Fast Five

I am back! I am sure you missed me. Please, who wouldn't miss me and all that insightful commentary I make? I mean, I LOVE ROGER'S HAIR and MAHUT IS AWESOME are key contributions to the world of tennis, n'est-ce pas?

Right. Let's ease back into things with a few quick stories:

1) Jarmila and Sam Groth are no more. Jarka and the GrothHawk have split up, which is a bit sad. She's back to being Ms Gajdosova now. His hair is presumably still silly. This event is probably most notable, tennis-wise, for her Twitter tirade about how she didn't marry Sam just for citizenship. Personally, I think the fact that people raised that question at all is insulting and ludicrous. Jarka does not need to be married to a man with stupid hair to play for Australia. Glad to have you, Jarka.

2) Fernando Gonzalez is back in town. I had almost forgotten about the existence of Gonzo, but I bet there were people that hadn't, like, oh, the entire nation of Chile. He chose to come back at the Djokovic - I mean, Serbian Open in Belgrade, where he beat Martin Klizan but lost to Feliciano Lopez. Winning your first match back - even if it is against someone I have personally never heard of - is no mean feat, so well done, Gonzo. Keep it up.

3) Someone who does not get a well done ribbon this week is John Isner. Ouch. That is going to hurt, rankings wise.

4) Welcome back Tommy Haas! He played doubles in Munich, his first match back in about 709838 years. He partnered Stepanek and they lost in a match tiebreaker, but it is so good to see Herr Hotness back on the court.

5) Grigor Dimitrov seems to have had something resembling a 'breakthrough', though I would not go counting chickens, you hear me. He beat Marcos Baghdatis, and the way people are talking about it, you'd think he beat Rafa in straight sets in the final of Roland Garros. Of course it's cause to be optimistic, but slow your roll, people, honestly. He's not exactly Milos Raonic yet.

Concentration Now Begins - Keep The Rhythm Going

So apparently it's news that Roger Federer is 'not Robocop' and that his mind wanders sometimes during matches. Anyone who has been a Federer fan for any amount of time will probably tell you of the unspeakable fear they experience in the moment (usually in the second set) when Roger seems to start wondering whether he left the oven on, so I have to admit that I laughed a little bit when reading this article.

But let's put our serious faces on here for a second. Of course tennis players' minds wander. They are, after all, not machinery - much as Rafa Nadal might try to convince you that he is, in fact, a cyborg. A tennis match can go for a really long time - ask Isner and Mahut. I just don't think it's physically possible to remain in that space of intense concentration for so long.

I am a university student (or will be again in a couple of months when I start my doctorate). I'm one of the lucky few that actually love what I study. But can I sit down for five hours (let alone eleven) and focus on it 100%? Absolutely not. Can I do it for one hour without my mind wandering? Not a chance. And that's without distractions like 'ow, my leg hurts', 'why did they play that song in the changeover?', 'why did that dude sitting behind the umpire decide to wear that horrible lime green shirt?', 'HawkEye is the devil', and 'I hope the twins aren't destroying anything'.

Some players are better at concentration than others. Rafa Nadal is the king of it. His mind is a steel trap. His 'not concentrating' probably looks like 'concentrating' for most players. But not even he can keep up 100% pure intense focus for five hours. No one can do that.

And then there's the added dimension that tennis is a tennis player's job. They might love the game, but it's still work. How many of us get through a workday with 100% concentration?

We've heard the term 'on autopilot', and there's a lot of people out there that claim that they or various other tennis players play better when they don't think. Concentration seems to be a function of thought, so maybe it's not the be-all and end-all. Muscle memory seems to have something to do with it - Federer talks in the article of serving down the T in his match today and barely being aware of doing it. When you hit as many tennis balls as these dudes do, then sometimes the auto switch is going to flick. And maybe that's better.

Though I would say that's more transcending concentration than not concentrating. But I am not a sports psychologist. This probably means you should disregard everything I've said in this post.

So, um, yeah, I think my point was that tennis players not only don't, but can't concentrate all the time. Like Roger said. Roger's on my side. Yep. When he's thinking about it, that is.

There's Something About Milos

I didn't want to. I didn't want to be the person that jumps on every bandwagon I see. I was determined to be the one person in the world who wasn't screaming and shouting OMG MILOS RAONIC FOR EMPEROR OF THE UNIVERSE! I was going to be the lone dissenter, the annoying cynic in the corner, the one that was determined it was all a fluke. In my mind, Milos Raonic was the second coming of Casey Dellacqua.

And then he had to go and win San Jose. Beating a top ten player in the final. (I mean, sure, it was Fernando Verdasco, but still.) And now I have to get on the bandwagon or risk being left behind.

Raonic has a singularly spectacular serve. I think Verdasco described him as having the body of a 12-year old... and then still firing down serves at 240km/h plus. Which is, like, a bit fast and stuff. But there are plenty of players with massive serves and not much else. This is the category I was determined to pigeonhole Raonic in.

But it looks like he's a bit more than that.

Problem is, I can't quite put my finger on it.

I think I'm going to have to watch him play a bit more, because there's obviously a little bit of something something going on with Milos. You don't jump from #156 to #59 in the rankings just like that because you have an enormous serve. I mean, he's obviously had an enormous serve for a while now. He might have grown into a bit, but there's just not enough time for there to be such a massive difference between 2010 and 2011. The off-season isn't long enough. Something's clicked for Milos. Something's suddenly started going right. I just can't work out what it is.

Maybe it's not his game at all. Maybe it's in his mind. Looking at the San Jose final, it certainly seems like Milos has quite a bit going on upstairs. We can't all be blessed with the iron mind of Rafael Nadal, but when you rally from 6-2 down in a breaker to grab a set, you are strong in the head. That's just the way it is. Your opponent can really only make so many mistakes.

And then there's the fact that Milos only dropped serve once in four matches. No matter how good your serve is, it's hard to hold your serve that consistently. Like, mega hard. Ask Isner and Mahut.

But has something come together in his game? What's the magic ingredient that I'm missing? Because it looks to me like the dude was losing a lot and now he's winning a lot... and I can't work out why. I must know the why. Because there is clearly something about Milos.

Sorry. Couldn't resist the wordplay. No matter how bad it is.

Tales From The Outside Courts

The side of the draw playing today is my non-emotional investment side (ie. no Federer, no Mahut), so today was sort of my off day at the Australian Open. This is not to say, however, that I did not have excellent times watching excellent tennis. Because I did.

Walking through the gates at Melbourne Park (and walking out again fifteen-odd hours later, knowing you'll be back there not long after) is magical. I've been to a few of the tournaments around Australia - Sydney, Brisbane, Hopman Cup - and while they are all excellent (especial props to the Hopman Cup) there's a buzz at a Slam. There are good vibrations in the air. Things are going to happen. Magic is going to be made.

And magic is made - not just on Rod Laver Arena, not just on Hisense, not just on the show courts. At every court there is magic. One of the most magical moments I've had this week was on Court 14 (arguably the most remote court in the complex) watching Mahut win his first round match. Watching tennis on TV, it seems like the main arenas are all there is. When you are there, there are so many other stories to be told on the outside courts that you miss otherwise.

Like Alexandr Dolgopolov. The media has been silent on him - he hasn't played anyone big yet - but MAN, has this guy got game. He took four sets to beat the also very talented Benjamin Becker (aka Becker-no-relation) today, but I was super impressed. He has a great serve, a massive forehand, and he can volley like nobody's business. He plays Jo-Wilfried Tsonga next, and I would not be surprised at all if he gives the big guy a run for his money. Watch out for this kid in the future. He has MAJOR talent.

And he is man enough to wear an Alice band. I respect that.

I also saw Youzhny play today. He earned his membership to the Roger Federer Let's Win Two Sets Then Lose Two And Give People A Heart Attack Club by winning the first two sets over Blaz Kavcic, then dropping two before coming back to see the fifth. I only saw the fifth set, so I can't talk about the rest of the match, but Youzhny certainly played very well. And I saw his salute live!

But that wasn't what I meant to talk about. Kavcic is another one of those stories that you only find on the outside courts. I saw some of his first and second round matches, and he is an absolutely outstanding talent. I really think we are going to be seeing a lot more of him in the future. He is a story that is not going to be on the outside courts forever.

Same with Santiago Giraldo. I saw him play - and lose to - Marin Cilic today, but he has some massive potential. He hits the ball hard and hits an excellent slice... and when he hits it, he makes a whoosh sound. How can you not love that?

For the first time this week, I sat and watched an entire match that did not involve Nicolas Mahut on an outside court. I don't normally do this - I'm flitting from court to court to court - but it was so hot today that there was no way I was giving up the patch of shade I found! Luckily for me, the match was a great one - John Isner vs Radek Stepanek. Throughout the match, you could actually see the cogs in Isner's mind turning as he figured Stepanek out. He played crap in the beginning - he lost the first set and smashed a racquet in spectacular fashion - but then... he worked it out.

There is a lot to be said for a thinking tennis player - indeed, any good tennis player needs to be one. I feel like Isner sometimes gets dismissed as being just a serve, but he really does have a multidimensional game. His volleys in particular are outstanding. I think he will make mincemeat of Cilic in the next round - Cilic was better than I expected him to be against Giraldo, but he's nowhere near where he was last year - and might even take a set off Rafa in the next one, if Rafa isn't zoning.

I'm really hoping Rafa is zoning in the third round, though. But even if he isn't, he is going to take Bernard Tomic TO F%^&ING SCHOOL. And that is all I have to say about that.

Tonight was my last night in Rod Laver Arena, and there was no way it could live up to the previous two. But it didn't do so bad. Stosur had a really high quality win over Dushevina - definitely the best I've seen her play this year - and then Baghdatis/Del Potro was entertaining, if a little short. I would have loved to see the fifth in this match, but JMDP couldn't do it for me. I am a little concerned about his ongoing wrist problems, however - he had the trainer out three times for it, and there was one instance where he actually DROPPED HIS RACQUET in the middle of a service action. On a break point. Has anyone ever seen that before? I haven't.

But I missed, it seems, the moment of the day. However, I've heard alllll about it. Good on you for taking Todd Woodbridge to task, Kim Clijsters. You are awesome.

#wildcardformahut and Other Animals

WILDCARD FOR MAHUT WILDCARD FOR MAHUT WILDCARD FOR MAHUT GIVE HIM A WILDCARD NOW WILDCARD FOR MAHUT. #wildcardformahut

...wow, sorry about that. I've been typing #wildcardformahut and various permutations so often for the past couple of days that it has become second nature. It takes a bit of dedication to captain a Twitter campaign to (hopefully) victory. But if anyone with the wildcarding power happens to read this - make my day! make the day of everyone else who wants a wildcard for Mahut! and, most of all, make the day of Nicolas Mahut! WILDCARD FOR MAHUT 2011. It's a thing.

Now, other business.

The Hopman Cup has finished up, with the USA very deserving winners. The John Isner/Ruben Bemelmans match was a bit of a non-event - which is not surprising, given the ranking difference - and it certainly wasn't the best mixed doubles match ever, but the match between Justine Henin and Bethanie Mattek-Sands was as good as I've ever seen.

I kind of love Bethanie Mattek-Sands. I never expected to, and I've laughed my arse off at her crazy fashion over the years, but I've discovered this week I sort of love her. I love her totally aggressive game, and her determination, and I especially love her backhand down the line. She seems pretty chilled out and yet totally focused on tennis all at the same time, and she was a really great addition to this year's Hopman Cup. If she can play in Melbourne like she did in Perth, then she can definitely get to at least the fourth round. It all depends on draw, of course, but there's no reason why she can't put up a great show.

And it was a great performance from Isner as well. He came back well from his shellacking by Murray to play very well against Bemelmans. Good stuff. Well done, USA - this was a very well-deserved win. And well done Belgium, on a well played final. And well done Hopman Cup, for bringing Nicolas Mahut into the spotlight for a week... #wildcardformahut.

Ahem. Back on track.

Petra Kvitova won in Brisbane, which was a great result for her, and she did it in style - she played an absolutely great match. Like Mattek-Sands, if she keeps her head in the game, there is no reason she can't make a tilt at a second week appearance in the Open. She totally dominated Petkovic and if she continues to play like this, well... with the state of the WTA, there is no reason why she couldn't be top ten rather quickly.

And then there was Doha. F^&* YEAH ROGER FEDERER.

It was a good win for Davydenko to beat Nadal - even an ailing Nadal - but Federer showed here today why he really is a worldbeater. He played very aggressive - and accurate - off the return, and it made a huge difference. That banana paddlepop outfit he's rocking is clearly giving him good mojo - and whatever Paul Annacone has been telling him, it's been good. I don't think there's going to be anywhere near the same amount of buzz this year about Davydenko as there was last year - which is a bit sad, in a way, because he is constantly over looked - but that doesn't mean that this wasn't an awesome win over a tough opponent for Federer. I loved every second of it. He played wonderfully. Even if he could do with upping his break point conversion rate.

And you know what else would be wonderful? AN AUSTRALIAN OPEN WILDCARD FOR MAHUT. DO IT. #wildcardformahut 2011! It's a thing.

Give Nicolas Mahut An Australian Open Wildcard. Now.

Seriously, where has Nicolas Mahut been all my life? Even when he loses, he does it very stylishly. And I love a dude with a sense of humour.

Please, Australian Open, if you have a spare wildcard lying around - maybe you left one under the sofa or something - give it to Nicolas Mahut. This dude gets so ripped off all the time, and he plays such awesome tennis. He has MAD SKILLZ. Come on, he's all famous now, after the whole Wimbledon shenanigan. He got shafted by his own federation, who gave the French wildcard to Benoit 'who?' Paire. Have some mercy. Support Nico.

He pushed Andy Murray all the way in the match in Perth tonight. I doubt Andy Murray knew what hit him at some points, to be honest. I know Nicolas is a grass court specialist, but he has some skillz on the hard courts too. He has a good tennis brain, some skillful shots and French flair, which is a wonderful combination - to watch, even if he doesn't always pull it off.

Nico isn't exactly up and coming. He's not the next big thing, he's never going to be in the top ten, he's not going to win a Slam. But he's exactly the kind of player that people like to watch. He has shots and style and he deserves to catch a break. Seriously, he has such extreme bad luck it is not fair. That Wimbledon match? Just the tip of the iceberg.

I meant to actually talk about the match a bit, instead of writing a plea for wildcardishness. Oops. Let's do that now. Whoever thought it would take Andy Murray two tiebreakers to see away Nico? And this match so easily could have gone to three sets... if Nico hadn't missed that shot at 5-all in the breaker in the second set I think it just might have. It was a very close match, and Nico deserved a set... but such is tennis, I suppose.

Watching him play, it makes you wonder how he is not ranked higher. Sure, he is a bit sketchy and has a few problems with execution sometimes, but he has got shots. And his first serve is right up there. There are plenty of players who don't have a serve as good as his. And if you want to know reliable it is, ask John Isner.

I'm glad that Mahut got the chance to play in the Hopman Cup. He is a wonderful character. And I love to watch him play, and I hope I'm not the only one. WILDCARD FOR MAHUT 2011. Spread the word.

Isnut: The Rematch

Well, we needed to have a dooozy of a match, and Mladenovic and Mattek-Sands certainly gave us that. Sure, Mladenovic faded and faded badly towards the end, but this was a match and a half. Is there any better type of tennis than pure aggression meeting pure aggression?

Anyway, I didn't see all of this match, so I don't want to go into it in detail, but this was a quality win for Mattek-Sands. And I also want to see more of Mladenovic in the future. She's a bit cool.

But the real story of the day was always going to be John Isner and Nicolas Mahut: redux.

It was always going to be Isner's match. If these two play off grass, being Mahut's favourite surface, then it is always going to be Isner's match, unless Isner has somehow been handicapped. But that did not mean it was not a little special to see this match - to see the power and wingspan of Isner go head to head with the Gallic flair of Mahut. And with all that history between them... how could that not be special?

I am glad to see these two are such good friends, because honestly, I would not be surprised if they were so totally sick of each other they just wanted to punch themselves whenever someone asked them about that match. In a year where Rafa Nadal achieved a career Slam and essentially made the sport of tennis his bitch, this match still managed to be one of the biggest (if not the biggest) tennis story of the year... and if I were Isner and Mahut, I would want to be over it already. Particularly if I were Isner, with designs on the top ten and second week runs at Slams. I would not want my greatest achievement to be a first round Wimbledon match. Both Isner and Mahut are more than that match.

But that does not mean it is not a bit special to see these two men, who are inexorably linked, play. Even if we are never going to see 70-68 again. And thank you, Hopman Cup, for getting THE REMATCH over and done with in a relatively safe environment, outside the pressure cooker of the tour (or worse, the Slams)!

An Unadulterated Pleasure

Daddy's home.

Roger Federer looked absolutely sublime today in his win over John Isner. I don't think I've seen him play better all year, except maybe - just maybe - in the Australian Open final. This was vintage stuff - old school Federer putting the beatdown on his opponents just by being awesome.

I've been cheating on Roger a bit with Rafa lately - paeans of praise-wise - but oh Roger baby, you will always be #1 in my heart. There is no tennis experience that compares to watching Roger Federer play well. David Foster Wallace was right on the money when he described it as being a religious experience.

Isner did not play badly - not at all. But how can you compete with the hungry awesomeness that was Roger today? He wants to win - this we can see clearly. And he's got his mojo back, at least for the next little while. And he's making the tweener his most consistent shot - seriously, do you think he practices them like he does forehands and backhands and serves?

It's been a long time since we've been able to simply gush about Federer. We got that opportunity today. Well done, Roger! Keep it up!

Hurrah for the Hopman Cup!

As regular readers of this blog will be aware, I embarked on an epic tennis adventure around the nation last year, stopping in at four cities. One of these was Perth, where I paid my first ever visit to Western Australia and the Hopman Cup.

Now, even though I had an absolute blast last year, I was tossing up whether to go to Perth again this year, because when you live in a country as big as Australia, flights clear across the country are expensive. It's like a punch directly to the wallet. But with the announcement of some of the teams, I think my decision's been made for me. I couldn't not go.

John Isner and Serena Williams are the American entry, and they have to be the top seeds for sure. Big Is played there last year (opposite tiny Melanie Oudin) and I think Perth will be very glad to see him back! And Serena, well… pulling a #1 player is a huge coup for an exhibition tournament like Hopman Cup! I'm assuming they pay appearance fees and that their bucket of money is very deep indeed, because they've also got Novak Djokovic and Ana Ivanovic. (I know Ana's ranking is not that high, but I still think she could demand big time fees!)

Oh, and Justine Henin, partnered with Steve Darcis. Minor coup. Pfft.

And then there's the French team! Gael Monfils is going to be very entertaining, and I'm really looking forward to seeing his partner, Kristina Mladenovic, one of the top juniors in the world. And Lleyton Hewitt is back (again), with a yet to be decided partner.

It would be pretty hard to dream up an exho field better than this! This has the two finalists from this year's AO and I for one am gagging to see them play. Perth 2011, here I come!

The G-Boys

There's a poll on the ATP website at the moment that is trying to ascertain who is the biggest improver of 2010. Mardy Fish, John Isner and Jurgen Melzer are all on there, as is Aleksandr Dolgopolov Jr, who obviously has improved, even though I don't remember it happening.

But most importantly, two of my favourite young characters are on there. Both have won their first titles this year, and I have hopes of great things for both of them.

Andrey Golubev. Ernests Gulbis. Improved. Still improving.

Finally.

I've talked a lot about my fangirlishness of Golubev lately, so I'll leave him alone for now, but let's talk Gulbis. I have been on his bandwagon for what feels like a thousand years now, waiting for him to break through. Sometimes I thought I was the only one on the bandwagon, though at other times it was quite popular. Though, with injury and whatnot, he hasn't been around much lately, it is really good to know that I was right. Gulbis is going places.

Both Gulbis and Golubev have massive tennis stories left to tell. Both are relatively late bloomers, but so what? So are plenty of players. I don't know if either of them will ever win a Slam - though Gulbis might surprise you! - but there is a lot of success ahead of both of them. I am sure of this.

And I'd also like to point out that Gulbis is leading the poll at the moment, and Golubev is coming second. But the real winner? Me, obviously.

(This is a joke, clearly.)

Truth and Wimbledon 2010

Let's be honest. This was not the bestest Wimbledon ever. And I'm not just saying that because I'm a thwarted Fedfan. I'm saying this because despite the number of five set matches and shenanigans going on, one match managed to overshadow the whole tournament. One lonely little first round match out on the back courts is going to be the reason Wimbledon 2010 is remembered.

Wimbledon 2010: the year of Isner and Mahut.

Normally I would try and cover a number of stories that went on over the week, but the fact is that everything, even the victories of Nadal and Serena, pale beside the achievement here. They won Wimbledon. Isner and Mahut won an enormous victory for tennis. Has any match ever garnered such public attention? John Isner is now some massive media dude in the US - everyone wants a piece of Izzy - and I'd be surprised if the same thing isn't happening to some extent with Nico as well.

After and during this match, people were all like, 'blah, this is why we need fifth set tiebreaks!' Um, no. It is matches like these and prove exactly why we don't. How could a fifth set tiebreaker adequately have described the drama that was this match? It deserved to go to 70-68, because the match was just that close. That is the truth of the matter, plain and simple. It's right that this match effectively went for fifteen odd sets, because no one was giving ground.

The person that blinks first is the one that loses. That is the truth of tennis. This match showed exactly what it means to be a tennis player, and a good one - not blinking. For ages and ages and ages. It is a cruel truth, but that is the nature of the sport. And there is no way a fifth set tiebreaker would have done justice to the drama of Isner and Mahut.

And so, not to devalue the immense and awesome achievements of Serena and Rafa, that is who really won Wimbledon this week. Isner. Mahut. Tennis. Because these are the things that will be remembered about Wimbledon 2010 for always.

Wending Through Week One

So. Week One. What's gone down?

Well, the ATP has gone all WTA and the WTA has gone all ATP. Without too much exception, the major contenders in the women's draw are still alive - by which I suppose I mean the Williams sisters, the Belgians and Sharapova. Outside those five, I'm not really seeing too many major contenders for the title. All five of these women have got through with relative ease - I don't recall any of them dropping a set, though I could be wrong.

In the ATP, on the other hand, we've had a festival of very-nearly-almost but no major, major upsets. Federer and Djokovic have survived one major scare each, Nadal two. Only Andy Murray has come through relatively unscathed... but Robin Soderling has been cutting his way through the draw so ominously you can practically hear the Jaws soundtrack. You have to like his chances against Rafa if they both get that far.

Because it's been a festival of very-nearly-almost, we've had some guys who have come away with very hard losses - harder to bear, I suspect, because they were so very close. Alejandro Falla, Olivier Rochus, Robin Haase and Philipp Petzschner will probably be engaging in some solid self-flagellation, if I am right. They all put up great fights but couldn't quite get it done.

We had some bad behaviour - Victor Hanescu springs to mind, in one of the most bizarre cases of tanking and crowd abuse ever. He got fined the big bucks, and I'm pretty sure no one knows what went down. That was weird. We also have Sveta Kuznetsova refusing to shake Anastasia Rodionova's hand. She said she had her reasons, but I don't know what they are. Also weird.

Surprise packet of the week has to be Jarmila Groth. She hasn't had a super tough draw or anything, but she has come through to the fourth round for two Slams in a row. That is something which is most definitely not nothing.

The Queen turned up. I don't think anyone really cared.

And then the story of the week - John Isner and Nicolas Mahut put on the match of a lifetime on Court 18. An absolute gladiatorial epic, I am pretty sure this match will be remembered long after we have forgotten who won this tournament. Absolutely outstanding. 70-68. Can't imagine this ever being matched.

What are your Week One memories?

The Court Where Stuff Happens

Court 2 used to be the Wimbledon court with all the notoriety - the graveyard of champions where big names fell with such incredible regularity. But Court 2 doesn't have it any more. The most notorious court on the Wimbledon grounds now has to be Court 18.

I'm not sure if playing there is a blessing or a curse, but if you're playing on Court 18, chances are your match will be memorable. Maybe it will go for eleven hours and span three days. Or maybe it will be the forum for one of the foulest cases of bad sportsmanship I have ever witnessed.

I know there were people in the crowd who were doing something (not sure what) to upset Victor Hanescu. But come on, he's supposed to be a professional tennis player. Tune it out, dude. Get into your zone. There is no excuse for the way Hanescu behaved.

His opponent, Daniel Brands, had this to say:

"In the final set I recognised that he had some problems with his leg and he was getting angry, and angry with the crowd. The main reason was because [he was getting jeered] from some people in the crowd. I didn't hear [him swear]. I think he was deliberately foot faulting and serving some double faults on purpose.

"At the end he came and shook my hand at the net. I asked him what happened. He said he was injured and had to retire. I didn't see him after leaving the court. That was the first time that we played against each other. It doesn't happen really very often that the player gets angry. It's not polite to act lke he did but that's his decision that he made."

Brands is very diplomatic about the whole thing - primarily because I think he is as confused about the whole situation as everyone else is. I don't think anyone really knows what went on with Hanescu and the crowd, but I don't really think it matters. There is no excuse for the kind of stunt Hanescu pulled. There is no excuse for unsportsmanlike conduct and there is no excuse for tanking. It is extremely disrespectful, not just to the crowd who were on his case, but to his opponent.

I am sure Daniel Brands would have loved to have won this match under better circumstances. I am sure he'll take the win anyway, but I don't anyone would really want to win this way. I hope Hanescu gets smacked with a big, big fine. This behaviour is unacceptable.

Oh, and also on Court 18, Jarmila Groth won her match against Angelique Kerber. This might not seem so remarkable, but when you consider that Jarka has now made the round of sixteen at both Roland Garros and Wimbledon despite being ranked around #80, then it starts getting pretty remarkable! (What's even more remarkable is that the Australian media don't seem to have noticed yet...)

And John Isner's tournament is over. I don't think anyone expected him to beat de Bakker, and in a way, I'm glad he lost. It would be wrong if he progressed deep in the tournament and Mahut was left stranded holding nothing but a first round loser's check and a souvenir bowl. That match existed outside Wimbledon (and, some might argue, all sense of time and reality). It'll go down as one of the great ones. Victory was Pyrrhic for Isner, and really, that's the way it should be. That match wasn't about winning and losing - that one really was, to use the old adage, about playing the game.

A Piece of History

No matter what happens in this tournament, no matter who wins, no matter who visits, this is the match Wimbledon 2010 is going to be remembered for.

Isner. Mahut. These names will go down in history.

I don't think we'll ever see a set to match the epic 70-68 that was the final set between these two gladiators. I don't want to go on about this match too much, because, hello, enough people have done it already, but I can't not. It was a match where time literally lost all meaning. It was a match where the sport of tennis became the cruellest sport there is, because there could only be one winner. It was a match that made all the other sports in the world seem like completely pansy sports, because it just did not end.

...and it was also the match that drew some focus away from the World Cup and reminded us that soccer is not the only global sport!

I have so much respect for both these guys now. This is what tennis is about. It's matches like these which remind me why a fifth set tiebreaker would be the worst idea ever - because how could you truly evaluate this match, this drama, in a first to seven breaker?

Respect, John. Respect, Nic. This match is history.

(Also, Nicolas totally lost that game at 69-68 because everyone would laugh if the score got to 69-69. You know it's true.)

There were a heap of five set matches around the grounds yesterday (um, 10-8, Jo-W? what kind of set is that? That's barely double digits!) but I want to quickly discuss Rafa's particular battle - looks like Roger and Nole aren't the only ones who have done it tough early on. I don't think this is really signalling any great dystopic doom, but it is kind of interesting - haven't seen this level of challenge in the early rounds against so many of the top guys for a while!

Gladiators

And I bet you thought last year's Wimbledon final was an epic.

16-14 looks like a pansy-ass walk in the park compared to what is currently in progress at Wimbledon - a match that has nearly doubled the length of any other tennis match in the history of the world ever. 59-59 in the fifth set.

How does that happen?

Who will blink? Will anyone blink? Is this match destined to go on and on and on forever?

It is such a shame that one of these dudes, one of these gladiators, have to lose this match. John Isner and Nicolas Mahut, I salute you. You are both going down in my very good books, under the 'man of steel' category. This match is unprecedented and I very much doubt that we will see anything like it ever again. If you look up 'anomaly' in the dictionary, you get a livestream of this match.

You also get a livestream of this match if you look up 'endurance'.

This match is testament to the fact that tennis players need to have it all - speed, skill, endurance, incredible fitness - to succeed. It could be argued that tennis players are the best athletes in the world, because they have to be so versatile. There is so much that a tennis player needs to be able to do to succeed.

But beyond this - beyond the iron physicality that both Isner and Mahut have displayed - is the mental. Tennis is in the mind. This is point by point tennis, where everything matters. And neither has blinked. Neither has faltered.

Now that is strength.

Now that is an athlete.

Now that is a gladiator.

Wimbledon 2010 - The Gents

We did the ladies yesterday, time for the gents. Wimbledon T-minus one day!

Roger's quarter: I don't think my pick in this quarter is going to be exactly revolutionary. Unlike Roland Garros, Roger has what I would call a better draw than his buddy Rafa. He opens up against Alejandro 'don't say my name' Falla, which you'd think would be not too bad. And the other big seed in this quarter, Davydenko, is fresh off injury and hasn't really been right since the whole beatdown at the Australian Open incident.

So yeah, surprises.

There are some interesting lurkers in this section, however. Andrey Golubev is going to be the one I keep my eye on, but I'm going to track the progress of Marsel Ilhan, Dustin Brown and Carsten Ball carefully. They're not exactly top ten material yet, but they're interesting guys with upset potential.

Winner: Roger. I am SUCH a revolutionary.
If not him, then: Heaven forbid such a thing occur. But I'm going to keep it Swiss and say Stan Wawrinka. I like his grass court game.
Dark horse: See note re heaven forbid. But I'm going to go with Berdych or, if the apocalypse happens to occur, Schuettler.
First round matches to watch: Tursunov/Schuettler, Luczak/Robredo, Brown/Melzer and Berdych/Golubev.

Novak's quarter: I'm going to be equally revolutionary and not pick Djokovic in this quarter, because please, what has he done these days? Wimbledon seems to bring out something special in Roddick, and much as I am not keen on the idea of a Roger/Andy semi, what with Soderling's retribution in Roland Garros, I can definitely see it happening.

I suppose Hewitt might be another contender in this quarter, but I am really not on that bandwagon and frankly don't see it happening - not over best of five. The biggest threats otherwise, in my opinion, are Marin Cilic and Philipp Kohlschreiber. They haven't done much of much lately, but they're both solid guys who could just solid their ways into the semis, should everyone crumble around them.

Also keep an eye on Yen-hsun Lu. I like him on grass.

Winner: Roddick. What a daring gamble, Jodi!
If not him, then: I'm going to say Cilic. I like him on grass.
Dark horses: Kohlschreiber and (sigh) Hewitt. Emphatically NOT Bernard Tomic. I don't think his style is especially well suited to grass.
First round matches to watch: Schwank/Korolev, Fish/Tomic and Monfils/Mayer.

Muzz's quarter:I can't figure out if it's more revolutionary to pick for or against Muzz in this quarter. I don't like the way he's playing, nor do I think he will react especially well to the British pressure (particularly if the English team goes out in the World Cup) but his quarter of the draw is really not that tough. If this were Roland Garros, he'd have cause to be scared, but there's not huge stacks of grass court prowess going on in this section.

That said, I wouldn't want to face Sam Querrey's serve on grass if I were a pro tennis player. No sirree.

I suppose you never know what Jo Tsonga can pull either, but he's injured (yesno?) Anyway, I picked him to make the semis in Paris and the boy let me down. Same with Ferrero - have never really seen him play on grass, but can't see it suiting him especially well.

Winner: Muzz. For lack of a better option.
If not him, then: Sam Querrey. See notes re serve.
Dark horses: Watch that tumbleweed going by. Oh, all right, I'll pick Verdasco and Tsonga. And Marco Chiudinelli, just for funsies.
First round matches to watch: Benneteau/Vliegen, Tsonga/Kendrick and Querrey/Stakhovsky.

Rafa's quarter: Now this is not a nice quarter for Rafa. The current question mark over Gulbis (is he in? is he out?) might lessen his angst a little, but the fact remains that he has a rocky road to the final... and I'm a little worried about how his body's holding up. Boy's played a LOT of tennis lately (even if he was winning all his matches in straights).

So I really am going to be revolutionary. I'm not picking Rafa. Faint now. Off you go.

I'm giving my vote to Soderling. I think he has the drive to prove himself outside Roland Garros, and you can bet that if he met Rafa in the quarters, he would want to give him what-for in recompense for the finals in Paris. I haven't seen a great deal of him on grass, but I think he could definitely keep the ball low on Rafa, and that would help his cause a lot.

Also, watch out for John Isner. That's all I'm saying.

Winner: Robin Soderling. He wants it.
If not him, then: Rafa. I'm not THAT revolutionary.
Dark horses: John 'I could kill you with my serve' Isner. Youzhny could also be a spoiler and Baghdatis has been to the semis here before.
First round matches to watch: Ferrer/Kiefer, Youzhny/Sela and Nadal/Nishikori.

That leaves us with the following semi finalists:

FedEx vs Andy R
Andy M vs The Yoker

I think either of these matches could go either way. But if someone had a gun to my head and forced me to choose, I would pick the following final:

FedEx vs Andy M

I'm as surprised as you are. I certainly didn't expect myself to be tipping Muzz for the final. And here I find myself doing it. That said, Soderling is totally going to take him to five. And if it does end up that Nadal makes the semis, he will make Muzz his bitch. But the winner of this hypothetical final is...

FedEx.

Told you I was a revolutionary.

What are your thoughts?

Stepping Up In Davis Cup

Davis Cup is over for another badly-scheduled round, and while I don't think we've had any huge upsets per se, there have certainly been some interesting results.

Exhibit A: Spain vs Switzerland. I think we knew that Spain was going to win this one and win it easy... and some of us were secretly hoping Spain would win so that Switzerland that there could be a home tie in Australia in the playoffs. Which is very possible now. Woot.

Back on track. What I actually wanted to talk about here was the great effort that David Ferrer that put in. If you read the write up on the Davis Cup website it seems to blame Switzerland's showing all on Wawrinka playing poorly, which I think is a bit unfair. I mean, sure, he didn't play great, but I think David Ferrer played really, really well, especially in that decisive reverse singles rubber. He hasn't the bestest Davis Cup history in the past, as I have discussed before, so I like to see him bring it for his nation.

Ferru had that great year a couple of years back where he was up at about #4 in the rankings and then fell right back down again. I haven't seen him play this well for a long time - he's reached two finals of late, winning one, and now he's brought it at DC. He seems delightfully upwardly mobile!

The other really interesting result - and the only one that might even vaguely be called an upset - is the Serbia/USA tie. With Djokovic playing for Serbia and without Roddick, I think this one was always on the Serbian racquet. And I don't want to imply that US boys didn't bring it, because I think we can say they brought it. Especially John Isner. He very, very nearly knocked Djokovic off his perch. But this one had Serbia written all over it, and it really was Viktor Troicki that stepped up. I've been sort of following him since I saw him play Rafa in the first round of Australia a few years back, and he's really grown up excellent.

I felt really sorry for the US boys - they did a great job - but there was just not too much they could do about drawing the Serbians. (Hey, maybe if the Davis Cup were scheduled better, then someone like, say, Roddick, might be able to play! Mull on that, Davis Cup. Mull on that).

Andy Roddick's Bridesmaids

You know who I haven't been that impressed with lately? Sam Querrey. You know who I have been impressed with? John Isner. So you can imagine my surprise when the Memphis final turned out the way it is.

Since James Blake slid down the rankings like melting butter, the search has been on for the next American wunderkind. Mardy Fish was a little old for the job, and Sam Querrey seemed to be the prime candidate. He had a few seriously quality months last year where he scored some awesome wins. And then he sat on that glass coffee table and things started not going so well.

Enter Isner. He'd been around for a while, but then he started, you know, being all good. I think his real big break probably came in the US Open last year when he beat Andy Roddick in the third round, but Big John had been coming hard for a while. Both he and Querrey play Karlovician tennis - however, I would argue, that John is more Ivo than Ivo. Ivo may be taller, but John at the net...

I think the reason I am so surprised at this result coming out of Memphis is that Querrey and Isner have similar games - the Dr Ivo style of tennis, based around a monstrous serve. However, Querrey seemed to me to be declining and Isner to be rising, and not just because Querrey fell through that coffee table. It seems to me - and, despite this result, it still does - that Isner and Querrey play the same style, only Isner is better at it.

It happens, I suppose. And Isner did have the match on his racquet in that second set tiebreak. There was some real mental toughness involved in this match - as there always is, I suppose, when you have a match that is centred around tiebreakers. I was still surprised, however... and I'll be interested to see how this rivalry plays out in the future. Because it seems to me that Isner, not Querrey, is going to be Andy Roddick's bridesmaid in the long term.

Jodi's Epic Tennis Adventure 2.8 - Why Tennis Needs Gossip Girl

Well, it is the final day of my epic tennis adventure... something which I would like to forget, because I have loved every second of it. If only I could be a professional tennis writer instead of a public servant. I would give anything for that to be a reality. So if any professional tennis writers need an apprentice... call me.

I write this from my hotel room, watching Rafa Nadal take out a ballboy on TV in his not-so-secret desire to be a soccer player. I tried to get tickets to this match but, alas, failed... oh well. I have seen both Rafa and Kohli live before and I suppose it is someone else's turn now! Though on this match - this is sort of live-blogging, I guess - Philipp Kohlschreiber would be awesome if he could only convert break points. And Rafa needs to stop doing those Gael Monfils splits. I've never seen him do them before this tournament - noticed it when I saw him play Luczak on Monday - and it seriously cannot be good for him. I mean, he must know how often Gael gets injured. And it's not like his legs have been stunningly healthy of late either.

But enough of what I am watching on TV (that way I can pretend that Clijsters' loss to Petrova NEVER HAPPENED). More on what I did today.

I opened the day watching Caroline Wozniacki practice for a bit, before settling in with some lunch and a glass of wine to catch a bit of Safina on the big screen - who, despite playing on the big arenas, is flying totally under the radar, and I think it is doing her the world of good. Sure, she hasn't faced any major tests yet... but remember the US Open. She got taken all the way by Olivia Rogowska and then lost to Petra Kvitova. She's into the round of sixteen without dropping a set, and that is very respectable. I still wouldn't pick her to win the tournament or anything, but I don't think she's going to embarass herself. Which is new and exciting for her, much as I hate to admit it.

I saw some of her practice yesterday, and she and Zeljko are as in each others' faces as they ever have been. There was a shaking of the racquet under Zeljko's nose and a whole lot of shouting. It is relationships like these that make it clear to me just how badly tennis needs a Gossip Girl style blog. 'Spotted: D and Z, passion on court, passion off court'.

Yes, I have this pet theory that Dinara and Zeljko are having an affair. Yes, I am very aware I am miles off base.

And tennis totally needs an insider to start this blog IMMEDIATELY. A player would be ideal, but a coach, a physio... actually, you know who would be great? A masseuse. They must hear about the woes of all the players. 'Rumour has it that Marcos is Karolina's new Sprem'. 'Is MariKiri angling for a proposal from Bigor?'

This needs to happen. If only someone would pay for me to travel on the tour around the world, I'd be completely happy to do it myself...

But back to tales of What I Did Today. After catching some Dinara and then some Justine, I headed off to Court 16 for Roger's 1pm practice sesh. I am now the owner of not one but two signed caps, one RF cap, one RG cap. RG was courtesy of Tuesday, RF today, and yes, in case you're wondering, Roger is very pretty close up. ('Spotted: swooning fans at Roger practice session, Mirka somehow completely unthreatened'... okay, maybe that's not newsworthy.)

After I had finished hyperventilating, I headed to Margaret Court Arena for a couple of afternoon matches. I caught the last set and a half of Wickmayer/Errani, and despite it being a WTA match and thus error-strewn, it was very entertaining. Both these players are aggressive wheeler-dealers, and that is always good to watch. There were some absolutely exquisite winners from both ladies, and I enjoyed it a lot. Wickmayer won in the end - she'll face Justine Henin in the next round - and she is looking very good. This will be a very interesting battle of the Belgians, mark my words.

After this match, I sat through all four sets of Isner/Monfils. I confess, I kind of understand what the big deal is about Monfils and why people like him, but he leaves me cold. Maybe it's because his coach, Roger Rasheed, is such an enormous douchecanoe. Maybe it's because he's always injured and I forget about him a lot. But I am just not in Camp Gael.

And then John Isner played at Hopman Cup, and that generally endears me to players a lot. As I discussed with Dootsiez afterwards, big servers usually = totally boring, but Isner has some real game to match his serve, especially in the volley area. This was a totally great match... albeit bittersweet, because it was the last match of my Australian Open adventure.

Every year my tennis tour gets longer and longer. I took in four major cities this year - Perth, Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne. Will I do it all again next year? You bet your bottom dollar. Will it be even bigger and better? YES YES YES... if I can afford it!

Kind of Loving Tommy

Tommy Robredo is one of those players that I have, without meaning to, somehow conspired to see play a lot. He's not up there on my favourites list or anything, but somehow I always manage to catch a bunch of his matches. And I kind of love him now - a love born of familiarity more than anything else, because I doubt he'd stand out to me otherwise. He's not spectacularly interesting or anything.

But. Yes, I have just been all like, 'I love you, Tommy, but hot damn you are boring,' but when I saw him play John Isner at the Hopman Cup yesterday, I realised there was a reason I kind of loved him, and it's his speed. The way he can run down balls is pretty awesome to watch. They actually did a bit of stats thing on the TV where they showed how often Isner was hitting the ball to Robredo's backhand - something like 71% of the time. However, despite the speed of the Isner groundies, Robredo was running round most of them to hit forehands. Because he could.

And his passing shots! Oh, his passing shots! There is something in the Spanish air which predisposes the Spaniards to hitting beautiful passing shots, and Robredo is no exception. The best tribute I can pay them is silence.

The Isner/Robredo match was a seriously good match. It went 7-6 in the third, with Robredo coming out on top, but it was a titanic struggle - and it looked like it was going to be all Isner until one moment midway through the second set. Robredo had struggled mightily to get it to 30-all on Isner's serve, and then he hit an absolutely inspired forehand to bring up break point. He went on to break Isner - the only break of serve in the match - and run off with the set. And even though the third set went deep, you kind of had the feeling Robredo was going to win.

Spain won the tie 3-0, cleaning up in the women's singles and the mixed as well, and they surely must be favourites to win the group now. Another failed year at Hopman Cup for Australia.

Over in Brisbane, there were quality wins for Alicia Molik and Matt Ebden, which surely must turn Tennis Australia's collective frown upside down. Good stuff.


Today's Results

Hopman Cup (Perth)

Spain 3, USA 0

Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez def. Melanie Oudin, 6-4 6-4
Tommy Robredo def. John Isner, 6-7 (5-7) 6-3 7-6 (7-4)
Martinez Sanchez/Robredo def. Oudin/Isner, 6-4 7-5


Brisbane International (Brisbane)

Women's Draw

Kim Clijsters def. Tathiana Garbin, 6-2 6-1
Alicia Molik def. Ekaterina Makarova, 6-4 1-6 6-4
Vania King def. Sybille Bammer, 6-4 6-1
Andrea Petkovic def. Iveta Benesova, 6-7 (6-8) 6-2 6-1
Melinda Czink def. Lucie Hradecka, 6-4 3-6 6-3
Barbora Zahlavova Strycova def. Olga Govortsova, 6-4 6-1