early stages, and Cilic made sure he never got a chance to. I'm not sure why, but Murray's game doesn't seem as effective now as it was a year ago. Maybe players are starting to figure him out, or maybe he's just a little fatigued at this point in the season. But I feel like he's gotten too dependent on playing passively and hoping that he can simply outlast his opponents. If he's going to win a major (not that necessarily I want him to), he's going to have to add more offense to his game.

- Other than the final result, the Tsonga/Gonzalez match went about as I had expected. That is, Tsonga made some wild dashes into the net; Gonzalez hit a few spectacular winners and even more what-was-he-thinking shots. Ultimately, it was always going to end with one of them (Tsonga this time) making a few stupid errors on critical points to lose the match.

- Del Potro continued to win without much drama.

- So much for Nadal being injured, huh? His match against Monfils was as physical a test as possible, and everything--abdomen, knees, fingers, toes, eyebrows--seemed to hold up. Suddenly, I'm a little worried that Federer might not be the only guy with a career slam this year.

Predictions for tomorrow:
- Wickmayer vs. Bondarenko: Okay, I've heard of Wickmayer. I know she was working with Carlos Rodriguez (the man behind the Henin machine) last year. But I couldn't have picked her out of a lineup before this tournament...and come to think of it, I probably still can't. I guess I have to go with Bondarenko here, seeing as she's the only one I'll recognize on the court.

- Oudin vs. Wozniacki: Oudin has been a great story this year...it's such a shot in the arm for women's tennis in the U.S....blah, blah, blah. I want to like her, but I'm getting just a little sick of hearing about her incredible story every hour or so. Anyway, Oudin has done well against big hitting Russians, but it should be very interesting to see how she fairs against a counter-puncher. I have a feeling the Wizard of Woz will end the dream tomorrow.

- Federer vs. Soderling: Soderling for the win! Just kidding. It's hard to justify picking against the guy who has eleven wins and zero losses against his opponent. Although, one of these days Soderling is bound to shock us all.

- Djokovic vs. Verdasco: Verdasco's got this one.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 8 Remarks

2009-09-08T00:19:00.002-04:00

I'll make this short because I have to get back to sulking over Kuznetsova's loss to Wozniacki.

- I blinked (okay, more like overslept) and I missed the Bondarenko/Dulko match. Looks like I didn't miss much.

- It has been a weird tournament. There are no Russian women in the quarterfinals but, believe it or not, two Belgians. What is this, 2003? Meanwhile, there are no American men left in the tournament for the first time ever.

- I was 5 for 7 in my predictions for yesterday. Not terrible, but let's see if I can do better this time:

Clijsters defeats Li
Serena defeats Pennetta (I'd love to be wrong about this)
Tsonga defeats Gonzalez
Monfils defeats Nadal
Del Potro defeats Ferrero
Murray defeats Cilic

Okay, I resume sulking.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 7 Notes

2009-09-07T01:42:00.002-04:00

Other than Juan Carlos Ferrero's upset of Gilles Simon (which wasn't such a huge upset anyway), the men's draw has continued to hold form. However, Nadal's health is becoming more and more of a question. In addition to his knee problems, he has apparently aggravated an abdominal muscle. If were a Nadal fan, I would be very nervous about his next match against Gael Monfils.

It was a day of bagels on the women's side:

Serena, as expected, demolished Hantuchova 6-2 6-0.
Venus and Clijsters split bagels in first two sets (what the heck?). I'm just glad Clijsters got it back together long enough to close the final set out 6-4.
The most exciting match of the day was Flavia Pennetta vs. Vera Zvonareva. Pennetta saved six match points in the second set, which seemed to push Zvonareva over the edge. She cried, she hit herself, she taped, untaped, and taped again, but it was all to no avail. Pennetta stormed through the final set 6-0. Pennetta is one tough biscotti.

Predictions for tomorrow:

Kvitova vs. Wickmayer: I'm not touching this one.
Dulko vs. K. Bondarenko: Will K. Bondarenko avenge A. Bondarenko's loss to Dulko in the second round? I'm going to say...no.
Oudin vs. Petrova: In an interview with Corina Morariu, Oudin explained that Petrova actually plays a lot like some of the other girls she beat this tournament. No kidding, Mel. You're going to find that most of the girls you face play like that, especially if their names end in -eva or -ova. Anyway, considering Oudin's record against big hitting Russians recently, I have to go with the American in this one.
Kuznetsova vs. Wozniacki: Kuz, Woz, Kuz, Woz. Tough choice. I'll say Kuznetsova, more out of hope than anything else.
Federer over Robredo, Soderling over Davydenko, Djokovic over Stepanek, and Verdasco over Isner.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 6 Stuff

2009-09-06T01:28:00.007-04:00

- I turned on CBS this morning to hear the familiar voice of my favorite commentator, Dick Enberg. Oh my! No Grand Slam tournament would be complete without me wanting to reach into my TV and strangle him.

- Maria Sharapova is out! Luckily, she got to play a day match so that she could show off her radioactive outfit before leaving New York. Her conqueror was Melanie Oudin. At first I found Oudin's wide-eyed youthful enthusiasm a little annoying (I guess I'm just a cynical, jaded old 22 year old), but I have to admit she's growing on me. Her game is very different from most young girls these days, and while I don't really see that much of Justine Henin in her style, I do appreciate that Henin is her idol.

- All of the top 4 guys have lost a set now. Roger Federer played a bit of a loose match against Lleyton Hewitt, but his serve got him out of a lot of trouble today. Novak Djokovic was really terrible but scraped through against Jesse Witten, who must be the most overweight player to make the third round of a Slam since Irakli Labadze.

- I was hoping that Dinara Safina, after struggling through her first few rounds, would start to feel more relaxed in the second week. After all, they say that whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Unfortunately, "whatever" killed Safina before she could get stronger.

- And oh yeah, JOHN ISNER BEAT ANDY RODDICK! What a friggin' roller coaster ride that match was. Roddick reverted to his passive, pusher game in the first two sets. Then Isner's game started to come down in the third and fourth. When Isner lost the fourth with a terrible service game, I figured it was over. But no, he managed to get it to a tiebreaker in the fifth, where he quite simply was the better player. So much for Andy Roddick carrying his momentum from Wimbledon to get his second Grand Slam title at the U.S. Open. Sorry Cliff and Patrick, maybe next time. Or not.

- So what's on the menu for tomorrow?

I have a feeling that Serena will eat Hantuchova for lunch--though I can't imagine she would be very filling.
I'm sticking with my original prediction of Clijsters over Venus, although it seems Venus is most dangerous when she struggles though her first few rounds.
Cilic has not been playing well all summer. I would be surprised--but not too surprised--if he went out to Istomin.
Ferrero vs. Simon is too close to call, but I'll call Ferrero anyway.
Otherwise, I'm not expecting any upsets...which probably means there will be loads.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 5 Reflections

2009-09-05T02:19:00.008-04:00

- Marin Cilic, Juan Carlos Ferrero, and Nicolas Almagro all narrowly avoided upsets today, but one Victoria Azarenka was not so lucky. Let's hear it for Francesa Schiavone, single-handedly representing the one-handed backhanders in the women's draw!

- I was happy to see that the team of Michael Llodra and Ivan Ljubicic (Ljudra? Llobicic?) beat the "twin towers" Sam Querrey and John Isner (Quisner?). I advocate a rule that forbids doubles teams that have a combined height of over 13 feet.

- I would also support an initiative by the ATP to hire a tour barber. And I would insist that Fernando Verdasco, Gael Monfils, and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga go to see him before they get to play their next matches.

- Speaking of hairdos, Rafa's hair is looking short. He says it makes him feel younger, but I suspect he really got it cut because it makes him feel more like Roger Federer.

- And speaking of Rafa, he was involved a surprisingly competitive match with Nicolas Kiefer tonight. I know at least one person went to bed early when it looked like Nadal was going to steamroll the German, but Kiefer held his own and even toyed with Nadal a bit during the last three sets. It turned out to be pretty entertaining.

- Although I don't care for most of the Americans of this generation, I was happy to see Taylor Dent win his second round match against his Spanish twin Ivan Navarro. Not only do Dent and Navarro look alike (at least follically and bodily), they're both serve-and-volleyers. When's the last time two serve-and-volleyers played each other? Let me think...was it in the first round of the 2009 U.S. Open when Taylor Dent took out Feliciano Lopez? Who says serving-and-volleying is dead?

- Upset warnings for Day 6--it's actually easier for me to list the players I'm certain won't be upset: Roger Federer, Nikolay Davydenko, Novak Djokovic, and Andy Roddick. Any of the other players (and that includes all of the women) are at risk of going out tommorrow.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 4 Ruminations

2009-09-04T01:10:00.002-04:00

- So much for my prediction that Elena Dementieva would win the tournament. I can only hope that this Melanie Oudin keeps up her good play for at least one more round, as her friend Christina McHale was not able to follow her lead and and upset Maria Sharapova.

- Following today's upsets of Dementieva, Jelena Jankovic, Alona Bondarenko, Sabine Lisicki, and Patty Schnyder, the women have lost 16 seeds in two rounds. On the contrary, the men have only lost 5 seeds in one and a half rounds. How times have changed, huh?

- To answer Mike in Etters' question about whether Marat or Dinara is a bigger headcase, I still have to give Marat the edge. But if Dinara keeps struggling through these nail-biters, she might fall off that edge.

- Speaking of people who are ranked higher (kind of) than they deserve, how is it fair that Sam Querrey ended up no. 1 in the U.S. Open Series? He and Andy Murray had the same number of points at the end, but Murray did better in the bigger tournaments, while Querrey gathered up most of his points just by playing more. Somehow, though, Querrey ended up getting the bonus prize money. It makes no sense. But I don't hear the ESPN2 folks declaring that Andy Murray is the real U.S. Open Series number one! Oh the injustice!

- Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, but when Pam Shriver mentioned tonight that Justine Henin might come back, Mary Carillo seemed to become uncharacteristically quiet. What, not excited about the prospect of the return of a "small babe?"

- Andy Roddick had no trouble with Marc Gicquel tonight, but if I were Roddick, I wouldn't look past the quarterfinals. It's a sure sign that Novak Djokovic is feeling good about his game when he starts stripping on court, which he did after defeating Carsten Ball today.

- Tomorrow's upset forecast: Nicolas Almagro will need to stay cool to survive the Robby Ginepri wave, and Daniela Hantuchova should brace herself for tropical storm Vania King. However, the radar looks clear for the rest of the day.

U.S. Open 2009: Day 3 Musings

2009-09-03T00:00:00.003-04:00

- Amelie Mauresmo exited the tournament with a whimper this morning. While I'd enjoy seeing her get back into the top 10, that's looking highly unlikely. What is she getting out of early round losses to mediocre players, anyway? Perhaps it's time for her to hang up the racquet and buy a vineyard.

- Speaking of disappointing French players, Richard Gasquet played his first main draw match in several months. Maybe my expectations for Gasquet are just ridiculously low, but I thought he acquitted himself fairly well, considering he drew the worst possible first round opponent, Rafael Nadal. Despite his secret life as a reckless, bacchanalian homme à femmes, he can still produce the odd eye-popping backhand. I'm glad to see him back.

- This afternoon, as I was trying to count the overly-abundant number commentators/anchors hired for the U.S. Open on ESPN2 (I think there are 11 total), it occurred to me that dear old Dick Enberg was not present. I don't know what happened, but I want to thank whomever is responsible for this merciful reprieve.

- Turns out my prediction of Beth Mattek over Venus wasn't such a good call. But, mark my words, Venus is going out before the quarterfinals.

- Serena, on the other hand, is not.

- And finally, two of the most entertaining players in tennis played their final Grand Slam matches today. Fabrice Santoro was the first to bow out. Over the course of his 20 year career, he beat 17 players who at one point were ranked no. 1. I doubt that anyone will ever be able to replicate his style of play. These days, who would even try? Nonetheless he was always a pleasure to watch, and he'll be sorely missed.

- The second to say goodbye was Marat Safin--although he openly admits that mentally he said goodbye to tennis in November last year. In some ways, Safin's retirement is akin to putting a dying animal out of its misery. No one enjoyed watching Marat struggle to beat the Wesley Whitehouses of the tennis world and blow big leads match after match. Many people say that the workings of Marat's mind are a mystery that no one will ever truly understand. But I think he is just a perfectionist: He couldn't ever be happy with the way he was playing, but he couldn't play well when he was unhappy. It sounds like one of Andre Agassi's platitudes, but it's true.

- And with that I leave you with Marat's plans for the future:
"Basically put everything on cruise control and you just cruise. I'm ambitious. I want to achieve some things. I'm a different than another person who want to lay back and do nothing for rest of the life and talk nonsense on ESPN, talk about my match against Sampras. I will not do that."

U.S. Open 2009: Day 2 Thoughts

2009-09-02T00:15:00.005-04:00

I wished for more upsets, and I got 'em I guess.

- Dinara Safina nearly crashed out in the first round. I'm glad she didn't, since it would only have created more fodder for her doubters. But she's not going to get away with playing that badly later in the tournament. On the other hand, maybe an early-ish loss here, which could result in her losing her no. 1 ranking, wouldn't be the worst thing for Dinara. She is clearly not dealing well with the pressure of being the top player in the world. If she were to drop to no. 2, she might not feel the same pressure, which would, ironically, mean that she would perform better and perhaps finally win a Grand Slam final. Also, she needs to get rid of Zeljko Krajan stat.

- Ana Ivanovic, speaking of not dealing with pressure well, did crash out in the first round. I really don't know what to think about that. Okay, so she kind of lost her way after winning the French Open in 2008, but that was over a year ago...shouldn't she have found it by now?

- Most disappointing result of the day: Nicolas Lapentti defeats Stanislas Wawrinka. I went away my computer with Wawrinka serving for the match in the third set. When I returned a couple of hours later, I was shocked to find him down a break in the fifth. Wawrinka had a great match against Murray at Wimbledon, and I was hoping for a rematch in the fourth round here. No such luck.

- Second most disappointing result of the day: Maria Sharapova defeats Tsevetana Pironkova. I may have dissed her in my last post, but she looked disturbingly good in this match. And by that I mean she was hitting huge and making her shots. I don't mean that her outfit looked good. In fact, the color scheme only reinforced my image of her as part robot.

- Predictions for tomorrow: Federer and Nadal get through easily, but Clijsters "upsets" Bartoli and Venus Williams gets knocked out by the only player with worse fashion-sense than Sharapova: Betthanie Mattek-Sands.

Where does she even find this stuff?

U.S. Open 2009: Day 1 Reactions

2009-09-01T00:41:00.006-04:00

- Why does the U.S. Open have to have a ceremony every opening Monday? Okay, I get it: Althea Gibson and Billie Jean King were pioneers and Andre Agassi is a great philanthropist. Good for them. But this is a tennis event, isn't it? Can't we celebrate their humanitarian achievements elsewhere? Let's watch tennis during the U.S. Open and turn on a Lifetime movie when we want a sappy story about the human condition.

But beyond my own personal dislike of sentimentality, the ceremony is a problem because it delays play. The men's match didn't get started until 11:00. I'm sure the players don't want to play until 1am, the fans need to go to sleep and get up for work in the morning, and the matches will end way past my mom's bed time, yet she insists on staying up. So either have the ceremony on the Sunday before the tournament or scrap it all together.

- The usopen.org's free live streaming video is (when it's working) the highest quality live feed I've ever seen. At last the USTA is doing something worthwhile with their money. Forget the U.S. Open Series, if the USTA really wants to make tennis better for the fans, they should just provide free live online coverage of all summer hard court events.

- It's amazing how fast Kim Clijsters has gotten back to top form. But then again, this isn't the first time Clijsters has comeback from a long layoff and immediately found her winning game. Serena Williams has also proven she can come back strong after a lot of time off. And so has Justine Henin, for that matter. I guess it doesn't really matter how long you've been away from tennis: If you've got enough talent you can get back to winning form pretty quickly. That must explain why Maria Sharapova is still struggling to get back into the top 30 after her injury break. Harhar.

- I've been following some of the tennis pros on Twitter recently. I'll admit, when I first heard about Twitter I thought it sounded kind of stupid, and strangely public or exhibitionist. But now I see what all the fuss is about. You can get all kinds of inside information about the tennis world from that site. For example, at around 9:45pm on Monday, one of the Bryan Brothers (they have a joint account--surprise, surprise--so I couldn't tell which one) was frantically looking for the his missing TV controls--will this have an adverse effect on his preparation for his opening match? On August 10th, Robin Soderling informed his followers that he couldn't stop eating granola bars--was this the cause of his withdrawals from several tournaments last month? And a few weeks ago, Sam Querrey went onto Twitter to say that he spent most of his day doing laundry. Riveting, revealing stuff.

- Venus Williams was tantalizingly close to losing tonight, but as always, she managed to squeak through. Still, whatever it is that's going on with her knee, it doesn't bode well for the rest of the tournament.

- Overall, it was not the most memorable day in tennis history. I demand more upsets tomorrow.

U.S. Open Predictions

2009-08-31T00:16:00.002-04:00

We'll start with the women's draw.

But first, a word (or many) about Dinara Safina and the number one ranking controversy: It seems like everybody from Serena Williams to Brad Gilbert has been disparaging Safina for being a slam-less number one. Yes, it’s a little weird that Serena currently holds three of the four majors and is still number two behind Safina. But let’s look at the stats:

- Safina has won 52 matches this season, 17 of which were at the Grand Slams. She has lost 12 matches.
- Serena has won 38 matches this season, 18 of which were at the Grand Slams. She has lost 10 matches.

They’re close in number of matches won at the Slams, but Safina has been far better in regular tour events. If Serena had to, would she even be able to win 40 matches outside of the slams in a season? Could she show up to a slam, having played 15 matches in the lead up, and still get to the final (as Safina did at the French Open this year)? I would venture to guess that Serena would be both physically and mentally fatigued by that much match play, and she would find winning majors much more difficult. Safina, on the other hand, plays to win every tournament and ends up going deep in almost all of them. If people are going to criticize Safina for not being able to win a Grand Slam final, they should at least give her credit for consistently doing well in WTA events and Slams alike—unlike Serena.

Besides, why disparage Safina when she isn’t responsible for designing the ranking system? Complain to the WTA, tell them that they should award more points to the winners of slams. But don’t take it out on poor Dinara. Between her mother, brother, creepy coach, and herself, I think she has enough people criticizing her.

Anyway…

Women’s Quarterfinals:
Dinara Safina vs. Jelena Jankovic – After my defense of her number one ranking, Safina better make it to at least the quarterfinals. Jankovic has looked down-and-out for most of the season, but her title in Cincinnati should give her enough momentum to make the second week of the U.S. Open. Then Safina will defeat Jankovic in two sets.

Elena Dementieva vs. Svetlana Kuznetsova – Dementieva beat Maria Sharapova in the final of Toronto two weeks ago, and the confidence that came with that will come in handy in the third round where she will probably have to take out Sharapova again. Assuming she survives that, she’ll probably play Caroline Wozniacki or Svetlana Kuznetsova. And for no good reason, I say she plays and beats Kuznetsova in three sets.

Victoria Azarenka vs. Kim Clijsters – I confess I don’t really know what’s been going on with Sharapova 2.0 except that she lost to Sharapova 1.0 at some point this summer. But given that her draw to the quarterfinals isn’t too grueling, I have to pick her. As for Kim Clijsters, I do know she’s back, and I do know she’s beaten a few good players so far. But thanks to ESPN2’s stellar coverage of the U.S. Open Series, I haven’t actually gotten to see her play. So yes, it might be a risky pick, but I choose Aussie Kim—strike that, New Jersey Kim—to make it to the quarters instead of Williams the Elder. And she’ll beat Azarenka in straight sets.

[Speaking of Belgian comebacks, Belgian media is reporting that Justine Henin may be returning to competitive tennis next year. I won’t believe it until I hear it from JH herself, but if it’s true that would be, if not entirely surprising, friggin’ awesome.]

Flavia Pennetta vs. Serena Williams – It’s been a good summer for Pennetta, who won Los Angeles and became the first Italian woman in the top 10. Pennetta has Venus’ number, but that probably won’t help her get past little sis who, despite a mediocre summer, is still the favorite for the tournament. Serena in straight sets.

Women’s Semifinals:
Safina vs. Dementieva – Dementieva, despite having her own meltdowns in Grand Slam finals, is probably feeling less pressure to do well than Safina is at this point. That will give her enough to win her semifinal match in a close three sets.

Clijsters vs. Serena – I’d like to pick Clijsters, but it’ll be Serena in two tough sets.

Women’s Finals:
Dementieva vs. Serena – Dementieva in three. Didn’t see that one coming, did you?

Men’s Quarterfinals:
Roger Federer vs. Nikolay Davydenko – After Federer’s performance against Tsonga in Montreal and the way he began in Cincinnati, I was beginning to wonder how this guy actually won two majors this year. But as he so often does (although less recently than in years past), Roger picked up his game at the business end of the tournament to declare himself the definite favorite for the 2009 U.S. Open. This is bad news for Davydenko, who is already 0-12 against Roger, and will probably have to play him in the quarters. Straight sets for Fed.

Novak Djokovic vs. Andy Roddick – Djokovic has been uncharacteristically quiet the last few months, which has actually increased my appreciation of him. His draw isn’t a piece of cake, but he should be able to make the quarters. As for Andy Roddick, this is the most hyped-up he’s been since the 2005 U.S. Open—and we all know what happened there. There might not be a Gilles Muller in his first round match, but Haas or Verdasco is lurking in the fourth round. If he makes it through them, he’ll like his chances against Djokovic, whom he has beaten in all three of their meetings this year. But Djokovic should have a little more swagger in his step from his good performance in Cincinnati. Djokovic shocks the tennis world (or at least the ESPN commentators) by defeating Roddick in five sets.

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga vs. Rafael Nadal – The headcase quarter includes Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Tomas Berdych, Fernando Gonzalez, and Gael Monfils. Any one of these guys could get on a roll and make the final, and any one of them could lose in the first round. Add tendinitis-stricken Spaniards David Ferrer and Rafael Nadal to that mix and it’s even tougher to pick. But I’ll play it safe and stick with the highest seeds, Tsonga and Nadal. Tsonga gave Nadal a beating at the 2008 Australian Open, but I don’t see Nadal allowing that to happen again. Nadal in four.

Juan Martin Del Potro vs. Andy Murray – JMDP has become a hard court monster. He’s got huge ground strokes and moves incredibly well for a guy his size. If he had been a little fresher in the Montreal final, he would have beaten Murray. With two weeks off, he should be feeling good and ready to give the new world number two, Andy Murray, a little payback. Upset alert: Del Potro in four sets!

Men’s Semifinals:
Federer vs. Djokovic – Unless Federer plays as badly as he did on Arthur Ashe Kids day this weekend (if you didn’t have the misfortune of watching that, I’ll inform you that Federer’s backhand got outclassed by a girl from a local New York tennis club), then I’ll take Federer in four sets.

Nadal vs. Del Potro – Del Potro has exactly the kind of game to beat Nadal on a fast hard court. DelPo in four sets.

Men’s Finals:
Federer vs. Del Potro – Fed get’s number 16 in three sets.

Stay tuned for daily tournament updates!

Wimbledon 2034

2009-07-24T01:36:00.005-04:00

Greetings loyal readers! I have just returned from an exciting voyage…

…into the future!

I arrived on the date July 13th, 2034 just in time to catch the Ladies’ Wimbledon Championship (Wimbledon has been moved back a week so that there is more time between it and the French Open). The final is contested between twin sisters named Charlene and Myla. The sisters have dominated all of the Grand Slam events for the past five years, but they have been particularly impressive at Wimbledon, with at least one of the sisters making the final for the past six years. Charlene won last year (beating Lauren Davenport in the final), but Myla is currently the top ranked player and is coming off a victory at Roland Garros. It’s a tightly contested match with some spectacular athleticism and shot-making on display, and Charlene just ekes it out 6-4 in the third.

Already commentators are declaring that these two girls will surpass the Williams Sisters (who dominated women’s tennis between 2000 and 2009) as the greatest sister-sister pair in the history of sports. Charlene is known for her graceful movement about the court and her wicked forehand. Myla plays with the kind of variety that gives her opponents fits. They bring a stylishness to the women’s game that hadn’t been seen since the great Justine Henin retired for the second time in 2013.

During the post-match ceremony, Charlene accepts the trophy happily but remarks that she can’t celebrate too hard yet because she and her sister still have to play the doubles final. Charlene and Myla exit the court to the sound of tumultuous applause from the Wimbledon crowd. As they pass down the hallway towards an interview with universally-respected writer Callie Masten, they pause to look at the list of champions. This marks the twelfth Wimbledon title to the Federer name...

Anyway, back to the present. Congratulations Roger! Let’s hope they inherit your footwork and Mirka’s nose.

The Wimbledon (Near) Disaster: A Survivor's Perspective

2009-07-10T16:54:00.004-04:00

Before we get to the important stuff, I’ll briefly summarize the women’s final:

Booooooring.

Okay, that ought to cover it. No, seriously, I really hate "big babe" tennis. I also hate the term "big babe." I suggest we start using "freakish female" instead.

Now for that other match last weekend…

First of all, I know you all want to know about both my thoughts and vital statistics at various moments on Sunday:

I felt very confident that the match would have a pleasant outcome, so I had a restful sleep the night before the match. Unlike before the 2005 Wimbledon final, I had no nightmares about a smug, swaggering, self-satisfied Roddick putting his chewed up fingers on the Wimbledon trophy.
At 9:17am EST, I was slightly worried to see Pete Sampras arrive late to the match. I recalled how Bill Clinton’s late arrival to a match between Andre Agassi and Sebastien Grosjean at the French Open in 2001 had completely thrown Agassi off his game. Then I felt bad about comparing Pete Sampras to Bill Clinton.
At 10:00am EST, I was a bit stunned at how it had gone so quickly from break point Federer to first set Roddick.
At 10:31am EST, Federer was down a set and 2-6 in the second set tiebreaker, and I was considering what hobby would make a good replacement for watching tennis.
At 10:33am EST, I was still trying to figure out how Federer had managed to win the second set. I have to think it was divine intervention. Or maybe Roddick just choked big time.
At 11:20am EST, Federer had won the third set and I was trying to decide what to have for lunch.
At 11:52am EST, Roddick had won the fourth set and I had lost my appetite.
At 12:44pm EST, with neither player giving any quarter on his own serve, I was beginning to wonder what the All England Club’s policy would be on using the roof for matches that go past midnight.
At 12:50pm EST, it was double break point for Andy Roddick to go up 9-8 in the fifth set and have a chance to serve for the title. I had locked myself away in my room and was watching the wimbledon.org scoreboard. I was too nervous to watch the fifth set on TV, especially in the company of others. Also, I felt that it was a matter of public safety that I maintain a distance of at least 20 feet from other living things, lest the unthinkable should happen and I lose all sanity and self-control.
At 1:27pm EST, I emerged from my room, certain that no one, not even Federer, was more relieved to see Roddick shank his forehand into the stands.

Yes, I think I was a bigger wreck on Sunday than Mary Pierce in a close third set (if you saw the final of the WTA Tour Championships in 2005, you know what I mean). I’d like to say that this is one of those matches that I’ll be able to enjoy more upon re-watching it, but seeing as it basically came down to a serving contest, I rather doubt it. I suppose I ought to give credit where credit is due and admit that Larry Stefanki has really helped Roddick to become a fitter, smarter, more aggressive player this year—but it still causes me pain to say anything nice about Roddick, so I won't.

What I will say is that the stars aligned for Andy Roddick at Wimbledon this year: Nadal pulled out, he got a favorable draw, and Murray, as Mike in Etters had warned me, played too defensively in the semis. Still, even with all that going for him, and even playing some of his best tennis in years, Roddick couldn’t get his second major. So it will be very interesting to see what happens to Roddick now. Will he continue to play the tennis that got him to the Wimbledon final? Or will this be the final straw for Andy Roddick? Will his heart be so broken that he can’t bring himself to pick up a racquet again, let alone face the possibility of losing his 20th match to Roger Federer? Maybe he’ll quit tennis altogether and start writing poker columns for local newspapers (I hear there’s a market for that).

But enough about Roddick. Roger Federer broke some kind of record on Sunday, or so I hear. It’s hard to believe Pete Sampras won his 14th major less than seven years ago, and already that record has been surpassed. When a lot of people were feeling sorry for Roddick at the trophy ceremony, I was feeling a bit bad for Pete. But he’s been very gracious about the whole thing, and I do believe him when he says that if someone has to break his records, he wants it to be Roger.

And as for Roger? He’s come a long way since he last saw Pete Sampras at Wimbledon. In 2001, Roger Federer was just some goofy teenager who could play brilliantly in patches, but hadn’t yet learned to make the most of his talent. Now, eight years later, he’s considered the greatest tennis player of all time, he rubbing elbows with all kinds of celebrities, and he’s married and expecting a child. But, of course, he’s still kind of goofy.

2009 Wimbledon Predictions

2009-06-21T21:22:00.002-04:00

What you've all been waiting for:

The Dudes
Quarterfinals:
Rafael Na—wait, what’s Del Potro doing in the top spot? I guess Toni wasn’t exaggerating his nephew’s condition this time. I suppose it’s a pity that the defending champion won’t be able to play. But given Nadal’s physically demanding playing style and the number of matches he plays per year, his injuries aren’t a huge surprise. I guess that’s the trade off for Nadal: He can win a lot of majors (at least for a while) with his physical style, but he’s probably not going to have an especially long career.

Okay, the real picks:

Juan Martin Del Potro vs. Andy Roddick: I’m not so sure Delpo will be happier in his new position than in his original one on the other side of the draw. If he lost to Lleyton Hewitt in the second round, I’d file that under the “not shocked” category. Still, I’m playing it safe and picking him to get to the quarterfinals. Andy Roddick, on the other hand, has a pretty good draw to the quarters, and is no doubt delighted that he won’t have to face Rafa. Roddick over JMDP in four sets.

Andy Murray vs. Fernando Gonzalez: I don’t see anyone who could really scare Murray (Safin? Nah) so there’s no reason he shouldn’t make the quarterfinals again. Gonzalez’s third round will probably be tricky (Ferrero, Youzhny, Santoro, or Kiefer), but he’s a former quarterfinalist at Wimbledon and is coming off a good result at Roland Garros, so I expect him to make it through. Then Murray will get his revenge for his loss to Feña in Paris. Straight sets.

Tommy Haas vs. Novak Djokovic: Tommy Haas is in form at the moment, having almost beaten Federer at Roland Garros and winning the Halle title last week. Djokovic continues to have mediocre results this year, but his draw is pretty forgiving. In a rematch of the Halle final, I pick Djokovic to beat Haas in five sets in the quarterfinals.

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga vs. Roger Federer: The Tsonginator had a disappointing grass court warm-up, but he’s proven himself to be a good grass courter in the past, so I pick him to make the second week. And Federer…well, I don’t think I need to justify picking him for the quarterfinals. Federer defeats J-WT in straight sets.

Semifinals:
Andy vs. Andy: Murray is in better form and quite simply is a better player than Roddick. Muzza in straight sets.

Djokovic vs. Federer: If Federer plays badly, Djokovic certainly has a chance. But if they both play well Federer wins in four sets—and that’s my prediction.

Final:
Murray vs. Federer: Federer has a poor record against Murray, but the best-of-five set format helps him, not to mention the fact that he’s been in the Wimbledon final for the past six years. Federer will be secretly thanking his lucky stars he isn’t playing Nadal as he beats Murray in four sets.

The Girls:
Based on the results of seven of the past nine Wimbledons, picking a Williams to win the tournament is a pretty safe bet. Now it’s just a question of which sister it will be and who she’ll beat on the way to the title.

Quarterfinals:
Dinara Safina vs. Svetlana Kuznetsova: I don’t have too much confidence in Safina, but I don’t have the guts to pick Mauresmo. Kuznetsova made the quarterfinals in 2003, 2005, and 2007, so she has to make them again in 2009. Safina holds it together this time to beat Kuznetsova in three sets.

Venus Williams vs. Jelena Jankovic: I choose Venus because she’s won this five times and Jankovic because I don’t know who else to pick. Venus over Jankovic in straight sets.

Virginie Razzano vs. Elena Dementieva: Razzano was a finalist in Eastbourne, so I guess I’ll pick her. I don’t know what the heck has been going on with Dementieva recently, but I figure sooner or later she’ll get her act together. Dementieva over Razzano in three sets.

Maria Sharapova vs. Serena Williams: Uh. Yeah. Serena over Maria in two close sets.

Semifinals:
Venus def. Safina in straight sets.

Serena def. Dementieva in straight sets.

Finals:
Serena def. Venus in straight sets.

(As you can see, I’m both confident and enthusiastic about my picks for the women’s draw.)

The end.

Roland Garros 2009: Passing Shots' Passing Shocks

2009-06-08T01:16:00.004-04:00

In response to Mike in Etters’ last comment, I think I’ll give his game “Shocked or Not” a shot:

1. Safin loses to Ouanna – Not shocked whatsoever. After Safin came back from a two-set deficit to push it into a fifth set, I turned to Kathy and Ted in Ann Arbor and announced, “Safin is going to get up a break in this set and then choke it away.” Am I psychic? No, I’ve just seen too many Safin matches.

2. Kohlschreiber upsets Djokovic – Shocked. Luckily for Novak, this match was completely overshadowed by Nadal’s loss. But I didn’t see this one coming at all. And actually, I didn’t see it at all, so I guess I’ll never know what went wrong for ole Nole.

3. Soderling defeats Nadal – Shocked. Totally shocked. Still in shock, in fact. I’ve already said a lot about this match, so I won’t go too deep into this. But to see Soderling totally boss Nadal around on Nadal’s favorite court—it’s was almost surreal. Of course, Uncle Toni is now saying that Nadal’s knees are in bad shape and that he might not even be able to defend his title Wimbledon. But it wouldn’t be the first time Toni has talked up Nadal’s injuries, only to have his nephew sprint to victory, so to speak.

4a. Roger struggles against Haas the day after Nadal is upset – I agree with M in E, on this one: it wasn’t a huge shock. Whether Roger wanted to admit it or not, Nadal’s loss must have had a huge affect on him, in one way putting less pressure on him and in another way putting much more pressure on him.
4b. Roger comes back from 6-7 5-7 3*-4, break point down against Haas – Relieved? Yes. Shocked? No. Federer wasn’t playing well, but it always felt like he was close to turning the match around. After he eked out the third set, the final result seemed inevitable. Crazy, angry German that he is, you still have to feel bad for Haas, though.

5. Davydenko murders Verdasco – Not terribly shocked. Davydenko is a two-time semifinalist at Roland Garros, after all. And Fernando Verdasco? Like Arnaud Clement, Rainer Schuettler, Thomas Johansson, Marcos Baghdatis, and Fernando Gonzalez before him, I’m afraid he might never quite recreate the magic he produced in Australia.

6a. Roddick and Sharapova make it to the second week – Appalled, but not shocked. Sharapova shares this annoying habit with Williams Sisters where she plays terribly in her early matches but just barely manages to survive each one. Happily, her luck ran out against Cibulkova in the semifinals. Roddick had an incredibly easy draw to make the fourth round, but then again, that hasn’t stopped him from losing in the first round in years past. I’m just glad Monfils’ injured knee (injured…yeah, right) didn't hinder him from giving Roddick a schooling.
6b. Roddick throws a tantrum when things aren't going his way – Not shocked. He rarely plays a match where he doesn’t berate the umpire for something. This time it was because it was too dark to play. I guess it was only dark on Roddick’s end of the court though, as Monfils seemed to have no trouble running down Roddick’s shots and smacking winners. Apparently, Monfils found Roddick’s protests amusing and smiled as he walked by him at the end of a changeover. This prompted Roddick to shout, “You’re not good enough to be that cocky!” (1:10 in the following video). Well, Andy, the same could be said about you.

7. Soderling murders Davydenko – Shocked. Like Mike, I expected a letdown from Soderling after his upset of Nadal. And given that Davydenko likes to stand close to the baseline and hit the ball flat, unlike Nadal, I thought it would be tough for Soderling to impose his aggressive game on Davydenko. Then again, maybe if I had bothered to look at their head-to-head and see that Soderling had a 2-0 advantage on clay courts, I might not have been as surprised.

8. Federer beats Monfils in straight sets – Not shocked. Monfils rarely manages to string two really good performances together, and considering the beat-down he put on Roddick, I was half-expecting a letdown. It was a tight first set, but as soon as he lost it, and he started trying stupid shots again, you knew it was over.

9. Sam Stosur and Cibulkova make the semifinals – Shocked. I mean, what the hell happened to Jelena Jankovic, Caroline Wozniacki, Venus Williams, and Elena Dementieva?

10. Federer goes 5 with Del Potro – Shocked (kind of). Looking back, maybe I shouldn’t have been so surprised. Del Potro has made some large strides (no pun intended) in the last couple of months. Before March of this year, he had a really embarrassing record against the “big four,” not even winning a solitary set in about thirty tries. But he came back from down two breaks in the third set to beat Nadal in Miami, and then got his first win against Murray in Madrid. He played really well on his way to the semifinals while Federer…didn’t. But as in the Federer/Haas match, I never felt the match was totally out of Federer’s control: he just needed to step his game up a notch.
10b. NBC doesn’t show Federer vs. Del Potro and tape delays Gonzalez vs. Soderling – Not shocked. This is my ninth French Open and I know NBC way too well to expect anything better from them.

11a. Kuznetsova wins the whole damn thing – Not shocked. She’s had her share of chances at the French Open, and it seemed like a good opportunity for her to get her second major this year. Sure, Dinara Safina helped her out quite a lot in the final, but Kuznetsova earned it in earlier rounds:
11b. Kuznetsova beats Serena in the quarterfinals – Mildly shocked. Kuznetsova has a much better game for clay than Serena does, but Serena has the mental edge (who doesn’t she have the mental edge against?). After Kuznetsova blew her lead in the second set against Serena, I was prepared to write her off. But she surprised everyone by holding it together to beat Serena in a tough third set.

12. Nut runs out of stands during final – Shocked, and kind of outraged it took so long for the security guards to tackle the guy. Even if the guy didn’t mean any harm to the players, this kind of thing shouldn’t be allowed to happen. It disrupted the match and obviously startled Federer. By the way, if Wikipedia can be believed, the perpetrator was one “Jimmy Jump,” a Catalan real estate agent and professional pitch jumper. I guess everyone need a hobby.

13. Federer cries after (and almost during) the final – Not shocked. Geez, Roger, you’re such a softy.

The Apocalypse Cometh? Nadal Loses at the French Open

2009-05-31T23:12:00.004-04:00

If today, at around 11:55am EST, you felt a lurch in your stomach and a slight sense of disorientation, it’s because Earth came to a sudden halt and began rotating the wrong direction on its axis. No one could have foreseen the cosmic disturbance that caused this because, like time travel or the creation and destruction of matter, this event was thought to be a theoretical impossibility. Yet it has occurred. Rafael Nadal lost in the fourth round of the 2009 French Open to his sworn enemy, Robin Soderling, in four sets.

Of course, if you were in the U.S., you probably didn’t get to witness this unfathomable event live because NBC bought the rights to the match and decided to show it on tape hours later. However, I’ve found that if you are determined enough, you can find a way to watch just about any match live. But even though I witnessed the action as it unfolded, I could not believe what I was seeing—nor could the French commentators on the channel I was watching, as all they seemed to be able to utter at times was “incroyable!” and “oh là là!”

After Nadal’s total domination of the event for the past four years, everyone must have expected that if Nadal were going to lose, it would take an epic effort from one of the top players in one of the later rounds. Certainly no one expected the 25th ranked Robin Soderling to take him down in the fourth round. That’s not to mention that the match wasn’t really chock-full of scintillating shots. It was more reminiscent of those matches Nadal used to lose against guys like Berdych and Blake, where they overpowered him and kept him pinned far behind the baseline. But those matches were all on hard courts, and Nadal stopped losing to them about two years ago. No one has ever been able to bully Nadal like that on clay in a best-of-five set match, which is what makes this even more of a shock.

To add insult to injury, Soderling has not exactly been Nadal’s best buddy ever since their contentious match at Wimbledon in 2007. In fact, I recently watched this video, in which he states that Soderling is a player with whom he would never want to play doubles. Now he probably doesn’t want to play singles with him either.

So, aside from going down as one of the biggest upsets in French Open history, what are the ramifications of this match? Of course, there’s one guy who’s got to be particularly relieved to see Rafa go down. For the first five months of 2009, it looked like the season would belong to Nadal. But if Roger Federer could win Roland Garros, which he is now the favorite to do, not only would he have the career Grand Slam and tie Sampras’ record of 14 major titles, but he would have a realistic chance of regaining the top ranking from Nadal, assuming he does well at Wimbledon. It will be very interesting to see how Federer reacts to Nadal’s loss and this opportunity: Will he feel relieved to know that he won’t have to play Nadal in the final, or will this put even more pressure on him because he knows this may be his last, best shot at the French Open?

This also opens up the draw for other players. Either Soderling, Davydenko, Murray, or Gonzalez will make the final (I’m leaning towards Davydenko at the moment). The French crowd will be hoping that either Tsonga or Monfils can repeat Yannick Noah’s feat in 1983. And no doubt Patrick McEnroe, Cliff Drysdale, and Justin Gimelstob will be quivering with excitement over the prospect of Andy Roddick becoming the first American man in 10 years to win the French Open. God help us all if the latter happens, as it really will be a sign of some sort of apocalypse.

2009 French Open Predictions

2009-05-23T23:59:00.002-04:00

What you've all been waiting for:

Les Hommes
Quarterfinals:
Rafael Nadal vs. Fernando Verdasco – It really isn’t a question of whether Nadal will get to the quarterfinals, but how easy will his path be? The best player in that section is David Ferrer, but I can’t see Nadal losing more than 12 games to him. Verdasco, on the other hand, could encounter some staunch resistance in the fourth round against either Nikolay Davydenko or Stanislas Wawrinka. If Verdasco makes it through that match, his reward will be his fourth loss of the year to Nadal. Straight sets.

Marin Cilic vs. Fernando Gonzalez – Andy Murray and Gilles Simon are the top seeds in this quarter, but Murray’s clay results haven’t been especially impressive, and Simon doesn’t seem to be in the kind of form that will get him into the second week of a major. So I’m picking Cilic (although I might have picked Stepanek if I knew the status of his wrist injury) and Gonzalez. Gonzalez will win this match in four sets.

Juan Martin Del Potro vs. Novak Djokovic – JMDP should be pretty happy with his draw up to the quarterfinals, as it includes a bunch of old guys, little guys, out-of-form guys, hard court guys, and injured guys. Djokovic’s draw is nothing to sweat over either, and after a somewhat disappointing hard court season, Djokovic has gotten himself together during the clay season. He should be able to beat DelPo in four sets.

Andy Roddick vs. Roger Federer – I bet that’s not something you expected to read on this blog, right? But damn it if the tennis gods aren’t in a mind to torture me this year. As bad as Roddick can play at Roland Garros, I can’t see anybody in his draw beating him in the early rounds. I’d like to pick Gael Monfils to beat Roddick in the fourth round, but he’s injured and there’s still a question about whether La Monf will even play the tournament. So I grudgingly pick Roddick to get to the quarters, where Federer will complete the Beat-Roddick-At-Every-Major Slam. Straight sets.

Semifinals:
Nadal vs. Gonzalez – Three easy sets to Nadal.

Federer vs. Djokovic – Before Madrid, I was feeling pretty pessimistic about Federer’s chances of making another RG final. But the manner in which Federer beat Nadal in the final of Madrid, especially his willingness to try some new things, convinced me that there’s hope for Roger yet. Of course, I’d be remiss not to mention that Djokovic had softened Nadal up with a four hour semifinal match the day before. But anyway, the semifinal between Federer and Djokovic could go either way, but out of loyalty, I have to pick Roger in four sets.

Final:
Nadal vs. Federer – Same old story, different year. Nadal won’t be tired this time, and he’ll be ready to run around that backhand if need be. Federer may take a set, but the end result will never be in doubt.

Les Femmes
Quarterfinals:
Dinara Safina vs. Victoria Azarenka – Despite what Serena Williams says, Safina is the real number one and the favorite for the title. She is seeded to meet the defending champ Ana Ivanovic in the quarters, but I have a feeling it’ll be Sharapova 2.0 (a.k.a. Azarenka) instead. Safina wins in two sets.

Venus Williams vs. Kaia Kanepi – Why them? Why not them? Venus in straight sets.

Caroline Wozniacki vs. Elena Dementieva – Wozniacki has been on fire during the clay season and will beat a slumping Jelena Jankovic in the fourth round. Then she’ll take out Dementieva in three sets in the quarters.

Svetlana Kuznetsova vs. Serena Williams – If Serena is going to announce that she’s the best player in the world, she needs to prove it. But I don’t think she will here. Kuznetsova in three sets.

Semifinals:
Safina vs. Venus – Safina in two sets.
Wozniacki vs. Kuznetsova – Kuzy in three sets.

Final:
Safina def. Kuznetsova in three sets.

A Davis Cup Fairy Tale

2009-03-06T19:24:00.005-05:00

Please click the image to enlarge it.

Australian Open: More Passing Thoughts

2009-01-28T15:00:00.003-05:00

I am fighting through sleep deprivation to bring you these thoughts:

-Is it Richard Gasquet's goal in life to disappoint me? Richard, you're the fourth ranked Frenchman now, behind Tsonga, Simon, and Monfils. I'll admit, Tsonga is pretty good. But Simon is a world-class pusher and the oft-injured Monfils is prone to bouts of brain inactivity. You should be ranked higher than these two. You should be consistently in the quarterfinals of slams. And you absofreakinglutely should not be losing to past-his-prime Gonzo after being up two sets and having a match point.

-Monfils injured himself and retired against Simon. Huge surprise.

-Murray's loss to Verdasco was a shocker, at least at first. Now it sounds like Murray has actually been pretty sick, so I guess it might not have been such an upset after all. Nevertheless, Verdasco surely would have lost that match a year ago. But winning the Davis Cup for Spain and getting a head shrink from Gil Reyes seems to have made him a new player.

-Djokovic is such a wimp. The first time I ever saw him play was in the second round of Roland Garros in 2005, where he retired after two and a half sets against Guillermo Coria. Since then he's retired four more times at majors, twice in the quarterfinals and twice in the semifinals. Yeah, it was ridiculously hot out there, but he only lasted one set. Shameful.

-Special thanks to Dokic and Djokovic, who are largely responsible for knocking me out of the Australian Open Suicide Pool.

-Federer went from almost losing to Berdych (but not really--we all knew Berdych couldn't pull it off, didn't we?) to thoroughly demolishing JMDP. He has been a bit up and down this tournament obviously, but overall I think his play has been very encouraging. I don't think that translates to beating Nadal though.

-Serena should not be in the tournament anymore. Azarenka would have beaten her if she had been able to continue. And I think Kuznetsova may have beaten her had the roof stayed open the whole match…although, knowing Kuzy, maybe not. Dementieva will finish her off in the semis though.

-Speaking of Serena, Mary Carrillo needs to lay off the Serena love. She sounds like Drysdale mooning over Roddick.

-Carla Suarez Navarro, all our hopes lie with you to bring the one-handed backhand to women's tennis!

-Advice to Vera Zvonareva: Don't get up 5-2 in the deciding set against Safina. That's just where she wants you.

-Okay, I know I said I was boycotting ESPN2, but I gave in and tuned into see what their expert analysts were saying. What am I going to rant about here if I don't watch ESPN2? At the beginning of the tournament PMac et al. surprisingly weren't too optimistic about Andy Roddick's chances of going deep. Then he beats a few of his pigeons, get's lucky not to have to play Kohlschreiber or Nalbandian, and basically gets a walkover from Djokovic. And now? He's playing great! This is a huge chance for him! He's a new player! Well, as usual, I'm not buying it. I'm just seeing the same old Roddick, minus 15 pounds: serve big and either (a) retreat and wait for his opponent to make an error, or (b) Kamikaze to net and hope his opponent won't pass him. I've made this promise before, and I'll make it again: If Roger Federer loses to Andy Roddick in the semifinals, I will swear off my allegiance to Federer, shut down this blog, and go join Marat Safin in his secret business ventures.

Australian Open: 2nd Round Winds Down

2009-01-22T20:06:00.004-05:00

After no major upsets in the 1st round, the 2nd round handed us a couple of surprises.

-David Nalbandian (damn it, I knew I shouldn't have picked him to go deep) got knocked out in five sets by Yen-Hsun Lu. Nalbandian was up two sets to one and should have been able to close the match out, but his returns were uncharacteristically bad and he did not play the big points well.

-Venus Williams was sent packing by Carla Suarez Navarro. I went to bed before this one started, thinking that it wouldn’t be worth watching. Since I didn’t see what happened, I’ll take Venus’ word for it when she said Suarez Navarro must have played the match of her life. I guess this is just what you have to expect from Venus Williams—win the title or crash out early to a relatively unknown player.

-I have now decided to boycott ESPN2 and use other methods to get my Australian Open fix. However, before I decided this, I did get a chance to see an interview with Marat Safin. When asked by Chris Fowler about his retirement plans, Mr. Enigma gave a cryptic answer about having some projects planned, and that he would be visible in sports, but the rest was a surprise. As Kathy in Ann Arbor pointed out, this probably means he has no clue what he’s going to do.

-The little of what ESPN2 showed of Federer’s match looked both encouraging and entertaining.

-With Kohlschreiber and Nalbandian going out, Weight Watcher’s new spokesman, Andy Roddick, looks like a lot better bet to get the quarters than I had originally thought. To quote Nadal, puta.

3rd round matches of interest:
Baghdatis vs. Fish: Didn’t I say the Baghman would beat Soderling? Let’s hope he keeps the upsets coming.
Safin vs. Federer: The last time they played at the Australian Open, it was pretty epic. I do love Safin (much against my better judgment), and I’ll miss him when he retires, but I sure hope he doesn’t do anything stupid like win this match.
Gasquet vs. Gonzalez: Possibly the best one-handed backhand vs. possibly the worst one-handed backhand on tour.
Murray vs. Melzer: Melzer nearly beat Murray at the U.S. Open last year. Can he finish him off this time?

Australian Open: 1st Round Round-Up

2009-01-20T17:43:00.003-05:00

- After reading Passing Shots and discovering that dating an ATP player is detrimental to most WTA players’ careers, Ana Ivanovic promptly dumped Fernando Verdasco. She is now taking a page out of Venus Williams’ book by dating a golfer (Australian Adam Scott). The bookies are saying her odds of winning the Australian Open have significantly increased in the last few days, and if she decides to start going out with a rapper or an ex-firefighter by the second week of the tournament, she’ll be the odds-on favorite to win.

-We’d like to applaud ESPN2 for its commitment to the sport of tennis. I’m so glad that they’ve decided to set aside 45 minutes of every hour for the commentators to tell us what’s happening in the matches and around the grounds—it’s so much better than actually watching the tennis. Also, congratulations to whoever created the new ESPN scoreboard—the old one was way too easy to read. And thanks for showing Christina McHale’s scintillating injury time outs against Jessica Moore instead of the fifth set of Gonzalez and Hewitt’s match. I mean, who cares about two Australian Open finalists when we can watch two 16-year-old girls limp and choke their way through a third set on Court 6?

-Best match of the first round: Was it Serena, Venus, and Rafa’s thrashing of their respective opponents? Federer’s up-then-down performance against Seppi? Djokovic’s inspiring comeback from 0-4 down in the third set against Stoppini? Pavel’s retirement against Murray? It’s just too tough to choose this one.

-Worst match of the first round: Thanks to ESPN360, I was able to see Gasquet struggle to beat Diego Junqueira in four sets. In case you’ve never seen Junqueira before, I’ll tell you that he’s about Olivier Rochus’ height, David Nalbandian’s weight, has Agassi’s 1994 hair, and makes club players around the world feel better about their strokes. For Gasquet’s part, he’s couldn’t have hit a decent volley if Junqueira had tossed the ball underhand at him. It won’t go down as one of the year’s classic matches (or at least we hope not).

-Matches to look forward to in the 2nd round:
Baghdatis vs. Soderling – Baghdatis seems to be picking up some steam, and I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw an upset here.
Federer vs. Korolev – Federer fans will be hoping their man play a little better than in the first round.
Roddick vs. Malisse – Will Malisse be able to turn the 0-7 head-to-head around? Will Cliff and PMac be able to continue to restrain themselves from making a wild prediction about Roddick winning the tournament?
Karlovic vs. Ancic – A good one to watch if you’re not a fan of long rallies.
Some women’s match – There's bound to be at least one good one, right?

2009 Australian Open Predictions

2009-01-18T14:21:00.008-05:00

Before I get to the predictions, a short update:

About 12 hours ago I hypothesized that players with short hair have more success than players with long hair. Federer obviously read this tidbit and decided to act quickly before the Australian Open starts:

Nadal reacts to Federer's new haircut.

Back to business.

Women's Quarterfinals:
Jelena Jankovic vs. Vera Zvonareva - It's hard to call no. 1 seed Jankovic the favorite for the tournament, but she couldn't have asked for a much better draw. I don't expect the flu she had in Hong Kong to be an issue anymore, so I think she's a clear favorite to get the quarterfinals. I also don't see Zvonareva being troubled before the quarterfinals. It's always hard to judge players' form this early in the season, so I'm just going to stick with Jankovic to win this one in three dramatic sets (because she doesn't know how to do it any other way).

Dinara Safina vs. Ana Ivanovic - Blondes may have more fun, but recently brunettes have won more slams. I suspect Safina recognized this and dyed her hair accordingly. No doubt this will help her get to the quarterfinals. Ivanovic has the brunette thing going for her, but she's also dating an ATP player, which we now know (if you read my last post) is a big no-no. Ivanovic may squeak through to the quarters, but Safina will take her out in two sets.

Venus Williams vs. Elena Dementieva - The Williams sisters always make predictions trickier than they should be. Venus seems to be in good form recently, wining the year-end championship and continuing her success in the exhibition tournament in Hong Kong. But she's got her nemesis Flavia Pennetta lurking in the fourth round, and it's not like her draw gets any easier after that. Nonetheless I'll pick her to get to the quarters. Elena Dementieva is two-for-two in tournaments this year, so I feel pretty confident about her chances of getting to the quarterfinals. Dementieva has become a pretty tough cookie, so I'm going to risk it and pick her to beat Venus is three sets.

Agnieszka Radwanska vs. Serena Williams - Kuznetsova is seeded to get the quarterfinals in this section, but given that she's suffering from an abdominal injury and that her recent results don't inspire much confidence, I'm picking the Pole instead. Although Serena recently stated that she believes she is the best player in the world right now, her play in Sydney last week suggests otherwise. Still, she is a three-time Australian Open champ, so I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. She'll beat Radwanska in two close sets to get to the semis.

Women's Semifinals:
Jankovic vs. Safina - For no particularly good reason, I like Safina for this one. Three dramatic sets.

Dementieva vs. Serena - For the same reason as the other semifinal, I like Dementieva for this one. Another three setter.

Women's Final:
Safina vs. Dementieva - Now that I think about it, these are really terrible predictions. But I have to be honest, I haven't been following women's tennis very closely since Henin retired, so I don't have any good hunches about who to pick. Besides, does it really matter who wins? I guarantee it's going to be a girl between 5'9" and 6'1" with a two-handed backhand and no real variety or strategy to speak of. Maybe I'm beginning to sound like a broken record or one of those old people who like to talk about how much better it was in their day, but really, wasn't women's tennis so much better when Henin, Clijsters, Hingis, and Mauresmo were at the top of the game? I even miss Capriati, and I never really liked her that much. Anyway, that's my lament of the week. For the sake of tradition and for the record, I'll pick Dementieva to win this in two sets. But I don't know that I'll stay up to watch it.

Men's Quarterfinals:
Rafael Nadal vs. Gael Monfils - Nadal's draw is a little tricky. Gonzalez beat him at the AO two years ago, and he could potentially meet him in the fourth round this year. Of course, we shouldn't look too far ahead for Gonzo because he plays Hewitt first round, and never a good idea to underestimate Lleyton Hewitt. Gasquet is also in this eighth of the draw, and he's had a decent start to the season. But Nadal really should navigate through this section to get to the quarterfinals, where I suspect Monfils will be waiting for him (assuming Monfils doesn't injure himself before the quarterfinals). La Monf beat Nadal in Doha, but Monfils can be a spectacularly stupid player, and I just can't see him beating Nadal twice in a row. The Spaniard in four.

Andy Murray vs. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga - Murray's hot right now, and I can't see him going out before the quarterfinals (although Verdasco may trouble him a little in the fourth round). I had a tough time picking his opponent in the quarterfinals. I probably wouldn't hesitate to go with Tsonga if he hadn't injured his back a few days ago. The other choice is Gulbis, who started the year out well by beating Djokovic in Brisbane. But Gulbis is still young and struggles to maintain a high level of play not only in back-to-back matches, but sometimes in back-to-back sets. Tsonga says that his back feels much better right now than it did a few days ago, so I'm going to have to stick with him. In a rematch of a first-round encounter last year, Murray will get his revenge in four sets.

David Nalbandian vs. Novak Djokovic - I'm probably putting way too much stock in Nalbandian's win in Sydney last week, but come on, he's easily the most talented player in this section, so why shouldn't he make the quarterfinals? Djokovic, who has twice blown the opportunity to take over the no. 2 position from Federer this year, is a bit of a question mark right now. He could meet Nieminen, who took him out in Sydney last week, in the third round, and the talented but slightly crazy Soderling in the fourth round. But if it comes down to Nalbandian and Djokovic in the quarterfinals, I'm going to be brave and pick Nalbandian to continue the upsets. Five sets for this one.

Juan Martin Del Potro vs. Roger Federer - Del Potro was a winner in Auckland, and I'm going to tip him to get to the quarters, but he'll probably have a tough time in the fourth round against either Marin Cilic (a winner in Chennai) or David Ferrer. As for Federer, unless something crazy happens (like Marat Safin decides to put in a real effort for his final Australian Open), he shouldn't have too much trouble getting to the quarterfinals. Federer's new haircut will enable him to get past JMDP with ease. Three sets for Roger.

Men's Semifinals:
Nadal vs. Murray - It'll be tough, but Murray's the man right now, and he'll win this in five sets.

Nalbandian vs. Federer - Federer in four sets.

Men's Final:
Murray vs. Federer - I hate to jump on the Murray bandwagon and I especially hate to pick against Federer, but it just seems to be Murray's time. Federer will win the first set in a tiebreaker and Murray will take the next three sets comfortably.

There you have it.

By the way, I'd like to congratulate the staff of Passing Shots (and by that, of course, I mean myself) on its 100th post.

Smart and Stupid: How the Players Spent the Off-Season

2009-01-18T02:19:00.005-05:00

The players all have different ways of preparing for the new season. Here I will evaluate a few players’ off-season activities in a dichotomous, scientific, and perfectly logical manner.

Marcos Baghdatis buzzed off his locks. After serious consideration, I have decided I like the new ‘do. He looks more 21st century and less...400,000 BC. But in terms of his tennis, will it help? Let us briefly examine the historical record. Kuerten tried the buzz-cut thing and found that he was a better player with the curls. But Federer won most of his 13 slams post-ponytail. Agassi’s best years happened after he got rid of that atrocity on his head. And the lowest point in Safin’s career was during a period when he refused to cut his hair. I could go on, but let’s just agree that most evidence points to the conclusion that short hair is more conducive to success than long hair.
VERDICT: Smart.

Novak Djokovic changed racquets from Wilson to Head. What do we know about Djokovic’s Head? Djokovic’s Head is unusually long and narrow. He has a big Head, and if he does well in Australia, he’s likely to get an even bigger Head. His parents encouraged his use of this racquet, as they too have big Heads. But I have to agree with Federer and Henman, who both think Djokovic should have used his Head more before making an important decision like this.
VERDICT: Stupid.

Rafael Nadal has started dressing in a less comical fashion. I think this move could actually prove costly for him. Why? People fear and admire Batman, but don’t really respect Bruce Wayne. Superman has super-strength, but Clark Kent is just some guy. Spiderman can climb walls, but Peter Parker is kind of a loser. The way one dresses clearly can have a big affect on ability and success. Nadal may have just traded in the source of his superpower.
VERDICT: Stupid.

Marat Safin arrived to the Hopman Cup ball late, in a t-shirt, and with a bruised and battered face. He claimed he was not “in the right place at the right time" but that he won the fight. I can’t imagine a situation where getting into a fight in Moscow is a good idea. On the other hand, the last time he played Hopman Cup, he went on to win the Australian Open.
VERDICT: Stupid and smart (he’s a complex guy)

Ana Ivanovic and Fernando Verdasco started dating each other. Let us again review past evidence. Andre Agassi and Steffi Graf started dating after the French Open in 1999: Agassi began his renaissance around this time; Graf’s career was over three months later. Kim Clijsters and Lleyton Hewitt were a couple for four years, during which time Hewitt won both of his Grand Slam titles, but Clijsters became a perennial runner-up. Not until they broke up did Clijsters win her one and only Grand Slam title. Of course, we all know how Federer’s career has gone since he started seeing Mirka Vavrinec in 2000, and sadly, we also know how Mirka’s tennis career has gone since she met Roger. And let us not forget the ATP’s resident playa, Radek Stepanek. Stepanek’s singles career hit its peak in 2006, around the time he started dating Martina Hingis. She’s now banned from the WTA tour. Stepanek moved onto Nicole Vaidisova last year. She was touted as a future star a few years ago but has had no success on tour as of late. Do we see a pattern emerging yet?
VERDICT: Verdasco smart, Ivanovic stupid. (By the way, do they get a celebrity couple name? Fernana?)

Roger Federer doesn’t appear to have done anything new over the off-season. I didn’t expect him to switch to a two-handed backhand (although I’m not sure that would have been a bad idea), but he could have practiced hitting more aggressive returns or he could have sharpened his net game a little. Or seen a sports psychologist maybe. But from watching him in Abu Dhabi, Doha, and at Kooyong, I don’t see anything new or improved about his game, which is probably why he already has two losses to Murray this year. We here at Passing Shots are concerned!
VERDICT: Stupid.

So that’s an early preview of the 2009 season. I have less than 17 hours to finalize my Australian Open predictions, which I promise to post before the first ball is struck. But right now I have to sleep, because this may be the last chance I get for the next two weeks.

2008 and My Guilty Conscience

2008-12-31T23:59:00.005-05:00

Traditionally this is the time of year when one stops to reflect on the events of the past twelve months. I've never cared much for tradition, but I am feeling the need to spill my guts about some things that happened this year.

First of all, I think I need to come clean about when I haven't been very active in the blogosphere lately. At some point during the summer, I came down with a serious condition known in the medical field as “procrastinitis.” It usually manifests itself whenever the afflicted party attempts to do something productive, though symptoms may vary from patient to patient. In my case, whenever I ty to do homework, compose a new post for Passing Shots, or to attend to other pressing matters, I feel an overpowering desire to play FreeCell. Unfortunately I am still suffering from the condition, but specialists are working tirelessly to try to find a cure, and I hope to be fit to blog about the Australian Open.

But really, I am far more troubled by something else. Upon reviewing a post I wrote one year ago (entitled "2007: Year of the Boar or Year of the Bore"), I came across these lines:

"maybe there was just something a little too predictable about 2007...flipping through my mental catalogue of this season’s matches, I’m not recalling any one great match."

And suddenly I realized why all the bizarre things in the 2008 tennis season came about. I asked for unpredictability and I got it. First, Federer came down with mono and Djokovic sneaked away with the Australian Open, beating Jo-Wilfriend Tsonga, of all people, in the final. Then Nadal stole Federer's favorite title and his ranking in the summer. The Williams sisters won grand slam titles during an even numbered year (the first time since 2002). Gilles Freaking Simon pushed his way into the year-end top 8. Federer won exactly zero Masters events. And oh yeah, let's not forget Justine Henin up and retired just before Roland Garros. And that's only a few of the surprises 2008 had in store for me. Touché tennis gods, I wouldn't have predicted any of this.

And as for wanting more great matches, my wish was granted again. The first week of the Australian Open had more exciting matches than all of 2007. And that was fantastic. But the most memorable match of the year (and some say the most memorable ever) happened at Wimbledon...and I'd rather forget the result.

So my theory is that 2008 was just a big case of "be careful what you wish for," and that everything that happened is my fault. In an effort to avoid another disaster like 2008, I am going to make a very specific wish list of 2009:

10 Very Specific Wishes for 2009:
1. Roger Federer will be involved in a dramatic five set match in a final of a grand slam (preferably the French Open) against one of his young nemeses (preferably Nadal) and he will win after saving two match points.
2. Justine Henin will suddenly decide that reading the newspaper and taking hip-hop dance lessons just aren't enough to keep her busy. She will not only make a successful comeback at the French Open this year, but she will inspire a generation of young Belgians to play tennis. In ten years, the WTA tour will be dominated by 5'5" players with one-handed backhands and French accents.
3. Richard Gasquet will fight his way to the final of Wimbledon, where he will lose a close match to a 5-time champion. Despite this loss, the experience will have a profound effect on Gasquet and he will become a model of mental toughness on tour.
4. Maria Sharapova will give up tennis and decide to pursue a career as an actress in television commercials. (I have a feeling this one could come back to bite me--I do watch quite a bit of TV, and I don't fancy being interrupted by her every 10-15 minutes).
5. David Nalbandian won't wait until October to start his campaign to make it to the Masters Cup.
6. Kei Nishikori will emerge as the next best young player after making the semis of the Australian Open.
7. The Tennis Channel will greatly increase the amount of live tennis it shows throughout the year, and greatly decrease the number of episodes of Destination Tennis and Murphy's Guide it shows.
8. Marat Safin, Ivan Ljubicic, and Marcos Baghdatis will make it back into the top 20. Amelie Mauresmo will get back into the top 10. (That's like four wishes squeezed into one).
9. Mary Carillo, inspired by her Olympic experience, will decide to concentrate exclusively on human interest stories in the world of rhythmic gymnastics. She'll take Dick Enberg with her.
10. And of course, I can't forget Andy Roddick. May his road to a second Grand Slam victory be paved with plenty of Gilles Mullers and Janko Tipsarevics.

Happy New Year everyone. May all of your wishes come true as well...so long as they do not contradict the above list and/or are not otherwise in conflict with my well-being and happiness.

Breaking News: Roddick's New Game Plan Revealed

2008-12-11T11:08:00.003-05:00

I know it has been over three months since I last posted, and I have a perfectly good explanation for that, the details of which I will reveal in a later blog entry. For now, I only have time to break this surprising news:

Andy Roddick has found a new coach for the 2009 season: Larry Stefanki. You may remember, Larry Stefanki was widely credited for Fernando Gonzalez’s run to the Australian Open final in 2007. Unfortunately, not long after the Australian Open, Gonzalez was at home in Chile when he came upon a dog who was the victim of a hit-and-run. Being the big-hearted teddy bear of a man that he is, Gonzo attempted to rescue the animal. But unbeknownst to him, the dog carried a strain of an extremely rare virus that causes the loss of any knowledge gained over the past six months. Consequently when he tried to play tennis again, he was the same old mindless ball bashing Gonzo that we had grown accustomed to over the years. Stefanki tried to help his pupil return to form, but it proved futile, and eventually they parted ways.

But it seems that Gonzalez’s loss is Roddick’s gain, as he has snatched Stefanki up in hopes that Stefanki can work the same miracles on him that he did on Gonzalez.

Roddick and Stefanki have both stated that they are very excited about working together. Personally, I was initially skeptical about this partnership, mostly because I think that Roddick is beyond help. But new information about their plans to retool Roddick’s game have made me reconsider: specifically, a photograph of one of their first practice sessions that has leaked onto the internet.

(At first I did not recognize the subject of the photo, but upon closer inspection I realized that it is in fact good old Andy Roddick. I think he was difficult to recognize because his hairline seems to have receded quite a lot since I last posted on this blog.)

Behold the new secret weapon:

Yes, under the advice of his esteemed coach, Roddick has decided to exchange his racquet for a frying pan. Also, due to the nature of his new equipment, Roddick has had to switch to a one-handed backhand.

“I told Andy, ‘Listen, your old Babolat Pure Drive basically played like a frying pan,’” said Stefanki. “It was big and clunky, and he got no feel with it anyway, so I told him to give the frying pan a try. This new stick is a little more head heavy than he’s used to, but I think it will add some power to his shots.”

Roddick feels hopeful that the changes he’s making to his game will propel him back into the top 5.

“Larry has been great. I’ll admit I wasn’t sure the frying pan was a good idea, but Larry sold me on it. And he totally reassured me that switching to a one-handed backhand wouldn’t be a big deal since my two-handed backhand kind of sucks already anyway. I really think I’ve got a good shot at the majors again thanks to Larry.”

Roddick will get his first chance to test his new game out at an exhibition tournament in Abu Dhabi at the beginning of 2009. The tournament will also feature Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Andy Murray, Nikolay Davydenko, and James Blake.

US Open 2008: Passing Thoughts from Passing Shots

2008-08-26T11:31:00.008-04:00

Every night (or the next morning if I'm lazy...or the next afternoon if I'm really lazy...or not at all if I'm really, really lazy) I will try to post my thoughts on the day's action. Check back incessantly.

Day 7
Well, so much for updating daily. I guess now that we've reached the halfway point for the tournament I'll just give my halftime report.

So far, none of the top seeds have impressed me too much:

Ana Ivanovic was upset in the second round by Julie Coin (Please, no puns on the Frenchwoman's last name--none that I've read are funny).
Jelena Jankovic has been making all of her matches a big, dramatic three-set production, as usual. But surely it's only a matter of time until her luck runs out. She might get past Sybille Bammer next round, but she won't beat Elena Dementieva in the semis.
Svetlana Kuznetsova is continuing her disappointing year. Sveta is my favorite Russian, but she can be such a headcase.
Rafael Nadal has won all of his matches in straight sets, but he's looked uncharacteristically unconfident at times. He is playing more defensively than he did in Toronto and Beijing, and I think I may have even seen him choose the wrong shot at one point during his match against Ryler De Heart.
Roger Federer looked bad in his first two matches and I feared for the worst against Radek Stepanek, but he took it up a notch in the third round. He played a bit more aggresively and came over his backhand more. He's still going to need to cut down on his unforced errors to have any chance of winning the title, but at least he seems to be going in the right direction.
Novak Djokovic also hasn't been especially sharp early on. Marin Cilic is a tough opponent, so maybe the scoreline wasn't that surprising, but Djokovic definitely lacked some of his typical swagger in that match.
Andy Roddick...well, he would be out of the tournament by now, had Ernests Gulbis not had that incredible meltdown. Roddick will probably beat Fernando Gonzalez now, but I can't see him getting past Djokovic in the quarterfinals unless Djokovic has a really, really bad day.

There are, however, a few players that do deserve some positive mention, though:

Kei Nishikori (or Nishikori Kei, if you prefer) is really growing on me. He got his second win over a top ten player by beating David Ferrer. He'll have his work cut out for him next round when he plays Juan Martin Del Potro, but I'm hopeful that this tournament is just a start of good things for him.
Marin Cilic, despite losing to Djokovic, showed off some good stuff. I remember seeing him for the first time a few years ago and not thinking much of him. But he has really become a solid player. Like a good Croatian, he has a monster serve. But he is arguably better off the ground than any of his compatriots, and he moves really well for a guy who is 6'6".
Actually, overall, it has been a good tournament for the young guys. Seven of the eight players alive in the top half of the draw are under 24 years old.
And finally I'll mention Amelie Mauresmo. She hasn't been much of a factor for the last year and a half, but she has a very good chance of making the quarterfinals here. And let's face it, ever since Justine Henin retired, women's tennis has been painfully dull. I mean, there are only so many tall, two-handed Eastern European girls one can take. If Henin isn't coming back, the next best thing would be to have Mauresmo get back into the top ten.

Day 2

I forgot to mention the James Blake/Donald Young match yesterday. Prior to Monday night, I never really got what all the hype was about for the Donald. I mean, he had a good game for juniors—he’s consistent, places the ball well, and has a bit of that crafty lefty thing going for him—but he doesn’t really seem to have any weapons. But he really held his own against Blake. He wasn’t flustered by Blake’s pace and outsmarted him quite a few times. Granted, with Blake it’s not that hard to do. But maybe American men’s tennis has some sort of future after all.
We have to give Marat Safin props for not losing his mind and his match after those dubious foot fault calls. The second one was especially fishy. The linesman all the way on the other side of the court called a center line foot fault. How the heck could he see it all the way from over there? And I also have to agree with Safin that the whole rule is strange. His foot wasn’t across the center line when he hit the ball, so why does it matter where it is when he starts his motion? And how does one decide when the service motion officially starts?
My evaluation of Roger Federer’s first round match: Not impressed. Yeah, he played well enough to beat Maximo Gonzalez but nowhere near well enough to compete with the top dogs. His net play was kind of sloppy, his returns were downright bad, and he used that ineffective backhand slice way too much. Why isn’t he working on being more aggressive in these early round matches that he’s almost certain to win? Very frustrating. But what can you do?
Finally, an update on Nadal’s clothing situation: Apparently Nadal got cold feet and decided to keep the old gear for the rest of the year. I’m sure Nike isn’t happy about this. And personally, I’ve been ready for his new outfit for about three years. But clearly Nadal (1) likes looking like a cartoon character and (2) is very superstitious. Very frustrating. But what can you do?

Day 1

The good news for Rafa is that he won his 1st round match in straight sets. The good news for people who don’t want him in another final is that he has already got blister problems.
Speaking of Rafa, this morning as I came into the kitchen I was surprised to see Nadal’s face staring up at me from my kitchen table. Upon closer inspection I saw that it was just photograph accompanying an article in the Wall Street Journal about his new mature look for the U.S. Open, which is to include a polo shirt and, gasp, regular shorts. It looked to be a vast improvement over his old attire. But I was disappointed to see that he actually played his first round match in the skin-tight sleeveless shirt and pirate pants of old. So I’m confused. Either the Wall Street Journal got its facts wrong, or Nadal panicked just before his match and decided to change back into his lucky clothes. I think it was the latter.
During Nadal’s match, they invited some golf guy (clearly I’m not a golf fan) to the USA commentary booth. He seemed fairly knowledgeable about tennis and was eager to discuss it. But what did the actual tennis expert in the booth, John McEnroe, want to discuss? He wanted tips for getting the ball out of the sand trap. It was the golfer who had to remind him not to talk during points. I tend to think McEnroe is one of the better American commentators, but geez, this really makes you miss the ATP Masters Series commentators.
People never get sick of hearing other people sing their praises, do they? Seriously, why is it necessary to have some sentimental ceremony every opening night of the U.S.Open?
And David Nalbandian…only five more matches from the final.

2008 U.S. Open Predictions

2008-08-25T10:58:00.002-04:00

For the record, this is what will happen in the next two weeks:

Women's Quarterfinals:
Ana Ivanovic vs. Dinara Safina - Ivanovic has been out for a while due to a thumb injury, but assuming she has recovered, this may actually work to her advantage as she won't be at risk for a burnout, unlike some of her opponents. Dinara Safina has had a great summer, but I'm worried that she may have pulled a Jelena Jankovic and have played too much and peaked too soon. I'll pick Ivanovic over Safina in three sets.

Serena Williams vs. Venus Williams - As always, who knows what's going to happen with the Williams Sisters. One of them could have another Wimbledon type performance, or they could both crash out early as they did at the Olympics. But given that I don't see any other obvious picks in that section to make it to the quarterfinals, I'll play it safe and go with "Vee" and "Ree." Little sis to take this one in two sets.

Elena Dementieva vs. Svetlana Kuznetsova - Dementieva could carry the momentum from her gold medal to have a good run at the U.S. Open or, like so many gold medalists before her, she could lose early. Kuznetsova has been kind of disappointing lately, but she's done some of her best work at the U.S. Open, so I'll pick her to get to the quarters. And then I guess I'll go with Dementieva over Kuznetsova in three.

Vera Zvonareva vs. Jelena Jankovic - Zvonareva has looked pretty good recently and her draw looks pretty easy up until the quarters. Jankovic has not looked very good recently, and her draw doesn't look as good, but she has a habit of limping her way into the second week of majors. Then I'll go with Zvonareva for the upset in three sets.

Women's Semifinals
Ivanovic vs. Serena - Ana for the win, in two.

Dementieva vs. Zvonareva - Olympic semifinal rematch, same result.

Women's Final
Ivanovic vs. Dementieva - I'll be yet another failure in a Grand Slam final for Dementieva, and it will be Ivanovic's second Grand Slam title this year, finally solidifying her no. 1 status. Three sets.

Now for the men...let's make this interesting, shall we?

Men's Quarterfinals
Rafael Nadal vs. David Nalbandian - Nadal, Nadal, Nadal. This guy is getting on my nerves. But the good Nalbandian will reawaken and shock Nadal in the quarterfinals in five sets.

David Ferrer vs. Andy Murray - I was tempted to pick hotshot Juan Martin Del Potro instead of Ferrer, but I think he's due for a letdown. Murray has had his big breakthrough this summer, and as long as he doesn't play like he did at the Olympics, he should be good to get to the quarters. Then I'll pick Murray over Ferrer in four sets.

Ernests Gulbis vs. Novak Djokovic - Yes, I'm predicting Gulbis to take out Andy Roddick in the second round. Roddick has had a pretty unimpressive summer, which is ironic given that he skipped the Olympics so he could get good preparation for the U.S. Open. And young Gulbis is on his way up. And Djokovic? Well, he's just too good on hard courts not to get to the quarters here. Djokovic has always had routine matches against Gulbis but this time...it'll be routine again.

Richard Gasquet vs. Roger Federer - I'm picking Gasquet because I don't know who else to pick. Nikolay Davydenko? Not focused right now. Dmitry Tursunov? Headcase. Tommy Haas? Too fragile. So I guess it's Gasquet. And Federer? Well, he's got to turn this slump around some time, right? And Federer will prevail against Federer-lite in four sets.

Men's Semifinals
Nalbandian vs. Murray - The first two sets will be ugly, but Murray will prevail in them. Then Nalbandian will start to get going down a break in the third. He'll come back and win the next two sets. The fifth will have many breaks of serves but will end in a 12-10 tiebreak for Nalbandian. How's that for specifics?

Federer vs. Djokovic - I just can't bring myself not to pick Federer. Federer in four.

Men's Finals
Federer vs. Nalbandian - Nalbandian, worn out from this semifinal match, won't put out much of an effort and Federer will salvage his year by winning the final Slam of the year.

Then end.

Federer and Nadal; Past, Present, and Future

2008-08-22T02:19:00.002-04:00

Well, I’m back from my mission and, as you may have noticed, it was not as successful as I had hoped. It’s my intention to give a more detailed account of the events that transpired while I was in Cincinnati, but for now I simply feel the need to comment on the current state of tennis. And, yes, I know that I swore not to come back if I was not successful in helping Roger win Cincy but, well, I also said I would play loud music outside of Novak Djokovic’s door all night, but you didn’t really think I was serious about that, did you?

So let’s start with Rafael Nadal. Rafael Nadal really made his grand entrance onto the tennis scene in Miami 2005, where Federer narrowly beat him in the final. The slow hard court was to his liking as it allowed him to track down a lot of balls and use his heavy topspin to make his opponents very uncomfortable. Then he moved onto clay where he used these tactics even more effectively. His return to hard courts that year proved initially successful as he did win Montreal (Federer had skipped it), but at the U.S. Open, one of the fastest hard court tournaments on the schedule, Nadal was knocked out early by James Blake. This match demonstrated the tactics and conditions that were ideal for beating Nadal: hard, flat hitting on a very quick hard court. Blake along with Tomas Berdych, Mikhail Youzhny, and even Federer on occasion showed that Nadal, because it was so much more difficult for him to use his defensive skills on hard court and because his shots did not kick up as much, could be dominated on quicker outdoor hard courts or on indoor courts.

But let’s fast forward to July 2008. Nadal has just come off of his historic victory over Roger Federer in the Wimbledon final and now must move on to the American summer hard court swing. It’s the time of the year when he has been most vulnerable in the past, and let’s not forget that he’s on a 24-match winning streak, so surely he must be tired, right? Apparently not, as he only drops one set on his way to the title in Toronto. In the semifinals of Cincinnati, it takes Novak Djokovic, who has been arguably the best hard court player in 2008, to finally halt Nadal’s now 32-match winning streak. Nadal is no doubt terribly dissatisfied with this result, but the rest of the field must be somewhat perturbed that Nadal is having this much success on his worst surface.

After the disappointment in Cincinnati, Nadal heads to Beijing to take part in the Olympics which, as it happens, is being played on DecoTurf, the same surface the U.S. Open is played on, and which is supposedly playing similarly quickly. Nadal appears slightly uncomfortable in his first round match against 74th ranked Potito Starace when he loses the second set. But after this minor slip up is rectified, Nadal demolishes his next three opponents, then gets only his third victory over Djokovic on hard courts, and finally routinely beats Fernando Gonzalez for the gold medal. And to cap it off, the very next day he is finally able to see his name at the top of the ATP rankings. Nadal is, right now, is as untouchable as he has ever been.

Meanwhile, things are continuing to go downhill for Roger Federer. Mononucleosis hindered his off-season preparation and almost certainly contributed to his lackluster start to the year. Things begin to pick up during the clay season, although Nadal beats him in three finals. But Federer has to feel better about his game going into the grass season than he felt earlier in March. He wins Halle without dropping a set and continues that trend all the way into the Wimbledon final. Nadal is now the only person standing between him and a record 6th Wimbledon title in a row. But despite a valiant comeback, Federer cannot defeat Nadal and suddenly he’s in an even worse place than he was in four months earlier. Wimbledon, after all, is supposed to be his tournament.

However, the compacted summer hard court schedule leaves Roger with little time to dwell on the loss, nor to regroup from it. One thing is clear when Federer steps back out on court for the first time since Wimbledon: his confidence is at an all-time low. Gilles Simon and Ivo Karlovic, two players who have nothing in common except that they shouldn’t be able to beat Federer, both get the better of him early in the North American Masters Series events. Federer looks bad. Even the simplest of put-away shots become cause for his fans to turn their heads and cringe, and let us not speak of the countless times Federer fails to capitalize on his big chances in the matches. This unsure, lethargic, and occasionally irritable player in no way resembles the congenial genius who dominated tennis only a short while ago.

So Federer, having only won one of his last four matches, heads to Beijing for the Olympics, a tournament he has had his sights on for eight years. Not surprisingly, he loses in the quarterfinals to James Blake, a player he had never lost to in eight previous meetings. So it seems Federer will have to wait four more years to have a chance to stand on the Olympic podium--or will he? A few hours after being knocked out of the singles tournament by Blake, Federer returns to court to play doubles with his partner Stanislas Wawrinka. And instead of looking dejected, Federer looks more determined than he has in any of his recent singles matches. At the same time, he looks loose, confident, and like he’s having fun playing tennis again, finally. He’s hitting those effortless passing shots, he’s picking up some incredible half-volleys, and he’s leaving his opponents with nothing but disbelieving looks on their faces. He and Wawrinka storm past the Indian pair of Mahesh Bhupathi and Leander Paes, shock the top seeds Bob and Mike Bryan, and defeat the Swedish duo of Simon Aspelin and Thomas Johansson, and suddenly they’re gold medalists. It may not have been the event he expected to win, but judging from the way he’s grinning ear-to-ear and doing his odd celebration rituals with Wawrinka, Roger Federer doesn’t seem to care much. Nor does he care, at least for this moment, that Nadal is poised to win the singles gold medal and will soon be the new number one player in the world. For Federer and his fans, the Olympic curtain closes on a happy scene.

But what happens next for our gold medalists? Rafael Nadal will be the number one seed in a Grand Slam tournament for the first time in his career. The odds makers say that he’s the favorite to win the U.S. Open. Will this extra pressure have any effect on him? It’s doubtful. He has a great chance to win his third Grand Slam title in a row in 2008, despite never having made it past the quarterfinals in New York before. And if he doesn’t win it? No big deal. He’ll say that he isn’t really the favorite anyway--he has a habit of putting the pressure off himself this way. Besides, two Grand Slams, an Olympic gold medal, and a handful of Masters shields almost certainly are enough to leave him with the number one ranking at the end of the year, not to mention plenty of self-satisfaction.

On the other hand, the U.S. Open seems much more dire for Roger Federer. This is his final chance to win a big title before the year is over. He has the opportunity to silence the naysayers who think he’s old news. And he can edge ever closer to breaking Pete Sampras’ Grand Slam record. Yes, there’s going to be a lot of pressure on Roger Federer in the upcoming weeks. But if he wants to succeed in winning his fifth straight U.S. Open, the best thing for him to do is to forget what’s at stake. Federer was a different person when he played doubles at the Olympics. No one expected him to win, so he played without pressure. It allowed him to swing freely and come up with his best stuff, the stuff he used to come up with regularly when he was so dominant a few years ago. If he could forget about his ranking, forget about Nadal, forget about what people are saying about him, and just play tennis for the sake of hitting the brilliant shots he’s capable of, he might just salvage his year after all.

Mission: Save Federer's Year

2008-07-29T00:41:00.003-04:00

It is the eve of my fifth annual journey to Mason, Ohio, home of the 7th ATP Masters Series of the year. The bags are more or less packed and my sidekick and driver is resting up for the 3 ½ hour ride south. But somehow I’m not filled with the eagerness I am accustom to feeling the night before my much anticipated summer trip.

But why? This is my once-a-year opportunity to watch world class tennis up close and in person, to mingle with another culture (interacting with Ohioans actually offers a fresh perspective on life), and if I’m lucky, to share an elevator ride with one of my tennis heroes (or if I’m not so lucky, Nikolay Davydenko). What’s not to look forward to?

One man is to blame for my muted enthusiasm: Rafael “One Half Beast, One Half Machine, One Hundred Percent Relentless” Nadal. He never cracked my top ten favorite tennis players, but I could tolerate him when he was the King of Clay but second fiddle to “numero uno” Roger Federer the rest of the year. But Rafa has finally overstepped his place. He stole Federer’s favorite tournament, he stole Federer’s confidence, and it looks like he’s about to steal Federer’s ranking. So I’ve come to a conclusion: it’s my duty to help Roger Federer halt Rafa’s quest for world domination.

But what this really entails is helping Roger to turn his year around, and ensuring that he wins this tournament. If this means finding Roger, giving him a forceful shake, and reminding him that he’s one of the all-time greats and he should start playing like it, so be it. If this involves switching out Andy Roddick’s morning coffee for decaf, so be it. If this requires playing loud music outside Novak Djokovic’s door all night to keep him up, so be it. If this comes down to cornering Rafael Nadal in the elevator and taking him on in an “ultimate fighter” type contest--well, then Roger’s on his own.

I vow to return victorious, or not return at all.

[And now, because past experience has taught me that not everyone shares my predilection for hyperbole, I feel that I must put a disclaimer here to ensure that no misguided soul reads this and decides to report me to the police. I HAVE NO TRUE INTENTION OF SABOTAGING RAFAEL NADAL OR ANY OF THE OTHER PLAYERS AT THE TOURNAMENT. However, I do intend to give Rafa a dirty look if I pass him in the hotel hallway.]

Greatest Wimbledon Second Round Ever? I Think So!

2008-06-27T01:25:00.003-04:00

If you asked me which three players I wouldn’t mind seeing lose early at Wimbledon, I would have replied without hesitation, Djokovic, Sharapova, and Roddick. And for someone who doesn’t care for these three players, it was a pretty miserable start to the year. Sharapova started the year off winning the Australian Open and not losing a match until Indian Wells. Novak Djokovic also won the Australian Open plus a couple of TMS titles, and has been on Nadal’s heels for the no. 2 spot. And Roddick won two titles, and finally got his second win over Federer in Miami. Suffice it to say, by the end of March, I was one unhappy camper.

So yeah, I wanted to see Djokovic, Sharapova, and Roddick go out sooner rather than later at Wimbledon. But I would never have believed that all three would go out in the second round. No way. I’m still a little in shock.

First Djokovic. On Wednesday morning I was really just hoping that Marat Safin wouldn’t be totally embarrassed by Djokovic. As the match went on, it was clear that Djokovic was the one who should have be embarrassed. Djokovic never really looked comfortable out there. I don’t know whether that was because he was just having a bad day, or because Safin's hard, deep and flat shots weren't giving him a chance to get into the match, or because of some yet undisclosed mysterious illness, but he definitely did not look like the no. 3 player in the world. Safin, on the other hand, looked more like the guy who won the 2005 Australian Open than he has since, well, the 2005 Australian Open. Is this victory finally going to turn things around for Marat again? Err, let’s just say that, knowing Safin, I’ve already penciled Andreas Seppi into the fourth round.

Next Sharapova. This had to be the biggest shock of the three. I really thought Sharapova was going to win the tournament, and certainly didn’t think she’d have trouble in the second round against a player ranked outside the top 100. But not only did Alla Kudryavtseva beat Sharapova in straight sets, but she insulted her outfit too. Ouch.

Finally Roddick. When I looked at the draw, I thought Tipsarevic would have a good chance to take Roddick out (and if you don’t believe me, just check my Wimbledon predictions post!), although I picked Roddick to get through. It took Tipsarevic a set to get his rhythm and a read on Roddick’s serve, but after that, he was clearly the better player. Roddick has become such a pusher from the baseline that it really only takes someone with a reliable serve and a decent down-the-line backhand to beat him now. And much to Roddick’s dismay, Tipsarevic has that.

Of these three upsets, I’d have to think it hurts Roddick the most. I'm sure Djokovic and Sharapova are disappointed, but they will have plenty more chances to win slams, without a doubt. However, Roddick’s chances to grab a second major are pretty much gone now (contrary to what Justin Gimelstob might insist), and now he isn’t even making the second week of majors. He has only made one quarterfinal in the last four slams, and he hasn’t been to a semi since the Australian Open ‘07. He’s just getting further and further away from winning slams. And with all the effort he puts into trying to remain a top player, he’s looking increasingly pathetic.

But hey, I’m not complaining.

Nadal Reveals His Inner Beast, Wimbledon Predictions, and Other News

2008-06-23T02:14:00.009-04:00

Wimbledon is nigh, and I have modified the color scheme of my blog accordingly.

In other breaking news, Rafael Nadal’s secret has been discovered. After winning the French Open without dropping a set, Rafa traveled to London to compete on the grass. Nadal had a slightly tricky encounter with Japanese prodigy Kei Nishikori in the third round and a very tight match against Ivo Karlovic in the quarterfinals, but after those challenges Nadal eased past two-time Wimbledon runner-up Andy Roddick and then dispatched of Novak Djokovic in the final in straight sets. He was the first Spaniard in 36 years to win a grass tournament.

This quick, successful change of surfaces and these dominant performances against two of the Wimbledon favorites planted a few questions in the minds’ of some tennis fans. Specifically, they wondered, “Does Rafael Nadal have supernatural powers?” We now have the answer: Yes.

When does the Incredible Nadulk surface? Does Nadal need to drink some sort of potion to become Nadulk? Is there some counteracting potion? Can Rafa summon his alter ego whenever he needs him, or does this green machine have a mind of its own? Most importantly, will Nadulk show up in the latter stages of Wimbledon? We cannot yet answer these questions, but we’ll undoubtedly know in two weeks time.

Meanwhile, Nadulk’s arch-nemisis was also in action last week. Roger Federer shook off the embarrassment of his loss to Nadal at the French Open to win Halle without dropping a set. The field wasn’t quite as strong as the one in London, but beating Marcos Baghdatis, Nicolas Kiefer, and Philipp Kohlschreiber routinely isn’t a piece of cake. And let’s face it, Roger could use the confidence boost.

This week, the action was in Nottingham and ’s-Hertogenbosch (my favorite tour stop, if only for its name). Ivo Karlovic repeated as champion in England (beating Fernando Verdasco in the final), and in the Netherlands David Ferrer beat Marc Giquel to become the first Spaniard in six days to win a grass tournament.

In WTA action, Kateryna “the other one” Bondarenko beat Yanina “who the heck is she?“ Wickmayer to win Birmingham. Tamarine “I thought you were retired” Tanasugarn beat Dinara “not just Marat’s little sister” Safina at ‘s-Hertogenbosch. And Agnieszka Radwanska beat Nadia Petrova at Eastborne. Sorry Agnieszka and Nadia, I don’t have any nicknames for you.

And now I will disclose my Wimbledon predictions, which are based on the results summarized above, in addition to my vast tennis knowledge:

Women’s Quarterfinals:
Ana Ivanovic vs. Samantha Stosur - The new no. 1 lucked out and got a cakewalk draw to the semis, no doubt about it. But Sam Stosur lucked out too. The seeded players in her section, aside from Ivanovic, have all been struggling recently, and there are no other threatening names. Stosur had a reasonably good week in Eastbourne, and with her serve and net play, I think she’s got a pretty decent chance of making the quarters--where Ivanovic will demolish her in straight sets.

Agnieska Radwanska vs. Serena Williams - Svetlana Kuznetsova is seeded to get to the quarterfinals, but given her poor loss to Caroline Wozniacki in Eastbourne, not to mention her past struggles against Radwanska, I’m going with the Pole to get through. As we all know by now, Serena could go out in an early round or win the tournament with equal probability. But I’m picking her to reach the quarters and beat Radwanska in straight sets.

Dinara Safina vs. Maria Sharapova - Elena Dementieva (or Lindsay Davenport? Nah.) could pose a problem for Dinara Safina en route to the quarters, but I’m picking Safina because she’s got all the momentum right now. And Sharapova…ugh…I think she’ll have no trouble getting to the quarterfinals. It’ll be a rematch of the French Open 4th round, but Sharapova won’t make the same mistakes again, and she’ll win in straight sets.

Venus Williams vs. Jelena Jankovic - Again, who knows what’s going to happen with Venus, but she’s got a good draw, so I’ll pick her. Jankovic has a few potentially tricky matches before the quarters, but I think she’ll get through. And here’s my (kind of) bold prediction: Jankovic will “upset” defending champion Venus Williams in three sets to make yet another Grand Slam semi.

(Let me just add right here that my most anticipated second round match is between Wozniacki and Wozniak in the bottom quarter of the draw)

Women’s Semis:
Ivanovic vs. Radwanska - Ivanovic in straight sets.
Sharapova vs. Jankovic - Sharapova in three sets.

Women’s Final:
Sharapova def. Ivanovic - I don’t like it, but I don’t see anyone to stop the Sharapova machine from bashing her way to the 2008 Wimby title.

Men’s Quarters:
Roger Federer vs. David Ferrer - Federer doesn’t have an especially easy draw, but given that he’s the five-time defending champ, we’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. Ferrer also has a tricky draw, but I’m so impressed by his win in the Netherlands that I’m not hesitating to pick him to get to the quarters. But that’ll be it for Ferrer, as Federer will take him down in straight sets.

Novak Djokovic vs. Marcos Baghdatis - Djokovic has a pretty easy route to the quarters. There are a few of different guys who could make it through to face him, including Ivo Karlovic, Feliciano Lopez, and David Nalbandian, but I guess I’m going with Baghdatis because…well, I don’t know why. But Baghdatis it is. Djokovic will beat the Baghman in four sets in their quarterfinal match.

Andy Roddick vs. Marin Cilic - Maybe it’s just wishful thinking, but I could see Roddick going down to Janko Tipsarevic in the second round (he almost did three years ago). But if he doesn’t lose then, he’ll probably make the quarters. I’m picking Cilic as the surprise quarterfinalist in this section because Davydenko, Ljubicic, and Mathieu…well, they aren’t exactly known for their grass court prowess. In the quarterfinal match, Cilic will outplay Roddick for a set and a half, but then he’ll start to get nervous and Roddick will end up winning in four sets.

Andy Murray vs. Rafael Nadal - Murray has never made a Grand Slam quarterfinal before, but this is his chance. Tommy Haas and Richard Gasquet may stand in his way, but really, the only thing you can count on either of them to do is retire when the going gets a little tough. And of course there’s Nadal who, despite a slightly tricky draw, will make the quarters unscathed. Depending on how Murray feels, it could be a tight match--or not. So I’ll play it safe and go with Nadal in four.

Men’s Semis:
Federer vs. Djokovic - Partly because Djokovic looked vulnerable at Queen’s, but mostly because I really, really, really want Federer to win, I’m picking Federer to win in four sets.

Roddick vs. Nadal - Their London match was an appetizer. This is the main course, and Nadal will eat Roddick alive. Straight sets.

Men’s Final:
Federer vs. Nadal - They played each other three times in the French Open final. It seems only fair that they play each other three times at Wimbledon. I know all the cool kids are picking Nadal to win this one, but I’m not giving up hope for Roger yet. Federer wins his sixth Wimbledon title in five sets.

This is undoubtedly going to be a very important tournament, both historically and in terms of what’s happening in the short term. If Federer wins, he breaks the record for consecutive Wimbledon titles won, and he turns his season around; if Nadal wins, he become the first man since Bjorn Borg to win the French and Wimbledon back-to-back, and he establishes himself (even if not in the rankings) as the best player in the world now; if Djokovic wins…well it’ll just be remembered as a sad, sad year for tennis.

So that’s all for now. Sorry for any typos; I procrastinated writing this and now it’s the middle of the night. I may throw down a few observations as the tournament progresses, but I’m making no promises.

2008 French Open Parting Shots (un peu en retard, encore)

2008-06-15T00:40:00.004-04:00

The last three times that Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal played at the French Open, Federer didn’t win but he held his own for a good part of each match. This year was obviously different. I’d say that Nadal demolished Federer, but that doesn’t seem to be a strong enough word for what happened. In fact, I don’t think any single word could truthfully describe how badly Nadal beat Federer. A more accurate depiction of the scene would go something like this: Nadal punched Federer in the face, flipped him onto the ground, stomped on him until he was just a messy pulp, put him into a blender to pulverize him a bit more, stuck him in an oven to dehydrate his remains, and then took the powder that was left and mixed it into red clay of Philippe Chatrier. Really, it was so painful for all that watched that even John McEnroe, in his post-match interview with Roger, felt compelled to comfort Federer more than to ask what the heck happened.

But what the heck did happen? When I heard that Federer asked Jose Higueras not to talk about their game plan before the match, I was led to believe that Federer would come out and blow Nadal away with some astonishing new tactics: Unflinching net attacks? An array of spins and angles to keep Nadal off balance and without rhythm? A Nalbandian-esque two-handed backhand, perhaps? But alas, I saw none of the above. The only thing Federer did more of than usual was mix in his new-fangled forehand drop shot--which, it seemed to me, lost him more points than it won.

I’ve been trying to deny it all year, but I think it’s finally time to face the facts: Federer is not the unstoppable force he once was. Clearly he’s still in the top three players in the world, but one could make very justifiable claims that Djokovic and Nadal deserve the top spot more than he does now. Could Federer turn his year around and win four or five more big titles in the second half of the season? Sure. Wimbledon is just around the corner and, like last year, that could be a big pick-me-up for Roger. On the other hand, Federer is coming into Wimbledon as far less of a favorite than he has been the last four years, and if he can’t win it again, it would be a pretty huge blow to both his ranking and his confidence, which is already waning.

But that’s Federer. Let’s talk about Nadal--he did win his fourth Roland Garros title, after all. I hate to sound like everyone else (especially if everyone else includes Mary Carillo), but I have to agree that Rafael Nadal is getting better on clay each year. Not only has he not lost at Roland Garros in his career, and not only has he barely lost any sets, but now he’s practically not losing any games. 6-1, 6-0, 6-2 against Fernando Verdasco, a pretty competent clay court player; 6-1, 6-1, 6-1 against Nicolas Almagro, surely one of the top 10 on clay this year; 6-1, 6-3, 6-0 against the world no. 1. It’s ridiculous. The only thing that can stop Nadal on clay is fatigue or injury, and even then it takes playing fifteen matches in the span of two weeks to wear him out.

The other big story of the men’s tournament would have to be Gael Monfils, who slipped and slid to the semis. His big win was in the quarterfinals against David Ferrer. But what’s more remarkable than the opponents he beat is the fact that he made through six matches without getting injured. But what’s next for Monfils? Is this the start of a promising new chapter in his career? Nah. Standing three yards behind the baseline playing defense isn’t going to cut it on grass and hard court.

And of course, there was the other men’s semifinalist, Novak Djokovic. But as his father didn’t attack anyone, his mother didn’t make any outrageous proclamations, and he himself did not declare that he was “in control” against Nadal, there’s not much to talk about.

So let’s move on to the women’s tournament. I’m not one who likes to sing her own praises (well, not too much), but I was picking Ivanovic to win the French from the beginning of the clay season. I can’t say the same about Dinara Safina making it to the final, but who can? I think Safina could have won the final if she had gotten into more of a hole in each set; unfortunately for her, she kept it fairly close and never had the chance to come back from a great deficit like she did in her matches against Maria Sharapova and Svetlana Kuznetsova (and of course, two years ago against Sharapova as well). Or maybe she could have won if she had the support of her big brother, whom she clearly idolizes. Instead, she just had her mom and two men who weren’t her dad (although the TV commentators incorrectly identified both of them as Mr. Safin).

Speaking of commentators, let me take this paragraph to voice my complaints yet again about the TV coverage of the French Open. Dick Enberg was a blathering idiot as usual, Ted Robinson was as clueless as he ever was, Barry McKay continued to narrate points for the blind viewers, and Mary Carillo still wasn’t as funny as she thought she was. But I’ve come to expect all of that. John McEnroe was the real disappointment in terms of commentary this year. Sure, he can be a bit self-obsessed at times, but you can usually count on him to be objective, insightful, and not afraid to tell the straight truth. But while calling matches on the Tennis Channel, he seemed to diverge on completely irrelevant tangents (probably under the influence of Ted Robinson) and talk over the points, as if he weren’t even remotely interested in the matches. I expect better from him.

And I know I’m now spilling into a second paragraph now, but I can’t go without mentioning NBC’s unforgivable coverage (or lack thereof). NBC had the rights to the men’s semifinals, but they only set aside three hours to show tennis. So they showed Nadal vs. Djokovic (not live, of course, because they couldn’t interrupt the Today Show), and didn’t show any of Federer vs. Monfils. Why does NBC buy the rights to the French Open if they don’t intend to show it live (or at all)? I know I’ll never get an answer to this question, but I’ll ask it every year anyway.

So that was the 2008 French Open, or least what I can remember of it. The grass season is here, and the top players have already proven they can adjust to the new surface quickly. Except Nikolay Davydenko, who’s playing on clay in Warsaw.

Wimp.

2008 French Open Predictions (un peu en retard)

2008-05-27T00:11:00.001-04:00

I know I’m posting my predictions two days late, but I thought that it was important that I still post them so that when they are proven perfect, there’s a record of it.

Men’s quarterfinals:
Roger Federer vs. Igor Andreev
Nikolay Davydenko vs. David Ferrer
Tomas Berdych vs. Novak Djokovic
David Nalbandian vs. Rafael Nadal

Men’s semifinals:
Federer vs. Davydenko
Djokovic vs. Nadal

Men’s final:
Nadal def. Federer

Perhaps they’re not the most adventurous predictions, but honestly, do you take me for an idiot?

Women’s quarterfinals:
Maria Sharapova vs. Elena Dementieva
Svetlana Kuznetsova vs. Anna Chakvetadze
Venus Williams vs. Jelena Jankovic
Serena Williams vs. Ana Ivanovic

Women’s semifinals:
Dementieva vs. Kuznetsova
Jankovic vs. Ivanovic

Women’s final:
Ivanovic def. Dementieva

These are a little iffier, but I defy anyone to make perfect predictions for the final three rounds of the women’s tournament.

That’s all I have time for now, but if I’m not asleep during the rain delay tomorrow, I might post something concerning Richard Gasquet’s recent withdrawal, Maria Sharapova’s choice of on-court accessories, or my love of Ted Robinson.

Justine Henin Retires; Now Taking Applications

2008-05-14T11:59:00.004-04:00

I woke up at five o’clock this morning to see if Marat Safin could actually extend his winning streak to four matches in a row (and I’m happy to report that he did). As a reflex, I suppose, I also logged onto Yahoo!’s tennis page to see what was new. I was greeted by some shocking news: Justine Henin has retired from tennis. After recovering from almost chocking to death on my super-caffeinated drink, I scoured the internet for confirmation. Five hours later, Henin herself gave a press conference officially announcing that she was quitting tennis, effective immediately.

I’m shocked. Yeah, she’s been struggling quite a bit this year, and she recently suggested that she was lacking motivation, but I figured she’d get her act back together sooner or later. It never crossed my mind that just a year after her compatriot Kim Clijsters retired, Justine Henin would be gone from the game too.

I’m not going to go through the highlights of her career and reminisce about what a great player she was--I figure there’ll be quite a few chances to read/watch that kind of thing in the next few weeks (or maybe not, given that she wasn’t exactly the media’s favorite player). Instead, I’ll just say this: I’ve been a Henin fan for about seven years, ever since she surprised everyone and gave Venus Williams a run for her money in the 2001 Wimbledon final. I’ll admit, there were a few incidents that made my support for her waver somewhat. After one incident in particular (I don’t think I need to tell you which one), I swore I was done rooting for her once and for all. But once the sting wore off a bit, I couldn’t help but cheer for her yet again. The fact is, she’s played a different--and I think many would agree more entertaining--style of tennis than most of her contemporaries. This seemed to be especially true as time went on, and the dominant players began to get taller and taller, stronger and stronger, and more and more one-dimensional. I found it was just too hard to stay mad at someone with such a good backhand (which, incidentally, is why I’m still not giving up on Richard Gasquet), someone with such variety in her game, and someone who could take on opponents who outmatched her physically, and still come out the victor. Even those who didn’t care for her personally will have to admit that, with her departure from the game, tennis has lost a lot today.

Then again, who knows, maybe she’ll realize that adult education classes don’t offer quite the same thrill as winning a tight third-set tiebreaker, and she’ll make a successful comeback next year. But until that happens, it seems I am faced with a bit of a dilemma: Who should replace her as my favorite female tennis player?

As no candidate particularly stands out as a good replacement, I’ve decided to take applications. Here are the details:

JOB DESCRIPTION: Callie’s Favorite Active WTA Tour Player
JOB REQUIREMENTS: Must have a strong work ethic and willingness to travel. Must have clay court experience. Must be proficient at the net. Preferably under six feet tall (under 5‘9“ is even better). One-handed backhand preferred, but not required. Ability to speak multiple languages is a bonus. IMPORTANT: Must be able to reach at least the quarterfinals of tournaments fairly regularly, as earlier rounds are often not televised.
TIME FRAME: January-November
START DATE: As soon as possible.
END DATE: End of career.
COMPENSATION: The satisfaction of knowing that you have the support of Callie, tennis fan extraordinaire.
CONTACT: Leave a comment at the end of this post.

If you are a non-professional tennis player who has a recommendation for a candidate to fill this position, feel free to leave her name and brief description of why you believe she is the right person for the job. Thanks.

May I Introduce...

2008-05-12T22:05:00.006-04:00

It is with a mixture of trepidation and irritability that I must announce the beginning of a new era in the game of tennis, and accordingly, a new era for my shamefully neglected blog. This new age is an age of unpredictability, volatility and, as evidenced by the numerous recent retirements, fragility. The change has been so drastic that I have no choice but to conclude that, in fact, we are not actually watching the same players as we were during the past four years. No, this is obviously a completely new cast of characters, despite how familiar some of them may look. So let me introduce you to some of them and, in anticipation of the French Open, briefly analyze their clay court competency.

We begin with Roger Federer from Switzerland. He is generally considered a talented player, although his mental toughness must be brought into question, as he is rarely able to maintain even the most ample of leads (see: the 2008 Monte Carlo final). Clay is clearly his best surface as his only title this year came on the clay courts of Estoril, and his only Masters Series final was in Monte Carlo.

Next there is the Spaniard Rafael Nadal. Nadal’s hunger for trophies is clearly insatiable, but one has to wonder if this may in fact be his undoing. Determined to become both the world’s best singles player and doubles player, he played fifteen matches in fourteen days during the Monte Carlo and Barcelona tournaments. For his valiant efforts, he was rewarded with a nasty blister and a quick first round defeat in Rome. Nadal is the favorite for the men’s singles title at the French Open, so long as his camp can talk him out of playing doubles, mixed doubles, and the wheelchair events there.

We now move on to Serb Novak Djokovic, who was once unofficially proclaimed by his mother as the new king. Of course, she didn’t specify what he was king of. King of the road? King of the Principality of Liechtenstein? King of Chia Pets? It’s a mystery. In any case, King Djokovic has had a good year for the most part, although he was unlucky enough to contract what ATP commentator Jason Goodall described as “the worst sore throat in the history of the world,” which forced him to quit in the semifinals of Monte Carlo while trailing Federer by a set and a break. Djokovic looks like a contender for the French Open crown, especially if he can get a few retirements from his opponents along the way.

American Andy Roddick has also proven himself to be one of the leading challengers for the Roland Garros this year. Roddick and his cohort ingeniously devised a new, effective style of play for clay matches. The strategy is to hit the ball several stories high over the net while at the baseline, pinning his opponents in the back of the court, and then sneaking in to net to finish the point. This strategy was responsible for his recent semifinal appearance in Rome. If his back problem heals in time, this master tactician is one to watch out for at Roland Garros this year.

Stanislas Wawrinka is the other Swiss player in the top 10. His solid play en route to the Rome final warrants a mention here. He seems to know his way around a clay court, and if he continues to play well, he could certainly go deep at the French Open. And if he agrees to give his compatriot Federer some backhand lessons, it could be a historic year for Swiss tennis.

Finally we’ll mention Richard Gasquet, the top ranked French player. If the Parisian crowds are hoping for a native winner this year, they will almost certainly be disappointed. Gasquet, one of the most gifted players on tour, is afraid to play tennis. When he’s not busy convincing his Davis Cup coach not to make him play, he’s thinking of ways he can lose in the first rounds of tournaments so that he doesn’t have to compete any more than is absolutely necessary. We hope he gets psychiatric help as soon as possible.

Now we turn our attentions to women’s tennis:

Justine Henin, of Belgium, is one of those players than can beat the lower ranked players easily, but gets crushed by the better names. Clay clearly is not her best surface, as she has only won one match on clay this season and her only title came on indoor hard court. Don’t look for her to go deep at the French Open, especially if she meets up with someone a lot bigger than her.

American player Serena Williams is one of those bigger players. A winner in Charleston earlier this spring, she is certainly one of the favorites going into the French Open. She has a number of things going for her: athleticism, determination, and a certain degree of paranoia which leads her to be even more determined. Without a doubt, she is someone that none of the players will want to mess with in Paris.

Maria Sharapova from Russia is next up. She won Amelia Island and had a solid performance in Charleston before losing to Serena Williams. Her main obstacle for the French Open is not Serena Williams, however. This camera-shy young lady is concerned about being forced by the WTA to do publicity photo shoots for the tour. Sharapova fears that, by participating in this activity, she will be worn out before the tournaments even begin. Clearly having your picture taken is more taxing that most people realize. It will be hard to predict how Sharapova will do at the French Open until we know her exact media schedule in the days leading up to the event.

And finally, we have Russian Dinara Safina. Safina won Berlin the past week, beating Henin, Williams, and Elena Dementieva along the way. Safina comes from a sporting family, with a mother who coaches tennis and an older brother, Marat, who also plays professional tennis. Dinara seems to have inherited more the talent in the family, however. It will be interesting to see if she can keep up the family name at the French Open this year.

And now we are all better acquainted with this new group of players. Hopefully I will find the inspiration to regularly update this blog throughout the French Open and the rest of the summer to keep everyone informed of their progress.

We Appreciate Your Patience

2008-04-30T23:53:00.004-04:00

We have been recently experiencing technical, hypothetical, gastronomical, spiritual, asymmetrical, grammatical, and strategical difficulties, but expect an update very soon.

UPDATE: "Soon" is a fairly vague term. But real update is definitely forthcoming.

Surprise Winners and Silly Hats Week

2008-03-03T01:20:00.006-05:00

Let’s start in Acapulco and move east, shall we?

It looked like David Nalbandian might win back-to-back titles in Buenos Aires and Acapulco, but Nicolas Almagro foiled those plans in the final in Mexico. Actually, after seeing this picture, I'm wondering if Nalbandian didn’t purposely lose the final so that he didn’t have to wear that silly hat:
Flavia Pennetta, on the other hand, did not mind wearing the silly hat:

Lindsay Davenport won title number four of her un-retirement in Memphis and is now the undisputed queen of the Tier-III tournaments. Okay, Lindsay, you’ve proven that the Olga Govortsova’s of the world are no match for you, but it’s time to test the waters of the big kids’ pool again.

Steve Darcis, the outdoor clay and indoor hard court specialist, won his second career ATP title, beating Robin Soderling in the final of Memphis. He has as many singles titles as Marcos Baghdatis, yet the only thing I know about him is that his ATP picture makes him look like he only has one ear.

123rd ranked Sergiy Stakhovsky came into Zagreb as a lucky loser and won the tournament. Stakhovsky lost to Blaz Kavcic in qualifying and went on to beat Ivan Ljubicic in the final. The sad part is, given Ljubicic’s recent form, I’m not that surprised.

Finally, there was Dubai, where Elena Dementieva claimed the title and with it, a place back in the top 10. Good for her; bad for Kuznetsova, for whom losing in finals is becoming a nasty habit; bad for Justine Henin, whose 17-match winning streak in Dubai was broken in the quarterfinals against Francesca Schiavone, and whose start to the year has not been encouraging; and bad for Schiavone, who rarely seems to capitalize on her big chances.

The theme for next week is big, gaudy, gluttonous desert monstrosities. That’s right, it’s Las Vegas and Dubai time for the ATP players. Unfortunately for the Tennis Channel, they can’t compete with the exorbitant appearance fees in Dubai, so they’re stuck with a bunch of down-on-their-luck former Australian Open finalists like Hewitt, Safin, Gonzalez, and Baghdatis at their tournament.

Dubai, on the other hand, has a field that puts some recent AMS tournaments to shame. First round matches their include Federer vs. Murray, Nadal vs. Kohlschreiber, Gasquet vs. Tursunov, Ferrer vs. Haas, and of course, the one we’re all looking forward to: Mahmoud Nader vs. Mikhail Ledovskikh. Seriously, how is it fair that either Federer or Murray will go out in the first round, but we’re guaranteed to have either Nader or Ledovskikh in the second round? Then again, if the trend from this past week continues, one of these nobodies will probably end up winning the tournament.

Australian Open 2008 Creative Persuits and Other News

2008-02-26T00:52:00.007-05:00

It took me weeks to recover from my lack of sleep during the Australian Open. I still haven’t recovered from the outcome. But my blog must go on.

It’s too late to do a play-by-play recap of the tournament, so I’ve decided to get creative. Concerning the women’s tournament, I’ve composed an Ode to Maria:

To the lovely Russian Maria,
What a pleasure it was to see ya
Win major number three.
I marvel at your point construction,
And see no need for noise reduction,
Your voice sounds great to me.

Good old dad, clad as an assassin,
Was the epitome of fashion,
The embodiment of charm.
When Justine Henin was your rival,
At first I feared for her survival,
But dear Yuri meant no harm.

While still remaining “oh so pretty,”
You played your game with little pity,
For your final foes, the Serbs.
You gave poor Ivanovic a chance,
Which, considering the circumstance,
Was far more than she deserves.

Since Melbourne, you’ve not lost a bout,
Accordingly, there is no doubt,
You are totally on fire.
With your present form I don’t know when
Someone else could win a slam again,
So Maria, please retire.

I felt that a poem would not do sufficient justice to my feelings about Novak Djokovic’s win. But after reading some quotes (in this article) by Novak Djokovic’s mother, Dijana, I found my inspiration. Concerning her son’s defeat of Roger Federer, Dijana proclaimed,

“As we said, ‘The king is dead, long live the king.’”

After reading that, I felt that an interpretive dance, set to “In the Hall of the Mountain King” by Edvard Grieg, would allow me to convey my feelings nicely. Unfortunately, I have no way of showing you this choreography. Suffice it to say, it involves a lot of me writhing in agony on the ground, tearing out my hair, and banging my head against a wall.

I felt better after I got all that out of my system, and I think now that perhaps the Australian Open of 2008 was not the end of the world after all. “King” Roger is hardly dead, although he was a little sick during the tournament, which hopefully accounts for his horrible play during his match against Djokovic. Djokovic has solidified his position as the most arrogant player on tour, but I'm really looking forward to that inevitable moment when he (and his obnoxious family) gets knocked down a few pegs. As for Sharapova, well, she can’t keep that level of play up for an entire year…right?

And before I get too far ahead of myself, let’s not forget that there were some pretty exciting matches in the first week of the tournament. It started with Baghdatis edging out Safin in five sets. Then there was Roddick’s loss to Kohlschreiber 8-6 in the fifth, featuring a few classic Roddick hissy fits. Blake, although outplayed most of the match, got his second five-set win over an old Frenchman, this time Grosjean. Federer prevailed over Tipsarevic in a tight (and not pretty) fifth set. And finally Hewitt went the distance against Baghdatis to finish at 4:33 in the morning. All of this happened in a span of just over two days.

And of course there was Tsonga, the obligatory where-the-heck-did-he- come-from Australian Open finalist. He’s got an entertaining game and some nice touch at net like most French players. But being an Australian Open runner-up doesn’t necessarily mean he’s got a big future ahead of him. We’ll have to see if he’s another Clement/Schuettler/Gonzalez or a…actually, have there been any Australian Open runners-up who’ve gone on to win anything significant?

Since the Australian Open finished, it’s been pretty quiet on the tennis scene. There was the first round of Fed Cup, which, let’s be honest, isn’t usually the most exciting event in tennis. There was the first round of Davis Cup, which most of the fun players decided to skip. And then there have been a handful of smaller tournaments filling up the time between Melbourne and Indian Wells. The highlights of these included Justine Henin winning the last ever Proximus Diamond Games in Antwerp, new kid Kei Nishikori winning his first ATP title at Delray Beach, and David Nalbandian winning in Buenos Aires to take his 8th career title.

Last week, however, also featured the double whammy of Maria Sharapova and Andy Roddick winning titles. Sharapova looked vulnerable a couple of sets during the tournament, though (which is all I can hope for at this point). And Roddick? Well, he won, but he revealed himself to be a jackass yet again (click here, here, and here if you care to know more). Yeah, Andy, you’re a tough guy picking a fight with an inexperienced eighteen-year-old. But let’s see you try the same thing with Federer and find out if you win another game the rest of the match.

So that’s it for now. Indian Wells starts in about two weeks, but as neither ESPN2 nor the Tennis Channel are scheduled to cover it (nor Miami), American tennis fans better start thinking of different ways to get their tennis fix. Fox Sports Net may or may not cover it depending on where you live. If your internet provider subscribes to ESPN360.com, you might get a bit of coverage with Spanish commentary. Of course, if you're willing to cough up a few bucks you can buy the ATP online coverage.

Or you could move to another country. That might be the best long-term option.

2008 Australian Open Predictions

2008-01-13T18:48:00.000-05:00

Greetings readers (including that person from UCSD who thinks I’m a horrible human being). The 2008 Australian Open starts in a matter of minutes, so I must do some quick picks. Let me tell you, it was not easy to forecast how this year’s AO is going to go, but after a lot of diligent research, I think I have come up with a set of perfect predictions:

Women’s Quarterfinals:
Justine Henin vs. Maria Sharapova – Henin, currently on a 28-match win streak, doesn’t have anyone she can’t deal with in her eighth of the draw. Sharapova potentially has Lindsay Davenport in the second round, and while Davenport has won three of the four tournaments she’s entered since un-retiring, she hasn’t exactly been testing herself against the big names. I don’t expect Sharapova to struggle too much in getting to the quarters. Henin beats Sharapova in three sets.

Jelena Jankovic vs. Serena Williams – Jankovic was injured at the Hopman Cup (although it didn’t stop her from reaching the final with a little help from Novak Djokovic), and she lost kind of early in Sydney. Still, I’m not ready to count her out. Serena is coming into the tournament as one of the favorites. As Serena only seems to win Slams these days when no one expects her to, I think Jankovic has a pretty good chance of knocking the defending champ out in the quarters. Three sets.

Venus Williams vs. Ana Ivanovic – Venus won the warm-up exhibition in Hong Kong, beating Sharapova in the final. That said, she really hasn’t performed well at the AO since losing to Serena in the final in ’03. Ana Ivanovic has seemed a little shaky in some of her matches this year, but she has managed to find a way to win most of the time. I give Venus the nod in this quarterfinal match up simply because she’s given Ivanovic a fair drubbing the two times they’ve met. Two sets to Venus.

Daniela Hantuchova vs. Svetlana Kuznetsova – Ana Chakvetadze is seeded to get to the quarterfinals, but she’s 0-1 this year, and perhaps she’s still a bit shaken up from being tied up and robbed in her own home in December. Hantuchova ended 2007 strongly, and she’s continued to play fairly well this year, so I’m picking her to be the only seed outside of the top 8 to make the quarters. As for Kuzy, she gave Henin a run for her money in the Sydney final last week before, as usual, giving Henin a chance to get in the match, which Henin, as usual, took. I say Kuznetsova beats Hantuchova in straight sets in the quarters.

Women’s Semifinals:
Henin vs. Jankovic – It’s getting to be a bit like the Federer-Roddick head-to-head, and I expect the trend to continue. Henin in straight sets.

Venus vs. Kuznetsova – Like I said previously, Venus hasn’t done well in Melbourne the past four years, and the supposedly slower court may work to Kuznetsova’s advantage, so I’m going to go with Kuznetsova to win this semifinal match in three sets.

Women’s Final:
Henin vs. Kuznetsova – Hopefully it won’t be quite as lopsided as the last two Grand Slam semis they’ve played—but given that Henin is so tough in finals and that Kuznetsova is, well, not so tough, I see Henin picking up Slam number eight in two comfortable sets.

Men’s Quarterfinals:
Roger Federer vs. Fernando Gonzalez – Federer checked into a hospital last week with a stomach bug, but by all reports he’s doing fine now, so I see no reason why he won’t make it to the second week. I see lots of reasons why Gonzalez won’t make it to the second week (Guccione, Cilic, and Blake to name a few), but for some crazy reason, I’m going with Gonzo to make it out of that eighth of the draw. Federer will look to avenge that weird loss to Gonzo in Shanghai last year by beating the Chilean in straight sets.

Novak Djokovic vs. David Nalbandian – Welcome to the former AO finalists/winners section, including Marat Safin, Lleyton Hewitt, Thomas Johansson, and Marcos Baghdatis. And those guys aren’t even the biggest threats. Djokovic, Tursunov, Nalbandian, Ferrero, Stepanek and Ferrer have all been playing well recently. Djokovic proved that he’s not to be underestimated (although he is often overestimated) and he’ll probably make the quarters. Nalbandian has been having back problems, so he’s a bit of a question mark, but when he’s at his best, he can beat almost anyone. If Nalbandian is healthy, I see him beating Djokovic in five sets in the quarters (if he’s not healthy, I’m going with Djokovic over Ferrer in the quarters, for the record).

Andy Murray vs. Nikolay Davydenko – Murray had a good week in Doha and a bad week in Kooyong, but seeing as Andy Roddick has won Kooyong the past three years, I don’t think we can put much stock in Kooyong results. Davydenko’s results this year also haven’t been great, but for all we know, he’s been throwing all of his matches (oops, did I just say that?). Davydenko usually puts in a strong showing at the Slams, and I expect nothing less from him here. But it’s about time Murray had a breakthrough at a major, so I’ll go with Murray over Davydenko in the quarters in four sets.

Andy Roddick vs. Rafael Nadal - Yet again, Roddick has been given a pretty unthreatening draw up to the quarters (Kohlschreiber might give him a bit of trouble in the third round, but probably not). Nadal could face Moya in the fourth round (which he probably won’t be looking forward to after their four-hour encounter in the Chennai semis), but if he prevails without expending too much energy, he’ll give Roddick a spanking in the quarters. King of Clay over King of Kooyong in straight sets.

Men’s Semifinals:
Federer vs. Nalbandian – I don’t think Nalbandian can beat Federer yet again, but then, I didn’t think he could beat Federer a second time last fall. I’m cautiously prediction Federer to win this match in four sets.

Murray vs. Nadal – Murray should have beaten Nadal last year in the 4th round of the AO. And as Murray seems to have improved over the last 12 months, I’m predicting him to pull it out this year. Murray in five sets over Nadal.

Men’s Final:
Federer vs. Murray – Wow. I can’t believe I picked Murray to make the final. That’s crazy. He’s not ready to win a Grand Slam yet. Federer wins his 13th Grand Slam final in straight sets.

Whew. That's the fastest I've ever typed.

2007: Year of the Boar or Year of the Bore? (or 2007: How Do I Love Thee? Let Me Count the Ways.)

2007-12-29T01:38:00.000-05:00

2007 was a rather scandalous year as far as tennis goes. Nikolay Davydenko got fined. Martina Hingis and Radek Stepanek got engaged. Davydenko got investigated. Martina Hingis and Radek Stepanek broke up. Davydenko got fined (again). Martina Hingis got caught using cocaine and retired from tennis (again). Nicole Vaidisova almost got married to Radek Stepanek as the result of a nasty (but amusing) internet prank. Anna Chakvetadze got tied up and robbed. And let us not even speak of that awkward wardrobe faux pas at the Wimbledon trophy ceremony.

I like a good scandal as much as the next tennis fan, but I can’t help but be a little disappointed with the 2007 tennis season. Maybe it’s because I’ve been a little distracted lately and haven’t been able to give my full attention to tennis. Maybe it’s because there were a few results that I didn’t like. Or perhaps it’s because my favorite umpire, Fergus Murphy, was extremely underused this year. It’s hard to say.

Or maybe there was just something a little too predictable about 2007. Rafael Nadal won the French Open and Roger Federer cleaned up at the other three Slams. I can’t be the only one with a strong case of déjà vu. Meanwhile, on the women’s side, a Williams won the Australian and Wimbledon titles this year, and a Belgian won at the French and U.S. Opens. Didn’t the same thing happen in 2005 and 2003?

Maybe I shouldn’t be complaining. As a Federer and Henin fan, I can’t say the Grand Slam results were at all bad this year. Still, flipping through my mental catalogue of this season’s matches, I’m not recalling any one great match. The men’s Wimbledon final will be remembered as historic, but looking back at the quality of the tennis played that day, I’m left shrugging my shoulders, wrinkling my nose, and wiggling my ears. (I’m wiggling my ears not in response to the match but because it is one of my many hidden talents and never fails to impress my peers).

Is it unreasonable that I should want at least one match per year that leaves me either picking my jaw up off the floor or shut up in my room listening to funeral dirges and reading gloomy Russian poems? I don’t think so. But not once this year was I so in awe that I lost a piece of my face. Nor was there a time that I was so distressed at the glorious defeat of a valiant competitor that I could not bring myself to face the outside world. A wasted year, I say!

Nevertheless, I have made a list of my top 10 moments from 2007 for the sake of entertainment (and because, God knows, I do love a good list):

10. Pete Sampras beats Roger Federer at the exhibition in Macao – Okay, yeah, it doesn’t really count as a win. But it was still nice to see the old guy get some revenge against the man who’s in the process of stealing all of his records. Plus, the match served as a reminder that Sampras still has better volleys than any player currently on the tour, including Federer.

9. David Ferrer breaks through in the latter part of the season – It’s technically not a “moment,” but it was still one of the more fun stories of the year. The last three months of the season saw Ferrer get to the U.S. Open semis and the Masters Cup final, beating a handful of top 10 players along the way. The ATP stats people should keep track of how many winners are hit against a player over the course of the year, because from August to November, Ferrer’s total seemed like it was in the single digits. Ferrer is like what you’d get if you crossed a Jack Russell Terrier and the Engergizer Bunny: a dogged little competitor that keeps going and going…

8. David Nalbandian blows through the competition at the fall Masters Series events – For the first nine months of 2007, Nalbandian was disappointing, to put it mildly. In October, he took part in a professional rally car race. At this point, I thought tennis had seen the last of Nalbandian. But luckily for the tennis world, Nalbandian is no Mario Andretti (I don’t know why I know who Mario Andretti is) and Dave decided to come back to tennis. In the span of three weeks, Nalbandian beat Federer twice, Nadal twice, and Djokovic to win his first two Masters Series shields. Most of Federer’s losses this year were at the hands of players who basically let Roger beat himself (including Canas, Volandri, and even Nadal to some extent). But Nalbandian flat-out outplayed Federer in their two meetings this fall, and even though Federer is my favorite player, I can’t help but be impressed by that.

7. Defending champion Maria Sharapova loses to Agnieszka Radwanska in the 3rd round of the U.S. Open – After Sharapova absolutely crushed her first two opponents at the U.S. Open, I was feeling pretty pessimistic about the U.S. Open, tennis, and life in general. But in the third round, a bona fide miracle occurred, and my faith was restored. Agnieszka Radwanska, a Polish teenager ranked 32 in the world, sent Maria shrieking out of the tournament. Yeah, I know it’s usually considered bad form to throw a party because a particular player loses, but I think there are two we can make exceptions for. Maria Sharapova is one of them.

6. Roger Federer beats Andy Roddick in the semis of the Australian Open – Andy Roddick is the other one. Roddick beat Federer at the exhibition event in Kooyong just before the start of the AO. Not even Roddick was stupid enough to think that the match actually meant anything—but Cliff and Patrick, Roddick’s cheerleaders on ESPN, were predicting that this win would give Roddick the confidence to beat Federer in the real thing. Guys, when are you going to learn? Federer surrendered exactly five games in three sets and showed yet again why Roddick has only won one match against him in four years (not counting those all-important exhibitions, of course).

5. Justine Henin beats the Williams Sisters back to back en route to her 2nd U.S. Open title – Yeah, Serena wasn’t playing even 30% of her potential and Venus was injured, but if you don’t count matches when the Williamses aren’t playing at full capacity, they technically wouldn’t have played any matches this year. Anyway, it’s a rare thing for a player to beat both Williamses in the same tournament (and even rarer for that player to go on to win the tournament), so hats off to Henin.

4. Roger Federer breaks Rafael Nadal’s 81 match clay winning streak – I thought Nadal’s eventual defeat on clay would probably come in 2017 in St. Polten at the hands of some journeyman, but this seemed much more fitting. I only wish it could have come three weeks later.

3. Richard Gasquet knocks Andy Roddick out of Wimbledon – After letting Gasquet come back from a two-set and a break deficit in the quarterfinals of Wimbledon, Roddick displayed his tactical genius once again. He continually approached to Gasquet’s renowned backhand and continually got passed—after the match did he really wonder why he lost? For his part, Gasquet held his nerve at the important moments (something he’s had trouble doing in the past) and finally made it to his first Grand Slam semifinal. Now if he could just stop being such a wimp the rest of the time, he might actually start to live up to his potential.

2. Justine Henin beats Serena Williams at all three Slams that she plays – Three tournaments. Three surfaces. Three wins for Henin. Serena, somebody’s got your number. Better be careful or you might not be remembered as the best player of your generation after all.

1. Federer wins three of the four Slams for the third time in four years – Federer, on the other hand, doesn’t have much to worry about in greatest player department. Considering his losses at Indian Wells, Miami, Monte Carlo, Rome, Roland Garros, Montreal, Madrid, Paris, and Shanghai, it seemed like a bit of a disappointing year for Federer. But let’s not lose perspective: although his win-loss record for 2007 wasn’t quite as good as it was for the previous three years, it’s still significantly better than Sampras’ was during any of the years he was ranked no. 1. Federer has made it to ten consecutive Grand Slam finals and he has won eight of them. No player has been as dominant in as short a period of time as Federer has been these past four years.

Here end the 2007 tennis season and here ends my list.

Open Letter to a Neglected Comrade

2007-10-14T13:36:00.000-04:00

Dear Tennis,

The wardens have mercifully let me and my fellow prisoners out into the world for a weekend. So I’ve been taking this opportunity to revive my relationship with you, my old friend. I won’t lie, it’s been hard. You’ve been moving on without me, and I almost feel like I don’t know you anymore. For example, when I last checked in, Maria Sharapova had won the U.S. Open Series and had devoured her first two opponents at the Open. Now I come to discover that she is winless since then. Meanwhile Justine Henin, whom I thought for sure would fall victim to her horrible U.S. Open draw, has won her last 16 matches (and 32 of her last 33 sets). And let’s not forget that Lindsay Davenport won the first eight matches of her un-retirement. I’m not complaining about these developments—on the contrary, really. I just wish I could have been there to experience them with you.

But where are some of the other familiar faces? Roger Federer worked his magic at the U.S. Open again, and he did his part in Davis Cup (although it wasn’t enough), but since then he’s been as distant from the game as me. The same goes for Rafael Nadal and Andy Roddick. The latter isn’t even entered in Madrid next week. While I can’t say I miss him, it does seem odd to me that he’s fooling around at exhibitions and not scrapping and clawing to secure a spot at the Tennis Masters Cup. What’s going on, Tennis?

I guess not everything that has been happening seems unfamiliar, though. I see that Richard Gasquet had a great two weeks in Mumbai and Tokyo but characteristically capped them off with a pathetic loss. And a few of the other usual suspects have been picking up titles: Ana Ivanovic, Venus Williams, Tommy Robredo, Nikolay Davydenko. But Virginie Razzano, the bespectacled French “journeywoman,” has two titles this fall? She’s not a complete stranger, but I don’t remember her winning much before my time away from you.

Tennis, I know I can’t expect you to stop and wait for me when I can’t give you my full attention. We’ve both got our own paths to follow, and maybe ours will inevitably travel apart. But I’m not ready to give up on our relationship yet. We’ve had our ups (the 2002 U.S. Open comes to mind) and we’ve had our downs (the summer of 2003). And there have been times when you’ve upset me, and I know there have been times when I’ve said some mean things about you. But I didn’t really mean it, and I don’t think you meant it either. In the end, I’ve always felt like we really get each other. So Tennis, please forgive me for neglecting you recently. And don’t give up on me yet.

See you in Madrid,
Callie

P.S. Tell Novak Djokovic his new goatee looks ridiculous.

U.S. Open Passing Thoughts: Evolution of Man

2007-08-30T21:53:00.000-04:00

On display Thursday night at the U.S. Open were two players who couldn't be more different from each other. First up we had a freakishly large player who went to an elite tennis academy at a young age, where she hit thousands of balls every day until some semblance of skill was drilled into her. This upbringing resulted in a player who hits the ball extremely hard from the baseline but looks lost at net and thinks finesse is a hair product. Behind door number two, we had a player who is not as physically gifted and didn't receive the same type of world-class training, but who plays a completely unique (and easily more entertaining) style of tennis.

Something is wrong with tennis when Maria Sharapova, at age 20, has already won two Grand Slam titles, while Fabrice Santoro, who has been playing professionally nearly as long as Sharapova has been alive, has only made it to one Grand Slam singles quarterfinal in his career. If the tennis bigwigs really wanted to improve tennis, they'd demolish Nick Bolleteiri's tennis academy and all the other academies where ability is coached into talentless players and talent is coached out of more able players, and they would encourage youngsters to play their own games, no matter how unconventional they are.

On a different note:

2007 U.S. Open Predictions

2007-08-26T22:04:00.000-04:00

Men's Quarterfinals:
Roger Federer vs. Andy Roddick – I don’t see any major obstacles in Federer’s route the quarters. Roddick could meet Tomas Berdych in the fourth round, but Berdych has been a big disappointment this year, and I don’t see him turning that around here. I’ll admit that I was a little concerned about the lack of hype Roddick has been getting recently (even from PMac). With the weight of expectation off him, could Roddick pull of a huge upset? Then I remember what has happened the last nine times Federer and Roddick have played, and I’m not so concerned anymore (three sets).

Nikolay Davydenko vs. James Blake – Davydenko has a relatively easy draw, so I feel pretty confident that he’ll make it to the quarters. On the other hand, Blake could easily go out to Sam Querrey, Marcos Baghdatis, or Tommy Haas. But if Blake does reach the quarters, his (kind of inexplicable) 6-0 record against Davydenko makes him the big favorite to reach is first Slam semi (three sets).

Carlos Moya vs. Novak Djokovic – Carlos Moya is probably in the easiest sixteenth of the draw. Mikhail Youzhny might give him a bit of trouble in the third round, but I’m sticking with Moya. Djokovic’s section, on the other hand, couldn’t get a whole lot worse. He might have to beat Mario Ancic, Radek Stepanek, Juan Martin Del Potro, and Lleyton Hewitt just to get to the quarterfinals. But what doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger, right? So I say Djokovic gets some revenge against Moya and makes his third Slam semifinal of the year (four sets).

Juan Ignacio Chela vs. Rafael Nadal – Chela is in the same sixteenth of the draw as Fernando Gonzalez, Ivan Ljubicic, Marat Safin. I’m picking Chela to make it though this section because, whereas Chela has been fairly consistent, the other three having been anything but (well, I guess Ljubicic and Safin have been consistently bad). As for Nadal, he hasn’t been terribly impressive on the hard courts this summer, but I’m not ready to give up on him. Nadal makes his first U.S. Open semifinal (three sets).

Men's Semifinals:
Federer vs. Blake – Federer in three easy sets.

Djokovic vs. Nadal – Djokovic in four!

Men's Final:
Federer vs. Djokovic – I underestimated him at the French Open. I underestimated him at Wimbledon. To make up for this, I’m going to overestimate him at the U.S. Open, and pick him to win the U.S. Open final in five sets. Now watch him lose to Ancic in the first round.

Women's Quarterfinals:
Justine Henin vs. Serena Williams – Another quarterfinal between Serena Williams and Justine Henin? I’m calling for a draw-rigging investigation, and I say we investigate Yuri Sharapov first. Anyway, I don’t believe that Serena is really injured. And I don’t think that Henin can beat Serena three times in a row. Serena in three sets.

Jelena Jankovic vs. Ana Ivanovic – I think Ivanovic will avenge her Wimbledon loss to Venus Williams by beating VW in the fourth round. But she’ll lose in the quarters to Jankovic in three sets.

Nadia Petrova vs. Svetlana Kuznetsova – Pretty lame quarter. Kuzy over Petrova in two sets.

Anna Chakvetadze vs. Maria Sharapova – I don’t believe that Sharapova is injured either. Sharapova over Chakvetadze in two sets.

Women's Semifinals:
Serena vs. Jankovic – Serena in three sets.
Kuznetsova vs. Sharapova – Sharapova in three sets.

Women's Final:
Serena vs. Sharapova – Serena will beat Maria Sharapova back to Siberia. And that will be the only reason to watch the women's final.

There you go.

Hewitt Hits Hollywood

2007-08-07T00:24:00.000-04:00

Why? Because I can.

Amusing, Ailing, Annoying (Part III)

2007-08-06T13:33:00.000-04:00

Amusing
At the beginning of last week I wondered aloud, “How is Tommy Robredo still in the top 10? He never seems to win anything.” And, almost like he heard me and decided to prove me wrong, Robredo captured the title in Sopot, beating Jose Acasuso in the final. So that was kind of amusing, I guess.

And then I had a look at the Montreal draw, and that kind of cheered me up. Roger Federer's draw looks like a walk through Jarry Park. Meanwhile Roddick, Baghdatis, Berdych (who, as I write this has just lost of course), and Djokovic are all squeezed into one quarter, which is on Nadal’s half. Nadal will probably meet his good buddy Robin Soderling in the second round. It should be interesting to see who gets through to the final on the bottom half…ah, who am I kidding? It’s going to be Nadal.

I also found this mildly amusing, or at leat more amusing than the actual U.S. Open Series commercials.

But I have to admit that overall I didn’t find much else in the world of tennis to be very amusing this past week.

Ailing
Nikolay Davydenko seemed to be ailing when he had to retire with a left foot injury in the second round of Sopot. But the bookies seemed to think something was fishy, and now Davydenko is being probed for match-fixing. For some reason, reporters like to ask other top players their opinions on controversial matters like this. Roger Federer said, “Davydenko doesn't seem like the guy to do something like (that)…In this case, I think an investigation is good and I hope things go Nikolay’s way.” Andy Roddick said, “If something is found that's shady, I for one will be extremely pissed off... It's too bad it takes only one idiot to tip things off and create a bad story.” Marat Safin said, “To be honest, I don't really care…Whatever people do and whatever they want to do, I don't care…If the world collapses, I don't really care.”

How do I interpret each player’s reaction? Federer, like a good Swiss, is keeping a relatively neutral stance, but seems to trust Davydenko. Roddick, like the confrontational jerk that he is, is looking to make it personal. And Safin, from what I can gather from his quote, doesn’t really care.

Annoying
Some people have been lamenting the fact that the grass at Wimbledon has slowed down in recent years, allowing players like Nadal to win matches just by rallying from the back court. After this week, I can totally understand their frustration. It’s so refreshing to see guys that don’t have great groundstrokes, volleys, or movement, win matches by hitting huge, unreturnable serves. I mean, who wants to see these long, exciting rallies between the likes of Nadal and Federer when we can see other players hitting 25+ aces per match? Thank goodness that Ivo Karlovic, Sam Querrey, John Isner, and Andy Roddick are around to provide us with such compelling matches!

I was equally thrilled when, 2692 miles to the west, Maria Sharapova was tearing through the San Diego draw with ease. Why would anyone root for Patty Schnyder, who employs dropshots, lobs, and an assortment of spins and angles, when you could cheer on 6’2” Maria Sharapova hitting the ball as hard as she possibly can on every shot?

And finally, my compliments to ESPN, who totally rearranged the TV schedule on Friday in order to accommodate Barry Bonds, and relegated part of the Washington semifinals to ESPN Classic so that they could show “Big League” baseball (whatever that is) on ESPN. Don’t you think that it kind of defeats the purpose of the U.S. Open Series if they change the TV coverage so that no one knows where and when tennis is actually going to be shown?

No post next, as I will be chillin' with Roger Federer in Cincinnati in seven day's time.

Amazing/Amusing, Ailing, Annoying (Part II)

2007-07-31T01:30:00.000-04:00

Amazing/Amusing:
Carlos Moya – The 2007 Umag winner hasn’t won a major in over eight years, but he has won at least one title in twelve of the last thirteen seasons. Sure, there were a lot of Chennais and Umags in there, but his longevity is impressive nonetheless. And if you’re interested in the juicy tennis gossip, Charley seems to have dumped his girlfriend (or fiancée?), WTA player Flavia Pennetta, for a Spanish soap star…which is not nearly as impressive.

Ted in Ann Arbor – Out of sheer boredom, Ted in Ann Arbor has been watching some tennis this summer. He’s only a casual tennis fan (except when it comes to supporting Marat Safin), but he does sometimes offer a unique perspective on the game and its characters. This week his more amusing observations were “Sam Querrey is a cross between Luke Skywalker and the Rancor,” and “John Roddick is like a fat, furry version of his brother.” I can see it, I can see it. (And you can see it too if you click on these:)

Sam Querrey – Querrey, despite his unfortunate resemblances to Star Wars characters, made his first career ATP semifinal by defeating James Blake in the quarterfinals of Indianapolis. At one point in that match, Querrey hit 10 aces in a row (a record). Earlier in the tournament, 6’6” Querrey faced 6’10” Ivo Karlovic in what had to have been most boring match ever.

Ailing
Andy Roddick – Another gimme title, another missed opportunity for Andy Roddick. This time he blamed his stomach for his loss to a player ranked outside the top 100, Frank Dancevic. I’ve heard reports that it was food poisoning, but Jimmy Arias (one of the more unbiased commentators) seemed to think that Roddick just couldn’t handle the extreme heat. Personally, I think the heat started playing tricks on Roddick’s mind. When he looked over the net, he saw a guy wearing a white bandana, hitting a stylish one-handed backhand, and having no trouble returning his serve, and he thought, “Ugh, if I lose to Roger again, I’m going to be sick!”

Annoying
NBC – You can be assured that if NBC has tennis coverage, they’ll botch it up. This past weekend, the matches in Indianapolis began at 3:30…and NBC started coverage at 4:00. It’s like they do this on purpose.

But I guess overall I'm in a better mood this week, as I don't have anyone else to complain about in this section.

Items that fit into none of the above categories:
Dmitry Tursunov won the title in Indianapolis, beating Dancevic in the final. So far, the U.S. Open Series hasn't been too good to the American players.

Anna Chakvetadze won her second title in two weeks in San Diego. She overcame serving difficulties to beat the hard-hitting but incredibly erratic Sania Mirza in the final. Mirza was being coached by Patty Schnyder’s husband/coach Rainer Hoffman during the week...and between points. I find it a little strange that Mirza would seek the help of Hoffman, who is not actually a tennis coach, but a professional conman.

Jose Acasuso beat Potito Starace in the final of Kitzbuhel. Zzzz…

Francesca Schiavone improved her record in finals to 1-8 after winning a title in Bad Gastein. What a horrible name.

È finito.

Amusing, Ailing, or Annoying? (Part I)

2007-07-24T00:38:00.000-04:00

From now until the U.S. Open, I’ll be doing a review of the week’s tennis happenings in something we’ll be calling “Amusing, Ailing, or Annoying?” Behold:

Amusing:
1. Lindsay Davenport’s Return. It took Pete Sampras four years to get sick of changing diapers and desperate for some sort of escape. It took Lindsay Davenport a little over a month. Yes, it's true, Lindsay Davenport, who gave birth to her first child in June, has decided to start playing tennis again. She successfully tested the waters in World Team Tennis this weekend, and she announced that she’ll be playing doubles with Lisa Raymond in New Haven later this summer. And I heard through the grapevine that she might even be playing singles by October. Given the current state of women’s tennis, who’s not glad to have her back?

2. Mark Philippoussis’ TV show. You know how there are some things that are just so incredibly bad that they’re kind of entertaining (if only because you have to laugh at how bad they are)? Well that’s how I’d describe Mark Philippoussis’ reality TV dating adventure. This is the same guy who faced Roger Federer in his first Grand Slam final four years ago. If Philippoussis had ended up winning that match, would we be seeing Roger Federer as the object of affection for a bunch of creepy, heavily-botoxed 40-year-olds and their flakey 20-year-old conterparts? Er, no.

Ailing (but still Amazing)
1. Rafael Nadal. Although he was (supposedly) playing on an injured knee this week in Stuttgart, Rafa didn’t lose a set en route to his sixth title of the season. I’m sure the USTA isn’t loving that the no. 2 player in the world has decided to stick around in Europe for a few clay events instead of coming to play the U.S. Open Series to “kicksomebutt,” but what does Nadal stand to gain from coming the U.S. early? He’d be far from home, he’d be more likely to get injured, and he’d be less likely to win titles. On the other hand, by staying in Europe and playing a few clay court events, Nadal can easily collect a few extra ranking points, trophies, giant checks, and he’ll be able to drive around in a new Mercedes-Benz instead of that silly bus. Seriously, the USTA’s going to have to come up with something a lot more enticing than potential extra prize-money and the honor of being named “U.S. Open Series” winner to attract the top guys to play these tournaments.

2. Radek Stepanek. Has Stepanek broken the Hingis Hex? Maybe it doesn’t work when the Swiss Miss herself in down-and-out. Anyway, much to the chagrin of the USTA and ESPN, Stepanek beat American James Blake in the final of Los Angeles. Stepanek also claimed to be injured, but his break-dancing moves after the match didn’t lend a lot of credibility to those claims.

Annoying
1. Top WTA Players. I’m not buying the injury excuses on the WTA Tour either. Players like the Williams Sisters, Maria Sharapova, and Justine Henin seem to pull out of more tournaments than they play (except for the Grand Slams, where their injuries always seem to heal enough for them to make the quarters or better). I’m not sure what the WTA’s policy is regarding withdrawals at the moment, but I’m pretty sure it needs to be stiffer. Every week, I have less and less interest in and respect for women’s tennis.

And this spot will be reserved for my weekly unwarranted, unprovoked, and irrational rants:
2. James Blake. I used to like James Blake, but that was before he became such a big shot. I don’t like the way he jumps around the court now when he hits a good shot. I’m sick of hearing about his problems. I don’t want to read his stupid book—I know the whole story by heart by now anyway. I don’t like the way he plays. I’m not impressed with his game plans: Plan A is to hit hard, Plan B is to hit harder. That style of play belongs on the WTA tour. I think his headband looks stupid. I think that there’s a certain degree of truth to Vince Spadea’s claim that Blake’s niceness isn’t sincere. I find it incredible that he was able to get all the way to no. 4 in the world, and I’m not surprised his ranking has been dropping recently. I especially don’t like that he’s entered in all but one of the tournaments between now and the U.S. Open, and that his matches will probably be dominating the TV coverage. The New York Times Bestseller list can have him, ‘cause I sure don’t want him.

Check back next week for another exciting edition of "Amusing, Ailing, or Annoying?"

Sampras and Federer: Great? Yes. Smooth? No.

2007-07-16T02:00:00.000-04:00

Pete Sampras and Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario were inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame this weekend. ASV delivered a speech that sounded sort of like third grader reading a book report. This was partly because she didn’t sound terribly comfortable reading in English, but more because her speech chronologically summarized the events of her life and career. It was a little tedious, but it wasn’t the worst speech I’ve ever heard (that honor belongs to my high school principal, who also didn’t sound comfortable reading in English even though it was his first language).

Pete Sampras’ speech was about half an hour long, but only about five minutes consisted of actual speech. Pete filled the rest of the time making funny faces as he tried to keep from crying. Even so, it was kind of a nice speech. Unlike Sanchez-Vicario, Sampras didn’t summarize all of the great achievements in his career but, in his characteristically modest way, acknowledged all the people that helped him achieve what he was able to do.

I think the difference in the two speeches reflects the difference between a player like Pete Sampras and a player like Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario. ASV was born into a tennis family and probably had a tennis racquet in her crib and tennis balls on her little footie pajamas. The people around her probably expected her to have great results and let her know it. Sampras, on the other hand, wasn’t bred to be a tennis star; he was just a normal guy who happened to have an incredible talent. He didn’t have anyone behind the scenes forcing him to play and win (his parents didn’t even watch his first Grand Slam final). All of his motivation for tennis was self-generated. I think this made him both a great champion and a humble one. And even though he ended up becoming one of the most dominant players in tennis history, this made Pete Sampras an underdog.

And who doesn’t love an underdog?

Speaking of Pete Sampras, I recently read this quote from him regarding Roger Federer:

"I think he will break any foreseeable tennis record that's out there. He is my sort of guy. He is my sort of player. He is not grouchy. He is not abrasive. He is smooth."

Yeah, Federer seems pretty smooth most of the time. He’s got an effortless playing style, wears that suave attire from Nike, and never really looses cool—even when Hawkeye seems to have something personal against him. But it’s all an act. Roger Federer is about as far from smooth as anyone can get. Why do I say this? Take a careful look at these pictures (click to enlarge):

Notice anything strange? Yes, Roger Federer—the five-time Wimbledon champion, eleven-time Grand Slam champion, and tennis’s number one player—wore his pants backwards to accept the Wimbledon trophy. Yikes. Nike had better stop providing Federer with such complicated outfits, lest he continue embarrassing himself on tennis’s biggest stages. Seriously, how is it possible that he didn’t notice he was putting pants on backwards?

I think I’m always going to remember Wimbledon 2007, first and foremost, for Federer’s pants problem. But there were other highlights. Here are five more memorable things from the tournament:

5. Venus Williams’s fourth title. Some people were surprised by Venus’ victory at Wimbledon this year. Not me. I only picked her to get to the final, but if I had known that Serena would get injured, I promise I would have tipped Venus to win the whole thing. After some hiccups in the early rounds, Venus picked up her game and destroyed a slew of top players, including former Wimbledon champ Maria Sharapova in the fourth round. While we’re on the subject of Sharapova, I read an article that claimed that Yuri had a fit when he found out Maria was scheduled to play Venus on Court 3. Later, he blew up at a security guard as he entered the women’s locker room. Charming. But please don’t jump to conclusions about Yuri, because according to Maria (in this interview), he’s very misunderstood.

4. Bartoli’s surprise appearance in the final. I used to call her “Rolly” Bartoli, but after her run to the Wimbledon final—well, I’m still going to call her “Rolly” Bartoli. She certainly doesn’t look like the fittest player on tour, but as Serena Williams has proven, lack of fitness doesn’t have to stop a player from beating a bunch of top seeds and making the final of a Slam. Bartoli was no match for Venus in the Wimbledon final (who is?), but she beat Shahar Peer, Jelena Jankovic, and Justine Henin en route to the final. Not too shabby.

3. Rafael Nadal vs. Robin Soderling. I don’t dislike Rafael Nadal, but when Soderling and Nadal started hassling each other in the fifth set and fourth day of their third round match, I can’t say I wasn’t amused. In case you forgot (or missed all the rain delays and therefore didn’t see the 5,430 replays of the incident), early on in the fifth set, Soderling forgot that there were new balls (and Nadal didn’t give the “new balls” gesture), so as Nadal was preparing to serve, Soderling had to run to his chair to get a new racquet. Nadal was annoyed by this delay, and he sarcastically (or so it looked) made the “new balls” gesture when Soderling got back in position. Soderling then grabbed the back of his shorts, Nadal-style. It was kind of childish from Soderling, but Nadal, of all people, shouldn’t be getting his panties in a bunch (no pun intended) because of a short delay. If Nadal took a reasonable amount of time between points, maybe they could have finished that match in three days instead of five.

2. Andy Roddick vs. Richard Gasquet. I always love to see Andy Roddick go down, but when he loses a two set lead at his favorite tournament to a player who’s known for not handling the big moments well—well, it was just too good. And to top it off, I’ve been a cautious fan of Richard Gasquet for a while, and I was about ready for a real breakthrough. Et voilà! Let’s hope it wasn’t a fluke.

1. Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal. The good news is that Roger won. The bad news is that he probably should have lost. Nadal looked like the better player for the first four sets, and I’m still not sure how Federer turned it around in the fifth. As a Federer fan, the only real consolation I can take from this match is that, at this point, Wimbledon’s grass is probably playing slower than the U.S. Open hard courts. Maybe Nadal won't make the final of the U.S. Open, too?

Well, I could write more, but Wimbledon has been done for over a week, and nobody cares anymore. It’s U.S. Open Series time, and if you’ve been watching the commercials, you know what that means…road trip!

Ugh.

Passing Shots' Rain Delay Show

2007-06-27T15:24:00.000-04:00

Rain delays are boring. But reading my blog during rain delays is fun. Here's some food for thought:

Day 8:
The first week of Wimbledon was pretty boring. Too much rain, too few upsets. But today…well, today had too much rain and no upsets as well. Still, what little tennis was played today (you know, between the five billion rain delays) made up for some of the dullness of week one. The highlights:

The Serena Williams vs. Daniela Hantuchova match. Serena had a bit of a Mary Pierce moment, but Hantuchova choked. So what exactly is a spasm inducted calf strain anyway? Is it serious? According to Richard Williams, it’s career-threatening...so it’s probably not a big deal. And what was the deal with that bathroom break that Serena absolutely had to have towards the beginning of the third set (but suddenly didn’t need once she got the lead)? I don’t particularly love the Williams sisters, but I always respected them for playing fair. However, for her gamesmanship today, Serena deserves some criticism…or a maybe a slap in the calves with a bamboo stick.
I was really looking forward to the David Nalbandian vs. Marcos Baghdatis match, and I was really disappointed when I saw that it wasn’t on a TV court. But I guess I didn’t miss much. Baghdatis said that Nalbandian threw in the towel before the third set even started. For his lack of effort today, Nalbandian deserves a slap in the calves with a bamboo stick…or maybe to have his meal cards taken away.
Nikolay Davydenko is universally regarded as one of the most uninteresting players on tour. However, he’s been doing his best to change this image by making controversial comments in press conferences. In Australia, he said that nobody cares about the Sydney tournament (and consequently got fined by the ATP). Now he’s saying that Wimbledon is the most boring tournament in the world (after all these rain delays, I might have to agree with him). Etienne de Villiers may not like it, but I appreciate that Davydenko’s not afraid to speak his mind. For his honestly, I reward him with David Nalbandian’s confiscated meal cards (if he eats a little, maybe he won’t look like a Chernobyl survivor). Unfortunately for Davydenko, Marat Safin says that Wimbledon’s pasta is horrible.
Robin Soderling saved match point against Rafael Nadal in the third set tiebreak and then came back after a rain delay to win said tiebreak. He went on to win the fourth set as well. With all the momentum on his side, the last thing he should have done was to somehow inspire Nadal to get back in the match…but that’s exactly what he did. Mocking Nadal with the pants-adjusting-thing at the beginning of the deciding set? Seriously, what were you thinking, RoSo? Of course, Nadal got the break to get the lead in the 5th set before the rain stopped play for good. So what is Soderling’s punishment for his behavior? I don’t think I need to assign one: Aside from probably losing this match, I can’t imagine he’s going to get much support in Madrid this year (I don’t think the Madrileños have yet forgiven Tomas Berdych for an incident against Nadal last year).

Day 6:
I meant to post something during today’s rain delays, but, well, I slept through the first one. And then I encountered my own delays during the second one. I won’t go into details, but I’ll tell you that it involved a moving cart, about 50 tubes of lipstick, and a (possibly imaginary) cat named “Cricket.” But here’s something to chew on while you’re not watching tennis Sunday:

In the past few years, the Wimbledon folks have been surprisingly receptive to change. Players no longer have to bow to the royal box, prize money is now equal for men and women, Hawkeye is in use on two courts, and there should be a roof over Center Court by 2009. Good for Wimbledon for recognizing that change is sometimes necessary and traditions sometimes need to be abandoned.

But that said, why is there still no play on the first Sunday? For a tournament that regularly gets behind in the schedule because of rain, you’d think they’d want to have that extra day. Plus, more people are able to watch the tournament on Sunday than during the week. And the extra day would bring in more revenue for the tournament.

So, can anyone provide me with a logical explanation as to why I have to suffer through this excruciatingly boring, tennis-less day every year?

Day 3:
Last year it was a jacket. Personally, I didn’t care for it, but I got used to it. This year it’s a jacket and pants. I like it even less, but I’m going to forgive him. But I’m kind of worried that this fashion thing could get a little out of hand. If he shows up next year looking like this…

…there will be no more room for forgiveness.

I knew my prediction that Ivo Karlovic would get to the quarters was a bad one as soon as Brad Gilbert came on ESPN and agreed with me. And if I were “Ralf NAY-dal,” I'd be worried, since Brad picked him to win the whole thing. (And what was BG doing there anyway? Andy Murray isn’t even playing Wimbledon.)

It may cost $25, but the online Wimbledon coverage is totally worth it. I get a choice of up to nine live matches to watch, I can see interviews and completed matches, and best of all I don’t have to hear Dick Enberg’s verbal vomit. I highly recommend it, everyone!

A Tale of Two Surfaces (Plus Wimbledon Predictions)

2007-06-24T19:20:00.000-04:00

"It's the best of surfaces, it's the worst of surfaces. It was the Spring of hope, it was the Summer of despair. It was the season of long rallies, it is the season of service winners."
-- Anonymous

I've been meaning to post something post-French Open. But what is there to say? Justine Henin and Rafael Nadal are by far still the best players on clay, the Americans were as pathetic ever (if not more so), and Roger Federer blew another chance to accomplish the non-calendar year Grand Slam. Sounds an awful lot like last year. So I'll just move on. If you want to read my review of the 2007 French Open, I'll just let you dig into the 2006 archives and read whatever I wrote about the 2006 French Open. I bet 80% of it still applies.

Meanwhile, the grass season has started. Every year, when the clay season ends and the grass season begins, I kind of breathe a sigh of relief. It's like a clean slate. Even if my favorite player has had a rough French Open, he can put it behind him and start anew on the grass. The grass is so nice and neat; clay is messy and sticky. Green is soothing; red is harsh. "Ah, yes, what a relief to be back on grass," I think to myself happily.

And then the grass season actually begins, and I’m reminded of how much I actually hate that stupid surface. First of all, it seems like I spend more time waiting out rain delays than watching tennis. And then when play finally does start, I get to see serving competitions rather than actual points. Even if Player A is totally outplaying Player B in rallies, if Player B has a good serve, he’s got a 50/50 chance of winning the match on grass. That doesn't seem right at all. “Gah, no, I wish it were clay season again,” I think to myself bitterly.

But it’s not clay season. It’s grass season for two more weeks. And I have to make predictions other than, “It will rain. There will be a lot of aces hit. Andy Roddick will be around far too long for my liking.”

So here are my actual tournament predictions:

Women’s quarterfinals:
Justine Henin vs. Serena Williams: Henin, this year's Eastbourne champion, should have no problem getting to the quarters. Unfortunately, she had the bad luck of drawing Serena Williams in the quarterfinals for the second straight slam. Serena was way off her game at the French, and Henin was on. I guess I could see Henin beating Serena on grass if this were the case again…but I don’t think it will be. Serena in three sets.

Jelena Jankovic vs. Anna Chakvetadze: Jankovic beat Maria Sharapova in the final of Birmingham, and she made it to the final of s’Hertogenbosch (I still haven’t figured how to pronounce that). That’s the good news for her. The bad news is that she lost to Anna Chakvetadze in the final of s’Hertogenbosch, and Chakvetadze will probably be her quarterfinal opponent at Wimbledon. Still, I think I’m going to go with Jankovic over Chakvetadze in 3 sets in this one.

Ana Ivanovic vs. Amelie Mauresmo: I was tempted to pick Nadia Petrova over Ivanovic to get the quarterfinals. But these days Petrova is more likely lose one of her arms than advance deep in a major, so I’ll stick with Ivanovic, even though she’s 1-1 on grass this year. As for Mauresmo, she probably should have won the Eastbourne finals (darn those nerves that we aren’t supposed to talk about anymore!), but I still think she’s a good pick to get the quarters. And the semis, too, because she’ll beat Ivanovic in two sets.

Svetlana Kuznetsova vs. Venus Williams: Kuznetsova’s grass court results aren’t outstanding, but she’s got a very nice draw. And yes, I know it’s a bold move (is bold the right word?) to pick Venus Williams over Maria Sharapova, but like to live on the edge. Venus over Kuznetsova in straight sets.

Women’s Semifinals:
Serena vs. Jelena: Serena says she’s the one to beat, and I believe her. Serena in two sets.

Amelie vs. Venus: I’d rather not see an all Williams final, but I don’t think Mauresmo has the je ne sais quoi to beat Venus at Wimbledon. Venus in three sets. C’est la vie.

Women’s Final:
Serena vs. Venus: Serena will get her 3rd Wimbledon crown to tie it up with big sis at the All England Club. Three sets. And then they’ll probably win the doubles too.

Men’s Quarterfinals:
Roger Federer vs. Fernando Gonzalez: I’m not too worried that Federer hasn’t played any matches on grass. He’ll be able to find his form quickly. Gonzalez doesn’t have a terrible draw, so if he isn’t a total spaz (and that’s a big “if”), he should get to the quarters, where he’ll have the honor of losing to Federer in straight sets.

Andy Roddick vs. Arnaud Clement: Roddick got a very easy draw, and it got even easier when Andy Murray pulled out. Unless Ivan Ljubicic can pull off a miracle in the fourth round, Roddick will get to the quarters with ease. Arnaud Clement had a solid past two weeks, with a semifinal and final appearance. He could very possibly lose to Nicolas Mahut in the first round, but if he doesn’t, I think he’s got a good shot at getting the quarters. Roddick over Clement in straight sets.

Marcos Baghdatis vs. Ivo Karlovic: Baghdatis has Nikolay Davydenko and David Nalbandian in his section. Davydenko doesn’t have a good record on grass, and Nalbandian, well, who knows what’s going on with him. So I pick Baghdatis to get the quarters again. And as for Karlovic, he’s got Novak Djokovic and Lleyton Hewitt in his way. But Djokovic’s results on grass haven’t been anything special, and Dr. Ivo has a 2-0 record against Hewitt (both meetings on grass). Baghdatis will survive Karlovic in four sets in the quarters.

Tomas Berdych vs. Rafael Nadal: For the last four years, the guy who won Halle won Wimbledon. Okay, it was Federer every time, but it’s still a good sign for Berdych, right? Nadal will get to the quarters, but Berdych is about the last guy he’ll want to see, because Berdych is 3-0 against Nadal off of clay. And it will be 4-0 after all is said in done. Berdych in four sets.

Men’s Semifinals:
Federer vs. Roddick: I don’t want to jinx it, but come on, what sane person would go with Roddick in this one? Federer in three sets, or maybe four if he’s a little off.

Baghdatis vs. Berdych: It’s a rematch of this year’s Halle final, and it will be Berdych as the repeat winner. Four sets.

Men’s Final:
Federer vs. Berdych: Federer in straight sets.

So…there you go.