Tennis With Attitude

Closing thoughts

2012-01-31T00:45:00.002-05:00

There's a Bible verse that's a favorite of mine. It goes something like this: "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling."
There is no tennis player that embodies this more than Rafael Nadal. The man plays every point as though it is his last, as though he is terrified of defeat. But as hard as he worked at the Australian Open men's final, he came up short against Novak Djokovic. Again.
No one would doubt Nadal's status as a champion, not even after that loss. He carried himself impeccably, although his disappointment was obvious. Still, at some point, he and his team will go to the tape. They will observe that at the end of the match, Rafa spent an awful amount of time watching deep balls land before he even prepared himself to hit them. He was hoping they would go out. He was too careful with some shots, waiting for Djokovic to mess up. They'll find that Nadal didn't take that match and so he lost it.
Now, about Djokovic. He is a champion. He will probably go down as one of the best of his generation, and if he keeps it up, one of the best ever. But he is not Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal. Sorry, he's not. Would Federer or Nadal have collapsed to the court -- during a match -- acting for all the world as though he couldn't take it anymore, only to jump back up and run like a deer and hit winners all over the place? No. There's no doubt Djokovic was struggling physically, but he purposely made a show of making sure his opponent saw his antics in an attempt to throw him off. There's nothing illegal about it -- he's got every right. But it's why he's not Federer or Nadal.
Meanwhile, Victoria Azarenka won her first Grand Slam title by beating Maria Sharapova like she stole something. I once had a phone interview with Azarenka, when she played in a tournament here in the Pittsburgh area. It took about 12 minutes longer than the final. This, incidentally, is why I don't get up at 3 a.m. to watch a women's tennis match. There is no matchup today on the women's side (not one -- I defy you to give me one!) that is guaranteed the same quality competition as Nadal-Djokovic, or Nadal-Federer or Murray-Djokovic or Djokovic-Federer. Not to take anything from Azarenka or Petra Kvitova or Sharapova or Samantha Stosur, but women's tennis is weak right now. And I think we can all stop saying, "Wait until Serena gets back." She's back and it makes no difference.

AO: More ramblings from my couch

2012-01-22T11:18:00.002-05:00

... Tomas Berdych is a pu--, er, pansy (for the family readers. See what I do for people who might not exist?). What is he, 6 foot 8, and a little tennis ball to his arm hurts his feelings? Geez. Here's hoping he never plays the doubles.
... Victoria Azarenka should stop doing the No. 1 symbol after her matches until she can serve out a match in a game with fewer than 12 deuces.

AO: Observations from my couch

2012-01-19T22:38:00.003-05:00

1. Marcos Baghdatis was fined $600 for smashing four racquets during his match against Stan Wawrinka. Good. It's about time the powers that be paid more attention to racquet rights.
2. I had David Nalbandian beating Sam Querrey in my bracket, and if it weren't for that umpire pulling rank on a suspect overrule (and subsequent refusal to let Nalbandian challenge the call), it might have been right. He got screwed! Two questions arise here: (a) Do you think that umpires sometimes just don't like certain players and it affects the decisions they make? (b) If one of the Big Four had waited that long to make a challenge -- which, by the way, was, what, a few seconds? -- would the same thing have happened? Heck, I've seen players walk up to a line, walk over to their posse, consult, stop at their chair for a drink of water, stretch, then ask for a challenge. What we need is a specific amount of time to challenge a call, and it would need to be different for singles and doubles. That's it!
3. Sam Stosur. *face palm*

Who's in?

2012-01-14T15:01:00.003-05:00

Here are my Racquet Bracket picks. We all know I'm right, but I wouldn't discourage anyone from trying to top me ...
Preview coming soon.

Hi,

I submitted my picks into the Naf's Racquet Bracket :: Australian Open ATP contest.

Check out my picks here: http://www.tourneytopia.com/RacquetBracketAussieOpenATP/NafTWA/pool/EntryPicks.aspx?EntryId=264313&InviteLink=true.

You should get in this contest. Submit your picks here: http://www.tourneytopia.com/RacquetBracketAussieOpenATP/NafTWA/default.aspx. The deadline to enter is 1/15/2012 7:00 PM Eastern Standard Time.

Naf V

Hi,

I submitted my picks into the Racquet Bracket :: Australian Open WTA contest.

Check out my picks here: http://www.tourneytopia.com/RacquetBracketAussieOpenWTA/AussieOpenWTA/pool/EntryPicks.aspx?EntryId=265676&InviteLink=true.

You should get in this contest. Submit your picks here: http://www.tourneytopia.com/RacquetBracketAussieOpenWTA/AussieOpenWTA/default.aspx. The deadline to enter is 1/15/2012 7:00 PM Eastern Standard Time.

Naf

Another TWA bright idea!

2012-01-13T09:30:00.002-05:00

Hey, who wants to take me on in a Racquet Bracket faceoff on the Tennis Channel's website? Any ideas for a prize for the winner? That won't cost me a lot of money?? Anyone interested??? Any reason I keep adding question marks????
Details coming ...

It's a (tournament) wrap!

2012-01-09T09:12:00.004-05:00

The first week of 2012 promised great talent at big warmup tournaments. Let's check in on a couple of tournaments to see how that went:

Brisbane International top seeds
1. Sam Stosur: Er, injured. Diagnosed Tuesday with Grand Slam Letdown Disorder, or better known as Na Li Syndrome
2. Andrea Petkovic: Quarterfinals, and nursing a "minor" back injury ***BREAKING NEWS*** Petkovic is out of the Australian Open with a back injury and bitterness over having to put the kibosh on her victory dance.
3. Francesca Schiavone: Semifinals
4. Serena Williams: Left ankle sprain
5. Kim Clijsters: Left hip injury
Oh, and BREAKING NEWS! Venus Williams is out of the Australian Open, still recovering from an autoimmune disease.

Well. Women are the weaker sex, are they not? Surely, the top men must be faring better, right, Roger Federer? What, now? He's at the chiropractor having his back looked at? Weird. But how Rafa "Muscles" Nadal? Sore shoulder. Andy Murray? Knee. Robin Soderling. Mono.
Could it be that these injuries are springing up from not having enough of an offseason? Nah.
More on the seeds and draws this week ...

Why I'm back ... and other thoughts

2012-01-02T23:13:00.003-05:00

1. I worked very damned hard on that logo.
2. I am tired of junk responses on old postings coming to my email account.
3. When Serena Williams asks an umpire, "Aren't you the one who screwed me over last time?" AND SHE'S NOT, I want to be able to immediately write, "Wait a second. Is Serena Williams saying that all white people look alike??" There. That felt better.

All of the above is true. Mostly, I miss writing about tennis, even if hardly anyone read it. Life's not gotten less busy -- in fact, I have an infant here trying to get at my keyboard -- but you should make room for the things you enjoy in life, and so here I am again. I plan on bringing all the old features back, including the (much more scaled down) Grand Slam previews and my league updates (I finally made it to 4.0! Let's see how long that lasts). Anyway, it's on, y'all!

Apologia

2010-12-31T21:48:00.003-05:00

Right around the last time I posted here, my husband warned me I'd have to give up the blog. I didn't want to believe him, but here we are, more than six months since I whined poetic about the Fed Cup. What happened to the Naf?
Well. I got the job of my dreams -- plus kept my old one. It's been a lot of fun and a lot of work which left me with little spare time. So I had to decide whether to play tennis or write about it. Let's just say I managed to get my USTA ranking bumped up.
As for this blog, I feel bad. I'm a little undecided on what to do. End it completely or try to hold out until I only have one job. I'll come up with a decision soon, although regardless of the job situation, things are only going to get busier in the new year. Regardless, it's fair to at least address my poor lonely corner of the blogosphere, just in case there's still someone out there. While I've never been rewarded with a large readership, this was just plain fun to do -- going through draws, touching base with other tennis nuts and other great stuff.
I will wrap with a few predictions and observations from 2010 and looking to 2011:
1. Dinara Safina. Name sounds familiar. Hm. No, gimme a minute ...
2. I still believe in Andy Murray. This is his year. Seriously, it's this year.
3. I'm not saying I don't believe Serena Williams, but I want to see this cut. That's all I'm saying.
4. Women's tennis is starting to bore the crap out of me. Will we ever see a drag-out, hair-pulling slam final again?!?
5. With all the year-end reviews, I am so over this John Isner-Nic Mahut match. True, no one will ever do that again, and it was cool in that respect. But how about that one rally they had, pulling each other all over the court with expert shotmaking? You don't remember that? Exactly.
6. I think Nadal stays at No. 1, but winning the Aussie Open for a Rafa Slam might be a lot to ask.
That's all I got. Anyone still there?

The Fed Cup Report sponsored by TWA!

2010-04-26T09:02:00.003-04:00

I'm not convinced Melanie Oudin will ever win a major. Definitely not Bethanie Mattek-Sands.
So, after mocking endlessly the decision to make Mary Joe Fernandez the captain of the team, I have to commend the woman. I don't know how she does it -- and by "it" I mean something just a little less miraculous than squeezing blood out of a turnip -- but she's doing it.
I normally wouldn't take the time to watch Fed Cup, because the ITF doesn't take the time to do it right. But once I watched Mattek-Sands snatch victory out of her own melted-down nerves in the singles, I was hooked. Then to watch her come up the hero of the tie was just a surprise. Not because of the tube socks, either. THEY BEAT RUSSIA, for crying out loud! Yes, a Russian team without Svetlana Kuznetsova, Dinara Safina or even Maria Sharapova (because there are no Olympics this year -- and to be fair, because she's coming back from injury), but you would think Elena Dementieva could have handled this one all by herself and you'd also think a young Russian trumps a young American nine times out of ten. Wrong and wrong.
But now, a word to Fernandez. Mary Joe, I might have been a little harsh about your hiring in the past. I usually don't apologies (on account of the whole "attitude" thing), but ... damn, I still can't do it. I still can't figure out how they picked you, but you're saying or doing something right. Two finals with you at the helm. I gotta say that when I heard you were holding out at the last moment for the Williams sisters, I found it a touch pathetic. (Never let them see you beg.) You're giving the U.S. results somehow, and that's a lot more than I can say for ol' Zina Garrison, who is suing the USTA for racial discrimination. That might be true, but she also got no results. That might have had something to do with her getting canned.
I digress again. Way to go, Mary Joe. If I were a Fed Cup fan, I would be rooting for you. As it is, I don't think I can fit the event on my calendar. Mainly because I don't know when it is.

News flash!

2010-03-27T20:14:00.003-04:00

So, I finally opened this month's issue of Tennis magazine, and on page 38 is the question I've been asking myself: What's up with Nicole Vaidisova?
Well, as it turns out, there won't be any rebound from the rankings dregs. Vaidisova announced her retirement this month at Indian Wells. If you're thinking, "That's too bad ..." you might be the only one. Vaidisova's only 20, and man, if you can't get motivated by being in the top 10 at the age of 17, then it's safe to say that your head's not exactly in the game. So she probably won't be back. Which is a shame. She had some real talent. Far too talented to be on the sidelines.
And, perhaps in an unrelated note (but maybe not), she is engaged to Radek "The Ogre" Stepanek.
Man, he must be really funny.

Davis Cup: You know it's bad when Andy Roddick sits.

2010-03-09T21:57:00.002-05:00

Blah blah blah. I could go on and on about how screwed up the Davis Cup system is, couldn't I? How stupid it is to spread this event out haphazardly throughout the year, tossing whatever momentum that's begun to mount right out the window. Oh, and then there's the unbelievably brilliant move to set it up at various sites through the world, making it really hard to keep track of all the matches.
Well, it's clear that organizers couldn't care less what we useless fans think. But when the players begin to pull out, maybe -- just maybe -- it's time to reconsider. Consider this, the ITF, that one of the top five players came out to play for their country. It's March. The next major is in two months! Yet Roger Federer (scheduling conflict -- and you know what that means. Tanning bed.), Rafa Nadal (various and sundry injury), Andy Murray (Great Britain's not allowed to play in Davis Cup until they get more good players, basically) and Juan Martin Del Potro (injured) begged out. A little farther down to the top 10, and we have Robin Soderling representing for Sweden, Marin Cilic coming out for Croatia and Fernando Gonzalez playing for Chile, considering what they've been through.
Another notable name, though, who didn't make it last weekend was Andy Roddick. Yes, the same Andy Roddick who won't even go to the Olympics, but will go to the ends of the earth to play in Davis Cup. Until this year. He finally drew the line, and it looks like he realized that, basically, the Davis Cup ain't the Olympics. For one thing, the Olympics doesn't just convene about eight times a year, whenever. For another thing, although no one could give a damn about curling, they will watch it on television because the IOC know a little something about creating interest in a sporting event. Think Michael Phelps would just ditch the Olympics? Because when Roddick and Federer ditch, that's the equivalent. They're saying, "Yes, this is a worldwide competition, and the prize is supremacy not for me, but my country, but I don't care. I have an appointment at a tanning salon. Hello!?"
Meanwhile, David Nalbandian, who hasn't done anything in ages, returns to Davis Cup play and fights valiantly to get his team past Sweden, in doubles and in the deciding singles. And who cares?

Australia 2010: Man up! or Post-Script

2010-01-31T16:48:00.004-05:00

Come on. Does anyone else think the Roger Federer/Andy Murray scenario after the final today was a script? Last year, Fed's crying like a little girl after losing to Rafa Nadal. Now this year, Murray's fighting tears after Federer beats him?
It's full circle for Federer. After a rough start to last year, he came back to make history, snagging the next two slams. But then he lost a tough one to Juan Martin del Potro at the U.S. Open. Back at the stage of probably the most heartbreaking loss of his career, he comes up roses. I mean, really, when you making jokes about your opponent's nation not winning a slam for thousands of years, you've got to be very confident. You certainly wouldn't hear him making those jokes about Nadal. Except for the first round, Federer looked head-and-shoulders above all his opponents, and Murray was no exception.
But, moving on to Murray -- can we all agree that the Murray who showed up to the final was not the one who advanced to the final? Talk about tight. Especially in the third set. When Murray let that 5-2 lead slip away, he showed he wasn't quite ready for prime time yet. It's clear he's been working on his game but there are some things you can't prepare for. Like the massive pressure of trying to win a Grand Slam against the best player in the world. I still think Murray's going to win a Slam this year. I just don't put him in the same category as a Tim Henman, who had trouble with nerves and had limitations on his game. Murray's becoming a stronger player every year and whenever he deals with being something of a head case, he'll start racking them up and maybe one day against Federer.
But these men have got to do something about this crying at the Australian. Gosh, I haven't seen this much crying since Martina Navratilova's playing days.
You don't see Justine Henin crying. I cannot believe she can just show up in Australia with one tournament under her belt and make the final. You can't fault her dedication and fighting spirit. But why would she cry? She's still as lethal as ever, and quite likely to win some major this year. Question: If she wins Wimbledon, which is her goal, will she "retire" again?
And I guess Serena Williams' crying days are over as well. I have never seen anyone else with such an iron will to win. Unlike Federer, Serena had definite moments of, um, sloppiness? Dear Lord, how does someone get into a set and 4-0 break against Victoria Azarenka, who is no slouch, to suddenly find a second gear? Let's not forget that she is not the most technically sound player. And again, against Henin, she looked flat-footed and slow. I've just never seen someone's will transcend what is actually happening on the court and hot temper and all, you have to admire that. I guess that's a lesson for Murray. Winning isn't just the x's and o's sometimes. To win, one has to believe one can win. Doesn't one?

Australia 2010: 0 and 1?!? Really??

2010-01-22T23:45:00.002-05:00

Not quite sure what was more shocking -- the scoreline of the Nadia Petrova-Kim Clijsters match or the fact that Petrova wasn't wearing something that made her look like a cross-dresser.
Holy crap! What happened to her? Petrova, I mean, here's someone who basically has underperformed for her entire career, mostly as a result of injury and a little bit because she gets a little jumpy in big matches. Then she shows up at the Aussie Open with a dress that hangs properly on her and beats a tournament favorite in less than an hour? I mean, what got into her?
And will it last? And who made that dress?
And as surprised as some are about Clijsters, I'm not. I mean, what do you expect? At some point after returning from a long break in tennis, there has to be some lingering effect, right? It was crazy to think she could win the U.S. Open her first major back to begin with. To think she'll make the semis and up from now on is a bit much to expect.
I also would have given Justine Henin a break if she had lost her match yesterday, too. A set and a break down in her second tournament back? And she comes back to apply the beatdown? Very impressive, and that¹s hard for me to say about Justine. (I know, I know, it's hard for me to get over her transgressions. I had to remind my husband yesterday about my issues with her and it got me mad all over again. I wish Mel Oudin would have made another run. Then I'd have another short girl on the tour to root for, guilt free.) It's hard to argue with results. By the way, she also beat the woman on tour who was the most in form in Elena Dementieva. Does anyone else have trouble believing that Henin didn¹t touch a racquet for a year? I'm saying
it right out -- that cannot be true.

Australia 2010: Who's hot?

2010-01-19T21:57:00.002-05:00

To play tennis or write about it? That is the question.
The answer: I'm sitting here resting my sore feet (I figure it's gotta be the shoes), a couple days late, but not a penny short for my Aussie Open overview, shall we say. Instead of the regular rundown, then, we're going to play "Hot and Cold". Here's how it'll work. I name a player and discuss how likely it is they'll win the first major of the year. Cold means "cold day in hell". It can only get better from there.

MEN
1. Roger Federer: WARM-ISH -- It's hard to bet against the Fed, but I gotta say: I was not convinced by his first round play. If Igor Andreev hadn't punked out in the third set, our World No. 1 would've been going five with some guy. (But look what having the swagger of being Roger Federer does to a guy serving for the set.) Anyway, he's got a cushy draw. I don't think he'll have to worry about Lleyton Hewitt in the fourth round. For some reason, I think Donald Young might be ready for an Aussie upset. Anyway again, Fed might get Nikolay Davydenko in the quarters, and Davydenko took him down in a warmup tournament. Is he ready for that? Or Djokovic in the semis?
2. Rafa Nadal: HOT -- It's the beginning of the year. Spring has sprung. This is Nadal's time of the year. He's got an interesting draw, what with maybe Ivo Karlovic or Ivan Ljubicic in the fourth round, and Andy Murray in the quarters. Perhaps Juan Martin del Potro in the semis. Murray and del Potro are people he's had trouble with at the end of the year, but without any injuries to run him down yet, maybe he's got a run to the final in him.
3. Novak Djokovic: HOT -- Here's how you make a Grand Slam cake. You start with a contender with something to prove and add a cupcake draw. Then you stir the ingredients together with just the right amount of pressure (Jo-Jo Tsonga in the quarters and perhaps Federer in the semis) and put it in the oven (the final in Australia). Let bake in the sun for three, four hours and ...
4. Juan Martin del Potro: LUKEWARM -- Iffy wrist, tough draw ... I can't see him in the semis, past Roddick in the quarters and Marin Cilic in the fourth round.
5. Andy Murray: HOTTISH -- I'm telling you, Murray's winning a Slam this year! It might even be this one. To do that, he'd have to have to take Nadal down, then either del Potro or Roddick. He can do that. Federer or Djokovic in the final? He can do that! Right?
6. Nikolay Davydenko: LUKEWARM -- Yes, he just beat Federer and Nadal in a warmup tournament. The key word there is warmup. It's funny -- I think that because Davydenko is bald, we might think he's older than 28. He's still got time to make a run. Fed's playing with shaky knees, right?
7. Andy Roddick: LUKEWARM -- Yes, he can ride his serve past most hacks, but around the quarters is when they learn to block that sucker back. I see Roddick's trying the play the net more and that's admirable.
8. Robin Soderling: COLD -- Ha ha ha! I know he's the hot stuff now, but I've never liked Soderling, especially after that Nadal thing. He's a jerk! And you know what? That forehand's too flat! There is this one thing called "the net." And there's this other thing called "an ego." I bet it's hurting after that first-round loss. And ... Soderling's just a journeyman who's had his moment. This time next year, he'll be back where he belongs, ranked somewhere in the 80s.
9. Fernando Verdasco: WARM -- Can the Hot Truth make the semis again? Maybe do one better? I dunno ... in a five-set tussle against Davydenko? Or was last year once-in-a-lifetime? You know, like Robin Soderling in a final of the French Open.
10. Jo-Jo Tsonga: LUKEWARM -- Been out with injury, and although he can still hit the cover off the ball, I wonder if he can get past Haas in the third round.

WOMEN
1. Serena Williams: WARMISH -- Right now, I'm watching Serena play doubles, and they're cruising, 5-1 in the first set, but geez. Every time Serena plays a match, she's got more and more bandages on her. Not only that, but I think Sabine Lisicki's got a shot against her in the fourth round.
2. Dinara Safina: LUKEWARM -- Favorable draw, but her reaction to big moments were not so favorable. Example: the 2009 U.S. Open. Safina's wandering through early rounds, begging someone, anyone: "Beat me, beat me! Take me out of my misery!" Seriously, she has a big chance to really do something with her draw here. The second-highest seed in her quarter is Jelena Jankovic.
3. Svetlana Kuznetsova: WARMER -- Form's looking good. Draw? Maybe Clijsters in the fourth round and possibly the upset-minded Aravene Rezai. Look, Clijsters spends most of her time chasing a kid around the house. I'm sure tennis is like a back rub to her. Good luck, Sveta.
4. Caroline Wozniacki: WARMER -- I'd be all about Wozniacki if she wasn't content to just keep the ball going. She's such a passive player that I wonder if she won't run herself ragged just to get to the second week. But if she doesn't, I'd give her a decent shot against Venus Williams in the quarters.
5. Elena Dementieva: HOTTISH -- Arguably the player with the best form right now. The trouble is that she has to play Justine Henin later today in the second round. As a TWA reader recently pointed out, Henin has NOT been eating Bon-Bons all day while she was retired. I think Dementieva can make the semis if she can get past Henin. Big if.
6. Venus Williams: WARMER -- I think I've noted before that Venus' season is like me in the mornings. Slow, sluggish, don't talk to me until noon. Venus is like that in the first half of the season. She's got a cushy draw -- with the likes of Casey Dellacqua and Francesca Schiavone floating around. Is she ready for her sister, dressed for the Aussie Open as a mummy?
7. Victoria Azarenka: LUKEWARM -- Not yet showing any consistency at majors. If she were, I bet she'd be able to take on Serena in the quarters (or Lisicki).
8. Jelena Jankovic: WARM -- It's January. It's hard to tell where anyone is right now, but Jelena Jankovic has been flat for some time now. Being stuck with Marion (Candy) Bartoli and Dinara Safina in your half won't help much. But, as Jankovic will tell you, she had a lot of drama last year. Including "woman troubles." Which should count for something. Will there ever be an end to her drama? If there were, she could win a major for a change. Now that would be drama.
9. Vera Zvonareva: WARM -- Nestled in a part of the draw where she can do some damage. That is, if she's over her hysterics. And, of course, we won't know until she's blown a second-set lead in a major fourth round match again.
10. Aggie Radwanska: COLD -- Not until she gets some meat on her bones.

And, OMG! Rennae Stubbs and Lisa Raymond are playing together again! Say what?

The Aussie countdown!

2010-01-14T09:15:00.002-05:00

So I turn on my TV this morning and Serena Williams is going three with Bethanie Mattek-Sands. I mean, who else could it be -- wearing black and gaudy gold? Guess again, Naf. Seriously, Aravene Rezai turned some heads a couple years ago with nice results, but probably wilted under the pressure. Who knows? A little wisdom and foraging through Bethanie's closet might be just what her game needs ...

The seeds are out for the first major. Not too many surprises -- Serena and Roger Federer are the top seeds and for some reason Justine Henin is looming in the draw. Good luck, ladies. But here's a laugher. Yanina Wickmayerwas suspended briefly for allegedly trying to shake off drug testers. The suspension was overturned, but because she was suspended when entries closed, the only way Wickmayer can play is to win the qualifying tournament. That's fair. Unless you're in the qualifying tournament. Must be a nice feel when you look at the draw and you're playing a U.S. Open semifinalist. In qualifying.

Did anyone see Justine Henin and Kim Clijsters playing in the final of the Brisbane tournament? I have my issues with Henin, but one of them is not how very damned good she is. Seriously, the women Henin beat out to be ashamed. She's been eating Bon-Bons on a couch in Belgium for two years. They've been ... playing tennis. Nice work, um, pros.

Why is the guy doing commentary on Tennis Channel wearing a suit a) with 80s shoulder pads and b) that is at least one size too large for him? Wardrobe!

More when the draw comes out!

It's not "Goodbye 2009." It's "Hello, 2010!"

2009-12-31T12:31:00.004-05:00

So, I'm watching a replay of Andy Roddick lose the best match he's ever played at Wimbledon this year and it made me realize that 2009 was indeed full of ups and downs. An example: I was talking tennis with a friend at work who is a Roger Federer fan and he was trash-talking against Rafa Nadal. "C'mon, Federer owns Nadal now!" he says. "Really?" I said. "Really, Garrett? Remember the Australian Open? Remember Federer crying like a little (you know) after getting his (you know) handed to him by Nadal? Really? Really?" (I get a little worked up talking about tennis sometimes.) As it turned out, he had forgotten all about that. Understandable, though, isn't it? Federer went from that to winning the French, Wimbledon and almost the U.S. Open, placing him in every final this year. Not bad. At the very least, the man managed to silence the "Who's Next" talk -- Murray or Djokovic. For now.
It was a remarkable and history-making year for Federer (and also had a couple kids!). But that was then. What about 2010? Let's take a gander, yearbook-style:

Most likely to succeed (or win his/her first major):
Male: Andy Murray. I know a lot of people don't buy Andy Murray as a Slam winner, but his game gets stronger every year, and his fitness also improves by leaps and bounds. The question is: Can he handle the pressure, the fact that myself and many others expect him to do something big? I think so. He's no ...
Female: Dinara Safina. I would almost go with Caroline Wozniacki, but she doesn't have the firepower Safina has. Now, if you put Wozniacki's brain in Safina's body, you might have something. Seriously, Safina's melted down too many times at big moments to continue in that way. At some point -- and I think she's reached it -- you get tired of coming up short because you don't have the nerve to take a win. Barring serious injury issues, I wouldn't be surprised to see her come up big in Australia.

Most likely to skip a grade (or make a big ranking move):
Male: John Isner. I can't believe I'm picking an American and one who has a big cheat because he's like 10 feet tall. But I was really impressed with Isner at the U.S. Open, and he's showed that he's more than a big serve. He's got the game to give the top 5 players fits.
Female: Justine Henin. I hate to say it this way, but if Kim Clijsters can come back and win a major, then Henin can win the French after eating Bon-Bons for a couple years. If we're talking about someone who hasn't been to the top of the mountain, I say Sabine Lisicki. She's got power, she's got nerve, she's got wins over tour veterans like Venus Williams, Patty Schnyder and Svetlana Kuznetsova and I see top 10 coming for her.

Most likely to be at the head of the class at this time next year:
Male: Rafa Nadal. I know. Injury, injury, injury. But I believe in Rafa. He has been well able to adjust over the years to get to No. 1 in the world. I think he next has to change his game so it's easier on his body, although he is a grinder. He's got to find a way to make it to the end of the season, but he's young. Time's still on his side.
Female: Serena Williams. Justine Henin. Dinara Safina. Come on. It's women's tennis. As unstable as a mental patient.

Most likely to graduate (or to stay retired):
Male: Marat Safin. I went to my first U.S. Open in 2000. If you're an American tennis fan, going to the Open is like being cut loose in a candy store. You've got your show courts, of course, but then there's the Grandstand, where I saw James Blake for the first time playing doubles well into the evening. Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario was also playing doubles on an outer court. Martina Navratilova and Venus Williams were just walking around the grounds. Pretty awesome, sure, but my eye was on one man. We got into the Safin/Sebastien Grosjean match, I think, in time to watch Safin pull out a tough one. My brother and I were close to the front rows through the match and when it was over, I shot up to get close enough for a photo of the man who I thought was going to be my husband one day. (There's still time, Marat. Call me. I already have a husband, but I'll figure something out. Pool boy. Gardener. Whatever.) One problem: I was so nervous to be close to him that I couldn't move. But there he was, signing autographs close enough so I could see his sun-kissed forehead and perfect hair. Still couldn't move. So I did what big sisters do -- I ordered my brother to take that picture for me:

It's the closest I ever got to my first tennis crush. He won the Open that year. And everyone, including Pete Sampras thought there was more coming.
There was, but not exactly what we thought. Safin had the ability to be the equivalent of Federer for a window of time, and for some reason, he didn't. He showed flashes of greatness, but the year he lost to Thomas Johansson, in 2002, at the Aussie, was without a doubt the biggest head-scratcher of the decade. When people retire, having done the best with what they had, such as Andre Agassi, it's a celebration. When Safin retired last month, having barely scratched the surface of his potential, it's like, "That's it?!? I coulda had a V8!" Oh, well. Fare thee well, Marat. At least you'll always be hot.
Female: Amelie Mauresmo. Hell, there's no shame in retiring with two Slams. In retrospect, that was probably about as far as her abilities could take her, considering her contemporaries -- Martina Hingis, Lindsay Davenport, the Williams sisters, the Belgians. When she was quoted last year as saying that playing in front of half-empty stadiums wasn't doing it for her, you could see the end was near. Even when she peaked against this season, and looked like she could do some damage, she seemed uninterested in the work that went into getting those results. But whatever makes you happy, right? Wonder what she'll do next. She doesn't seem like the knitting type.
OK! I'm off to prepare for my social rounds for New Years! Everyone have a safe one and pick one part of your tennis game you're going to improve for 2010. (I'm choosing the forehand. Oh, and the volley. Also my backhand.) I'll be back for more on Jan. 13.

OK. Now I'm confused.

2009-11-06T20:00:00.004-05:00

"The 22-year-old player is gathering evidence to prove his innocence despite two samples testing positive."
No, that's not Yanina Wickmayer, who has just been suspended by a Belgian anti-doping committee panel. (Besides, she's a girl, and it clearly says "his.") Why? Because she didn't report her whereabouts to the same officials three times. Sounds about right. Rules are rules. And when you blow off officials three times, it does appear as if you're hiding something. It will be interesting if her one-year suspension stands. Because, of course, these are the same people (the ITF, or an independent group assembled by same) who let Richard Gasquet get by with "I kissed cocaine-crusted lips." For the record, the ITF and the World Anti-Doping Agency is still pushing for a suspension for Gasquet. Confused? No, it is retarded. (Gosh, Martina Hingis has got to be kicking herself right now for not fighting her positive test. All she'd need to say is that she brushed past a cokehead in the doctor's office and the residue got in her system. But really, who would have known it'd be that easy?)
Throw in Andre Agassi's Mountain Dew theory and we've got a severe case of mixed signals, people. Aren't all these countries using the same rulebook? Then why can you get suspended for not testing positive for drugs, but get let off when there were drugs in the system? In Gasquet's case, the point is not the drugs. It's cocaine. Hardly performance-enhancing. The point is that we need some consistency here. A spotty drug policy is worse than no policy.
Oh, and Xavier Malisse also got suspended for ducking officials twice. Which should guide him gently into the pasture of retirement. Unless he has been using something.

Hunh. I would have guessed cocaine.

2009-10-28T18:28:00.005-04:00

So, the top eight women in the world (now minus Dinara Safina with a back injury) are battling it out in Doha. Venus and Serena Williams just finished a heckuva match with a lot of great hitting and entertaining points, especially at the end.
But, really. Who cares about that?
So Andre Agassi used meth while he was playing tennis! As far as autobiographies go, it's no Mackensie Phillips-sized revelation, but this is a pretty big deal and not for the reason one might think.
Yes, Agassi is a role model and he ought to be ashamed of himself and his image (which is everything, remember) might take a hit. But, hey, it's the bombshells that sell books, not being a philanthropist who came back from being 141 in the world all the way back to 1 and winning "the" Grand Slam. Go figure.
The real question for me is why it took 12 years for this to see the light of day. The man failed a drug test while playing pro tennis. His excuse? His assistant, a drug user, used to put meth in his soda and Andre accidentally had a swig of Meth-Dew. That, and an apology, apparently was the end of that.
Really? I thought Richard Gasquet's line for testing positive for cocaine was lame.
And how is it that the Martina Hingises and Gasquets of the world are exposed the second their drug tests come up dirty and Agassi tests positive for meth ... and all is quiet on the drug-testing front. Is there a double standard? If Roger Federer or Serena Williams test positive for drugs, would we ever know about it? If that positive test had come up, it might have derailed Agassi's career, and tennis, the business, would have taken a hit. Is that a consideration these days?
Put plainly, is there some sort of double standard for athletes who are doping? If there's not, then the drug-testing policy is pretty lame. If you can tell folks you kissed a girl who had cocaine-crusted lips or that you drank some meth juice -- and it works -- that's a problem, too.
Really, the only way tennis looks good here is if we find out that Agassi made this up to move some books. It'd make his fans feel better, and it would also hold out hope that Mackensie Phillips is telling lies, too. Because that's just disturbing.

The TWA Crystal Ball

2009-10-14T19:07:00.003-04:00

I don't think Andy Roddick's really injured. Come on -- one day he's complaining about the long tournament schedule, the next he pulls up lame doing almost nothing on court. Grow up, dude and get back on that calendar! One month is puh-LENTY of time off!
Seriously, though. Seems like the fastest way to get the powers that be to do something about that calendar is to make them travel all over the world and play from January to November -- in their work shoes! Now we're talking.
This annual debate begs the question -- what if the players went on strike to protest the effed-up tennis calendar? Hmm ...

January:
The top ten male and female tennis players, in a rare move, call a press conference in Belgium. (Because that's where all the interesting press conferences have happened lately.) They announce that neither they nor their fellow players will play on their respective tours or any Grand Slams until the tennis heads come up with a schedule players like AND they want full input! Just days before the Australian Open, the ATP, WTA, ITF and other three-letter organizations quickly sit down with the twenty players. When TPTB tell the players to wait for a few more years to get it settled, the players, led by Roger Federer and Serena Williams declare a strike! Serena brandishes a racquet, but because she's on strike, she can't be fined.
Organizers are forced to cancel the Australian Open and disappointed fans lash out at the players for not entertaining them. Elena Dementieva announces that she married her hockey-player boyfriend and that she is pregnant. Maria Sharapova appears on David Letterman to talk up the players' viewpoint and appeal for fan support for their plight. Letterman asks Sharapova if she's ever considered becoming a model.

March:
The Indian Wells and Miami tournaments scramble to rustle up some tennis players so the show can go on. Charlie Pasarell, the organizer of the Indian Wells tournament, even apologizes to the Williams sisters and offers to allow them to play that semifinal from 2001 in an empty stadium. It's a no-go. The Sony Ericcson tournament continues on -- as a table tennis tournament. Some 10-year-old from Texas who's on vacation in Florida wins. Maria Sharapova poses for the covers of Vogue, Glamour and SI for Women.

May:
Rafael Nadal announces that instead of the playing the French Open, he will instead make his debut on WWE Raw to launch his wrestling career. He will be known as The Conquistador. In his first match, The Undertaker gets the drop on The Conquistador when he takes a second to pull out a wedgie from his very uncomfortable one-sie.
Halfhearted attempts from players to negotiate with tennis officials mean they won't be playing the French anyway. Hemorrhaging money, officials meet with tournament organizers around the world and finally offer the players an eight-month tennis schedule, with fewer required tournaments. Federer, whose wife is expecting again, tells them his people would call their people. Andy Roddick signs with the New York Yankees.

June:
Peyton and Eli Manning grace the cover of Tennis magazine, under the headline "Five Other Sports Out There." At the top of the list is table tennis, which has gained in popularity since the Miami tournament. The 10-year-old, who's now 11, is touted as the youngest table tennis champion ever. Table tennis officials consider setting a minimum age for players to join the pro tour, hoping to head off any Mountain Dew dependency problems in the future.
The Outback tour takes over at the hallowed grounds of Wimbledon, and in the final, Pete Sampras beats John McEnroe in straight sets. McEnroe breaks four racquets and swears at a line judge in the first set, but because there are few other options, officials let it slide. The next month, Venus Williams wins the U.S. Women's Open -- in golf. It's her first golf tournament. Michelle Wie doesn't make the cut.

August:
Bud Collins speculates that players are purposely holding off on an agreement with TPTB in order to get an entire calendar year off. When asked about this, Federer, reached at home and shouting over screaming children, offers a terse "No comment" in response. When he's asked what he thinks about the officials' proposal, Fed says he's trying to organize a meeting with the players, but it's "tough with their schedules." Sharapova appears in the soap opera "All My Children." She plays an injured tennis player who misses an unnamed major tournament held in Queens, lands in Pine Valley and falls in love with Tad Martin, who is now 60, but still hot.

November:
Federer and Serena Williams hold a joint press conference with tennis officials to announce that the players have agreed to the new schedule. Only Bud Collins is present. The rest of the sports world has its eye on the year-end table tennis championship in Shanghai. In a major upset, the 11-year-old wunderkind loses in the quarterfinals after showing up with a yellowed tongue and, according to a spectator, "hopped up on sugar." Andy Roddick is suspended from the Yankees, who are in the World Series, after an altercation in the locker room with Alex Rodriguez.

March 2011:
The Australian Open begins at its newly scheduled time and Roger Federer and Serena Williams are seeded first. Fans demand to get in for free because of last year's debacle and organizers refuse. Millions of tennis fans nationwide declare a strike.

Coach swap!

2009-10-07T20:47:00.003-04:00

So, tough times for Venus Williams and Dinara Safina. Two weeks, two early round exits for both. For Venus, she's lost twice in a week to Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova (and, yes, that, too, was cut-and-pasted), a mere qualifier. Meanwhile, world (ahem) No. (ahemahem) 1 Safina lost to Shuai Zhang, who is ranked TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY SIX IN THE WORLD! Think Roger Federer could do that? And men's tennis is actually deep.
It is late in the year, and as they say, shiz-nit happens. But both these players have had very interesting seasons. Safina gets to the top of the mountain, but wimps out in major tournaments. Venus gets her ranking back up, only to suffer puzzling losses all year, and sometimes, she has looked utterly lost out there. What can these players do to change things around?
COACH SWAP!
First up, Safina. Right now, she's under the tutelage of one Zeljko Krajan, who, some say is kind of hard on her. I will say I've never seen someone so irritated to see his student win a match. Maybe what Safina needs is some positive reinforcement, someone who can convince her she is a worthy No. 1, that she can beat anyone.
Someone like Richard Williams.
Now that man might not be able to fix a forehand, but he can sure light a fire under a sister. A Williams sister. But how about a Russian? How would that coaching session go?
Dinara: Oh, I hate my serve!
Pop Williams: What kind of crap is that? You need to go out there and beat those white turkeys! Ace 'em!
Dinara: I missed another one! (smashes racquet on court)
Pop: Listen, I'm from the ghetto. When you're from the ghetto, you don't get all nervous and stuff. Where are you from?
Dinara: Moscow ...
Pop: Got any ghettos in Moscow?
Dinara: I don't know ...
Pop: Ever hear gunshots on the tennis courts? Have to pay off gang members to protect you while you practice?
Dinara: No.
Pop: And you're worried about a serve? A forehand? Girl, you better shut up and hit that shot. And be glad you didn't get shot!
Hey, that logic has produced about, oh, 20 majors for the Williams clan. Couldn't hurt, right?
Now, on to Venus. Still, after all these years, she's being coached by her parents, who frankly, couldn't be less interested during her matches, it seems. Richard's fixing his ball cap, Oracene's sleeping and Serena's texting Common while Venus is trying to beat Kim Clijsters at the U.S. Open. What she needs is some passion, some anger, a fresh fire, someone to get mad at her.
Someone like Zeljko Krajan.
Maybe what Venus needs is someone to call down during one of those stupid mid-match coach conferences:
Krajan: What the hell is the matter with you?
Venus: I don't know. Too many errors. She's playing well.
Krajan: (mutters in Croatian) I told you move into the court. Be aggressive. What you doing back there?
Venus: It's just a tough day at the office right now..
Krajan: Oh, you look terrible. Six double faults. Pushing your serve? How you expect to win like that?
Venus: (drinking water and nodding)
Krajan: You gotta start every match 6-0, 5-0?

The Top Ten(nis) -- I am so clever

2009-09-30T19:11:00.004-04:00

From the "Mardy Fish Injury Duh" file: Sam Querrey is out for 6-8 weeks because ... wait for it ... wait for it ... because he sat on a glass table and it broke under his 6-foot-6, 200-pound ass. Which should have been completely unexpected. The glass cut his forearm and thus the vacation. I gotta admit, just looking at him, he looks sort of lanky. Surprise.

Venus Williams, Dinara Safina, Svetlana Kuznetsova and Elena Dementieva all were tripped up at the starting gate at the Toray Pan Pacific tournament. Dementieva said she felt players didn't have enough time to recover from the U.S. Open. I guess that'd be true of Kim Clijsters or even Serena Williams or even Mel Oudin. Dementieva lost in the second round. Sounds like plenty of time to me ...

LEAGUE WATCH: Princeton -- True Story.

2009-09-27T15:47:00.003-04:00

So the Early Start ratings came out around here. For the uninitiated, the Early Start ratings come out after the end of the summer league season and alerts you to the rating you can look forward to next year, which gives you time to go through an appeal process. I can still remember the year I opened them up and found I had FINALLY been moved up to 3.5.
I was fairly sure what I'd find when I looked this time, and I wasn't surprised. Still a 3.5. My year was as inconsistent as they come, and I would guess my results at Princeton pretty much sealed the deal. The Early Starts, for me, was the frustrating cap to a really frustrating regional tournament. Read on -- if you dare.
Now, before we went, my team captains had already decided on a lineup for each of the five matches we would play in Princeton because almost our entire team was going and, of course, you want to get everyone in. Sounds good. Well, our lineup was based ONLY on that. I was playing doubles with someone I hadn't played with all year. Our best singles player was on the bench in the first match and none of the successful doubles teams were together. It was a mess.
That was already in the back of my mind on the drive up, and the morning of, when I woke up and found it was pouring outside. The co-captain of our team (and I'll get back to her) called me to tell me we were indoors. OK, I thought. Works for me!
It had stopped raining by the time I made it to the complex where we would play, and it was there the real hammer fell. That was when I found out how the weather would change the tournament format.
We wouldn't play a regular scoring match. No. We would play an 8-game pro set. Yeah.
So, basically, we were made to play an abbreviated match -- to decide which team GOES TO NATIONALS. (Wow, I thought I'd have recovered from this bitterness by now ...) But there was nothing we could do. The decision had been made and play had begun.
Another really brilliant decision made in reorganizing because of the rain was that we would play only one match on Friday instead of the planned two. The second match would be made up on Sunday. (More on that boneheaded call coming up, too.)
Anyway, I was slated to play first singles against the strongest team there right out of the shoot. But I felt OK. I had recently begun taking on a more relaxed approach to my matches. By that, I mean I'd take more time, about three games, to really feel my opponent out and then come up with a plan. I'd decided that even though it was a pro set, I'd continue with that plan. I could afford to lose a couple of early games, I thought, if it came to that.
Well, it came to that. I was down 4-1, and on that changeover, I realized something. "Holy crap. The whole match is almost over!" And I went into overdrive and tried all kinds of tricks. Rushing the net. Drop shots. Slices. High loopy topspin. But in the process, I was making waaaay too many mistakes -- probably because I had one eye on the clock. After one too many missed backhands (and probably the easiest one I had all match), it was over. I'd lost the "match," 8-4. The news wasn't good for the rest of my team, either. None of us took well to the new format, and we lost 4-1.
I hadn't planned on attending the banquet, and I probably shouldn't have. Not because I got too wasted or stayed up too late -- I wasn't even on the Saturday morning lineup. But as I was leaving, our co-captain walks up to me, gets right in my face, tells me in as deadly a tone as you can get for someone who was just dancing to "It's Raining Men," that I needed to be at the courts at 8:45 tomorrow morning. And then stared me down! For real! There are witnesses! Now, we all know that last year, my lateness caused a bit of a problem for my team. I didn't realize that meant I could be scolded like a 4-year-old. I wasn't even in the lineup! So, more consternation.
The next morning, there's a message on my phone from Co-Captain Stalin, saying that I wasn't in the lineup (really?) and that "she wouldn't be upset with me" if I weren't there before 9 a.m.
Well, thank God.
Anyway, I got there to watch my team start three of five matches with a solid lead, only to lose them, and we were out 0-5 when it was all over. Yikes.
The second match, I was at first doubles with a teammate I had never played a match with before. Okay, I've tried to contain my frustration with the lineup thing, but I gotta get it out! I get it. You want everyone to play. Fine. But we are at PRINCETON! Allegedly, we spend ten hours round trip in a cramped vehicle to win. So why am I playing with someone for the first time HERE? And why, with the crappy-ass hand we were dealt, were we not rolling with the punches? In an 8-game pro set, there's no time to get a feel for your partner, and if you screwed up giving her the deuce side, well, then. That's that.
So, yeah, we lost, although we both played well, and had the chance to go up 5-4. My partner had been serving great, and after one of her service games, she walked up to the net, and I went back to the service line to fetch a ball. When I turned around I heard one of the opponents telling my partner, "I didn't want to say anything ..." and I was a bit curious. I asked her what they said, and she answered, "They said I was foot faulting." I could see it really bothered my partner even before her next service game, even though she tried to laugh it off. The next time she stepped up to the line, her serve had lost its sting and accuracy. On break point, she double-faulted AND the bitch, er, opponent called her on a foot fault. I, unlike Serena Williams, held my tongue but I did almost clock her with my racquet on the changeover. (Aaaand, yogahz, it turns out that in an officiated USTA match, an opponent is not allowed to call a foot fault. They can warn the server, which they did, and then they can call an official, who would call a foot fault.) Anyway, it was over from there. We went down pretty quickly and again, so did the rest of the team.
This left us at 0-3 in overall competition, and by extension, out of the running. This also left us in a very interesting situation. On Sunday, we normally would have had one match and then we all break for home. Now, we had two, including the makeup from Friday. Matches were slated to begin at 11 (outside, because now it was gorgeous after two rainy days. Nice. Reeeal nice.), and with the backlog of matches on the day, the second match would probably start no sooner than 3 p.m., which meant we'd hit the road at about 6 p.m. for a five-hour drive home. I wasn't in the first lineup, but I was in the second, and attempts to get into the first match failed. My captain called me and said that it'd be okay if I didn't want to stick around for the last match. Some people would probably debate with themselves loud and long. "Do I support the team?" "Do I leave early so I don't have to drive at night and so I can escape this hellish weekend?" "Should I tell my co-captain that she can stop being a bitch anytime she's ready?" "Should I find the tournament director and give her a piece of my mind?"
I left at 2 p.m., with my team ready to secure our first and only victory of the weekend, which made me feel good, especially because it was against the top team! As I was walking out, though, I happened to notice a little old lady sitting at a folding table, looking official. That was because she turned out to be the tournament director. Piece of my mind, here we go!
I introduced myself and explained to this lady that deciding who goes to nationals with an 8-game pro set was pretty effed up. I told her that I had played a 2 1/2-hour match just to get to New Jersey, and this seemed terribly unfair. She frowned at me and told me that the tournament was going to be finished, which would have happened no other way, although, she said, there was the idea of dividing teams into flights and playing a regular match. At that point, at hearing that there was a better choice, and that it was nixed, I wanted for the first time in my life to hit an old woman. No offense to old ladies (and when I'm one, I'll probably delete this post because I'll be more bitter than ever at that point because I'll probably still be a 3.5), but an 8-game pro-set setup pretty much ensured we'd be sending a bunch of blue-haired to Arizona to represent the Middle States, not necessarily the best team. She capped off her little lecture by saying I just wanted to complain, like everyone else. Then she just turned her back on me and started talking to someone else. True story.
So that was my experience at Princeton. I didn't think that if I made it back again, that it could potentially be worse than last year. Obviously, I'm frustrated with myself for not playing better. I still feel that in a real match, my chances would have been much better. But everyone had to play a pro set, so I can't complain too much. I can complain a little. But not playing for real sucked, and it wasn't worth a five-hour drive.
And then there's the matter of my team. I can't shake my team co-captain being a complete jerk all weekend, and as great as they are during the year, I have to ask myself if I want to still be part of this team. Given a little time, I can probably get past the whole taskmaster 'tude. But what if this happens again next year? I don't want to be on a team that's going to waste their chance at Princeton to let everyone play. And yes, if I was the worst person on the team, I'd feel the same way. I think we could have all played AND done better. It's always tough to lose when you feel like you had a chance to win. Those teams weren't better than we were. We played our cards wrong and got slaughtered. I think we'd make the same mistake again, and therein lies the problem. Is it wrong for me to tell this to my team captain? I'm still not sure, and as of now, I have yet to return a call to her because I don't know what I'll say. I'm still disappointed, and a little pissed. In the timeless words of Tina Fey, "Bluurgh!"
And now? Now, I get into winter tennis mode, in mixed doubles league. Hopefully, put this year behind me and do something about my drop shot, which can also be referred to as a drop lob. And think about something other than tennis and work.

P.S.: I'm watching a commercial for NCIS: Los Angeles. First, does anyone else think LL Cool J is too old to be going by LL Cool J? That was vaguely cool in the 80s. Second, is it now acceptable to come up with one good idea for a TV show, then slap a new name on it and make it another show? This is why I feel there should be a moratorium on new movies and television programs until someone comes up with a creative idea. I don't care how long it takes. Just give me a DVD of "The Wire" and I'm good.
Yeah, I'm in rare form today. I might need a nap.

From the "Just Kidding" Files ...

2009-09-21T19:53:00.005-04:00

Hear ye, hear ye:
From Yahoo! Sports – BRUSSELS (AP)—Former top-ranked player Justine Henin will announce her return to competitive tennis Tuesday, according to two top Belgian newspapers.
La Derniere Heure and Le Soir reported the comeback Monday
Her spokeswoman did not return phone calls and Henin’s Web site had no comment on the rumors.
Last year, Henin shocked the tennis world by announcing her retirement while still ranked No. 1.
As recently as May, she complained that the sport had left her with so many physical ailments that a return was unthinkable.
Henin, a goodwill ambassador for UNICEF, has begun training again, but has refused to comment on plans for a possible return over the past month.

Well, well, well. Looks like Justine couldn't let Kim all have all the glory. If true, this announcement is just more confirmation that anyone could take over at the top of women's tennis right now. Even the woman who left at the top, became a UNICEF spokeswoman and laid on the beach for about a year.
And again, if you're under 30, the word "retirement" should be stricken from your vocabulary. I get sick of my job sometimes, too . When that happens, I take a "vacation." Vay-CAT-shun. Learn it, Kim. Live it, Justine. Love it ... Steffi???
Intriguing. Discuss, everyone, discuss by all means ...

U.S. Open: Kiss your mother with that mouth?

2009-09-13T00:57:00.003-04:00

Watching the quite bizarre ending to the Serena Williams/Kim Clijsters match, I remembered Chris Rock's routine about O.J. Simpson where he says, "I'm not saying he should have killed her, but I understand."
I'm not saying Serena should have threatened to shove a tennis ball down someone's throat, but I understand. OK, line lady, you don't call a foot fault late in the second set in the semifinal of the U.S. Open unless it's obvious. No one in that stadium put down a hundred bucks for Ashe Stadium tickets to see the linespeople. Let the players play. Foot fault. From one of the best servers in women's tennis. Really?
Now, the aftermath: Dear lord, Serena. Now people actually did pay to see you play, not to go postal. I can understand being irritated enough to walk over and tell that woman, "Are you blind?" It's another thing entirely to say you'd kill her if you could. She goes back three times! Shut the hell up and get back to the match. And you have got to love Serena's denial about what she said at the end: "I never said I'd kill her!" No. You just said you'd shove a (censored) ball down her (censored) throat. Big difference. Right. It's like Jack Nicholson in "The Shining." "I'm not going to kill you, Wendy. I'm just going to bash your head in."
I also have to add this. Why do players get penalized for smashing racquets? It's a racquet! AAAnd, it's the player's racquet. Who's getting hurt by that? That's just one of the silliest rules in tennis.
Also silly (but a good silly) is the fact that Kim Clijsters takes about two years off from tennis, comes back about a month and a half ago and now is poised to win the U.S. Open. Now, she's shown she can still be good ol' streaky Kimmy (her scoreline against Venus: 6-0, 0-6, 6-4.) but she played a strong and smart match against Serena and would have probably won it even if Serena didn't get all ethnic out there. Please, please, please, Caroline Wosniacki, please give us a good woman's final on Sunday night.

U.S. Open: Ooo-ooh-ooh-Ou-DIN!

2009-09-07T23:02:00.004-04:00

I have a new mission in life. I will not stop until I find a dress that looks good on Nadia Petrova. So far, I can rule out ruffles, poofy sleeves, balloon dresses and the color mauve.
Perhaps the color yellow. After all, she had Melanie Oudin in the corner and she simply wimped out. At the point where Petrova stopped playing aggressive tennis and began to let herself get pushed around by a kid, at that point in the match at 4-2, it was actually harder for her to lose that match than to win it.
OK, maybe Oudin had something to do with it. Besides Petrova, she's knocked out Elena Dementieva and Maria Sharapova, who probably was the main source of her own undoing. But how does Oudin do it? I'm asking. I don't know. It's like a movie script with this Oudin girl -- and it would finally be a tennis movie I would watch, by the way. I am, however, heartened by another successful vertically challenged woman such as myself. So far, no conspiracies for Oudin, so I can root for her guilt-free, though (unlike Justine Henin).
Yellow, yellow, yellow. Perhaps it should be a significant part of the Russian flag. There was Vera Zvonareva last night having a nervous breakdown and literally beating the hell out of herself during her match with Flavia Pennetta. (So, at what point does a player say to themselves: "You know, I'm wearing more bandages than clothing. Should I sit this one out? I mean, really.) I thought Zvonareva was past the meltdown stage. Clearly she is not.
Of course, Svetlana Kuznetsova also did a nice job at choking a match against Caroline Wozniacki. I don't have anything against Wozniacki, but really? Her? Wozniacki is not exactly a big hitter, but she's got a heckuva pair. Big props to her. Back to Sveta, though. Here's another classic case of having to work harder to lose than to win. With a game and athleticism like Kuznetsova's, she should have been right in the mix at every Slam for about four years now. But no. She only comes through when she's facing other nervous Russians in Slams.
Like our world No. 1 Dinara Safina. She is like the queen of freaking out on court. I almost feel like Safina wakes up in the morning freaking out. Not necessarily about tennis, either. Just freaking out in general. Anyway, it's like she showed up to the Open thinking waay too hard about what everyone thinks about her being No. 1. Who cares? And who cares about getting your match moved from the main court? (Yes, James Blake and Tommy Robredo are no Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal, but neither is Safina v. Whoever-the-hell-she-let-beat-her. Sorry, girl. Fact is, just about any men's match will be higher quality than just about any women's match. It pains me to say that, but it's true.)
But, thanks to Oudin and Kim Clijsters, this women's tournament has got to be one of the best in recent memory. I just have a really bad feeling that Serena Williams is going to end up steamrolling somebody in 42 minutes in the final. Maybe it'll be Clijsters doing the steamrolling. Who knows? If it were Clijsters, I almost wouldn't mind it. Almost.

Open preview: Well, or not.

2009-08-30T23:54:00.002-04:00

No U.S. Open preview this year. I can't. Princeton was a nightmare, and I can't even bring myself to do it. But I will listen to your picks while I recover. For the record, I'm thinking Dementieva and Murray. Eh.

LEAGUE WATCH: Oh, hello, New Jersey. How are you?

2009-08-17T09:34:00.004-04:00

Right now, I'm sitting in the lobby of a Howard Johnson hotel at 8:44 a.m., blogging and watching the rain fall. Yeah, it's not supposed to be raining, but it is, and (I guess) sectionals will go on anyway.
While I'm waiting for my 11 a.m. start indoors, I suppose I have some time to catch LEAGUE WATCH up. When last we left, I was preparing for the playoffs. Which went well. I'll tell you about it.
Do you know what you get for winning your flight in the Allegheny Mountain District? You get an 8:30 a.m. start for your first playoff match. Hey, thanks. Where will I hang this?
Anyway, once again, I was awake at 6:30 in the morning to play tennis. And with not nearly enough sleep. (Ever know you have to wake up earlier and are so paranoid about it that you keep waking yourself up and when you do fall asleep, you dream that you overslept. Yeah.) I set up a coffee IV and left the house to hopefully kick some ass.
Of course, the rest of my team was there with bells on and we hit the courts to warm up. I'm spraying balls all over the place and I hit 20 serves before I got one of them in. Not exaggerating. Worst. Warmup. Ever. I was playing second doubles that morning and hitting with my partner, and she was being very cool, but I could tell she was terrified. Anyway, we hit the court and found a tough team awaiting us. Great. Couldn't wait 'til the second round, huh? Anyway, one definitely appeared to be stronger, with a flat and hard forehand and serve to match. The first warmup ball I hit to the other girl went to her backhand at the net and it went two courts over. Paydirt, I thought. So we picked up a 4-1 lead picking on that backhand and something bad happened. She got better at hitting it. Now both of them were playing well and getting EV-erything back. So a little nip here, a little tuck there, and before you know it, we're at 6-all. My partner and I ran away with it and on our way to start the second set, she said two words to me in a deadly serious tone: "No more." That is, no more games, no more mistakes -- it was time to assert our dominance. Her tone kind of scared me, and we went out to a 3-0 lead. At the next changeover, it was 3-2. Then they were up 4-2. My partner and I couldn't find a weakness anymore and we still weren't prepared for some of the shots that came back to us.
Manwhile, throughout our entire battle, I had been peeking up to see how the rest of the team was doing, but not to closely. Was a bit preoccupied. I knew we'd won our second singles match with ease and our third doubles match was wrapping up in our favor right next to us. We had just lost our first doubles and on first singles, they were locked in a tough second set.
When we switched sides, I looked up to where spectators would be and there were a couple of my teammates, giving me the thumbs-up and gushing. I returned the gesture. Hell, yeah, we can do it! And thanks for believing in us! What can I say? It was early. I had no idea what they were saying.
They did it again the next time we switched, and now we were down 5-6. I was locked in, and I looked up again and found surprisingly little team interest in our righteous struggle. But I did get the thumbs-up again, and this time, I realized we won the match! It didn't matter what happened in our match -- we were already through! Sweet!
But. I didn't really want to lose, and neither did my trusty partner. We did lose the second set 7-5, and ran up to take a break. I ran into supportive teammates and a hopeful future opponent -- my sister-in-law. She was playing in the opposite half of the draw and if her team advanced, I wanted to play her. I think I've gone over BallGate here in detail, but I was motivated. Plus, she was moving soon, and it would be my last chance to take her down. But, hey, still love her.
Back to the match. We were now joined by an umpire and we got started. It was more of the same. 2-all. 4-all. 6-all. 8-all. I thought it was about to be 10-all when I threw up a weak lob right at the net person. She dumped it into the net. Victory was ours!
Our team won, 4-1. We merely had to wait for our next opponents. We went to lunch to bask in our victory and returned to see the conclusion of the other half. My sister-in-law looked a lot better than I remembered out on court. She was poaching and forcing errors. Her partner? Eh. They were locked in a second-set tiebreaker against the other team from our division, a team (if this is possible) made up entirely of slicers. I don't think anyone on that team was capable of hitting with any topspin. Anyhow, my SIL double-faults twice in the tiebreaker and her team loses, which meant her team lost in the playoffs. Sigh. Maybe some other time ...
Well, at least our next opponents were familiar to us. We had won the last matchup against them, but I had lost a terrible singles match against some old dumpy lady I should have beaten. Speaking of, she was now my opponent in third doubles -- and half of the same team that had just beaten my sister-in-law. I had my same partner, and I was ready for some revenge. We had the perfect balance against this team -- I hit deep shots with plenty of topspin, and my partner had the cutting slice and aggressive net play. We beat them 6-1, 6-1 and notched one win for the good guys. Plus, no one beats Naf twice in a row. That's actually not true. At least that lady didn't!
As a result of our lengthy match earlier, we had set the next matches back, and so our second singles player wasn't even on court yet. The first singles match was a tussle, and our first singles team made it a valiant fight, but lost in straight sets. Soon the second dubs finished up with a win for us, which left us up 2-1 with one match being played and another yet to start. So, our second singles player began to freak out a bit, and we all began to watch the other singles match with much interest. They had split sets and were playing a back-and-forth tiebreaker. The umpire had joined them, as he did for all stupid tiebreakers. And it was sort of a good thing he was there.
At around 13-12 or something like that in favor of our girl, she served to her opponent. The receiver said in response, "I think that's out." Our teammate looked up to the umpire for confirmation, and he said, "That's good. Game, set, match." Whoa. Now, to this day, we still go back and forth as to if that ball was out. Half of us said yes, half said no. It didn't matter. We still screamed like idiots because WE WERE GOING TO PRINCETON!!! I did feel bad for the other girl, who stormed off. Later, the umpire would say that not only did he see the ball in, but admitted that the flimsiness of the call influenced his decision as well. If you're not sure, he said, it's in. Count that a lesson, league warriors.
We ended up winning our match 4-1, which leaves us here in rainy New Jersey. I'm about to start my second cup of coffee and head out to meet my team. We don't know what awaits us, as far as opponents or surface. I hope hope hope it's not har-tru. Yeah, I know it's good on the body.
Off to battle. Woo!

More evidence that women's tennis needs help

2009-08-10T21:08:00.003-04:00

Right now, Kim Clijsters is three points from taking down Marion "Candy" Bartoli in Cincinnati in her first match back. Yes, you can be a female professional tennis player right now (and fresh off a tournament win) and still lose to a woman who just had a baby. Look, Chris Evert could get back into the top 20 right now. True story.
Seriously, it's great to see Kim back. Vote in the poll.

LEAGUE WATCH: "The worm has turned for you."

2009-07-31T23:27:00.002-04:00

Lately, all my matches have followed a similar theme. I start out well in the first set, sometimes even winning it, then "take a personal set" and then - at just when I used to need to talk myself down - I think. At the tightest points I've been playing lately, and sometimes in the middle of a point, I just breathe. Then I do what I need to do by going back to the strategy and just making it happen.
I guess the best example of this was my team's last USTA match of the season. It was a pretty big deal. We win and we are in. As in, in the division playoffs. We get a spot in a four-team, one-day competition for a spot in Princeton for sectionals. We lose, and we're done for the season. So, although the team we were up against wasn't the toughest, the scenario might make a few racquets a bit heavier.
I had to admit to a few nerves, but I swear, every time I get nervous, I think of the last time I got nervous and choked away a match, and I toughen right up. I was back at singles, and my opponent was a solid-enough player, and really liked to crush balls midcourt. So, simple plan. Keep the ball deep.
I was feeling pretty comfortable at the beginning, and peeked down to check on everyone else. Down the line, all our teams were up. Yes! So I win the first set, 6-2, (amid my opponent's annoying "habit". Every time I had a sitter that was mine to put away, she would start squeaking her shoes, just as I was about to swing. "Oh, but Naf, she's just a noisy runner. Can't help that." Yeah, but she wasn't going anywhere! She's just standing in place, and obviously following this line of reasoning: "Well, damn it. I just messed up and gave her an easy ball, which was a mistake on my part. I've already effed up my shot, but if I try to distract her while she's hitting, it'll stop her from making the shot, and then I'll win the point anyway. It'd be nice if I could win on my skill, but since I can't, might as well use my sneakers. My, that IS annoying!")and checked in on my team again. Well, my teammate in singles had also won the first set, but was now down a break, and farther down, our first doubles team was struggling. Same with the third. But, the second dubs was looking solid. Anyway, I got back to business and built a modest lead. A few minutes later, our second doubles team walked off with a win. One down, two to go to win the match. Oop, one. Somehow, my teammate on the other singles court had turned it around and come back in the second set to win 6-4.
Back to it. I'm up in the second against Squeaky, and I look up to find our first court doubles were finished. But did they win? I looked up at the spectators from our team for a sign, and got nothing, so I kept playing. At the changeover, I was up 3-2, and I looked up at my team. They gave the thumbs-up. WOO! WE ARE IN!!
Which rendered my match meaningless. And I was fine with that. More than fine. I saw my teammates busting out the margarita bucket, and I wanted to stop! I was so relieved that my team had won that at the next changeover, I noticed that the score of my match was now 3-4. Don't ask me how, but now I was down in the second set and had put myself in an interesting spot. I wanted to hurry up and get off the court and celebrate, but now, I'd increased my chances of playing three sets. Sigh. Back to it.
It wasn't really that tough - keep the ball team, ignore the squeaking and run her all over the place. (Have you ever looked at your opponent in a match and seen a beet-red face and heavy breathing and thought: "Hell, yeah!") But here was the cool part: So, we're at deuce at 4-all, and we're both running back and forth during a point. In the middle of the point, I thought to myself, "Well, what's the hurry. Just take it easy and set up the point." And I did it - adjusted in the middle of a rally, and I stayed on course for a straight-set win. And a MARGARITA!
So, all told, we won the match, 5-0, which earned us a spot in the divisional playoffs on Sunday. As followers of League Watch know, that was not the road we started on as a team. We started out struggling, but steadied ourselves just in time and ran the tables. We went from middle of the pack to blasting our way into the playoffs. Sweet. But.
There are two open spots in our flight. One of the teams in our flight had gone undefeated for most of the season and all of us had just assumed they'd get the first spot. While we were making our push, the undefeated team lost their last two matches, which dropped them into a four-way tie for first place with us, among others. However, the next tiebreaker is matches won, and the previously undefeated team came up with the third-most matches, which cost them a spot in the playoffs. (Yeah, that'll leave a mark.) The team with the most matches won? That'd be us! Not only did come back from a slow start to make the playoffs, we finished first in our flight!
So that was unexpected. And awesome. You know what they say. It's not how you start, it's how you finish. We'll find out on Sunday how we finish, but I swear, I can smell Jersey from here. And believe me, I'd know that smell anywhere.

LEAGUE WATCH: The final countdown!

2009-07-22T21:30:00.002-04:00

In life, one has to visualize goals. It allegedly helps. So, one more time, with feeling, are my tennis goals for my USTA season:
1. To make it back to Princeton -- and to win maybe two matches this time.
2. To get moved up to the 4.0 level.
3. To win (the rest of) my matches and utterly dominate all my opponents.
I gotta admit, my last league loss is still staying with me -- but in a good way. It doesn't hurt as bad, but every time I find myself in a tight situation, I realize that it's more important to play my game than to win like a scaredy-cat. This has come in handy in the matches since my last team loss.
Quick recap:
Y-Not: Our next match was against the undefeated YMCA team. Again, I knew a lot of them from another weekday league. Basically, we needed this match. With two losses, we were down, but not out -- as long as we could get the rest of the field to come back to us a bit. So beating the Y was key. My captain made a key change to the regular lineup and moved me to line one doubles. I was relieved. In the winter, I'd been playing so much dubs, and I felt more comfortable there. I could tell you all about it, but I'm going to let my team captain, Lyn, do the honors:

"Bev and Nafari also won their first set pretty easily—6-3 and started their second set. Their opponents started playing much better and I moved away from their court when they were losing 4-1—this is way too painful for a Captain to sit and watch! I headed for the bathroom.
After three trips to the bathroom with diarrhea, Marla and Vicki were down 4-3 in their second set. Bev and Nafari were still losing 4-3. Wait . . . what is this???? Donna and Karol are shaking hands . . . . they won!!! 6-3! That means—we won too! We beat the Y!
One more trip to the bathroom and back to Bev’s and Nafari’s match.
I’m not sure how this happened but all of a sudden their score shows us winning 5-4! Is it possible we could beat the Y 4-1??? Yep, we could and soon Bev and Nafari were hugging on the court and jumping around."

Now, that was sweet. First, nice to get the monkey off the back and get a win. Second, nice to have someone on court with you to release some of that pressure. Third, I wasn't the reason our team sucked it anymore! That was also nice. And for the record, we went 5-0 in that win -- whitewashing an undefeated team AND saving our chances for playoffs.
Next up:
Mt. Lebo: Not one of the tough teams in our league, so the key here was not to drop any matches. I was back at first singles, and my opponent was one of my practice partners from back in the day. Here's how comfortable I was. I won the first set, 6-0, and the first game of the second set before my opponent decided she needed some more water. I accompanied her and before I knew it, we were shooting the breeze with everyone we ran into. We were gone for about 20 minutes. We resumed the match and I dropped three games on the way to another 5-0 win. So far, so good. Were we on a roll, or were we just lucky? Our next match would be a stern test.
The Hills are alive? The next team was usually right in the mix of our league division, but like us, they were struggling a bit this year. Still, our teams always had tough matches. Once again, I was back at first doubles, and as we walked to the court, my partner told me she had played our opponents a few days earlier and went three tough sets before they won. I decided to myself I wasn't going to go three sets with them. We didn't, and we won in two fairly easy sets. And for once, I was the first one to finish! Huge relief. Anyway, we dropped one match on the way to victory. Can't be sure, but it's almost a legitimate roll now. Meantime, looking at the league standings, we'd moved into third place, behind one last undefeated team and another with just one loss. We still needed some things to happen to break our way. It's certainly not ideal to not be in control of your own destiny, but if we did our part, anything could happen. Right? Ri-ight!
West Virginia! Road trip for my team, but I was taking the week off. Which actually is more nerve-wracking than playing when you, in theory, are still in the playoff hunt. I'm at Highland Park, playing with my homies, and wondering what happened. Why won't anyone e-mail me? Until I got a text from my teammate that said one thing: Johnstown lost! Let me help you -- Johnstown was the one-loss team we needed to catch. They lost! Which put us in a tie for second place, but our match wins gave us the edge in wins -- if we beat the West Virginia team, which we did. 5-0! Crazy! What's next?
Default: Anticlimatic, but our next team opponents defaulted the match, which gave us yet another 5-0 win. Aah, no one want to win with defaults. Do they?
So we want to play now. We've got one match left and it's coming up Sunday. Our last match won't be a pushover, but it's doable. The standings: We are in second place, solid. For now. The last undefeated team finally lost, but they're safe as long as they win. There are two slots for the division playoffs. We're in the driver's seat for one of them. All we have to do is win. It's been a crazy road, and it's not over yet, but isn't this why we're on the ride? For the journey? We hope it takes us to Princeton, or at least the division playoffs. But this is the fun part -- the suspense and the fact that it's in your hands. There are so many parts of life -- work, family, etc. -- when it's not in your hands. I guess that's what's great about sport -- the fact that it's all on you. If you fail, you have no one else to blame but yourself (which sucks). But if you succeed, man, is it sweet.
So. Back to those goals:
1. To make it back to Princeton -- and to win maybe two matches this time.
2. To get moved up to the 4.0 level.
3. To win (the rest of) my matches and utterly dominate all my opponents.
We shall see. We shall see.

What you get for kissing strange women ...

2009-07-16T09:58:00.000-04:00

Dis-cuss!

July 5, 2009: The Day Andy Roddick Became a Man

2009-07-05T13:54:00.004-04:00

Everyone likes to say that Andy Roddick was unfortunate to play in an era with the likes of Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal. Without them, they say, Roddick could be the holder of multiple Slams. Maybe.
Maybe he should have been anyway. Let's be realistic: Had Roddick been working to vary his game in the days of Tarik Benhabiles, he could have already been able to throw in a U.S. Open, maybe an Australian, definitely a Wimbledon.
It took him a while to get on the bus, and get to work on his game, but he did it. And because he chose to get to work at this stage in his career, and chose not to be just another top 10 or 20 for the rest of his career, he deserves a reward.
Yesterday, he played well enough to get it, but still came up short. He finally played the kind of tennis in this tournament that everyone thought he could have been playing his whole career. What does he get for it?
Well, that's the interesting part. Roddick gets possibly the most painful loss of his career, but he also gets -- the most motivational loss of his career. Every champion -- Rod Laver, John MacEnroe, Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras and Roger Federer -- have had that loss that's just like a kick in the stomach. For all of those men, that loss propelled them to never feel that way again. It brings the champion out of them. (And don't tell me Federer wasn't thinking of a specific Wimbledon loss in the late stages of Sunday's final.) If there's still a major to be had for Roddick, this loss is the thing that brings it out of him. Losing that match could be the best thing for Roddick's career -- especially if he goes back to the practice courts determined to learn how to volley. Really, now, with a serve like Roddick's, how do you not follow that to net and win matches in about 35-40 minutes?? Anyway, losing Wimbledon the way he did might leave a mark now, but it'll put some (more) hair on his chest.
As for Federer, well, look. Sampras didn't show up to Wimbledon at the last minute to see Andy Roddick. Sampras knew he'd win, and for good reason. As long as Rafa Nadal's not on the other side, Federer's got that bad boy done. Federer's come a long way, hasn't he, from the man who was practically weeping on Nadal's shoulder in January. Now, he's back on top of the tennis world, is the best player ever if you use Grand Slams to gauge that sort of thing AND now is the holder of two majors this year. And most importantly, Federer has finally won a major without collapsing on the ground in tears.
In other Wimby news, Serena Williams is racking up the majors, isn't she? Must be nice to play an opponent who walks up to the net at the beginning of the second set with a covered dish in hand, gestures at you to move closer, then removes the lid to just gives you the match on a silver platter. Brilliant. So glad I got up early to watch Venus Williams implode when it counted, especially after playing such a nice tournament.
Sigh. I don't know what I expected from the women.

The Big "W": What? No rain? and other observations

2009-07-02T21:16:00.003-04:00

OK, I haven't been blogging, but I have been playing lots o' tennis! Which is better, right? (More on that coming up in "League Watch."
Oh, and watching a lot of tennis. So much tennis that I've been averaging about 45 minutes later to work trying to watch this. Moving on:
1. Ever seen a 347-pound woman wearing stretch pants? You wonder, "Why would you do that to yourself? You look like a (insert wildly hilarious comparison here)!" Consider, friends, the case of Nadia Petrova. What the EFF was she wearing to Wimbledon?? Here's the thing I'm sure she's not picked up on yet -- not everyone can wear everything. It's a matter of body type. There is a tennis outfit that looks good on her. There has to be, just because of the sheer volume of tennis clothes out there. Is it a burlap sack? Maybe. You don't just discount those options, Nadia. What you especially don't do is walk out of the house wearing something that looks like you're wearing feathers on your ass and that is randomly spewing ruffles. It doesn't matter how well you play, either. Everyone's just busy wondering why. Why, Nadia?
This is why Wimbledon might consider an adjustment to its clothing policy for players. Just because it's white doesn't mean you should wear it.
2. And then there's Dinara Safina. Two-parter: First, if you are losing the battle between tennis and chocolate, then you're gonna need a top that covers the battleground. Listen, girl, no one wants to see the flab. Cover it up, son! Second, until her match today with Venus, I was very impressed with Safina's play through the tournament. In that Lisicki match, as in countless recent others, I could see a glimpse of a Safina who had overcome and played through the jitters. You know, raising the level of her tennis when her back was against the wall, only to come out on top. And you begin to feel as though she could do it -- she could step up her game and get that Slam! And then she rolls over in big matches like my lab who just wants to be petted. It's a matter of time for sure, but it's sort of painful to watch sometimes.
3. Biggest surprise so far? Not Novak Djokovic getting handled by Tommy Haas (have I mentioned before how unfortunate it is that Haas never got his Slam?) or Jelena Jankovic losing to a 17-year-old American (OK, stop sentence! We all know how much of a drama queen Jankovic is -- mostly, it even offers a bit of amusement. But when you blame a loss on your "woman troubles"? That's not crossing the line. It's just pretending there was never one. Gross! No one wants to hear that! Even if it's true!! Yikes. Pop a Midol and call me in August.). It's Elena Dementieva taking Serena Williams to three tight sets using ... drumroll ... her serve! Not even the sneaky underhand serves! Real, well-placed, hard serves! First and second!! It's nice to see that finally, Dementieva is really developing a serve to go with the rest of her great game. To do it on grass should be a huge boon to her. Maybe she can get that major one day. She should be able to now. After all, she doesn't have to play against the likes of Anastasia Myskina.
4. Venus v. Serena: Venus. Easy.
5. And then there's Andy Roddick. Can he beat Andy Murray? Yes. Will he beat Andy Murray? Doubt it. I think the reason is simple. Murray is a well-rounded player who can absorb power, dole some out and has unbelievable touch. He also moves like a freakin' deer. Roddick is trying to become a well-rounded player who still can't volley. (Here at TWA, you have to earn your title of "Andy the Butcher.") Yes, it's Wimbledon and he can always Ivo-Karlovic his way through a draw, but not against a returner like Murray. And then there's this talk of pressure for Murray. And maybe it played a role against Stan Wawrinka. But it sure seems to me that he's embracing that pressure. Why else would you show up to Wimbledon wearing Fred Perry gear? So, I'm going with Murray and I think he's looking good. I would even give him an edge in the final, where he'd face ...
6. Roger Federer. Probably. OK, yes, for sure. In my heart, though, I want Haas to win. Is that really so wrong? Haas has been all over the place in his career, including near the very top of the game. He's always had such a beautiful game, and it's too bad injuries had to derail that. At the French, and here, he's shown he can still compete with the big boys. Here's hoping it lasts a while.
7. Is Djokovic becoming a head case? Vote in the poll.
8. Oh, and I almost forgot. James Blake out in the first round? Of one of Slams the Americans focus on instead of the French? Because it's more important? Sigh. Would it be wrong to suggest Blake needs another coach?

The Big "W": The big preview

2009-06-21T19:47:00.004-04:00

I am pretty depressed that Rafa Nadal is sitting out this Wimbledon, especially considering last year's epic. So the preview this time will be different. How? Well, I guess you'll just have to read on to find out ...

The men
The way it'll go down:
Quarterfinals: Andy Roddick v. Juan Martin del Potro, Andy Murray v. Fernando Gonzalez, Tommy Haas v. Novak Djokovic, JoJo Tsonga v. Roger Federer
Semifinals: del Potro v. Murray, Djokovic v. Federer
Final: Murray v. Federer
Winner: Murray ...?
Yeah, I'm off the charts! OK, first of all, I believe in Andy Murray. Kind of. I've listened to all my tennis buddies trash him for the last few days, and enough is enough. Yes, the British pressure to win Wimby just about killed Tim Henman, but Andy Murray is a more complete player than Tim Henman. However, he is playing in a time when men's tennis is unbelievably deep. But without Nadal, the top half is wide open. There is Andy Roddick, who flourishes at Wimbledon, but does he have the confidence of recent success against the big boys? Like del Potro? Like Murray? Del Potro would really have to alter his game, shorten those swings, improve that movement to be a force on grass. Murray's the best player left in the top half. The big question will be the pressure for Murray. In the bottom half, Fed is easily the most established there -- certainly on grass. Djokovic would have to show me something on grass in order to have any part of the second week of the draw.
Which leaves us with Murray and Federer as the last men standing. In such a (hypothetical for now) situation, both would be playing under a great deal of pressure. This is what I've come to, folks. I'm now trying to envision a final that could even approach last year's final. (Now, that's some pressure.) Once can only hope.
Come back, Rafa!

The ladies
Quarterfinals: Amelie Mauresmo v. Caroline Wozniakcki, Venus Williams v. Jelena Jankovic, Razzano v. Dementieva, Azarenka v. Serena Williams
Semifinals: Mauresmo v. Venus, Razzano v. Serena
Final: Venus v. Serena
Winner: Venus
Let's just start by saying here that there are some floaters out there. Maria Sharapova especially. She is still knocking off some rust, but she has a favorable draw, with Nadia Petrova and Azarenka looming. So those could go either way depending on the shoulder. Obviously, I favor Azarenka.
While I'm not willing to just give the title to Venus, really ... who's going to beat her? Jankovic? Grass is Venus' thing, but I have problems with fully endorsing her candidacy. I just don't get it -- how can you play aggressively on one surface, and the rest of the Slams, you don't look like the same person? Why wouldn't aggression work for Venus on any other surface, especially considering her serve? It's frustrating to me, but not quite enough to discount Venus. She's the hesitant favorite because anything can happen in the women's draw and because Dinara Safina is not yet ready to deal with Slam nerves.

LEAGUE WATCH: Three reasons to hate tennis

2009-06-07T16:55:00.003-04:00

Last Saturday, I found myself in a strange place during my team's league match.
Bed.
As per the predetermined schedule, I was sitting for the match, and to be honest, I didn't really mind at first. I couldn't remember the last time I'd started a league season with two straight losses. OK, I can. But one good year has spoiled me, and I expect nothing but the best from myself.
Plus, my second loss was a 6-2, 6-2 beatdown by an old lady who "sliced and diced me to death" -- her words. My words for that match probably involve some language not suitable for a family blog. I spent about an hour in that match running after balls and wondering why I wasn't the one standing in the middle of the court dictating play.
So I needed a week off. In that time, I had been playing more singles, doubles and improving my serve. I was feeling good going into yesterday's match.
What really sweetened the pot for this match was the opposing team -- most of my friends from my home court over at Highland Park. I had also been asked to join this team when it was established this year, but had already committed to my team. So there was a little friendly rivalry.
In warming up with my opponent, I was grateful for two things. First, I didn't know her. I can never play well against my friends. Second, she was hitting the ball. My first two matches were against lobbers (who, I feel, have a special cubbyhole in hell) and while her pace was a bit tough, I still felt it was a matchup I could handle. I felt as though my mind was engaged -- a major departure from my first match.
I jumped out to a 5-2 lead, and found myself getting really tight. My opponent, meanwhile, had taken to hitting lobs. High, arcing, baseline-kissing lobs. And, I, in my supreme idiocy, began lobbing back, pushing the ball around, hoping she'd start missing balls again. I dropped the next two games, but tried to talk myself down. "All you have to do is win this game," I told myself. "No pressure."
So.
In response to myself, I double faulted a couple times in my next service game and took the set to 5-all. Oh, and then I had to serve to get INTO A TIEBREAK FOR A SET IN WHICH I WAS UP 5-2. Oh, yes. That was also awesome.
OK, tiebreak. I build a 4-2 lead, and then make two unbelievably stupid mistakes, including an attempted drop-shot return at 4-3. Guess where that went. If you guessed the net, then you'd be right. And things got really tight after that. We switched sides at 6-6, and one point later, I was serving down 6-7. My second serve plopped right into the net.
To say I was a little, er, miffed, would be understating it. But as the second set began, a couple of my teammates were there to encourage me, telling me I was looking good and that it was all mine. It helped, as corny as it might sound. It also allowed me to relax enough to think about the debacle that had been the first set. I realized that the points toward the end had been far too short -- because I was ending them in errors. I felt I needed to keep the ball in play, go for winners inside the service line and use my burgeoning slice, which my opponent seemed to dump into the net. Speaking of the net, all my misses were landing there, and I encouraged myself to hit out, and if they were long, it was better than the net.
I made a special effort to move my feet (which always stop when I get nervous) and began to hit my shots. I waited for the ball to get to me and attacked the backhand side of my opponent, and put more on my serve. When the ball was short in the court, I moved in carefully and ran around my backhand to hit a better shot. The points were longer, but I was winning most of them, and the second set ended in my favor at 6-1.
The third set was more of the same. Until, that is, I went up 5-2. Now, at this point, there were two matches left -- my match and the other singles. All the doubles had ended, and our team had split 2-1. All we needed was one more match, and we would win. And we needed this win. We were 2-1 in overall standings, and although we have a playoff system, the goal is to keep the "L" column low. So, we needed this.
It's probably not the best thing that I was thinking all this while I was standing at the service line. I peeked over at the score in the other match, and we were up, but it was still close. My goal was to get all my serves in and to be careful. My opponent, meanwhile, hadn't hit a groundstroke since late in the second set, and was now opening her racquet face (the way you would to balance three balls on your racquet head) and pushing everything. Everything. She was remarkably good at this, keeping most balls deep and in corners. She wasn't missing much, except when she stumbled coming in or when she pushed one long. Anyway, I got anxious and went away from the plan. I went back to pushing with her, watching balls land short, but not pursing them because I was afraid I'd miss. And again, I found myself with a dwindling lead. 5-3. 5-4. 6-5. I lost every game. Meanwhile, the other singles match had ended, and I could tell my the cheers of the opposing them that it was all on me.
And I blinked.
One double-fault, a wayward forehand and a two-handed backhand volley that landed wide, and I was down 3-0. I got it to 4-2 with a running passing shot, but it was the last good contact I had with the ball. I tried to calm myself, convince myself to get back to the plan, when I stood to serve, down 3-6. I eased in a second serve and then hit a forehand while stumbling backwards. I knew it would be long.
Nearly three hours later, I had lost a match that I had multiple opportunities to win. And even now, it makes my stomach turn. This one's going to stay with me for some time, I think. I know why -- I've never thrown a match away before. Obviously, I've come out with my back to the wall and lost that. I've also been in real tussles with equal players, but never been unable to convert match points or match games when I had them. I felt I wasn't being outplayed -- my opponent played as scared as I did. If you have that many chances to win and come away with a loss, it's because of you. It's disappointing, because I had a great year last year, and thought I was past the yips. More painful is that I can visualize the points in hindsight where if I had done something else -- no drop shot return in the first set, not quitting on a point because I thought my shot was going out -- that would have made a huge difference. I choked, and that's hard to swallow.
So. It really sucked to have to write this. And as bad as I feel right now, I know the only thing that will make it go away is to play again, to win again. I have to get back on the horse. And there's no better way than to start at the beginning, with my goals for the season:
1. To make it back to Princeton -- and to win maybe two matches this time. (With this team loss, this one's almost completely out of our hands at this point -- everyone would need to lose twice for us to get back in the race. But ... you play to win the game, right, Herminator?)
2. To get moved up to the 4.0 level. (ri-ight)
3. To win (the rest of) my matches and utterly dominate all my opponents. (Stop laughing.)

FO'09: Android malfunction!

2009-05-31T19:32:00.001-04:00

OK, my mouth is still hanging open, so it's a good thing this is a blog.
It had to happen sometime, I guess. Nadal couldn't go undefeated at the French Open forever. But to have to lose to Robin Soderling? The same guy who openly mocked his wedgie issue at Wimbledon a couple years back? The guy who's going to lose in the next round?
This is really the worst part of the whole thing. You lose to the Fed, or to Djokovic (another disappointment -- what is the deal with Philip Kohlschrieber? I mean, this guy shows up to a Slam about once every five years) or even Andy Murray, and that's respectable. But such is life, no? The lesson here is clear: You have to beat all comers. Later, Rafa.
Now, this begs the question: Who wins the French Open? The obvious choice is Roger Federer. He has Tommy Haas next, then either Andy Roddick or GAEL MONFILS. I'm giving the slight edge there to Monfils. But even if Roddick won ... please. He ain't beating anyone good on clay. We're not quite that far into the alternate reality world yet. I think. In the top half, Andy Murray is looking really strong. And may I add that it's really nice to see Alex Corretja again? I've always been a fan and it was really smart of Murray to hire a successful clay court expert. Plus, he just seems like a nice guy. Back to the draw: The top half has fallen apart for Murray. It's just up to him to get past Fernando Gonzalez, and he's in the final. The real dogfights will happen in the bottom half, with Jo-Jo Tsonga and Juan Del Potro to do battle as well. It'll be interesting to see how this will unfold.
On to the women. Shockingly, Ana Ivanovic, defending FO champion, got her ass kicked by Victoria Azarenka. Meanwhile, Dinara Safina continues through the draw as though she has a hot date in 15. Next victim is Azarenka. Should be interesting. Over-under, people, on the games Azarenka gets? I say six.
Maria Sharapova is still around. I figured Na Li would take her shoulder out of its misery today. Should she advance, sure would be interesting to see what would happen against Safina.
In doubles, the Williams sisters lost to Bethanie Mattek-Sands and Nadia Petrova, and I just want to give BMS some props. She was the best player on the court! It's nice to see a team win in doubles on guile rather than brute strength. Not that there's anything wrong with brute strength.

FO'09: Hold that plane, James ...

2009-05-29T19:55:00.003-04:00

6-0?
Really, Venus, Really?
Really?
Let's face it -- time is running out for Venus Williams to win the French or Australia. Losing today to Agnes Szavay (who ain't winning this tournament) 6-0, 6-4 (?) obviously is not encouraging. Getting pushed to three sets by Bethanie Mattek and Lucie Safarova isn't good, either. While it's good to know that she could win Wimbledon the day after waking up from a three-year coma if she had to, it's really time for her and her crew to figure out why she can't win a major in the first five months of the year. To me, Australia is the most perplexing. She actually is trying to play more tennis before that tournament, but no luck. I read an interview with her mother Oracene "Sideshow Bob Hair" Price in which she said Venus was focused at this point on winning those elusive Slams, which made me hope. Then I heard Richard Williams say she had a knee injury, and that made me realize that I actually hadn't been missing Richard Williams.
At least she beat Szavay in doubles. I've lost to the same person the same day in singles and doubles. Ain't fun.
Moving on, Maria Sharapova! OK, if there's anyone who would be forgiven for slinking out of an early round match, it'd be her. But for the third time, she pulled out a win in three today. This prompted my husband to note that Sharapova's will to win is stronger than anyone on the women's tour. Which made me look at him like he'd sprouted a second head. Hello? Serena?? Anyway, vote in the poll.

FO'09: Oh, Lord, Marat.

2009-05-27T18:23:00.002-04:00

I'm crushed over this. What's the point of coming back from two sets down just to lose in overtime? I don't know how ready Safin really is for retirement, but I'm ready for it. Grr.
The other thing I have to get off my chest is James Blake. That might not have come out right. All right, kids, heads out of the gutter. Seriously, so he loses in straight sets to someone who's never played in a major before! This guy he loses to, Mayer, doesn't even have a cool name like Maximo Gonzalez! No one's surprised to see Blake, or any other American, fall on their face in Paris. But what Blake had to say about it really was somewhat intriguing. In a bad way.
In case you missed it, Blake said the reason Americans don't do well at Roland Garros is because it isn't a priority. Apparently, they are more focused on their strengths -- the U.S. Open and Wimbledon.
Really. So ... when was the last time an American even sniffed an Open or Wimbledon trophy? Maybe in the locker room when Blake was passing Roger Federer. Ooh. I'll always think of Blake as an underachiever, but I've always respected him as an intelligent kind of guy. But to me, this goes down in the "Grass is for cows" comment from ol' crazy eyes Marat. Look, if you suck on clay and you don't know why, then just say that. Don't say that you and Andy Roddick and Mardy Fish don't care, and that you're warming up to lose in the quarters to Novak Djokovic at Wimbledon. Really disappointing from Blake.
I can't leave with all this anger. So, let's end on a good and sad note. Fabrice Santoro also lost today and has played his last French Open. Despite the fact he's never won a Slam and never will, Santoro is a class act. He's shown us that you don't have to bludgeon a ball to play high-quality tennis. Although, in retrospect, it was the heavy hitters who had him for lunch all the time. Regardless, fare thee well, Fabrice. I shall cheer for you.
There. That's better.

FO’09: “A double bagel is fine. I had one last week. It’s nothing new.” – Rainer Schuettler

2009-05-26T15:41:00.001-04:00

Well, I know one German who sounds like he’s already thinking retirement.
Moving on, the period of American domination of failure at the French Open continues, at least for the men. Serena Williams eked through in three sets today and right now, she and her sister are battling through their first round of doubles.
But back to the men. Down went Bobby Reynolds (Gael Monfils), Mardy Fish (Maximo Gonzalez (coolest name ever!)) and probably James Blake (some guy named Leonardo Mayer is two points from a straight-sets win). Really, we (Americans) have the discussion every year: How can we get better red clay results? I don’t really feel like theorizing about it this year. It’s exhausting. But if anyone has any ideas, I’m all keyboard.
Another notable match today was a battle of the has-beens: Jelena Dokic v. Karolina Sprem (who never quite did enough to fill up her 15 minutes of fame. She had, like, eight minutes, tops). Anyway, Dokic came through in three sets. Caroline Wozniacki polished off Vera Dushevina with surprising ease, considering she was down a set and a break halfway through the match yesterday.

FO'09: How do you say "Oh, snap!" in French?

2009-05-25T12:02:00.002-04:00

Oh, those French.
I'm watching Marion Bartoli take on Pauline Parmentier right now. Every time the French comes back around, I am stunned by the production differences. For instance? A close-up of Parmentier wiping her chin with her wristband -- in slow motion. Are we watching tennis or a model shoot? For the French, I suppose there's no difference. Why limit yourself, right?
Anyway, a few minor upsets so far, mainly Amelie Mauresmo, who had been looking good this year. She lost to Anna-Lena Groenefeld, who herself is on a comeback trail from injury and coach drama. Normally, I get on the case of the not-so-fit player, but I get the feeling Groenefeld's heard it before from her peach of an ex-coach. (Oh, and, uh, way to go Meghann Shaughnessy. You scored.)
Flavia Pennetta just lost 6-1, 6-1 to Alexa Glatch. From America. Seriously.
And if you want an idea about the direction of Venus Williams' FO campaign, she had to go three with Bethanie Mattek-Sands (looking remarkably unremarkable -- no aluminum foil outfits or anything!). Yeah, it's just the first round, but other mid-roaders like Lucie Safarova and Agnes Szavay are looming in the next couple rounds. Just saying.
Maria Sharapova also won today. Still am not quite understanding why you'd make your first major tournament back from injury the French Open. Well, that shoulder'll get a workout, that's fo' sho'.

FO'09: The men

2009-05-23T23:51:00.002-04:00

So you're asking yourself: What's the point? Nadal's going to win anyway. Probably true. But what's interesting is what's happening in the No. 2-4 positions on clay this season. Yeah, Fed just got a win on Nadal in Madrid, but the real problem for Rafa is Djokovic right now. Put on your safety belts!

1. Rafael Nadal: OK, so let's pretend for a second that Nadal is human, and not the android that he is. If he were human, he might find Ivo Karlovic a problem in the third round. Or the "Hot Truth," Fernando Verdasco, in the quarters. In reality, he's on warmup mode until the semifinals.
2. Roger Federer: Roger's status as the second-best clay courter in town is in doubt, quite frankly. Does anyone else here think he's going to beat Novak Djokovic in the semis?
3. Andy Murray: Not so impressive this clay season. I could see him continuing that trend in the quarters.
4. Novak Djokovic: If Nadal were human, and not the android that he is, and therefore capable of losing this tournament, I would then conclude that Novak Djokovic would win the French Open. If.
5. Juan Martin Del Potro: Nice win against Murray in Madrid. But if anything, Del Potro is inconsistent. He should make the quarters, or he could lose to Jo-Jo Tsonga in the fourth round.
6. Andy Roddick: Andy did take a set off Fed on clay, so I have to give him at least half a prop. There it is.
7. Gilles Simon: Fernando Gonzalez in the quarters ... not good.
8. Fernando Verdasco: Can the Hot Truth repeat his Aussie Open run? Well, a clash in the quarters with Nadal will be a good test.
9. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga: OK, I don't really think he can beat Del Potro. Now, Wimbledon ...?
10. Nikolay Davydenko: Not this year. I think he needs a few more matches under his belt. You know, like Maria Sharapova.

The way it'll go down:
Quarterfinals: Nadal v. Verdasco, Murray v. Gonzalez, Del Potro v. Djokovic, Roddick (only because Gael Monfils is not in top shape) v. Federer
Semifinals: Nadal v. Murray, Djokovic v. Federer
Final: Nadal v. Djokovic
Winner: Nadal

FO'09: The women

2009-05-22T10:03:00.005-04:00

Don't you just love it when the Yahoo!Sports headline for the French Open preview reads: "Williams sisters could face each other in French final?" Yes, I suppose they could. So could the Bondarenko sisters. As could Daniela Hantuchova and Marion Bartoli. Let's not forget Maria Sharapova v. Victoria Azarenka. Because the Williams sisters are the only game in town anymore, right?
Aaanyway, ahem:

1. Dinara Safina: Lord knows. Yes, she has shown remarkable poise in her game through the clay season. And, yes, she made the final last year, and yes, she has been able to finish strong in finals. I gotta say this, though: Watching Safina take advantage of this on-court coaching makes me wonder if she's really able to figure things out on her own when things get tight. Geez, she calls this coach over every 15 minutes! Girl, they don't allow coaches in Grand Slam finals. Yet.
2. Serena Williams: Lord knows. It's hard to bet against the Serena, because she's got that X-factor -- the desire to win, which has propelled her through more matches than her form. And claims to be the real No. 1 aside, she's not been looking great due to injury. Will she be ready?
3. Venus Williams: Oh, Lord. This is the shakiest top 3 ever to enter a major, methinks. Especially when compared to the menfolk. She should have a nice draw, but it remains to be seen what she'll do with it.
4. Elena Dementieva: You know what Dementieva is like? The Energizer bunny. Keeps going, and going ... She's been around a while now, and if anyone has a shot at this title, it's her. I'd give her a good shot against Jelena Jankovic in the quarters.
5. Jelena Jankovic: Speaking of. I really like watching Jankovic play. Hopefully, the personal drama in her life can take a backseat to her climbing the rankings again. If she could get past Dementieva, she could definitely knock Serena off on clay in the semis. Svetlana Kuznetsova? Dunno.
6. Vera Zvonareva: Last minute withdrawal with injury, and I say Venus is lucky. She was going to be a problem in the quarters.
7. Svetlana Kuznetsova: I hate to say this, because Sveta's not dealt well with pressure, but she's looking good coming into this tournament. She split final matches with Safina, 1-1, in the last month. She's always had the game to do damage.
8. Ana Ivanovic: Ri-ight. OK, poll time, folks. Over-under on the rounds Ivanovic will last?
9. Victoria Azarenka: Yeah, I'd pick her over Ivanovic in the quarters. Is she ready for prime time ... the semis? I don't think so.
10. Caroline Wozniacki: Wozniacki is almost there. She just needs to grow up, that's all. She gave Safina a good tussle in Madrid, but also showed she's easily distracted. She's on the up-and-comer list. Emphasis on comer.

The way it'll go down:
Quarters: Safina v. Azarenka, Venus v. Petrova, Jankovic v. Dementieva, Kuznetsova v. S. Williams
Semis: Safina v. Venus, Jankovic v. Kuznetsova
Final: Safina v. Jankovic
Winner: Safina

"Cocaine. It's a helluva drug." -- Dave Chappelle playing Rick James

2009-05-11T19:38:00.002-04:00

No kiddin’. Ask Richard Gasquet.
He’s been suspended by the ITF for a positive cocaine test and now can’t play in the French Open, which, in retrospect, might be the least of his problems.
It’s too early to know for sure if ol’ Richard likes the nose candy, but just the accusation can derail his career. I mean, Gasquet says he’s gathering evidence, but what kind of evidence is going to clear him? For the ITF to suspend him, the backup sample had to have tested positive, too.
Of course, he can try to attack the drug testing system. Good luck with that.
So far, Gasquet’s the most promising tennis athlete to test positive for coke. (Martina Hingis was on the down slope of a comeback.) Dude’s 22 years old. This is really not the best time for a possible two-year ban – the penalty if he’s found guilty at a hearing. Gasquet’s had his ups and downs in his career, but as he’s been showing with some solid play on clay, it’s not too late. Well, right now, it’s not too late. If he didn’t do it, let’s hope any mistakes are cleared up. If he did, writing an early obituary on a potentially great career is no one’s fault but your own.
Pittsburgh’s own Ben Roethlisberger almost learned the really hard way that when you’re a professional athlete – when you make money because of your fitness – you can’t do what everyone else does. I guess, in his own way, Marat Safin was trying to say the same thing. But his take on the Gasquet story is a bit perplexing at best.
“Everyone makes mistakes. I feel sorry for Gasquet. When you’re at a party, at a huge table full of people having fun, it’s absurd to have to watch what glass you’re drinking from,” Safin said (after losing to Jo-Jo Tsonga, BTW).
I’m the first to admit I don’t get invited to a lot of hifalutin’ parties with rich people, but is putting cocaine in your drink an acceptable practice? Is that “cool”? And even still, is that the best training regimen?
Maybe it is for the folks Safin hangs out with. It also might explain why he now stinks these days. Just sayin’.

Pick up pedicured foot. Insert in mouth.

2009-05-05T21:47:00.003-04:00

Serena, Serena, Serena.
Had no time yesterday to post about Serena's comments about being the REAL number 1, dammit.
"Quite frankly, I'm the best in the world," she says. Shh, Serena, shhh...
Next day, she's thisclose to getting bageled in the third set by Patty Schnyder on her way to a second round beatdown in Rome.
The really bad part about this is that even though she just got her ass handed to her, she is still the best player in the world. Until someone, namely Dinara Safina, can prove that she's not.
Speaking of, did anyone catch what Safina had to say about Serena's comments?
"She’s also older than me, so she has more experience than me. So let’s see when I’m her age how many titles I’m going to have, and then we can say."
That's nice and sneaky-catty, just the way I would do it. I'm starting to like Safina.

Some quick hits:
-- Rafa Nadal won another tournament on clay. WHAT!??!
-- Roger Federer did not win a title on clay. In fact, Roger's not won much of anything lately. What on earth has happened to that forehand? Is this one of those Tiger Woods things, where he's got to retool his swing -- and look bad for a little bit -- in order to return to dominance? Or have we got some other issues going on? I'm not talking about Mirka, either, people!
-- Maria Sharapova isn't playing the next couple clay tournaments. I'm going to give her about ten more days before she pulls from the French.
-- The Williams sisters now want to play for the Fed Cup team in the final against Italy. Look, that's foul. Great -- just sit around for the early rounds and let the Bethanie Matteks and Alexa Glatches of the world do the heavy lifting, then decide to probably rob them of their chance to enjoy the fruits of their labor. Sounds perfectly fair to me. Yeah, I know. If you want to win, you gots to go Williams. But if I really cared about Fed Cup, which I do not, that would bother me.
-- James Blake lost to a qualifier in Rome. WHAT?!?
-- So, I was watching the Tennis Channel and there was a show about the top 10 chokes in pro tennis, and my boy, Guillermo Coria was just behind Jana Novotna at Wimbledon (y'know, crying on the dutchess' shoulder). It remembered of watching that French Open final, when I was sure Coria was going to beat the crap out of Gaston Gaudio. Personally, watching Coria lose that match, I remembered wondering how anyone could blow a match like that. Unfortunately, that's about the only memory tennis fans will have of Coria, who announced he was retiring this week. Man, I hope he finds redemption somewhere else in life. Later, G.

LEAGUE WATCH: Ahhhh -- WIPEOUT!

2009-05-03T19:46:00.004-04:00

It's springtime in Pittsburgh, which means two things: (1) The sky goes from gray to grayish and (2) That's right. League season, baby! It's on!
Those (OK, you, yogahz) following League Watch know that my team made it to the regionals last season. The Princeton experience wasn't much to write home about, but it has a lot to do with my goals for this season. I will list them here:
1. To make it back to Princeton -- and to win maybe two matches this time.
2. To get moved up to the 4.0 level.
3. To win all my matches and utterly dominate all my opponents.
So, modest goals. But, hey, I can do it, right?
Well, I woke up on Saturday morning at around 10 a.m., two hours before my match. You know that pre-match, jacked feeling you get? Well, I had nothin'. Which can be a good thing. Or a bad thing.
I was still pretty blah by the time I was warming up with my opponent. Now, as we know, warmups are very important. It's when you get a feel for your opponent's strengths and weaknesses, develop a strategy. Or if you're me, it's when you think about how effed up your week was. About the one-day seminar and the six hours you spent in a car in less than 24 hours to get there, about getting reamed out for not calling when you had a defective cell phone anyway, about coming back from a two-week vacation to face immediate deadline pressure and the fact that certain things that were supposed to be done while you were out of town were not done, about having to get a new car and cell phone fairly quickly, about spending nearly four hours in a hair salon for no really good reason watching Judge Judge and Days of Our Lives when I could have been at work, about spending 30 minutes on a phone with some guy yelling at me for something that happened while I was on vacation. About the time wasted on the way to the match on the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Whoo. Didn't expect to go there.
Anyway, the match. I started out pretty listlessly, and found myself down 1-2. Then, as I was standing there between points, I realized something. I wanted to, right at that moment, walk off the court and go home. I did not feel like playing. I tried to get myself into the match, but even after hitting winners and retrieving nearly impossible balls, I couldn't get interested. I might have looked at the ball I hit about three times over that two-hour match. Even my opponent's sketchy calls couldn't piss me off enough to get in the match. (OK, I have to say this. People -- ladies -- if the ball lands on the line, it's in. We don't invent different rules for your dream world. In tennis, if you hit the ball OUTSIDE the line, the ball is out and out of play. If it's on the line or inside the line, it's in play. Either you try to play the ball or you walk to the other side of the court. You don't hit the ball into the net and then call it out in order to bail yourself out. (Wo)Man up and say, "Nice shot." Yes, that happened yesterday. A few times. And yet I couldn't get as mad about it as I'm getting right now.)
So, she wins the first set on a AA (accidental ace), 6-4, and I go to get some water from their vending machine. (So, a tennis club without water on the court. Nice. What, exactly, do these people pay for? The privilege to play in a building that also has no air conditioning?) I put a dollar into the machine and absently hit A1. Nothing comes out. I also don't get my dollar back. Son of a @#$^$#. Another dollar later, I have some water, finally. It's only on the way back home (an HOUR LATER) that I realized that the A1 slot was empty. I literally selected, and paid for nothing. Yeah, folks. That's where my head was.
Set two. We start out evenly, and I feel entirely no anxiety or pressure to rebound. That might have been why every groundstroke I tried to hit almost hit the wall without bouncing and why all my drop shots landed at the baseline. It didn't help that the strings in my main racquet broke in the first set, and I was using a backup that felt a bit heavier. I suppose I could have figured out how to keep those balls from sailing, but it just seemed like a process that would injure my brain. Even when I stood at the line to serve at 5-6 to get into a tiebreak, I didn't think it would happen, and it didn't. Strangely enough, my opponent walked up to me at the net and says, "Close match."
I thought, "Really. You think? If you hadn't screwed me on about a dozen calls, it might have been even closer. What are you, blind? Do you not understand the rules of tennis? I can't believe your teammates are sitting up there, cheering, when they watched you screw me on about thirty calls! You almost screwed me on a let cord when it landed right on the line! You said, "Too close to call!" The ball was traveling EXACTLY .001 MILE PER HOUR!! And you said it was TOO CLOSE TO CALL!!! I know a good eye doctor. I can get you his name if you need it. Maybe your teammates also need his number. I'll loan you my glasses next time if you want! I don't mind. I don't need them as much as you do. Even if the prescription's not right, it couldn't hurt you. Do you understand?!"
I said, "Nice match."
Yikes. A day later, I can't explain what happened to me. I'm a little afraid that it might be the dreaded "B" word -- burnout. I've never been unable to get stoked for a match. Even when I lose, I get dialed in enough to at least have a plan of attack -- even if it's wrong. As of this second, I have no idea what my opponent's weaknesses were. I'm hoping it's general life burnout, because if I don't enjoy tennis, what the hell am I supposed to do? Start a blog about macrame?
So, the goal list took a hit, but here's the great thing about our region: Playoff system! All we have to do is finish in the top two and we've still got a chance at Princeton. Easy, right?
Right. Ri-ight.

Musings from the beach

2009-04-16T10:56:00.003-04:00

So, I’m on vacation in the Florida Keys, trying to ditch the hibernation weight for the upcoming league season when I notice that Serena Williams lost a match to someone ranked 95th in the world and Dinara Safina, she without a Slam, will be world No. 1 next week. There’s no Maria Sharapova in sight, and no one else in the top five has even sniffed a major, except spring chicken Venus Williams, who'll be 29 this year. And I’m getting ready for the leagues. Does anyone else think this would be a really good time to go pro in women’s tennis?
Anyway, some headlines since I’ve been gone:
1. Roger Federer gets married! OK, I hate starting out with gossip, but this is a big deal! Listen, Fed’s been pretty stubborn about not needing a coach, so who would’ve thunk he’d finally marry Mirka? Well, as someone celebrating her fourth wedding anniversary this week, I feel qualified to say: “Run, Roger, RUN!!!” Kidding. I guess.
The real question is how or if this will change Roger’s game. Because we all know that athletes are incapable of being married and successful at the same time, right? That’s silly. The issues keeping Roger from No. 1 have nothing to do with outside forces. It's that Spaniard ... and that Brit ... and that Serb.
Rumor also has it that Andy Roddick got married over the weekend. Aww. Let’s hope the wings of love will carry Andy to the second round of the French Open this year. But! getting married is a fine excuse to miss Roland Garros. Clever move, young Andrew.
2. Women’s tennis is still whack! This is getting hard to watch. It’s like walking into a bank to find the vaults have been cleaned out and the money left strewn on the ground – and that Jelena Jankovic, Safina, Ana Ivanovic, Elena Dementieva, Vera Zvonareva and the rest of the top 20 are just walking over it like it’s not there. Although congratulations are in order for Jankovic for winning Andalucia and mowing down top 1,000 competition ... and winning a tournament that sounds like a Disney movie. “Someday, my Slam will come ...”
3. WTA’s Larry Scott leaves! I’ve actually been meaning to get around to this one for a while. He’s moved on to some NCAA conference. He claims to have left because attempts to merge the men’s and women’s tours failed. I can see his point. Because the men’s tour is a well-oiled machine compared to the women’s tour. And when you're the CEO of the women's tour, and the tour sucks, then guess who's responsible for that? When you have the Williams sisters and Sharapova experiencing fame -- without the tour taking advantage of some of that, it's really your fault. Yeah, what's happening now is nothing to write home about, but it used to be, and the tour never benefitted from that. I say that's a failing of the PR machine. See you around, Larry. Thanks, anyway.
I'll be back in a week or so. Vacation calls.

There goes that android theory ...

2009-04-02T22:13:00.002-04:00

So, I saw a few things I've never seen before while watching tennis. I'll share them:
1. Unfortunately, I had to watch the Rafa Nadal v. Juan Martin del Potro on Fox Sports Network. For the uninitiated, this means tennis coverage can be interrupted with no notice and in a blink of an eye, you're now watching hockey. Taped hockey. Anyway, today, toward the end of the match, a crawl came across the screen saying "Savran Sportbeat (or whatever) will air after the match." Wow. Look at them. All grown up and everything.
2. Then, I watched Nadal play very strangely in the third-set tiebreak. I don't know how to describe it. And I hesitate to even make this implication, but (gulp) did he looked to be afraid to lose!? Playing patty-cake against an opponent who had missed two wide-open sitters at the net? Whatever. I guess Nadal's entitled to lose every now and again, although just last week, he had beaten the crap out of del Potro. Is this going to be a milestone for the Argentine? I guess we'll find out when he takes on Andy Murray in the semis.
3. Right now, I'm watching the Williams sisters slug it out in the semis. I have one question: Why won't one of them take one step back from the baseline on the return? I've said it before, and I'll say it again: That only intimidates people if your returns are good. I don't know that the 25 percent of the time they can connect on the shot is worth it. Actually, I do know. Um, it ain't.

"The hunger is back."

2009-03-26T09:06:00.002-04:00

So says Kim Clijsters, who announced today a slow-but-steady comeback to tennis. She plans to play some exhibitions, then start in Cincinnati, play Toronto and then the U.S. Open. (Good to see some players take that "Road Trip" campaign seriously.)
It'll be good for the game to see Clijsters back. It sure doesn't look like Maria Sharapova's coming back anytime soon, and all the players in the second tier right now seem content to stay there, and not challenge the Williams sisters. The question, though, is if injuries will continue to dog her, because if they do, she'll be making another quick exit from the game.
How-EVAH, should Clijsters come back and say, make the U.S. Open semis, it's really going to reveal some holes in the women's game. Not like they're not immediately obvious, but if a 25-year-old who took a couple of years off to have a kid can come back and go toe-to-toe with Jelena Jankovic or Dinara Safina ... well, that's remarkable, but not in a great way for Jankovic or Safina.
Clijsters was always a fun player to watch, and if she ever wanted to rack up the Grand Slam titles, this would be a good time to come back.
One more thing: Clijsters, in her press conference, said the urge to play again came almost immediately after practicing for exhibitions. She said, "We'll evaluate things after the U.S. Open and take it from there. What counts is that I simply feel like doing this right now!"
She feels like doing this right now, folks. I'm just going to throw this out there: You know, when you think retirement, you usually think about older people, because they've had time to think about it, make their mark on their career, and are now appropriately done with it. Kim. You're a kid. It's nice that you're back, but if you had taken a year off without retiring, it looks like you would have come back anyway. Here's a new tennis rule: No retirement press conferences for anyone under the age of 32. That's it!

Comeback time?

2009-03-24T14:16:00.001-04:00

Some people (Jelena Jankovic, Dinara Safina, Ana Ivanovic, Vera Zvonareva, Amelie Mauresmo – shall I continue?) have no idea of how to take advantage of the proverbial gift horse.
Then there’s Kim Clijsters, who, taking a page out of Lindsay Davenport’s book, has decided that even with a kid on her hip, she could be in the women’s top 10 by the end of the year. If she puts the kid down, that’s top 5, easy.
Clijsters is having a press conference on Thursday to discuss her plans for 2009. Either she’s coming out of retirement or she feels the need to tell us she’s reserving a sitter every Wednesday for date night.
Having not seen her play lately, she still has a hella edge, as Serena Williams might say. She’d easily make the quarters of the French with the state of the women’s game, which is not a great thing. But the much-needed depth she could bring would be a huge breath of fresh air.
Although, as good as Clijsters was, most would add that she probably should have “finished” her career with more than one Slam. But now that Henin’s not around to choke against, maybe having a family will allow her to play with abandon.
More about this on Thursday. Meanwhile, let’s dish. How long before Kim Clijsters cracks the top 20?

Popcorn tennis

2009-03-19T16:41:00.002-04:00

Sometimes, men’s tennis is so good, I wonder if there’s a script. But then it would be wrestling and that would make me sad.
If there were a script, Rafa Nadal would be the guy who always looks down and out … then claws his way to victory, defying the odds, probably with a Peter Cetera song shrieking on in the background about the glory of love.
Nadal’s latest magic trick was performed in the wee hours of Thursday morning at Indian Wells, fighting off five match points, then utterly dominating David Nalbandian 6-0 in the third set. A lot of people might see a result like this, and add them with the previous titanic battles he’s been through, and wonder if he’s really good enough to be No. 1, because he doesn’t wipe the floor with opponents (like some former world No. 1, ahemRogerFedererahem). Um, yeah! And on top of that, I like him more with each improbable victory. He da man! That’s it!

And then there’s Dinara Safina, who could have become world No. 1 with an appearance in this final. You did notice the past tense usage, right? Yeah, quarterfinal loss to Victoria Azarenka, who would have probably beaten Serena Williams in Australia if the match hadn’t taken place in an oven. However, Safina is slowly showing the ability to deal with pressure situations with a steady hand. Very slowly. How slowly? She might be mentally ready for a Slam final by this time next year.

Last, but certainly the most entertaining news this week is Roger Federer and his girlfriend Mirka expecting a baby. Let’s just kill the noise about fatherhood taking the edge off the Fed. Look, Tiger Woods has two kids, and he’s still the best player in the world! (He also finished ninth in his last tournament …) But we need to get to the heart of the matter here. There are some serious concerns to address:
1. Roger. Are you going to marry your girlfriend?
2. Whatever happened to traditional child names, like Susan, and Thomas and Randall? Why do people have to name their kids after car parts, fruits and aging rock stars?

The return of Maria Sharapova

2009-03-09T20:27:00.001-04:00

Good to see Sharapova back! But did anyone tell her that she will probably have to volley in doubles?

9 things I've been doing instead of blogging

2009-03-07T14:14:00.006-05:00

1. Watching Serena Williams clean up in a one-day $1.2 million exhibition tournament and wishing my parents had slapped me silly when I said I wanted to be a journalist.
2. Choosing my local league teams for the summer.
3. Thinking "This would be a good time to blog," then going on Facebook.
4. Watching Andy Roddick dismantle some poor Swiss guy in Davis Cup play. Besides Stan Wawrinka and that other decent Swiss player, there are no other men from that country in the top 100. In the top 200, make it three -- Stephane Bohli. You know. Stephane. Bohli.
5. Finding it interesting that David Nalbandian couldn't play Davis Cup because of a "virus." I think I've had that virus before. The original name is very scientific, but translates to "I don't feel like it."
6. Watching Venus Williams win two titles in a row. OK, one of them was in Mexico, but it was clay -- not a bad move if you really want to do some damage in Paris.
7. Reminding myself that it's been a long time since I've seen Maria Sharapova play. Allegedly, she's practicing and planning to play doubles in a tournament with Elena Vesnina -- just doubles. I'm asking myself how bad this injury is, because if I'm a pro with a lingering shoulder injury, I don't think the first major I'd be playing would be the French Open ...
8. Thinking that Zina Garrison has a long road ahead of her trying to prove discrimination in her lawsuit against the USTA. You know, Zina, my job happens to discriminate against me not doing my job. I understand I can be fired for that. Just sayin'. Let's get real for a second, hon: You can't allege discrimination for getting fired just because you're black.
9. Getting tired of Chris Brown. And Rihanna. I can say in all confidence that I DON'T GIVE A &@$(#! Is there nothing more interesting going on in the world? Like Indian Wells? Damn.

The week (or two) that was

2009-02-22T11:36:00.002-05:00

So, I joke a lot about how some players shouldn't even bother to show up to events (ahemAndyRoddickatFrenchOpenahem), but everyone should have a chance, right? Specifically Shahar Peer, who, being an Israeli, was denied a visa this week so she could play in the Dubai tournament. Organizers claimed there was concern about her safety because of Israel's incursions into the Gaza Strip. But essentially, Peer was denied the chance to work because of her nationality, which I thought was called discrimination. And credit is due to the WTA and the Tennis Channel for fining and boycotting the event, respectively. More credit is due to Andy Roddick for speaking out about it and marking it off his calendar in support of Peer (although the Dubai organizers classily pointed out that Roddick wouldn't have made it to UAE if he made the final of the Memphis tournament anyway. Like I said, classy). The tournament gets a little bit of credit for clearing Andy Ram to play in the mens draw next week, I guess.
Here's something, though, that I have to put out there. Where is the outrage? Does anyone know what would have happened if Venus Williams was told she couldn't play because she was black? I actually do know. That tournament either would have been canceled or participants would have been forced to drop out, even if they didn't care, just because of the public outcry. Not really clear yet on why some discrimination is okay, while other forms are not. Maybe because if the tournament had not been bleeding cash like Dubai, there would have been a bit more outrage.

Speaking of the sisters Williams, don't they appear to be in the way-back machine. On the way to winning the tournament, Venus had to take on (and took down) Serena in the semifinals. Both women spoke early and often about the two of them being the best players in the world right now. Hunh. Well, I guess that's half-right. Serena is No. 1 in the world, but Venus lost in the third round of the Australian Open, right? Is that what one of the best players in the world does? (OK, it was Carla Suarez Navarro and a tight match, but ...) And you can't be the two best players in the world and be streaky as hell. This is why Jelena Jankovic hangs around, by the way. That's nit-picking, though. Women's tennis needs the sisters to make some noise right now. Be nice to have some other players making some noise, too.

Like Amelie Mauresmo. She beat Elena Dementieva last week in the final in France for her first win in two years. Others who just found themselves in Mauresmo's way were Aggie Radwanska and Jankovic. Very impressive for Mauresmo. She is a two-time Slam winner, and still has a dangerous game, obviously. I never quite understood how she just fell off the radar AFTER winning two majors.

Fed Cup time. Woo.

2009-02-07T21:47:00.004-05:00

It's Fed Cup time again, and really, who wouldn't be thrilled about the prospects?! Most of the United States, plus the world. Hard to get excited about a world competition that is played whenever the calendar allows.
I watched some of Melanie Oudin's match against Argentina's Gisela Dulko, and besides being dumbstruck by the lack of quality of the match (it's rare when a match is so bad that I turn off the television), I had a couple more thoughts. I will share them now.
1. U.S. tennis is in trouble. Did you know that there are four American women in the top 10? Yes, four. And two of them are the Williams sisters. Another is Jill "Gramma" Craybas, who at 34, is decidedly not the future of American tennis. The last one, Beth Mattek-Sands, isn't even playing this tie -- and by the way, married some insurance guy in November. So, yeah, four. There are five Russian women in the top 10. Bad shape, people. The worst part is that the new crop doesn't exactly exude hope for even eventual dominance. If you wonder where all the U.S. women are, let's try the 100s: Julie Ditty, Vania King, Carly Gullickson, Oudin, Ashley Harkleroad, Alexandra Stevenson -- the mediocrity roll goes on and on. It's not even their fault. You have to ask: What's going on over at the USTA? How's that player development program going? Let's ask ...
2. Mary Joe Fernandez? Look, she's seems to be a really nice person. But Fed Cup coach? Hell, she's never even struck me as a really great commentator of the game. I'm guessing she was hired because she gets along with everyone. (Has she ever said anything critical about any player?) But what is it about Fernandez that made the USTA think she's going to be able to crack the whip and be a teacher? Even Pam Shriver would have been a better choice. She has a clear grasp of the game and is not afraid to point out shortcomings in players as she sees them.
Not that the criticism is limited to Fernandez. Her predecessor, Zina Garrison, was no Billie Jean King, either. Quite far from it. Come on, USTA, let's show Martina Navratilova the money! (If she's not busy playing hockey. Or making her 18 millionth comeback to tennis.) And who says the captain has to be a woman? There's Brad Gilbert (who, quite clearly, would have something to say), Robert Van't Hof, who coached Lindsay Davenport, Darren Cahill, Patrick McEnroe (hey, Shamil Tarpishev coaches both Davis and Fed Cup teams. Everybody has a price.), etc., etc. Sure, the real development starts way below the Fed Cup level, but what's happening right now at the top is not a good sign.
Oh, yeah, the U.S. and Argentina are tied at 1-1 right now, thanks to Gramma.

Random Aussie Ramblings, Vol. IX: Post Script, part 2

2009-02-01T20:24:00.003-05:00

So, I'm trying to explain to my husband why I had to watch the Roger Federer v. Rafa Nadal final live, at 3:30 a.m. -- instead of getting up and watching the 9 a.m. replay on ESPN. I stumbled through a lot of reasons, which boiled down to the same thing, which was "It's just not the same," until I realized what it really was. Fed v. Nadal is like crack cocaine to a tennis buff. You just have to have it, and you don't know why. That explanation, by the way, didn't go over all that well, either.
Regardless, while watching this match unfold, I found myself asking: Is Nadal rope-a-doping? Not in a disrespectful way, but really, in that third set, did he not look like he was foundering, down break points in his last two service games? And then, did he not suddenly rediscover his legs after that massage (trainer bonus, puh-leeze) and dominated that tiebreaker? You don't think of Nadal usually the same way you think about Serena Williams, but there is that refusal to lose that they seem to have in common. Even after Nadal blinked and lost the fourth set, he charged back in the fifth and didn't flinch at all after that. If there was any question before about Nadal's ranking, there shouldn't be anymore. Not until he gets beaten in a Grand Slam final again.
Which brings me to Roger Federer, who has been beaten in a few major finals lately. I want to say glowing things about the way Fed dug in in the second and fourth sets to get it to a fifth set, about how he flattened out his backhand at times and approached the net at others. All I can think about are bad double faults and very bad errors. If Fed ever wants to see the No. 1 ranking again or a Grand Slam champions trophy again, he really needs to address the fact that his backbone comes oozing out of his racquet every time he plays Nadal. If I can see someone tensing up from thousands of miles away on television, then he's freakin' tense. You could literally see Fed checking his swing -- on both wings -- as the match got tighter. I hate to say this, but it appears we're watching the process of Federer getting owned. He hasn't beaten Nadal since late '07, fer cryin' out loud. And his goes schizo against the world No. 1. Now he's attacking the net. Now he's running around his backhand. Now he's hitting drop shots. Nadal doesn't alter his strategy at all. He slugs away at the backhand and it might take a while, but it works. Federer seems to try something for about 15 minutes, and then abandon it at the first error.
Anyway, it was tough watching Federer post-match. And it was nice to see that someone raised Nadal right. He handled watching his opponent weeping in front of him like a real man -- and this is why I'm grateful that tennis is not football. Can you imagine Chad Johnson or Terrell Owens resisting the urge to talk about how great they just played? Sheesh.
All told, AO'09 delivered in drama. We've got the apparent deterioration of the women's draw, only to come up with a familiar winner and the men's draw coming down to the best possible match up and delivering the quarterly fix we tennis junkies need. Some props to for the Williams sisters, the Bryan brothers and Mahesh Bhupati and Sania Mirza (now a doubles specialist??) for winning the -- as follows: womens doubles, mens doubles, and mixed dubs. Um ... woo!

Random Aussie Ramblings, Vol. VIII: Post Script, part one

2009-01-31T20:37:00.003-05:00

You know, when you see Serena Williams shouting like a pissed-off lioness, pumping her fist and with her big hoop earring looped over her ear instead of hanging neatly on her lobe, it makes you realize that you wouldn't really want to run into her in a dark alley. She reminds me of the wannabe gang members girls I knew in junior high who packed a plastic container of vaseline in their bookbags just in case someone looked at them wrong.
Also quite glad I didn't stay up until 3:30 a.m. to watch the Williams v. Dinara Safina final. I'm almost upset I got up at 9 to watch it. What a stinker -- really? 6-0, 6-3?? Anyway, Safina's movement, or lack thereof, really hurt her in this match. Up until now, Safina's gotten the edge because of her solid groundstrokes, and not because she's chasing everything down. The writing was on the wall early here, but at least Safina can take a lot of positives out of this tournament.
Moving on, I will be staying up for the Roger Federer v. Rafa Nadal match tonight (this morning?). First, some props to Fernando Verdasco for pushing Nadal to the limit in the semis. It's nice to see a journeyman finally tap that potential. I've said it before, but this is what's great about men's tennis right now. Everyone in the top 20 is dangerous. Here's hoping we see some more great tennis for The Hot Truth.
Back to the battle of the titans. I wouldn't even venture to guess who's going to come out on top, but the idea that Nadal will have trouble recovering from this tournament is a little ridiculous to me, even if it's coming from Nadal's own mouth. Dude is 22 years old and I again point out that he's pretty much a cyborg. He sleepwalked through the first five rounds of this tournament. One match, and he's tired? Are you kidding me?
As for Fed, he has recovered nicely from going the distance with Tomas Berdych earlier in the tournament, and against Andy Roddick in the semifinals, he was fairly frightening. A lot is being made of this match being the first Grand Slam final against Nadal on hard courts, and Fed has a 3-2 edge on the surface. However, it has been more than a year since Fed last beat Nadal on anything. In that time, Nadal's been able to expose Federer's backhand, and Fed's been unable to settle on a match-long strategy. But it's a new year and a new major. The real question is "What can you snack on at 4 a.m. during an instant-classic match?"

Random Aussie Ramblings, Vol. VII: More guesses that are just going to be wrong

2009-01-28T18:19:00.002-05:00

OK, that's what's great about Serena Williams, right? Love her or not so much, only very special athletes can summon their best game when they're on the verge of losing. Her win over Svetlana Kuznetsova was phenomenal. Yes, she might have gotten an assist from Aussie Open organizers, who opted to close the stadium roof after the first set, but she still was down 5-3 in the second set. Then she started hitting the ball. Really, what was she doing in the first couple sets? It was like she didn't want to break a nail. Anyway, she recovered from that dire concern to lay the smackdown on Kuznetsova, who, unfortunately, has to wonder again what happened to her in a high-stakes match. She can't just blame the closing of the roof. Just as Serena grabbed victory from defeat, she's got to believe she was just as capable of sticking one more volley. She definitely let Serena off the ropes.

Anyway, a few semifinals coming to a court near you (if you live in Australia):
Elena Dementieva v. Serena Williams: Still not ready to give Dementieva her props, and after watching Serena yesterday, not utterly convinced that she'll beat Dementieva, either. Maybe Dementieva's finally ready for her Grand Slam close up. If it gets tight, and it comes down to someone getting free points on the serve, well, I guess we all know Dementieva's not winning that battle. I'm hesitantly going with Serena in three.
Vera Zvonareva v. Dinara Safina: Too close to call. This is a huge moment for both these players. Safina's been to a major final before, but she is really playing with conviction now. For Zvonareva, this is the best she's ever done in a Slam, and it's hard to tell how a player will respond to that. I just hope they don't revert to their former selves at the same time on court. Could you imagine? Safina's over there smashing hell out of her racquet and Zvonareva's on the other side having a nervous breakdown. Here's hoping nerves don't get in the way of what could be a great match.
Andy Roddick v. Roger Federer: Federer in straight sets. I'm not drinking the Andy Roddick Kool-Aid. I don't care how much weight he's lost. OK, I do. Very impressive rededication to fitness, blah, blah, blah.
But.
He needs to learn how to volley, and really make that serve work for him.

On a non-AO note, the U.S. Fed Cup roster was announced and the Williams sisters are absent. Scheduling conflicts or the skirmish between the USTA and Zina Garrison? Inquiring minds ...

Random Aussie Ramblings, Vol. VI: Is it hot in here or is it me?

2009-01-27T15:51:00.003-05:00

Today's TWA post is brought to you by the number 95, as in the on-court temperature that sucked the game right out of Novak Djokovic. He eked out a tiebreaker win against Andy Roddick, but couldn't hang for much longer after that. Post-match, Djokovic complained about having a couple of late matches, then an early one, which threw off his preparation for this match. Normally, the schedule goes like this: Ladies first. And it just figures that men would have an issue with that. Geez. Seriously, though, he raises a good point. Why not balance out late matches among all players? Never mind, really, how the players feel about it, but if messed-up scheduling leads to lopsided late-round matches, then spectators don't get the best matchups, either. And isn't it really all about us?

The weather sure has turned out to be the third man in Australia. I wonder, though, are players not as fit as they should be, or is it just too darned hot in January out there?

And, AND! Did anyone catch the women's doubles match between Cara Black and Liezel Huber and Daniela Hantuchova and Ai Sugiyama? What a match! Who doesn't love Ai Sugiyama? Or at least saying Ai Sugiyama?

On tap for today:
Carla Suarez Navarro v. Elena Dementieva: I'm just not ready to jump on the Dementieva bandwagon. Everyone's all, "She's won 14 straight matches. She's a threat." She sure seems to be on a roll, true enough, but so does Suarez Navarro. She's followed up her win over Venus Williams with a trip to the quarters, so who knows? Plus, I'm still waiting for Dementieva's serve to fail her yet again. At some point, she's going to encounter someone who can attack it. So ... I'm going with Dementieva in straights.
Svetlana Kuznetsova v. Serena Williams: Serena. Straights. Let's move on.
Fernando Verdasco v. Jo-Jo Tsonga: Curious matchup, and exactly what I expected in this part of the draw. Uh-huh. It's hard to pick against Tsonga, and I won't do it here, although if the excessive heat continues, it would probably hurt him more than Verdasco. Otherwise, it's hard to beat the kitchen sink when it comes at you with every shot. I think Tsonga's going to cruise.
Rafa Nadal v. Gilles Simon: Nadal. Simon is crafty and patient, but Nadal has the best form of anyone left. He's smacking winners around like the ball stole something from him. Maybe Simon grabs a set. Maybe.

A quarterfinal for your thoughts?

2009-01-26T19:53:00.000-05:00

Boy, these are exactly as I called 'em!

Marion Bartoli v. Vera Zvonareva: I might have to stop calling Bartoli "Candy". She looks to have slimmed down a touch, and she's in the quarterfinals of a major again. After she beat the fuzz off the balls against Jelena Jankovic, it's pretty clear that when she's on, she's on. But Zvonareva has been very solid lately. I think this'll be a tight one, but Zvonareva will come out of top. It's about time to her to make a move in a major.
Andy Roddick v. Novak Djokovic: OK, Djokovic did not look very impressive against Marcos Baghdatis. Or Amer Delic. And Andy Roddick has been firing on all cylinders at this tournament. I can't see Djokovic getting aced off a court, though, and that's all Roddick's really got. Novak in four.
Dinara Safina v. Jelena Dokic: This match should be really entertaining. Basically, it's the collision of two really good stories this tournament. It looks like Safina is really maturing these days -- digging deep when she falls behind instead of going all Marat on her racquet. And Dokic, now baggage free, is collecting her own little collection of scalps. I don't even want to call this one, because if I did, I'd have to favor Safina, and what kind of heart would I have to do something like that?
Juan Martin del Potro v. Roger Federer: Look, after watching "Houdini" Federer get out from under Tomas Berdych the other day, I can't see him losing to anyone except the big 3 (or 4. Whichever.). Del Potro's been starting his matches slowly this tournament, and he should really not try that here. Friendly suggestion. Fed in straights.

Random Aussie Ramblings, Vol V: Shame on me ...

2009-01-26T14:01:00.001-05:00

It's quickly becoming clear that being a favorite at the Australian Open will mean nothing. Whoever wins the Open this year will be the last man standing (possibly literally).
It won't be Andy Murray, who lost in five sets to Fernando Verdasco. I swear, I fell asleep last night with Murray up a break in the third set. What happened after that? Anyone? Well, I guess I'll see it in the replay, but I did suspect that Verdasco would be a bit dangerous with that Davis Cup win under his belt. As for Murray, it's back to square one trying to convince Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic to take him seriously. And me too, dammit. Once again, I pick Murray to make noise in a Slam, and he comes through -- but it's a whimper.
Gael Monfils won't be the last one standing, either. He managed to win the second set against fellow Frenchie Gilles Simon, before he was waylaid by injury. It seems like it's always something with Monfils. Isn't Roger Rasheed supposed to be a fitness trainer? So what's he getting paid for, to offer unsolicited commentary on the fitness of the women on tour? He might want to focus on the job at hand, and get his charge deep into the second week of a major.
How-EVAH, I am really starting to dig Simon's game. I have never seen this guy overswing at a ball. He just absorbs power, then waits patiently to whack his own winners. He showed how dangerous he is at the end of last season, and he'll get a chance to beat Rafa Nadal, this time in the quarterfinals of a Grand Slam.
Who, by the way, might be a cyborg. He's tearing through the draw like he's going to be late for dinner. Unforced errors against Fernando Gonzalez: 11. Which is just pathetic compared to the eight he had in the previous round. And then only 33 winners. That's +22, people. But this is where the draw's going to get really tough for Nadal. First Simon, then probably Jo-Jo Tsonga, and most likely either Djokovic or Federer in the final. If he can beat them around the court, then it'll be official: He's a cyborg.
Decidely not a cyborg is Serena Williams, who was up against the ropes until Victoria Azarenka had to stop due to illness. For Serena, it must be nice to get through, but really, she was getting outhit and looked really sloppy in the fourth round. Next up: Svetlana Kuznetsova. This could be a really ugly match, or a really good one.
Quarterfinal previews comin' up!

Random Aussie Ramblings, Vol IV: Reason No. 172 that Rafa should NOT be a wrestler

2009-01-24T18:40:00.004-05:00

How about Richard Gasquet losing a heartbreaker in five sets to Fernando Gonzalez? Pretty nice match for week one of a Slam. But did anyone notice that Chilean fans appeared to have started a fire in the stands at the end of the match? They apparently set off flares. Seriously. I know I said tennis could use some more active fans, but I wasn't talking about setting the joint on fire.
Despite the loss, Gasquet really showed something aside quite different from the shaky mentality he had last season at Davis Cup. He had a match point in the third set, lost it, and then played a hell of a fifth set before he simply blinked. Here's hoping he doesn't lose massive amounts of confidence from this. Gonzo just beat him, and he fought well. Besides, if you're Gasquet, your consolation is that you know you left Gonzo with very little in the reserves for ... wait for it ... Rafa Nadal.
One of the horrid commentators on the Tennis Channel made an, um, interesting observation against Nadal while he was dismantling Tommy Haas (who really deserved, with his game, to be No. 1 in the world at some point in his career): "Y'know, Nadal should have been a wrestler. You just sense that he's grappling with you the whole time." Nadal does draw every ounce of energy from his opponents, but no, he should not be a wrestler. Why?
1. Nadal with cauliflower ear is not a Nadal I would like to watch.
2. No time to pick out wedgies as a wrestler. Clearly.
3. Onesies.
4. Nadal is actually beating the crap out of people. Triple H is faking it. Seriously. (And what are the triple h's? If one of them is Harold, ...)
Regardless. Nadal made 8 unforced errors for the entire match. Are you kidding me? The big four (and there are four now) are playing like demons, and they're on a collision course. Whew.
On the women's side, I just watched Marion Bartoli beat Jelena Jankovic in straight sets. Bartoli played great, no question, but if you're Jankovic and watching the tape later, you'd have to ask yourself why you didn't make Bartoli run up and back with crosscourt angles. It was a clear weakness that begged to be exposed. Basically, the top draw is now led by Dinara Safina, which means that anyone can come through. I'm officially intrigued by the women's draw now. There. I said it.

Random Aussie Ramblings, Vol. III: What is this now, soccer?

2009-01-23T11:37:00.001-05:00

... I've never been able to understand why people choose sporting events to make political statements. And why they'd think that throwing chairs and injuring innocent people proves you're right. Ethnic tensions between Bosnians and Serbians came to a boil on Day 5, with morons -- er, spectators -- throwing chairs at each other and knocking some woman unconscious. There's not a lot more to say about this, except that the days of the streaker are sorely missed ...

... except on the doubles court, where a guy showed up on court half-naked during the Williams sisters match. Considering the alternative, bring it on, I guess ...

Ana Ivanovic bowed out to Alisa Kleybanova in the third round. Kleybanova's a nice player and played a great match, but it's hard to win a match when you give up 50 unforced errors. And can anyone name one man in the top 100 who is so obviously not fit, because I can name about 10 women, and that ain't right.

Marat Safin indicated that this will be his last year on tour in his post-match conference. For those of us who could just break a tooth over that eye candy that is Safin, it's a sad day. As a tennis fan, though, it's about time, methinks. It's really sad to watch someone so naturally gifted lose matches for no really good reason and manage to lower his level to that of journeyman. If, as he says, he's no longer happy playing tennis, then that's that. At the conference, though, he was asked if he knows what he'll do next. His answer: "Yeah, but I'll keep it to myself for the moment. I would love to do that. I'm ready."
So, inquiring minds want to know: What's Safin's next move? Actor? Model? Wrestler? (Heaven forbid.)

Random Aussie Ramblings, Vol. II: Yikes, Venus. Yikes.

2009-01-22T11:11:00.003-05:00

There's always one alternate reality day at a Grand Slam, and Day 4 might have been the one. Amelie Mauresmo went three rounds with Elena Baltacha (huh?), Serena Williams struggled with Gisela Dulko (wha?) and Venus Williams lost in three sets to Carla Suarez Navarro.
Now, Suarez Navarro is no Julie Coin, who upset Ana Ivanovic at the U.S. Open last year and will probably do nothing else. She's drawn a lot of comparison to Justine Henin in the last year or so, but Venus is her biggest scalp yet.
As far as Venus, it's a disappointment, but it was also a close match against someone who played their butt off. It's not like she threw in one of her classic 72-error/12 winner matches. Regardless, she could learn a lesson from little sister Serena, who found herself in a bit of a dogfight finishing out her second-round match. Serena was spraying errors all over creation, but found a way to come back.
Venus is running out of time to prove that she can start a season strong. She even played some exos this year to get ready, so she had matches. Maybe she'll have better luck at the Aussie Open if it's ever moved back in the calendar year.

Moving on, Roger Rasheed, Gael Monfils' coach is catching some heat for calling out some female players on their lack of fitness. I, for one, am appalled. Because folks like Casey Dellacqua, Kaia Kanepi, Baltacha, and Marion Bartoli don't deserve to be called out for looking more like spectators than competitive athletes. I, for one, would never call someone "Candy" Bartoli or tell people to pass on a snack for a change.
OK, it might be hard to hear from a man. That's understandable. But the man is right. If you're an editor, you always have a dictonary. If you're a plumber, you always have a plunger. If you're an athlete, you always have a fit body. That's your tool, and to show up on a court looking dumpy, it signals a lack of full commitment. It's certainly an athlete's prerogative not to be as fit, to surrender to the Snickers urgings, but you'd absolutely deserve to be called out about that.

Jo-Jo Tsonga just limped away from a 3 hour and 25 minute match against Ivan Ljubicic in the second round. Get the popcorn ready for that replay ...

And then there's Andy Murray. Novak Djokovic joined Roger Federer in saying that Murray shouldn't be a favorite at the tournament, despite the fact that he beat Federer and Rafa Nadal before it started. Yeah. Whatever. Anyway, it's Murray's comment to Djokovic and Federer that is cracking me up.
“They say there’s a lot of pressure on them, but then (when) people aren’t saying they’re the favorites, they want to be the favorites. Therefore, by saying they’re the favorites, they’re putting more pressure back on themselves.”
Uhmmm ... what?'

Random Aussie Ramblings: Back in the big leagues?

2009-01-21T15:10:00.002-05:00

By far, the big story so far at the Australian Open has got to be Jelena Dokic. Yes, she screwed up my draw a bit, but what a story! At the risk of going all Afterschool-Special here, it really is unfortunate that a father could take total advantage of his kid's talent and status to completely derail her career and make her hate the thing she should love doing. But big props to Jelena. For her to win her first round match against Tamira Paszek, who's an up-and-comer, is a bit more than what most would have expected (which would be nothing). To follow that up with beating Anna Chakvetadze is just cake. It would be great to see Dokic have another semifinal run, to overcome all the family angst to start over and be rewarded. Next up for her is Caroline Wozniacki. Should be interesting ...

The magician strikes again: First Phil Kohlschreiber beats Sam Querrey. Then Fabrice Santoro beats Kohlschreiber. The old man's still got it, I guess. He's going to need some more of "it" for his next match, against Andy Roddick. Last time those two played, I seem to remember Santoro nearly in tears because he thought Roddick was trying to kill him with his hard serves. Well, two rounds ain't bad ...

Oh, yeah, and David Nalbandian. You know, being a fan of Nalbandian is like being a woman with a boyfriend who keeps acting up, and you swear him off. Then he comes back with flowers and promises to do better, and you take him back. He cleans up after himself, stops flirting, wins a couple tournaments, whatever. Then he's back to his old loser self, and the cycle begins ... again and again and again. Sheesh. Would it kill Nalbandian to show some consistency?

The Aussie Open preview

2009-01-15T20:16:00.011-05:00

Let's do this!

MEN:
1. Rafael Nadal: Very suspect preparation for this tournament (three matches), especially considering that he ended '08 with an injury. The draw won't be altogether helpful if he's feeling any rust. There's Dmitry Tursunov, Richard Gasquet -- and the guy who just beat Nadal a week or so ago, Gael Monfils. However, Nadal is basically awesome. There is that factor.
2. Roger Federer: Here's something I didn't know: Apparently, having previously been world No. 1 gives you the ability the determine who can win a major. Federer seems amazed that anyone would pick Andy Murray as the favorite. There seems some hesitance on his part to let Murray into the club. Could he be a bit touchy about his own tenuous membership of that club?
Federer, of course, is always a strong competitor. He saved his season last year by winning the U.S. Open, but he comes to Australia still with a lot to prove. He mainly needs to prove he can hang with everyone else in the club. The ones will full privileges, that is. Such as Novak Djokovic, who he might face in the semifinals. If he's not careful, Fed's going to have to count all the way to three to get to his ranking come French Open time. (Which would be just what he needs for that tournament.)
3. Novak Djokovic: The reigning champion seems to have been rewarded with a sweet draw. Looks like the second best player in his quarter would be David Nalbandian. To defend his title, though, he'd probably have to beat Federer in the semifinals. As we discussed, Fed might have a slight chip on his shoulder. Plus, no mono.
4. Andy Murray: I wish Murray would lose again in the first round of this tournament. Because that would mean you'd have to lose to Andrei Pavel. Pavel's no slouch, but he's not really Jo-Jo Tsonga, either. It'd be hard for Murray not to find some confidence in his 2008, even though it took some time for him to warm up.
You know, George W. Bush once said, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice ... eh, heh, heh ... y'can't fool me twice!" Wise words indeed. I only mention this because I chose Murray to make the semis last year, and this year, I've gone a bit further. Read on.
5. Jo-Jo Tsonga: Tsonga might return to the site of his coming-out party with confidence, but his draw wouldn't be an easy one. He could meet Murray in the quarters this time. Or he might not show up. Looks like he's tweaked his back and is unsure about playing. It'd be a shame if he couldn't compete.
6. Gilles Simon: Is that right? Ranked sixth at a Slam?? Seriously, Simon's got a great game. He's like a backboard for the most part, but he has the ability to change the direction and add some pace. He deserves his ranking, but he sure doesn't deserve having to play consistent wild card Ivo Karlovic in the third round. Or Monfils in the fourth round. Or Nadal in the quarters. Crikey.
7. Andy Roddick: God bless Andy Roddick for keeping the hope alive, but this is about where he belongs in the rankings right now. This might actually be a bit kind. After all, if Nikolay Davydenko were here (out with injury), he'd be eighth. Whatever. In filling out the draw, I hesitated when I got to Roddick v. Querrey. And again with Roddick v. Nalbandian. In a nutshell, I'm not holding out much hope for Roddick to meet Djokovic in the quarterfinals.
8. Juan Martin del Potro: Del Potro was on a roll last summer, and even into the fall, where he was widely expected to take Argentina past Spain. We all know by now that didn't work out. It'll be interesting to see if he can get back on the horse. A rematch with Feliciano Lopez in the third round might be the motivation he needs.
9. James Blake: Ernests Gulbis in round three. This would be a good time for Blake to beat Gulbis for the first time, and I suppose anything could happen. Sure. James Blake could win the Australian Open. And Andy Roddick could win the French. I could quit my job to become the tooth fairy. See where I'm going here?
10. David Nalbandian: Well, it's only January, so it's hard to know what to expect from Nalbandian. Doesn't seem like he really gets going until somewhere around September (after the Open), but if he was on his game, he could handle his draw until Djokovic in the quarters.

The stragglers:
Gael Monfils (12): Nice win against Nadal this month. Make it happen in a major.
The Fernandos (13 and 14): Pretty boy Lopez and F. Verdasco should still be riding high after their Davis Cup win. Lopez in particular was impressive then, coming up with the big win against del Potro and in doubles. Verdasco, who is not exactly known for his consistency, finished off Jose Acasuso. Who knows?
Marat Safin (26): For old times sake. And because he allegedly shows up to a tournament with his pretty face bruised from a fight. Sounds like a hell of a story to bring to a tournament, but not really boding well for someone already talking retirement. Will he make it to Wimbledon? The French? Yeah, if someone doesn't piss him off, I guess.

I can't believe they're still seeded!
Rainer Schuettler (30): Kicking it old school. Emphasis on old.

First round matches to watch:
Lleyton Hewitt v. Fernando Gonzalez: Here's my question: What good is it to be a home boy like Hewitt only to get a draw like this? Good luck, Lleyton.

The way it'll go down:
Quarterfinals: Nadal v. Monfils, Murray v. Gulbis, Nalbandian v. Djokovic and del Potro v. Federer
Semifinals: Nadal v. Murray, Djokovic v. Federer
Final: Murray v. Djokovic
He is the champion, my friend!: Andy Murray. Prize money should be just enough for those braces.

WOMEN:
1. Jelena Jankovic: I've decided that Jankovic deserves to be number one -- in a way. She's played more than the other top contenders, and manages to stay fairly consistent. Realistically, though, if she wants a Slam and wants to stay numero uno, she's gonna have to ease off on that frenetic schedule.
As far as that other, small matter of winning her first major title, Jankovic can work with this draw. Nathalie Dechy and "Candy" Bartoli will be good warmup matches. The quarters could bring Vera Zvonareva and Dinara Safina in the semis.
2. Serena Williams: Well, we all know Serena's general policy about dominance -- "Never say No. 2!" Unless she's adressing a baby. Along with wanting to be No. 1, she also has what looks to be an easy draw .... that could suddenly become a brick wall in the form of her sister.
3. Dinara Safina: Here's one thing that can happen that will automatically make women's tennis more interesting. Dinara Safina could start to believe in herself. Last year, it was understandable that she blinked in the French finals. And in the U.S. Open semis. 6-3, 6-2 in a semifinal of a Grand Slam? Blinked. More like trying to play tennis with your hands around your throat.
Regardless, it'd sure be nice to see Safina live up to her potential. She certainly has the ability to advance to the semifinals and beat Jankovic. But will she?
4. Elena Dementieva: For all the jokes made here at TWA at Dementieva's expense, let's show some appreciation (so we can get back to the slow-serve jokes) for how she makes the most of what she has. Not that she doesn't have a lot. Some of the most solid groundstrokes in women's tennis, and the ability to make things tough for those in the top 10, regardless of where she's ranked. She could face Venus Williams in the quarters, and give her a tough match. And if she loses, at least we'll all have her post-match conference to look forward to, where she waxes philosphically about the Williams sisters fixing their face-offs.
5. Ana Ivanovic: Toss-up. After winning the French last year, she was waylaid by a thumb injury, which appeared to wreck her confidence. She managed to win a title at the end of the season to end on a positive-ish note. Having said that, she could draw Caroline Wozniacki in the fourth round. That'd be the same Wozniacki (is there another one?) who almost beat Serena Williams last week. Then maybe Safina in the quarters, and Jankovic in the semis. It just depends on the state of her game.
6. Venus Williams: I'm not really a morning person. I start really waking up starting at around noon. By three, four o'clock, I'm on fire. You sort of get the same idea about Venus in the scope of the yearlong schedule. She generally poops out in the early tournaments of the year, but by Wimbledon, she's kickin' butt. She did end the '08 season on a roll, and it could help her that the offseason's only about 18 minutes. She should be able to take advantage in a draw that includes Flavia Pennetta, Patty Schnyder and Dementieva. Looming in the semifinals would be her very own sister, and their latest matches have been hard-fought, high-quality battles.
7. Vera Zvonareva: So, the last time anyone questioned whether Zvonareva belonged in the top 10, it was the year-end championships in November. She beat everyone there except Venus. Lesson: Don't mess with VERA! Anyway, she's the player with the hottest streak in her quarter of the draw. She's taken down some big names at majors, including Venus in '03. But if she doesn't want to be discounted again, she might want to update that Slam resume.
8. Svetlana Kuznetsova: Yikes. How can someone like Kuznetsova have so much game with such an unsteady hand? To be fair, a lot of people would have been glad to have had the year she had in '08 -- fairly consistent appearances in late stages in tournaments, but with no titles. But those people probably don't have her bag of tricks, either. Being in the same quarter with Aggie Radwanska and Serena Willliams isn't really going to help her confidence problems.
9. Aggie Radwanska: I believe this is only Radwanska's second appearance in the top 10 for a major, and she's been rewarded nicely for it. The biggest obstacle for her (before the quarters) is the aforementioned Kuznetsova. Her issue is that she can easily overpowered, so basically, to win a major, she needs some face time with a hamburger.
10. Nadia Petrova: With Petrova, I always wonder 'What if?' What if she hadn't gotten injured before the French Open in 2005, where she was the huge favorite going in? Would she have gotten her first major and run with that confidence for years? Well, all we know now is she'll have a heck of a time getting past Zvonareva in the fourth round.

The stragglers:
None worth mentioning. Now, of course, Daniela Hantuchova's going to make a semifinal run because I said that.

I can't believe they're still seeded!:
Kuznetsova: Although I guess you get points for being a bridesmaid and never a bride ...
Petrova
Marion Bartoli (16)
Amelie Mauresmo (20): This is what I mean about the wading pool that is women's tennis. Amelie Mauresmo made two semifinals last year. In one of them, she lost to Nathalie Dechy. Unh-huh. She's been struggling in mediocrity for ... well, since she won two majors. But ... she did beat Ivanovic last week. So who knows, right?
Having said that, I read a quote from Mauresmo a while back that really made me feel her pain. Last February, she admitted that: "I sometimes ask myself what the hell I am doing there, in front of half-empty stands."
And at the risk of going off on a rant (especially one I've been on before), that should never happen. With all the storylines and characters on women's tennis, they shouldn't be playing in mostly-empty stadiums. I'm not saying tennis could be as big as, say, football, but it deserves to attract a bigger audience than it does. "Gee, how do we get someone to watch two hard-hitting, history-making sisters play for a Grand Slam title? Hunh. I'm stumped."
Seriously.
OK, that was a rant. Back to the program.

First round matches to watch:
Sania Mirza v. Marta Domachowska
Hantuchova v. Casey Dellacqua: I'm thinking Dellacqua, actually.
Jelena Dokic v. Tamira Paszek: Talk about "Whatever happened to ..." Hopefully, Paszek won't beat her too badly.

The way it'll go down:
Quarters: Jankovic v. Zvonareva, Safina v. Wozniacki, Venus v. Dementieva, Radwanska v. Serena
Semifinals: Jankovic v. Safina, Venus v. Serena
Final: Jankovic v. Venus (I think)
She is the champion, my friend!: One of the above, although I'm giving Venus the edge on experience.

TWA '09, or The dog ate my laptop

2009-01-11T14:13:00.003-05:00

Happy New Year! A moment of silence, though, please, for my ill laptop, which has kept me from ringing in the year a tad sooner. Resolution: get a new computer without the old one finding out about it.
Anyway, let's get right to it. Let's talk sportsmanship.

cheat: the fraudulent obtaining of another's property by a pretense or trick (from Random House dictionary)

So, Serena Williams is playing a warm-up tournament in Sydney (which in itself is surprising) against Samantha Stosur, and she hits a serve that is clearly a net cord, but is not called. So Stosur returns it, and gets the point because the umpire is sleeping on the job. Williams ended up winning the match.
Fine, umpires make mistakes. But whatever happened to the old soccer mom adage? The one that goes something like "It doesn't matter if you win, it's how you play the game?" How does Sam Stosur take that point with no qualms? Just because it's a clear error by the umpire doesn't mean you act like you have to go with it, even when you know he's wrong. Last I checked, that was called cheating. I've seen pro matches on big stages when opponents overruled an obvious umpire error and awarding their opponents a point, or a new serve. Players are not bound to the call -- especially if they think it's wrong. So, a very firm shake of the finger to you, Sam Stosur. Grow up.
Moving on, just read that Maria Sharapova is out of the Australian Open. Boy, this just makes for an interesting start for the women's tour, doesn't it? Bleech.

As if on cue ...

2008-12-17T18:27:00.000-05:00

So, last week, Lindsay Davenport was gearing up for the Aussie Open, and some of her fans (Vicki, Van and myself) were wondering what the eff she was thinking.
Today, nature intervened, and Davenport announced she was pulling out of the major with the ol' nine-month virus.
Whew! Talk about dodging a bullet. Look, the Australian Open wasn't going to turn out well for Davenport anyway, but 'lil Ringo will, in all likelihood, be just fine. Although he probably won't be lucky enough to get that name.

What, does she get senior parking rates?

2008-12-13T17:24:00.002-05:00

I'm at odds with myself over whether Lindsay Davenport's decision to enter the Aussie Open is good news. Here's the good, the great part: Davenport is still looking to pursue a professional and competitive tennis career at the ripe old age of 32 -- and as the mother of a toddler. Her intentions are inspiring, and if you've ever thought to yourself that it's too late -- for anything -- it certainly shouldn't have anything to do with your age. (As though 32 is old. But I'm sure it feels old for Davenport when she walks onto the court to play some 14-year-old hotshot.)
How-EVAH. Let's just be unflinchingly honest here. Lindsay Davenport would need to have gotten a speed transplant in the offseason to have a sniff at the Aussie Open third round. Or those Maria Sharapova-type draws. You can't play competitive tennis these days by hoping you hit enough winners that you don't have to rally. Even in the wading pool of women's tennis these days, Davenport hasn't made any major waves. Losing to Marion "Candy" Bartoli at the U.S. Open? Yikes.
Which begs the question: Is it enough (especially for a great champ like Lindsay) to just go out and give it the old university try? If you can't win, is it worth hitting the gym? It's one thing when you're coming up and getting better. When you're obviously on the downslope of your career, and you can't even stay in tournaments long enough to face the big players, it's another thing.
Seriously, I'm conflicted. Lindsay Davenport's return: Thumbs up or thumbs down?

Sneak peak

2008-12-04T17:24:00.000-05:00

Roger Federer's 2009 schedule (which starts about six weeks after his 2008 season wrapped) includes two fewer clay court tournaments.
I know, I know ... what does it all mean? His agent says Fed's trying to cut down on all tournaments and peak for the important ones -- the majors. It stands to reason, too, that because he can't seal the deal at the French, he should be playing more clay matches. However, Fed's been to three straight French Open finals. He's lost to the same dominant clay-courter every time. (Although the 2008 whomping had to be demoralizing.)
The other way to look at this: Maybe he's put too much pressure on himself to win at Roland Garros. He is still playing the Masters clay tournaments, so he will get quality opponents -- just not as many matches.
So, does Federer need more clay court play to win the French? And another twist: If he loses it again this year, will he stop trying? I open the floor.

Davis Cup musings, or "Ohhhh-ohhhh-ohhhh"

2008-11-23T00:34:00.002-05:00

For the most part, I am a purist, but today, the zoo in Argentina gave me a major revelation about tennis.
First off, wow! Great doubles between Argentina's Agustin Calleri and David Nalbandian and Spain's Feliciano Lopez and Fernando Verdasco! It's not often that you can squander a 5-1 lead in any set. Nope, that only happens when it counts, and you really want to win.
But this is where my revelation comes in, the second off. In the third set, when the Argentinians came back to force the tiebreaker, and were leading 5-1, something happened that seemed to change the course of the set. Someone in the crowd shouted out just as Nalbandian was serving -- and he double-faulted. After that, the Spaniards ran away with it, and set point was played with the crowd going berserk, banging drums, playing trombones, hitting whatever was around.
In theory, Davis Cup is a chance for teams to play for their country. I believe they even invite tennis fans to attend. And they do. With band accessories. Anyway, that's what makes Davis Cup great. (What makes Davis Cup suck is the way it's organized. But I digress. For today. With great hesitance.) Yet, the umpires are shushing the fans like they're in fifth grade again. Sorry, but isn't that what tennis is missing -- excitement? So my question is, "Why is tennis the last sport that needs to be played in utter silence?"
Answer: It doesn't. For the four thousandth time, tennis is 99.921842% mental. That means that if some drunk fans want to scream bloody murder during your service motion, that shouldn't mean you drop your serve. For those of us who don't play in clubs every week, how many times has a car alarm begun blaring during your tennis game? Or a kid started crying? Or a cell phone began ringing? Or a flock of seagulls took flight overhead? And how many times has your foursome just stopped playing until there was complete silence? (If you guys did, I am wagging a severely punishing finger at you right now. Shame.)
The point is, it's time to stop insisting on silence in order to play tennis. It's the last sport to hold on to such an archaic standard. Can you imagine a football game being played as long as the fans keep their pieholes full of beer and hot dogs? In fact, attempts at breaking concentration in football is a common strategy among coaches. How about trying to "ice" a kicker just before he kicks a key field goal? It's sport, people. Not tea and crumpets.
The great thing about not playing the silence game during tennis is that it becomes more of a crowd event, which is one thing tennis needs to gain traction. Note: tennis does not need to change the way it plays tiebreaks or the doubles game in order to gain traction. It needs the little things -- letting Andy Roddick throw his racket if he's a little irritated about that missed volley. We know that for Andy, there will be many.
Point is, this is a small factor that could change the culture of tennis -- for good. Watch the Davis Cup matches this weekend. There is excitement that you don't see in Grand Slams. That should be encouraged. And as for players, it's time they learned to play through fan noise, as Lopez and Verdasco did.
So, what do you think? What could possibly be the downfalls of letting fans be more of an active part of tennis?

The week (or so) that was

2008-11-15T11:54:00.008-05:00

Just noticing that a Mariah Carey lyrics blog has been updated before mine. Wow.
Anyway:
1. A belated congratulations to Venus Williams for winning the women's year-end event. There were a lot of good things going on for ol' girl this tournament. She dominated matches that could have been tight. Venus actually changed the pace on a few balls, too. (I really thought the first two were mishits.) She also didn't wilt in the third set, which she's done all season. Her forehand was on point, but her serve was not. I really don't understand how you have a first serve that'll break someone's wrist, and a second serve that strongly resembles Elena Dementieva's first serve. Especially after all these years, you'd think Venus would have developed a stronger weapon with it. However, we know that forehand of hers wasn't built in a day.
Plus, it was nice to see Serena Williams stick around to watch her sister, if that's what she wants to call it. Seems she didn't stop texting rap lyrics to Common until the end of the tournament.
2. Also nice to see Tracy Austin still with a job. Did she really say that the women's field had just seven players -- singling out Vera Zvonareva, who made the final? I'm not sure if that's worse than her saying Kim Clijsters had nothing to hurt Jennifer Capriati with just before the French Open final in 2001, which ended with a 12-10 tiebreaker.
I'm just going to make a quick suggestion for Tracy. If you've never heard of someone (and I don't know how you could not know who Zvonareva is after all these years -- and after her really solid season), refrain from speaking. Just ride the camels in Doha and shriek until I have to turn the television off and count to 60.
3. And on to the men. First, has anyone seen the promo shots for the Shanghai tournament compared to the Doha event? Not only do the men look totally hot, but the ATP appears to have planned the shoot in advance. Notice the similar clothing and controlled environment. It looks like it was organized.
The women? Seriously. What the hell is that? It's just a microcosm of what is wrong with women's tennis.
4. Anyway, put on your blindfolds and stick your hand into the hat. Pick the two men's finalists. That's how random it seems to have Novak Djokovic and Nikolay Davydenko as the last men standing. I thought it was kind of lame for Davydenko to admit he'd rather play Andy Murray than Roger Federer because he had a better record against Murray. (Sure, they all think that way, but actually says it?) I'm like, "Yeah, like you'd beat either of them." But Davydenko looked good this week, dumping water on red-hot Jo-Jo Tsonga and Juan Del Potro. Of course, the only person he didn't beat in his group was Djokovic. Their first match was tight, so we'll see.
Of course, all eyes were on Roger Federer, who went 1-2 in this event, losing to Andy Murray and Gilles Simon. Poor guy. You win one Slam and finish the year at No. 2 in the world, and everyone thinks you're washed up. See, this is why you don't establish a record of excellence. You miss a step, and you're a failure. Now, if you wade in mediocrity, and win a major every now and again (ahemMaratSafinahem), everyone thinks you're doing well ... for you. You decide which is better.
5. A lot of great doubles on this week in Shanghai. Three doubles matches only in Doha. Wow. Now that's suspense.
Oh, I feel a rant coming.
Yup. That's definitely a rant.
Look, WTA, tennis fans love doubles. Four teams in Doha? Are you people out of your tree? It's bad enough that we have "deciding points" and ridiculous "champions tiebreakers" instead of a third set. The powers that be at the WTA must think their singles lineup is waay too stellar to have doubles get in the way. That would be wrong. Doubles would have helped. How disrespectful to the players who concentrate on doubles to delegate them to "whenever we have time." Hopefully, they watched the men's tournament to see what they could have had.
6. Sigh. Let's try again about the men's doubles. It's great stuff! Despite the deciding points crap and everything designed to take the suspense out of doubles. I am suppressing the rant. How about the teams of Luis Hornas and Pablo Cuevas and Mariusz Fyrstenberg and Marcin Matkowski (hell, yes, I cut and pasted those names. Are you kidding me?) making a deep run against the more established teams out there? When you think about it, it makes sense. Looks like some of those other teams didn't know what to do against new-ish teams that don't really play the run-o'-the-mill doubles. The final match is down to the Bryan brothers and Danny Nestor (so does not look like a Danny) and Nenad Zimonjic. Should be a good one.
One more thing on doubles: There's positive reinforcement between partners, and then there's "OH MY GOD, WOULD YOU GET PLEASE YOUR HAND OFF OF ME?" What is the deal with all the hand slapping after every single point? Regardless, by the way, of who won the point! What do these pros know that rec players don't? I don't even talk to my husband after every point, let alone some random person. What cracks me up the most is that even teams not used to playing together fall right into this. Is the confidence really that thin? Yikes.
Well, at least we know we won't be seeing that kind of behavior from the Bryan brothers.

Doha -- Day Two

2008-11-04T20:50:00.002-05:00

Due to Election Day obligations and work deadlines, I found myself unable to watch the matches today. But Jankovic over Ivanovic, 6-3, 6-4? That was my match of the day!? So with that as prologue, a look at tomorrow's matches:
Ana Ivanovic v. Vera Zvonareva: Yikes. I'm actually going to go with Zvonareva here. If I'm wrong, a match might ensue.
Elena Dementieva v. Venus Williams: Despite the serve, Dementieva is always a threat. And rightfully so. Everyone has a weakness in their game, and hers is considerable. Although it's interesting that she can hit her serve all right until a match gets tight. Then it's back to that weak slice serve heading to the forehand. Anyway, Venus has been the opposite lately: Her serve is working, even when nothing else is. So this should be interesting.
Dinara Safina v. Serena Williams: Serena. Sorry. Obama just became president of the United States. Gotta fly!

No pressure, ladies, but ...

2008-11-03T23:08:00.002-05:00

Tomorrow begins the end for the women's season, and let's be honest: It should have happened right after the U.S. Open. The fact that five women have held the No. 1 slot this season might suggest a high level of competition to some.
Well, only two guys held No. 1 on the ATP tour. So I'm gonna nix that theory.
The women's tour has lacked any real rivalries, few really good matches, and about as much depth as my bathroom sink. If this season's to be saved, this year-end event in Doha is going to have to be a classic.
It's almost like the organizers knew it, too. The Serbians are together in one group. The Williams girls are in the other. A look at the first day in the desert:
Svetlana Kuznetsova v. Vera Zvonareva: This is going to sound terrible, but has anyone else wondered if Zvonareva's wearing that much eye makeup as a preventive measure against crying? Anyway, there's a big-time head case in this match-up, and it's not Zvonareva. Kuznetsova's had a good year, but has come up short in the big matches. Although Kuznetsova owns Zvonareva big-time in career meetings, that goes out of the window until Kuzzy proves she can close.
Jelena Jankovic v. Ana Ivanovic: Ooh. My interest is piqued. Right after I questioned whether Ivanovic is a one-Slam wonder, she stepped up, playing Venus Williams tough in Zurich and then won in Austria. (I'm gonna go ahead and take credit for that.) So Ivanovic is warming up just as her countrywoman's getting ready to shut it down for the season, after this, her 73rd tournament of the year. I don't think Jankovic's got enough left in the tank to get out of the round-robin, um, round.
Has anyone seen those "Looking for a Hero" commercials with Jankovic, by the way? While she's becoming a "superhero" by going through those revolving doors, I can't help but think that in real life, she would have definitely injured herself doing that stunt.
Dinara Safina v. Venus Williams: A match-up between the Jan Bradys of their families. I think that next year, this match will be more competitive, but Venus will probably steamroll Safina until she believes she belongs in the upper echelon. It's all in Safina's head right now.
Quick note about Shanghai: Rafa Nadal is OUT! We can blame the schedule or Nadal's wildly successful year, but the year-end championships should have THE best, so this is bad news! So this means Gilles Simon is in. I'm already way more excited about Shanghai without Nadal than a "full" field in Doha. Sad.

Freaky Friday (or Jo-Jo Tsonga, Your Life is Calling)

2008-11-01T13:45:00.004-04:00

Now you know things in Paris are officially on the flip side when Andy Roddick is blocking serves back.
Sorry, but that's more shocking (but barely) than Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal begging out of their quarterfinals. Federer never got on court because of a bad back. ("Who cares anymore?" he's thinking. "I'm only number two.") Meaning, of course, that James Blake advances to the semis, because he would have beaten Fed anyway. (...)
Then Nadal lost his first set against Nikolay Davydenko and pulled out after complaining of pain in his right knee. With the kind of year Nadal has had, going deep in every tournament, this late-season injury is no surprise. But how about this exchange in the locker room between Fed and Nadal:
Nadal said: "I saw him in the locker room five minutes before my match and he told me he had a pain in the back.
I said, maybe we are both going to be going home tonight."
Hopefully, their injuries are nothing a little time off can't heal, because if Fed and Nadal aren't in Shanghai, it's got to be cancelled. It just wouldn't be right not to have two of main characters of the drama that's been men's tennis there. When they're out of a tournament early these days, the vacuum they leave behind is definitely felt.
But that's not to say the remaining cast of characters in Paris aren't interesting.
For example, registering high on the weird-o-meter was David Nalbandian beating Andy Murray in straight sets. Murray's been hot stuff this season, no doubt. But can anyone derail Nalbandian's annual end-of-season run? What is up with that? That man owns the month of October. How about getting warm a wee bit earlier, David? Like, when Grand Slams are being contested?
Then there was Roddick and Jo-Jo Tsonga, the other two players to actually get on court and complete their matches. And it was very Halloween-ny. I wouldn't have believed it unless I had seen it myself, but Roddick finished several points at the net. And it wasn't because he lost his string dampener. He was actually trying to volley. Emphasis on trying.
Then there was the bizarre half-hour conference over whether Roddick had any challenges left. The scoreboard said there were none. The ref said there was one. Chaos ensued. Seriously, if there's no disagreement between the players, why the delay in game? And I thought I was mathematically challenged.
Eventually, Tsonga came out on top in a third-set tiebreak. Looks like Tsonga's looking to salvage the rest of his season, and he's been impressive here. He wasn't at his best against Roddick, but he kept his head just a bit longer. As for Roddick, I'm just starting to feel sorry for him. What does this guy have to do to catch a break?
Hopefully, the answer isn't getting on a plane.

Black Monday (or Thanks so much, Juan Monaco)

2008-10-27T23:27:00.003-04:00

Screw the stock market.
This is serious.
Marat Safin, after getting waxed by Juan Monaco, 6-0, 7-6, today in Paris, said the dreaded "R" word. No, not recession. Safin's talking retirement!
"I’ve been struggling throughout my career with injuries left and right. It’s a little bit uncomfortable to find yourself in the top 10 for many years and to find yourself ranked 70 and 30 and 50 ... It’s not really a comfortable position," he said.
He's going to take some time off, try to figure out how a two-time Grand Slam winner (should've been three, Thomas Johansson) finds himself with a record of only 24-24 this season. Or how someone with so much natural ability can lose to the likes of Philipp Petzschner (yes, THE Philipp Petzschner) or Andrey Golubev, a household name.
In Kazakstan.
This is a huge decision for Safin, with far-reaching implications. In his deliberations, he has to consider what could happen to him if he should hang up his racquet:
1. Safin could take the Andre Agassi route: He makes one last push, wins a few more Slams, shave his head and open a school for groupies in St. Petersburg.
2. Or, he could quit right now and film a reality show, a la Mark Philippoussis, called The Color of Love. Safin is presented with two groups of women -- the Blondes and the Brunettes -- and must decide which group is his true love(s).
3. Then there's the Roscoe Tanner road. Safin's mug shows up on The Smoking Gun's Web site after he's busting passing bad checks for million-dollar cars. Prison is no place for such a cute face, Marat.
Hopefully, though, Safin is inspired by the success of his sister, Dinara -- who, by the way, is nowhere near as naturally gifted and has done more with less -- and comes back with a fire under his cute tush.

The week in review

2008-10-21T19:18:00.004-04:00

A brief recap of the week in tennis:

1. Venus Williams did something she hasn't done since Wimbledon -- close out a match. She won her second (yes, that's it) tournament of the year at the Zurich Open, beating her nemesis Flavia Pennetta in the final. In the semis, she played Ana Ivanovic. Judging from previous performances from both of them recently, it could have been an ugly match, but both played well. Ivanovic showed this week she's still got game, but it remains to be seen whether she can get -- and keep -- her mind right.
I have to admit to agreeing with Corina Morariu on the Tennis Channel, which is rare only because I can't stand her voice. I can't explain why. Anyway, as Morariu says, Venus insists on standing inside the baseline to receive serve, no matter how hard it is. Because nothing is as intimidating as standing just inches behind the service line and screwing up every single return. Imagine what would happen, Venus, if you *gasp* stepped back a foot or three? You might have room to, oh, I don't know, SWING!
2. Speaking of intelligence, I gotta give it up to Gilles Simon. He fought off something like twenty-eight match points during the week and played a great match against Rafael Nadal in the semis. And here I thought he was just a pusher. That's some pusher, changing spin, direction and speed whenever he wants. He finally encountered a match point he couldn't shake, though. And how about that Andy Murray? (I gotta ask: What is that gigantic blotch on the back of Murray's leg?) Looks like his U.S. Open run was no flash in the pan. Just when you thought things were heating up at the top of the men's game, you've got to make room for more. A Scot, no less. I'm going to guess that one day, Murray will do a little better than Tim Henman at Wimbledon. And the Open. All of them.
3. Roger Federer is relegated to world No. 2 for the rest of the year. Can we agree that he might be the second-best world No. 2 EV-ER?

Tired yet?

2008-10-13T21:06:00.002-04:00

I don't often suggest this to players (especially not women players, given the lack of depth), but really, Jelena Jankovic, take a week off. Or three.
Jankovic's run this fall has been impressive. She's been great all year, actually. But, who wants to bet that by the year-end championship, she'll have nothing left?
A better question: Who wants to guess how many tournaments Jankovic has played this year? And compare it, to say, Serena Williams?
Here's someone who does what no one else does -- play a full schedule -- and yet comes up empty at every Slam. It's almost not fair, but part of being a consistent pro has to do with taking care of yourself, pacing yourself. If Jankovic has a deep run this week in Zurich, that'll give her about two weeks to recover from playing nonstop for a month.
The word is not "cast". It's "balance". We've seen the opposite happen (ahemVenusWilliamsahem) where certain players take weeks off at a time, then falter in early rounds. Even Williams, though, manages a Grand Slam with her scheduling. It's next to impossible for Jankovic to play every tournament, and still be tough enough to win a major. Kudos to her coaches and mom for making her the world's best. Now they just have to make sure she can stay that way for a long time.
No takers on how many tournaments she and Williams have played this year? No cheating. I already did that.

One-hit wonder?

2008-10-08T22:36:00.002-04:00

I remember watching Anastasia Myskina win the French Open in 2004, and thinking right away, "Now here's someone who'll never win a Grand Slam again." And where's Myskina now? Burping her 5-month-old.
It took a little longer, but I'm starting to have that one-hit wonder feeling about Ana Ivanovic. She lost today in the second round in Moscow -- against a talent, Dominika Cibulkova, but for those counting, she has played eleven matches since she won the French Open. She has lost six of them. To lesser players -- at bigger events. Let's not forget Julie Coin, who took her out at the U.S. Open. Or Nathalie Dechy at Wimbledon, which Ivanovic won, after about a year and a half.
I know, I know, she's just a kid. And, yes, she's been dealing with injury. Now that she's better, what's the problem? Tennis is 99.234% mental. Clearly, this is Ivanovic's hang-up right now. But why? Is it a lack of confidence? (After winning a Grand Slam? She must be hanging out with Amelie Mauresmo, also a loser today in Moscow ...) And if so, how do you get that back without winning matches? How do you win matches if you aren't mentally tough?
Ivanovic's got the game, there's no question. Lord knows she's no pusher like Myskina was. But where's her head at?
Anyone else wondering if Ivanovic's a one-Slam wonder? Or is she having a tough time handling the pressure?

Create your own caption ...

2008-10-04T21:42:00.001-04:00

"Aaaughh! Is that a mouse?!!?"

Is this fair?

2008-10-02T21:43:00.002-04:00

So, the ITF has penalized Croatia for having hard courts that were too fast during their Davis Cup tie against Brazil.
First, yeah. It was obviously the court that allowed the Croats to win, 4-1. As I recall, Gustavo Kuerten is no longer playing tennis. So, is there any surface Brazil could beat the Croatians upon? Ice? No, it's freakin' hot in Brazil.
Second, here's what really bugs me about this punishment. I'm just going to "borrow" this from the story:

Marina Mihelic, the head of Croatian Tennis Federation, said the ITF checked the court three days before the matches started on Sept. 19 and concluded that the speed of surface was indeed above the maximum, but only minimally. Mihelic said she consulted ITF again and it suggested that the court surface didn’t need another layer because it would postpone the matches.

Riight. So, the ITF knew the courts were too fast, and says, "Hey, don't worry about it. Not enough time to worry about it now." At the end of the tie, they take 2,000 points away from them -- after they told them not to fix the "problem?"
I'm not a huge Davis Cup fan, so I'm already slightly biased, I guess. But does anyone else think this punishment is a little wrong? Or a lot wrong?

Seen on my Yahoo page this morning ...

2008-09-27T10:19:00.001-04:00

Jankovic, Sela to meet in Beijing finals

Hm. Is that Jelena Jankovic and Dudi Sela? What's going on in that tournament?

The TWA Bestseller List

2008-09-25T21:26:00.002-04:00

Twenty-six-year-old Serena Williams is working on her autobiography, which will focus on her inspirational rise, fall and re-rise (don't use that word at home) in the rankings.
Not that Serena's story isn't interesting. It almost seems like she got back to No. 1 just to tack an ending onto that story, though, doesn't it? And really, isn't she kind of young for a book? I know James Blake has a book out already, but Blake also had a life- and career-threatening injury. It's hard for me to think Serena's going to have an uneventful rest of her life.
Regardless, her announcement came with the usual copycat flurry of book deals. A few to put on that library list:

1. My Meteoric Rise to No. 1 ... from No. 2 by Roger Federer
2. The Three Faces of Nole by Novak Djokovic
3. Serena, Serena, Serena! by Venus Williams
4. .... And All I Got Is This Lousy T-Shirt by Andy Roddick
5. Calm Under Pressure by Marat Safin
6. Yes, There's a Cast for That by Jelena Jankovic
7. Make Mine a Double ... Fault by Elena Dementieva
8. "No?" Means "Yes." by Rafael Nadal

TournamentWatch: End of an era

2008-09-23T17:16:00.000-04:00

The last tournament of my summer was the Highland Park Wrap-Up.
OK, so here’s the deal with Highland Park, because it’s probably the one thing I’ve never written at length about. I can’t believe I managed to gloss over Highland Park. Especially because HP players bring the ‘A’ to TWA -- big time.
My husband and I began to come to Highland Park a few years back, and our first event was the “Celebrity Mixed Doubles tournament, always held on Labor Day. The first team we went up against was Dwayne and Joy Woodruff. If you’re a man and a sports fan, yes, that Dwayne Woodruff. If you’re a woman, I’ll tell you who Dwayne Woodruff is as though I knew when I first met him. He used to be a cornerback for the Pittsburgh Steelers in the 1980s (DUH!), and anyone who used to be a Pittsburgh Steeler is royalty in Pittsburgh, even backup quarterbacks and even if they’re now working at the Taco Bell. Except Kordell Stewart. But I digress.
We warmed up with the Woodruffs, and Joy made an offhand comment about how young we both looked, to which her husband replied, “She is, but he ain’t.” Being that my husband’s just a tad older than I am, he took offense and the pissing contest begun. So here’s how our match went. Let’s say Dwayne serves. I return to Joy. Joy hits to Jerry. Jerry tries to blast a hole through Dwayne’s midsection. The whole match was Jerry and Dwayne trying to blast each other into next week. Joy and I just gave each other that “boys will be boys” smile, and we were probably both praying they didn’t actually connect on any of these shots.
Fortunately, Dwayne Woodruff is better at football than tennis, and we won that match. Apparently, guys do that kind of thing for giggles, and Dwayne and Jerry shook amiably at the end.
We found that Highland Park was the only place in the ‘Burgh where you could pick up tennis matches. You’ve still got one foot in your car, and someone on the court’s asking you to be their fourth. This is city tennis at its best. There is: trash-talking, blatant attempts to hit net players with overheads, steady conversations between players and those sitting on the bench during play, and various other goings-on that would get you drop-kicked out of Wimbledon. So naturally, we love it.
But it has its blemishes, namely two courts with cracks big enough to lose a can of balls. That’s why, as I tap, construction crews are removing the fences and resurfacing all nine courts. Which is great, but it’s like replacing your old couch. Yes, the springs are popping up out of the upholstery, but it’s your old couch.
This year’s wrap-up, then, would be the last time to note with annoyance the teeny bump along the baseline of the slow court nearest the street. Personally, I wanted to do well there to mark a high note to a nice season. When I saw the draw, I could see I got some help in that mission. I was seeded first in singles. Then I looked at the bottom half of the draw to find my nemesis, the girl who’s beaten me the last three times I’ve played her. AND she was unseeded. I had to laugh. Apparently, the organizers didn’t know who she was, or she would have been seeded first. Sigh. At least I’d make the final there. My partner and I were seeded second in the women’s doubles and half of the top team was my other nemesis. I have a lot of nemesi – meaning the people who beat me. Anyway, I cruised through the singles draw, and ran smack dab into Nemisis No. 1 in the final.
You know what’s frustrating? To know why you lose to someone and to still find yourself incapable of doing anything about it. I have had a different strategy for each time I’ve played this chick, and this time was no different. I thought deep topspin would make it more difficult to hit her push-y groundstrokes. We would see.
The first game of the match was on her serve and it lasted about ten minutes. When I won it, I thought to myself, “Woo! First strike!” Then I dropped my serve in about three seconds. Yeah. That kind of day. I won a lot of my matches just by running everything down and making my opponent hit one more shot. It was not cool to have it happen to me. Not cool. I played well and valiantly, and even held a 4-2 lead in the second set, but it wasn’t to be. I lost, 6-3, 6-4, but I left with some hope. I thought it was our most competitive match yet.
In the women’s doubles, my partner and I also cruised, but we had one of those “Court of Appeals” (you know, the advice column in Tennis magazine)- moments. So, we’re in a rally in the semis and my partner charges in and hits a volley behind the net person for a winner. We’re like “Awesome!” Then our opponent clears her throat and says politely, “Excuse me (yes, she said ‘Excuse me’) but I’d like to call a let. There’s a ball behind you.” We turn, and sure enough, there is a ball a touch behind the baseline. The four of us, on the other hand, are at the net. Also, the ball, I would imagine, didn’t just drop down from Mars. It had probably been there for a minute or so, and was of no consequence – until that volley skimmed her backside. We argued, not assertively, that you can’t call a let after a point is over – specifically, after you’ve already lost the point. But we were in control, and let it slide. A few games later, we had a date with Nemesis No. 2.
Nemesis No. 2 is basically the queen of Highland Park. She wins just about every tournament she’s in, and although I hadn’t played against her in more than a year, she’s beaten me twice. Naturally, all of us women (heck, even the men – she beats them, too) want to beat her. My partner and I felt this was a match we could win, but we didn’t sweat it too much, either. I’ve been playing with Mavis all summer, and win or lose, we’ve basically laughed our way through every match. We have so much fun, and even when we lost the first set 6-2, we were in good spirits. The spirits were better when we opened up a 3-0 lead in the second set. That set turned out to be quite a tussle. I was serving at 4-3, thinking that if I lost this game, we’d be tied, and then, we’d be just as good as dead. Despite my positive mindset, I pulled that game out, and we won the second set, 7-5.
Have you ever felt a sense of foreshadowing during a match? Even though the score is tied? Well, I had that feeling, and it was after we won a very nervous first game of the second set. I felt like we were barely hanging on, which I guess is what separates the champions from the second-place finishers. We lost the third set, 6-2, but I learned a lesson, I think. First, Nemesis No. 2 didn’t miss a single shot in the third set. She got focused and didn’t let up. Her mind’s like a steel trap, and I want to be like that when I grow up.
So, the last tournament on our old courts was not a complete wash. Got two (runner-up) trophies out of it. But that’s not it for me, although I’ve been ready to shut it down for some time. Winter mixed league is coming up. Can the Hubster and I make it to sectionals? Will we join one league or two? And who will we play for? Tune in next time … (cue Batman music) …

Decisions, decisions, decisions ...

2008-09-19T22:27:00.003-04:00

Here's how Rafa Nadal's summer went: He went to Wimbledon (won it), went to Canada (won it), went to Cincinnati (semis), went to Beijing for the Olympics (won it), went to the U.S. Open (semis), then went to Spain for the Davis Cup (barring a complete collapse, will win that).
Here's how Andy Roddick's summer went: He went to Wimbledon (lost early), went to Canada (lost in the quarters), went to L.A. (lost in the final), went to D.C. (lost in the quarters), went to the U.S. Open (lost in the quarters), went to Spain for the Davis Cup (not looking so good).
Never mind that Roddick's scheduling looks to have been a lost gamble. He's got the rest of his life to think about that one. Give him credit for setting priorities and sticking to it, though. It's just that nothing else really went to plan.
For example, it was Sam Querrey, not James Blake, who went up against Nadal in Davis Cup play on Friday. Now Querrey played Nadal close -- he lost in four sets -- but what would Blake have done? Yes, it's clay, but Blake does has a career edge over Nadal.
Then, Roddick played his ass off, only to come up short in the fifth set against David Ferrer. And as crazy as I thought Roddick was for putting all his eggs in one basket, it's pretty sad about seeing someone come up empty-handed.
Now, tomorrow, it's up the doubles match to give the U.S. a half of a half of a chance to come back. And, like everything else, it's not the team anyone planned. It's up to Bob Bryan and Mardy Fish, who have never played together, to keep this tie alive.
No pressure, guys.

Oh, this is special.

2008-09-16T15:42:00.000-04:00

The U.S. Davis Cup is dropping as though their next tie was on red clay or something.
Bob Bryan's bad shoulder mean's he'll be tapping out for the match against Spain this weekend. In his stead is Mardy Fish. Now, Fish has got the hops to do the flying chest bump with Mike. But Fish's record on clay this year? He lost to Andy Roddick in Rome. Yeah. So.
What say Cap't Mac? “We are the underdog but we are not here strictly for our health. We are here because we think we can win. No way do we look at this as a setback.”
Heh heh. I sure hope he doesn't OD on that Kool-Aid.

It's about time ...

2008-09-13T12:52:00.002-04:00

The ATP has finally made a decision about the gambling investigation surrounding Nikolay Davydenko -- although after a year, we could guess that there wasn't much evidence damning the guy.
Unfortunately for Davydenko, a good deal of the damage done can't be undone. That's because of the irresponsible and slow manner of this gambling probe. In that year, he's been warned (by 2 umpires) for not trying hard enough and has had to answer, oh, about twelve gambling questions per press conference everywhere he plays. In that time, he's not flipped out once. Which is pretty good, because he got screwed. The irregular gambling pattern was there, and should have been investigated. It shouldn't have taken a year. The fact it took so long means that the accusation stays with Davydenko for the rest of his career. If he becomes No. 1 in the world (If, I said. I'm not crazy), his Wikipedia page will still have the gambling investigation in the first paragraph of his bio.
What say you? Did this investigation take too long? Does the ATP owe Davydenko an apology? Discuss.

OOH!! He got served!

2008-09-09T17:27:00.000-04:00

The Davis Cup rosters for the U.S. at Spain semifinal are out today. Ho-hu-WHA?
Here's the U.S. team:
Andrew Roddick
The Bryan Bros.

(wait for it ...)

Sam Querrey

Yeah, James Blake was kicked to the curb. He told Coach Pat McEnroe he was exhausted. Makes sense. Losing in the third round at the U.S. Open must have been grueling. Seriously, Beijing to N.Y. to Spain is a little nutty. But why Sam Querrey and not Mardy Fish, who had the best run at the Open?
Oh. Because they're playing on clay, and Americans are allergic.
And, oh. Because Rafa Nadal's playing for Spain with about 20 minutes of sleep.
This should be interesting.

U.S. OPEN: Knocking on the door, huh?

2008-09-07T18:14:00.004-04:00

All right, all right! Andy Murray is ready for prime time, okay? When it looked like he would fold against Rafa Nadal (broken at love after a 15-minute game in which he had myriad chances to break Nadal), he stepped up and finished off the world number one. (Quick word on Nadal: That was some drop shot on match point, there, Rafa. I'd give you more of the business about that, but you've had a successful, but long, season. I can't think of anyone who deserves more of a break than you do, kid. See you in Shanghai.)
But, hey, Murray, huh? Now, can he beat Roger Federer in a major final? Yes. If you can beat the dominant player of the year in a major semifinal, you can take the next step. Oh, and Murray is 2-1 lifetime over Fed.
Now, will he beat Federer in a major final? No. Right now, I'd bet Federer is laughing in delirium over not having to play Nadal. He will be loose, confident and a lot fresher than his opponent. Fed wants that major win. For him, one is pretty wack, but it's better than coming in second ... again.

U.S. OPEN: A very male-heavy "pre"view

2008-09-06T10:59:00.004-04:00

If it doesn't get rained out, the men's semifinals could be a set of classics. First up is Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic, warming up as I tap. (OK, first, what was the deal with Djokovic after that Roddick match? Dude, you're a tennis player. When did you ever need crowd support to get by?) Anyway, this is the real popcorn match of the day, provided it doesn't get rained out. Fed's been struggling, but he also has been up against some folks who played well against him. However, I think everyone's noticing the shakiness of his forehand these days. Djokovic, on the other hand, is looking very solid, and where no one could even sniff Roddick's serve, he broke him often through the match. I can also see it's really windy out there, but I don't anticipate anyone yelling "I hate the wind!" (ahemDinaraSafinaahem). These guys are experienced. They'll figure it out. I'm going with Djokovic in five.
Then there's Rafa Nadal v. Andy Murray. During this tournament, Murray's shown the ability to check out a bit in matches, only to return just in time to win. Which is great -- if you're playing Jurgen Melzer or Juan Del Potro. To be fair, Nadal started slow against Mardy Fish the other day as well. I give Nadal the overwhelming edge in this match. He's growing in confidence and is just a mental steel trap. I think Murray's knocking on the door, so I'll give him a set.
As for the women's final, boy, I'd like to think Williams v. Jankovic at night will be good, but let's be realistic. We've got yet another women's final that might clock in at under 56 minutes. I really, really want Jankovic to play well, and to make it interesting, but Serena is looking really good. That's great for her. Sucks for us.

Really, Venus? Really?

2008-09-03T23:33:00.002-04:00

They say one out of 10 ain't bad.
And it ain't. For some tennis players (ahemVenusWilliamsahem), that would have been plenty.
That's right. Venus had 10 set points in her quarterfinal against her sister. If she'd converted one, I'd be watching the third set of their match right now. Big sis has got some hard questions to ask herself. Like, "Why did Serena need just one match point to win the match?" or "Why am I going for lines when my opponent's not even in the screen?" How about "Am I playing the ball or the situation?"
Anyway, it looks like Williams v. Williams is just what women's tennis needs right now. Strangely, no coaches on court throughout the match ...
Sooo, Mardy Fish is starting strong against Rafael Nadal. I can just see I won't be going to bed anytime soon.

Noooooo!!!!!!!

2008-09-03T15:29:00.002-04:00

From the news wires:
NEW YORK —The coaches of women’s tennis players will be able to visit them on the court during matches starting next year on the WTA Tour.
The Tour’s board approved the long-discussed change last week, and the decision was announced Wednesday during the U.S. Open. Tour CEO Larry Scott says the main motivation was for television, because fans enjoy gaining insight into the sport. Coaches must agree to wear microphones to have on-court access to players.
Coaches will be allowed one visit per set. They also will be able to come on court when an opponent is taking a medical break.

All this tennis tweaking is out of control.
If it's not a stupid-tiebreak, or club tennis, it's on-court coaching -- ruining one thing that sets tennis apart from other sports.
Plus, they're not even doing it right. I still don't understand how viewers can hear this coaching and opponents won't. You know, in football games, a team doesn't get to know what the other is doing.
I love how the WTA in particular tries to fix tennis when the game is just fine, thank ye. What's wrong with the WTA is that they have two history-breaking sisters, a fine player who just had a kid, two top-three players from a war-torn country, and, oh yeah, Maria Sharapova, and they still can't market the sport properly.
Yeah, let's fix tennis. Or let's fire Larry Scott and hire someone with a brain. Who's with me?

U.S. OPEN: A quarter for my thoughts? Sure ...

2008-09-03T09:12:00.002-04:00

OK, I'm just going to admit it. I hate watching Andy Roddick play. When he's on.
It's the most boring tennis you'll ever see, next to Ivo Karlovic. Ace, walk. Ace, walk. Second serve ace, game. No rallies to speak of, and not a whole lot an opponent can do.
It might not be fun to watch, but even I have to admit that Roddick is on. He took (and will continue to take at TWA) a lot of flack for missing the Olympics. But whatever Patrick McEnroe's saying to him is clicking. His serve hasn't been this dominant in some time. He's even swinging out on his backhand! The question is whether he'll continue this dominance when the draw gets tricky. Next stop for Roddick: Novak Djokovic. We shall see.
A peek at the rest of the quarters:

Flavia Pennetta v. Dinara Safina: Safina. She'd better win. Sheesh!
Juan Martin del Potro v. Andy Murray: OK, del Potro has shown me the error of my ways. He is not just a flash in the summer pan. But can he win the U.S. Open? Can Andy Murray? Will these two get into a brawl? Seriously, I choose Murray, because he's shown mental maturity in this tournament -- and he loves his mama.
Rafa Nadal v. Mardy Fish: I don't know how to say this tactfully, so I'll just say it: Fish is not playing Fed tonight -- someone who might have slightly shaky confidence. He's playing Rafael Nadal. And these guys should play before the ladies, because I don't see it lasting all that long.
Venus v. Serena: Don't complain, ladies. Get your rankings up and you can meet in any final you like. For now, only one of them can advance to the semis. Both are looking like buzzsaws out there, and here's hoping they really whup up on each other. I'm going to stick with my pre-tournament pick of Venus. If she serves well, I could see that being the determining factor.

U.S. OPEN: Bless those underdogs

2008-08-29T08:56:00.003-04:00

I don't think anyone who really follows tennis was surprised to see Ana Ivanovic tap out early at the Open. She's had little practice, is recovering from a thumb injury and doesn't appear ready to deal with the pressure of being world No. 1. Nothing against Julie Coin, but she's not someone with unbelievable talent. Considering that Ivanovic is no longer dealing with said injury, she should have been mentally strong enough to pull that match out. Considering the lack of depth in women's tennis, here's hoping she gets her head right and doesn't pull a Mauresmo for the rest of her career.
Anyway, Andy Roddick had no trouble whatsoever against Fabrice Santoro. (I think Roddick made Santoro cry. Or at least made him think Roddick's headhunting him -- with a serve. Whatever.) But tonight, Roddick takes on Ernests Gulbis, straight outta that tennis hotbed of Latvia. Gulbis is no Santoro. The only way that kid goes down 2,2 and 2 is if he comes out with a stomach-bubbling case of the nerves.
Before that, Lindsay Davenport takes on Marion Bartoli. Man, has Davenport been lucky. So far, she's drawn only the least fit players on tour. All these out-of-shape specimens remind me of this one American female, who once struggled with her fitness, only to whip herself into shape and Grand Slam contention. Then she took some time off and had a baby and now is beating kids practically half her age. The Kleybanovas, Kanepis and Bartolis of the world sure could take a lesson from Lindsay Davenport. Or they can just keep eyeballing that cookie jar.

LEAGUE WATCH: On why I'm retiring my Wonder Woman t-shirt

2008-08-27T20:32:00.003-04:00

I remember when I first started playing league tennis. My sister-in-law played on a team that's something of a powerhouse in our region, and she returned from her first trip to Princeton with stories of drinking heavily and playing with hangovers.
Having said that, it's going to sound really odd that her tales made me want to go to USTA regionals. I'm not a lush, I swear. Really, it was the camaraderie that made me want to go, but it was always one of those things I never thought I'd actually get to do. I never thought I'd be good enough, and therefore thought no team that was good enough would pick me up.
This season, everything managed to click for me. I found a team full of ladies who had the combination I've always looked for: they had a great time on court and they wanted to win. Look, the bottom line is this: If you find a team that grills hot dogs after every match, um, you've found your team. Hello!
Anyway, it was great to achieve the "impossible" with the best team ever. (Hot dogs! Hello!) Before we left town, we got a message from our captain featuring the weather forecast and an organized list of who was bringing what. Yes, the weather forecast.
Now what was missing from that weather forecast was that although it's only 85 degrees, the sun apparently is two hundred times hotter. Within an hour, I had darkened by two shades -- and that was before I started playing.
And here's something else I didn't envision. See, I figured that any facility hosting the USTA regionals would be near-perfect. So I didn't expect to warm up(Intermission! Oh, my gosh. Does anyone else gag when they see Andy Roddick volley? No pro has ever made me feel so good about any part of my game.) on a court with no net, and pastures growing through the cracks. But I did, for 20 minutes. That just didn't scream Princeton to me. But enough of the snobbery.
I felt pretty calm when we were called to the tournament desk to start our first round-robin match. Pretty calm when her team cheered wildly for her when her name was called. Pretty calm ignoring her while listening to the soundtrack to "The Good, The Bad and the Ugly" on my mp3. (Don't hate.) When I grabbed my racquet and walked to the backcourt to warm up, my heart skipped a beat. And then another one. My hand? Shaking. My legs? Stuck.
I started the match already trying to talk myself down -- and unable to serve. Or hit groundstrokes. Or concentrate. Fortunately for me, my opponent was having the same problem. Neither of us could establish a hold on the first set. Oh, yeah, until I served for the first set at 5-4. And at 6-5. That didn't go very well. So, my first set at Princeton went to a tiebreaker. Right away, I found myself down 5-3, and staged a mini-comeback. We traded set points until my opponent made her move, and won the set.
The bad news was I lost the set. The good news is that my nerves were gone. Or so I thought. Hindsight being 20/20 and all, I realize that my inability to stay focused was a sign of nervousness. I felt I would play better in the second set, and the exact opposite happened. I lost the second set, 6-3.
Obviously, I wasn't happy. One of my concerns this season, despite my success, was that I couldn't win matches against people who were at my level. Not above, mind you, but someone who I was on par with. This opponent definitely fit that description. She wasn't better than me, and I felt I should have won, or at least played better. Worse, I didn't know why I lost. And even worse than that, I had allowed my husband to convince me to wear my Wonder Woman shirt to my first match. Not a bad fashion statement, but it doesn't really work when you lose.
Anyway, we were on a two-match-a-day schedule, and I had to shake it off to prepare for my next match. And for an idea of my mental state, I warmed up for five minutes with my next opponent and played a game with her before I realized she was the pusher.
The dreaded pusher. I believe I've documented my problems with pushers at TWA in the past. I'm going to take it a little further. No offense to pushers (whenever someone starts with "no offense" ... get ready to be offended, right?), but pushers shouldn't play tennis. Because that's not tennis. It's tapping the ball, hoping not to eff things up enough to lose. Not tennis at all. And I'm not buying the idea that it takes a certain amount of savvy to play that style. If you can hold a racquet, you can be a pusher. No skill required. Being a pusher should be an instant default in a match.
Anyway, back to the Princeton pusher. Once I picked up on her pushiness, I decided to be aggressive. I charged the net whenever I got the chance, and, especially in the first set, had plenty of opportunity to put away winners at the net. I missed just about every one of them. Overheads, volleys, short putaways. I missed them all, and had no idea I could miss so much. Unbelievable. To help in matters, this woman's husband is right behind us, and cheering every shot I botched. Thanks, jackass. (Boy, the crap you notice when you're losing a match.)
I lost the first set, 6-1, but again, I felt good. I thought I was doing the right thing by staying with the idea of net charging. I had opportunities, and thought it impossible that I'd continue to miss my shots. Ha ha. Oh, possible. Very possible.
Second verse -- same as first. I was so angry at myself for losing to another pusher that I didn't even wait for her after the match. (You and your opponent must report the score together and sign off on the score. Oh, and by the way, if you need to do something humiliating, you should do this after you've gotten your ass kicked, 6-1, 6-1 to a pusher.)
I tossed and turned a lot overnight. I was thinking about how horrible I was, and also worried about being late for the morning match. For some stupid reason, they schedule matches for 8:30 a.m. (you have to report a half-hour before match time, on top of that), and I was paranoid my alarm clock wouldn't go off. Because I didn't sleep much, that wasn't a problem. I was up way before the alarm. We left the hotel with not too much time to spare, which turned out to be another problem.
We missed our exit to the courts, and soon found ourselves driving up to a toll in Trenton. For the uninitiated, that's the wrong damn way. I finally had to call my team and tell them I had no idea where I was going, and I wasn't sure if I could make it, which was a low point. I could hear their disappointment, but they told me to hurry up, because they were holding the court. The organizer decided she wouldn't default anyone. Instead, when I finally did show up at around 9:15, my lateness had cost me the loss of toss and three games. In case you thought I was mentally tough enough to overcome my morning tour of the Princeton ghetto, and a 3-0 deficit, you were wrong. I lost 6-2, 6-3, and again, completely unable to hold a thought in my head.
After the match, I pretty much tried to skulk away from my teammates, but they wouldn't let me, although when they went to lunch, I felt too guilty to join them. I figured I'd be pulled from the lineup in favor of someone who could show up to their matches on time, but I wasn't. A couple hours later, it was time for the next match, and although my team was down 0-3 so far, we kept our heads up. OK, they kept their heads up. Never mind getting lost, I couldn't believe I was playing so poorly. By the time match 4 began, I had no confidence. So, I decided to swing out and go for broke.
Until my match started, that is. My opponent was hitting just as hard as I was, on both sides, and before I knew it, I was down 0-2. And then, I had my first coherent thought all weekend:
"Wow, she plays like me. Hits hard. Oh, wait. If she's like me, she makes a lot of mistakes."
I am not exaggerating. That was my revelation. Instead of slugging with her, I decided to get the ball back, deep, and just like that, we were tied at 2. Also, as the first set progressed, I noted she was looking winded.
I got the service yips at 4-5 and lost the first set, but again, I felt good. First off, she looked like she was about to cramp up or pass out. And I knew that the longer the match went on, the better things were for me. Even the long rallies I eventually lost gave me confidence -- more than I've had in some time. For a change, I was right, and I won the second set, 6-1. At this tournament, a 10-point stupid tiebreaker decides the match. I jumped out to a 7-3 lead, and had some more serve yips. Before I knew it, it was 7-6. And I wasn't about to lose again, not in a match where I was so close. And I didn't. I stepped up and put away the short balls, and buried the urge to double-fault. And a couple minutes later, I had won. Finally.
So reporting match scores and signing your name to it when you've won is actually a better feeling. Looking over the scorecard, I noticed my team had lost two of the best-of-five matches, and I had delivered the first win. I ran over just in time to watch our #1 doubles team go to a tiebreaker. Then, while we sought out the #3 doubles match, we found our teammates bounding toward us. Win number 2. We were at 2-all, with our hopes of leaving with a face-saving win on a 10-point breaker. It was pretty nip-tuck, until my teammates watched the last shot sail out. We won!!
The next day, we had one last match, and my captain gave me the day off, which meant I was able to leave Princeton with a victory. Before I left the facility for the last time, I ran into one of my friends on the 4.0 men's team. He asked me how I did, and I told him I'd won, but that I wished I'd played better. He told me that he had come to Princeton for the first time last year, and played nervously, and said that this year, he was much calmer. "It's a learning experience, the first time," he said, and that's what I got to leave Princeton with.
I've heard a lot of people go negative about USTA league tennis. "Too time-consuming..." "Too catty ..." "Blah blah blah ..."
No offense, but none of those people have ever been to their regionals. Because the feeling of taking on the best of the best is the best. Win or lose, you walk in -- and out -- knowing that not everyone gets to compete here. You work for it, and damn it, you work some more to go back. Next year, utter world domination!
And, I don't know ... maybe next time, a Supergirl shirt?

U.S. OPEN: The (spoon) curl exercise

2008-08-27T20:17:00.003-04:00

What the hell is Alisa Kleybanova's training regimen? Is she on that Double Stuffed Oreo diet? How can someone be top 40 carrying about 20 extra pounds? Are there any men that out of shape?
These questions and more to be answered ... the day they let me into a press conference.

U.S. Open Night One

2008-08-26T00:40:00.003-04:00

I can see I'm not going to get much sleep during this tournament.
James Blake just edged Donald Young in the first round, 6-4 in the fifth. It was only 12:30 when it was over. Some props to Young, who's had trouble living up to the hype. The only real difference between these two (especially in the fifth set) was mental, and next time, Young'll be ready for the nerves.
Well, at least Venus Williams and Roger Federer are up for tomorrow night. Just so I can go to work in the morning, here's hoping it's not another midnight thriller. Oh, whatever. Work schmork. Play on, kids!

U.S. Open preview: Let the night tennis begin!

2008-08-20T18:59:00.003-04:00

Men:

1. Rafael Nadal: Remember when everyone was calculating how long it'd take for Novak Djokovic to overtake Nadal at No. 2 in the world? Now, it's "How long can he be number one?" And "Can he win the ultimate hard-court tournament? I think yes. It will be interesting, though, to see if he can continue his recent run of success against James Blake if they both make the semifinals. Also looming in his quarter of the draw is Ivo Karlovic, a real nightmare on fast courts. But, he can take heart. If he were the two seed, he'd have Ernests Gulbis/Andy Roddick, Novak Djokovic, and Richard Gasquet to deal with. Who is that two seed again?
2. Roger Federer: Will the slip to No. 2 light a fire under his behind? More importantly, will his doubles gold medal make him come into the net? OK, let's be serious. Fed's still on the brink of history. He's also still near the end of 2008 without a major to his name. Despite the slump, these factors still make him very dangerous. No one wants to play him. Except maybe ...
3. Novak Djokovic: It's all gravy for Djokovic. He's managed to stay in the mix while Federer and Nadal cement a legendary rivalry. But Djokovic is young. He's confident, and he even borders on cocky. He flamed out at Wimbledon, and despite a tricky draw (Robby Ginepri, Jo-Jo Tsonga, Roddick/Gulbis), he'll rise to the occasion. For him, that'll mean trying to show Federer who's really number two.
4. David Ferrer: He could practically sleepwalk through to the quarters, although Gilles Simon could give him fits in the fourth round. Anyway, the ride ends with Andy Murray.
5. Nikolay Davydenko: Um, pass.
6. Andy Murray: Murray had a real nice start to the summer, but lost in the first round in Beijing. Sign of things to come? Not necessarily. He did get to go to the U.S. earlier to train. He's about ready to make some real noise at a Grand Slam. And if there's one thing New Yorkers love, it's upstarts who play to the crowd and are in need of a set of braces.
7. David Nalbandian: I would like to point out that he lost to Frank Dancevic in the first round at Wimbledon this year. Frank Dancevic. (You know, Dancevic was bestowed the honor of playing for Canada at the Olympics. Know why? Because there aren't any other male Canadian tennis players.) Know who beat Dancevic in round two at Wimbledon? Bobby Reynolds. Yes, this is what it's come to for David Nalbandian. I have never heard of the person he's playing in the first round, but I think he's got a decent shot.
8. Andy Roddick: So let's get this straight. Roddick dodges the Olympics to play in two stateside warmup tournaments to get ready for the Open, and then wins neither of them? Oh-KAY! See, what'll stink for Roddick when he loses early is that he won't be able to use the ol' jet lag excuse.
9. James Blake: Hopefully, Blake will have taken two lessons from the Olympics: (1) Never turn your back on Fernando Gonzalez. (2) Blake can play with the big boys. If he doesn't come to the Open brimming with confidence over that Federer win, then he's just slow. Having said that, he's totally going to lose to Nadal in the semis.
10. Stanislas Wawrinka: The other Swiss Miss ... ter. Nothing flashy about this one, though. He's worked himself into the top 10, but where's the weapon? The lack of one will cost him against Andy Murray in the fourth round.

Dark horses:

Gael Monfils (32): Can he beat David Nalbandian and James Blake just to get to a quarterfinal with Rafa Nadal?
Jo-Jo Tsonga (19): It might be lofty to pick him for the round of 16 in his first tournament back from injury, but who's going to beat him? Carlos Moya? Marat Safin?
Ernests Gulbis: Considering he's unseeded, he really lucked out with getting Andy Roddick in round two, instead of, say, Rafael Nadal. Expect Gulbis to send Roddick to early training for the 2012 Olympics.

Players NOT to watch:

Juan Martin Del Potro: Not that he isn't immensely talented, but getting too excited about his summer so far is a bit premature. If he beats the dormant Guillermo Canas, I'd be kind of surprised.

Scintillating first-round matches:

Roddick v. Santoro: You know, I truly feel that every year, the draw organizers get together and say to themselves: "Hey, wouldn't it be fun to see Fabrice Santoro play (insert anyone he can't beat) in the first round of the U.S. Open at 9 p.m.?" Ha-ha-hell!, Santoro's saying somewhere. It is mean to pick on the old man, but at least these guys know good entertainment when they see it. Plus, with Roddick's confidence in the trunk, who knows?
Safin v. Spadea: Purely for comic relief. Quick riddle: What do you get when you cross two head cases? Answer: Duh! Safin v. Spadea!

The way it'll go down:
Quarterfinals: Rafa v. Blake, Ferrer v. Murray, Gulbis (uh-huh) v. Djokovic, Gasquet v. Federer
Semifinals: Rafa v. Murray, Djokovic v. Federer
Final: Nadal v. Djokovic
Winner: Nadal

Women:
First, a quick word: Women's tennis is boring! I actually had fun filling out the men's draw. I nearly fell asleep three times for the women. Yes, there are lots of up-and-comers out there, but is there one matchup that gets you excited? Yes, you! Is there one that even approaches Fed-Nadal? OK, even Fed-Blake? Wawrinka-Youzhny? All right, Venus and Serena intrigues me slightly. Who's got a reason to love women's tennis these days? Right now, I'm at a mild liking.
Women's tennis needs to DO SOMETHING? Let's move on.

1. Ana Ivanovic: You know, when it comes to women's tennis, I'm starting to think that 1 is just a number. And I don't think she's ready for prime time, between her shaky performances of late and an injury tap-out in Beijing. Her first round is tough, against upstart Casey Dellacqua. What is that I smell? An upset?
2. Jelena Jankovic: If they ever do an update of the board game "Operation", they have got to use Jelena Jankovic as the model. It's like a game, trying to figure out which injury she'll have next. Anyway, if she can avoid injuring her earlobe, she's got a sweetheart of a draw, with no really tough matches until Vera Zvonareva in the quarters, then possibly Elena Dementieva in the semis. This could be Jankovic's half to dominate.
3. Svetlana Kuznetsova: The problem is that men's tennis has spoiled me. I want Rafa-Roger-Novak. I get Ana-Jelena-Sveta? Not too fired up about these ladies yet. Especially not this lady. She's got game, but considering her experience -- and her Slam win -- is mentally shaky. If she plays Dementieva in the quarters, I pick Kuznetsova to crack first.
4. Serena Williams: It's been a hit-or-miss sort of season for Serena. Here's her chance to wind up the season on a good note. She's got a Bondarenko sister in the first round (Venus gets the other one in the third, if seeds hold) and not much resistance along the way. Oh, hold on. My phone's ringing. It's the French Open, reminding me that Serena lost in the third round this year to KATARINA SREBOTNIK! Ai Sugiyama, get ready for your close-up!
5. Elena Dementieva: Winning in Beijing will certainly boost her confidence, but will it translate to the biggest prize in tennis -- a major? She's got a tough draw -- tougher than the Olympics, with Kuznetsova and Jankovic standing in the way of the final.
6. Dinara Safina: It's been a breakthrough year for Safin's sis. (Maybe now, her brother will have one, too.) She's crumbled at the last hurdle of her big opportunities so far -- the French and Olympics. The top half of the draw is all hers, but what will she do if she's under the lights of Flushing Meadow against a Williams sister?
7. Venus Williams: She won Wimbledon. (Flavia Pennetta) And Olympic doubles gold with her sister, despite the fact that there's no rhyme or reason to their doubles game. (Petra Kvitova) There's one thing that's not the name of Venus' game, and that's consistency. (Those are some of the "big names" she's lost to this season.) Also, (Aggie Radwanska is in her half of the draw and might be really, really dangerous). And (so is Serena Williams).
8. Vera Zvonareva: She sure has come a long way from crying during changeovers. Anyway, she's certainly worthy of the top ten, but I think her run at the Open will end with Jelena Jankovic.
9. Agnieszka Radwanska: Not this year. But soon, she'll win her first major.
10. Anna Chakvetadze: Not a really good year for Chakvetadze. She had a good warmup in New Haven, but she seems to lack the confidence to take down even names like Li Na and Dementieva, let alone Kuznetsova.

Dark horses: Ooh, horses! Where?

Players NOT to watch: Where do we start? Top of the draw? 'kay:
Amelie Mauresmo, who might be the only player whose confidence has plummeted after winning two majors
Nicole Vaidisova. Both her boyfriend, garden gnome Radek Stepanek, and her injuries have managed to corrode her game.
Lucie Safarova, despite her warmup tournament win in Forest Hills. Not even the Pilot Pen. Beat the big girls, Lucie!
Lindsay Davenport. I feel bad putting her on this list, but let's be realistic. 'Taint easy being a part-time tennis player, even when you're as fit as a Williams sister. It's even harder when you're a new mother playing girls almost twice as fast as you, although she can still outhit most people. Davenport really needs to ask herself what she's gaining out of this comeback, besides representing the U.S. at the Olympics. I'm guessing the answer to that question will be made public after her U.S. Open.

Scintillating first-round matches: Ha ha. Nothin' cooking here, except maybe Venus v. Stosur.

The way it'll go down:
Quarterfinals: Petrova v. Safina, Serena v. Venus, Dementieva v. Kuznetsova, Zvonareva v. Jankovic
Semifinals: Safina v. Venus, Dementieva v. Jankovic
Final: Venus v. Jankovic
Winner: Either Venus or Jankovic.
... What?

Shut up. The Olympics are over already?

2008-08-20T18:36:00.004-04:00

No, unfortunately, they aren't completely over. I say "unfortunately" because of what I saw on late-night Olympic coverage a couple of nights ago.
Trampolining.
I'm serious.
I thought sychronized swimming and diving were lame, but who decided that jumping on a trampoline was an Olympic event? If I won a gold medal in trampolining, I'd use it as a paperweight. Sheesh. In twenty years, when our lucky trampoline champion has birthed the next RPS (Rock-Paper-Scissors) gold medalist at the Summer Games in Rhode Island, you'll know that it's in the blood. What "it" is will still be up for debate.
Trampolining.
Anyway, speaking of gold medals, how about some that mean something? Like the one Rafael Nadal won over (ahemcheaterahem) Fernando Gonzalez. What a year it's been for Nadal. After running into the buzz-saw that was Jo-Jo Tsonga (is he going to be a Jeopardy answer one day or will he actually stay healthy?), Nadal has been practically unbeatable. Just when you ask yourself how long someone can stay motivated by being the second-best player for more than two years, Nadal showed he's been hard at work, and it's nice to see his efforts rewarded. Not only did he reassert his dominance at the French Open with a thorough butt-whupping of Roger Federer, but he also came out on top at the match of the century at Wimbledon. His Olympic gold was no cakewalk either, having to beat Novak Djokovic in the process. He really deserves No. 1, and here's hoping his stay at the top is at least half as long as his stay at No. 2.
Apparently, Elena Dementieva won the gold medal in women's singles. You know, this result makes me worried about the U.S. Open. If Dementieva can win a gold medal, then anything is truly possible at Flushing Meadow. Hear that, Lindsay Davenport?

LEAGUE WATCH: Tournament watch

2008-08-20T17:51:00.002-04:00

I have a theory about my successful tennis season. I got a job I actually like in February, and that very same weekend, my husband and I won our first tournament together. It's been all good from there.
My husband and I split up (on the tennis court, OK?) briefly, and thought we'd have a real chance to win an open tournament if we "partnered up" -- playing with someone better than us.
He lost in the first round.
I lost in the final. Oh, yes, it was another third-set tiebreaker.
Anyway, we decided to join forces again at the site of our first victory -- Akron, OH, the Rubber Capital of the World. (I wonder if there's a Glue Capital of the World. If there is, they should play a softball tournament.) First, we scored a bye, which was nice, except that left us at only two matches to play. We actually knew our first-round opponents from our last visit to the area. The guy was apparently a Division I hockey player, and if you can imagine a guy waiting for a serve like a goalie protecting his turf, there you have him. His wife seemed nervous, as she did before, and you got the vibe that she'd be a problem if she'd just relax. Our last match against them was memorable. I was slightly hopeful when we showed up to find that the guy was playing a singles match. Not so hopeful when he crushed the guy he was playing, 6-0 in the second set.
We exchanged niceties and got going. The strategy was simple: Hit to the girl. Sounds easy, right? Well, I played some very dumb tennis to start with. I couldn't return the guy's serve, and when I was, I hit it right back at him! My husband observed this for about three games, then laid into me. Something about "Are you crazy?" which seems to be his common refrain when he addresses me. I wonder why. Anyway, as the set, then the match, began to get away from our opponents, the husband began to poach. How early? Bounce-before-serve early. Anyway, we took turns going down the line for a game, and it was enought to get him a bit panicked. It wasn't always pretty, but we eked past them in two sets, and prepared for the next bout.
In the final, we took on another married couple, and a different sort of situation: The woman was rated a 4.0 and her husband was a 3.0. They were both solid enough, and because we had watched them play their semifinal, we thought we'd be able to attack the woman's serve. But no. No cream puff here. Her serve was solid, and it surprised us at first. But we dealt with that. Althought the first set was 6-2, we had a bunch of tough games, and it was the beginning of the second set when my husband suggested that I serve to her forehand. Most players are taught to serve to the backhand, because it's usually the weaker wing. But I didn't even realize this lady's backhand was very good. Don't you just love it when you have revelations about your opponent halfway through a match? After that adjustment, and some unbelievable net play from my man, we wrapped up the match a lot easier than we started it.
So, we're shaking hands at the net, and the woman asks us what our USTA ratings are, and we tell them we're 3.5s. She rolls her eyes, and basically tells us we didn't belong in the draw (because we were too good). This vexed me greatly. I've improved a lot in the last year, but I don't think I'm dominating in my league. Just the thought that someone thought we were sandbagging sort of killed the immediate buzz of victory. Then I thought to myself: "We do belong in the draw. Maybe they didn't." You know what I mean. So there.
Another thing that temporarily killed the buzz was our lack of a shiny, happy trophy. The organizers told us the mixed doubles trophies hadn't yet been delivered. (OK, I'm a girl, and I like shiny bling. Is there anything wrong with that?)
Our trophy? In the mail. Must be Pony Express, because we don't have it yet.
On a real League Watch note, I'm off to Princeton, N.J. for regionals tomorrow. Matches begin on Friday. I will be updating, so keep an eye out!

No way. The Olympics started already? part three

2008-08-16T11:05:00.003-04:00

I'm just sitting here watching Roger Federer serve for the gold medal ... in doubles. Guiding us TV spectators on our Olympic journey is Barry Mackay, master of stating the obvious.
"Ohh, it's wide."
"Let cord."
"Second serve."
Anyway, this is pretty nice. Federer and Stanislaus Wawrinka just won the gold. OK, that was the oddest celebration I've ever seen -- Wawrinka lying on the ground and Fed doing some sort of voodoo on him. Maybe that's how they were able to take down the Bryan brothers in the semis.
'Kay. The Williams sister also rebounded from the singles and continued their doubles run, beating the sisters Bondarenko, and will play Anabel Medina Garrigues and Virginia Ruano Pascual.
But the big story so far has been the Blake v. Gonzalez fiasco. I still haven't seen the point in question (anyone know of a video?), but I do know this. I've never not been sure when a ball has grazed my racquet. So, Fernando, the whole "If I’m 100 percent sure about it, I mean, I will give it. But I’m not sure, you know" thing doesn't fly. But congratulations, I guess.
Back in the States, Andy Roddick is holding it down on the U.S. Open preparation tip. Oh. No, he's not. He lost in the quarterfinals in D.C. to Viktor Troicki. OK, so he doesn't go to Olympics to play the best in the world, which I think can be argued would be the best preparation for a Grand Slam. Instead, he stays in the U.S. with the second stringers -- and can't beat them! Man, if that doesn't boost the old confidence, I don't know what will. (Oh, maybe playing for a bronze medal at the Olympics?)