A Highly Educated Look At Things I Know A Lot About

There is not so much to report today. We're in that brief no man's land between the Davis Cup weekend and Indian Wells where fat nothing happens. So what I thought we might do is have a quick snappy look at the dudes who won Challengers over the weekend. Are you cool with that? You better be, because that's what I'm doing.

In Cherbourg, much to my chagrin, it was not defending champion Nicolas Mahut to took away the trophy, but young Bulgarian Grigor Dimitrov. As a result, Dimitrov leaps up the rankings ten spots while Mahut goes down ten (but he's still in the top hundred, fear not!) Dimitrov is the latest player, as we all know, to be touted as the second coming of Roger Federer... but while we have the first one I don't really see the necessity of a second. Dimitrov's strokes are so closely modelled on Roger's that it's uncanny. And if there's a model you want to take, Federer is not a bad one...

...but I heard Jim Courier say once that unless you develop your own style, there's not much out there for you. I'd like to see Dimitrov move in his own direction a little. Sure, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and his Federerness is clearly working for him, because hello, he just won Cherbourg, but I'd like to see something in the mix that is pure Grigor. And I think it'll come too - what's the attraction in being a carbon copy of another dude when you can be yourself? The Federer strokes will provide a great base for Dimitrov to build on, provided he's prepared to get his hands dirty and build a beautiful house. The house is a tennis player. This metaphor is bad.

In Dallas, the tournament where all the Australians thought it would be a good idea to go for some reason, we saw Alex Bogomolov Jr take away the title. Here is all the things I know about Alex Bogomolov Jr:

...

...

...

As you can see, I am supremely well informed about this young man and all his prospects. I'm going to stick with 'well done' - particularly as he beat Rainer Schuettler in the final, and Schuettler, while he might be past it now, has been to a Grand Slam final in his day - and give a big shout out to Matt Ebden, who made the semis, and lost to this Alex Bogomolov Jr character in three tight sets. It's only a matter of time before Ebden starts winning these tournaments, I think - he gets better and better every time I see him play.

And then in Salinas, Andres Moltini was the winner. You know how much I knew about Alex Bogomolov Jr (ie. his name and nothing else)? I know even less about Moltini. I'd never even heard of him before this week. But he's clearly doing something right, because he just won in Salinas. And he upset top seed Brian Dabul to do it, so well done Andres. May you continue Moltini-ing on for the rest of your days.

Seed Massacre

Okay, what is with this seed massacre going on in s'Hertogenbosch and Eastbourne this week? It's crazy! It's covering both the men's and women's tournaments, and it seems that no one is immune. Is it grass? Or is it just that we're having a ker-razy week?

*

The only draw which seems even a little immune is the men's draw at Eastbourne, we have the #2, #4 and #8 seeds in the semis - but still, they're hardly the four seeds you'd expect! That's Tursunov, Santoro and Garcia-Lopez... and a qualifier, Frank Dancevic. What's the bet that Dancevic goes on to win the title? From memory, he's already knocked out the top seed (which was Andreev, I think). It looks like we're having a bit of a misrule hangover from Roland Garros.

*

In the women at Eastbourne, the only seed left standing is #6, which is Caroline Wozniacki. (Odd, isn't it, that the women's draw seems to have attracted a lot more high-end players than the men - Dementieva as a top seed has a lot more pulling power as a name than Andreev). I really would like see Caro go on to win the tournament, and considering the rest of her opposition consists of Razzano, Bartoli and Wozniak, she should be able to do it... though Bartoli is a former Wimbledon finalist, I suppose, and has game on grass. Still, if Caroline can't pull this one off you practically have to write the tournament off as a moment of WTA insanity.

*

...which is mirrored over in s'Hertogenbosch, where only top seed Dinara Safina remains standing - and only after a real battle against Daniela Hantuchova. It would be great for her to win this title to get her confidence back up after the Chernobyl incident in the Roland Garros final, and like Wozniacki, she should be able to do it: her opposition is Tanasugarn, Wickmayer and Schiavone, all players she should theoretically be able to beat with one hand tied behind her back. So here's hoping she does.

*

And our last bastion of normalcy in the men's s'Hertogenbosch draw is fourth seed Rainer Schuettler - and even though he's the seed, I don't think there's any way in hell I'd pick him to win. Even if he did make the Wimbledon semis last year. Up against him is Becker, Navarro (who put an absolute pounding on defending champ Ferrer) and Sluiter. I think this one might be Becker's. It'd be nice to see him come up through qualies like that - and he really does have a great game.

*

So, in conclusion, there's general madness, and I think the only thing you can really attribute it to is the miniscule amount of play that happens on this surface. And why is that? Wimbledon is probably the most important event of the year! Why does Roland Garros get two or three months of lead up clay tournaments when Wimbledon only gets two weeks?

*

*

Today's Results

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

Men's Draw

*

Benjamin Becker def. Michael Llodra, 7-6 (8-6) 7-5

Rainer Schuettler def. Jeremy Chardy, 7-6 (9-7) 3-6 7-6 (13-11)

Ivan Navarro def. David Ferrer, 6-4 6-2

Raemon Sluiter def. Dudi Sela, 4-6 6-4 6-4

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Dinara Safina def. Daniela Hantuchova, 1-6 6-4 6-3

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Flavia Pennetta, 2-6 6-3 6-3

Yanina Wickmayer def. Kristina Barroi, 6-1 6-1

Francesca Schiavone def. Olga Govortsova, 6-1 6-3

*

*

AEGON International (Eastbourne)

*

Men's Draw

*

Frank Dancevic def. Leonardo Mayer, 6-7 (4-7) 6-4 7-5

Fabrice Santoro def. Ivan Ljubicic, 3-6 4-2 retired

Guillermo Garcia-Lopez def. Janko Tipsarevic, 6-4 3-6 6-3

Dmitry Tursunov def. Denis Istomin, 7-6 (8-) 6-4

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Virginie Razzano def. Agnieszka Radwanska, 7-6 (7-5) 7-5

Marion Bartoli def. Anabel Medina Garrigues, 6-1 6-4

Caroline Wozniacki def. Ekaterina Makarova, 6-3 6-2

Aleksandra Wozniak def. Vera Dushevina, 6-1 6-0

That Strange Unfinished Feel

Very little to report on today... mostly because very little happened. Only six matches were played in Madrid, and none of the results were particularly unexpected... that said, I only picked four of them correctly in the bracket challenge. But, you know, some of them were hard picks.

*

Like Simon vs. Andreev. I mean, who are you going to pick in that one? They couldn't decide who was going to win - Andreev had four match points. I had picked him to win, but Simon came through in the end. If that had been a five set match, that one could have been a thriller. I mean, as a three set match it looked like a bit of a thriller, what the nail-biting final set breaker. I hate final set breakers, I have to say - I think it is the stupidest way of deciding matches. Well, not stupid, I guess - I have no issues with breakers used in other sets - but I just feel that if the match is that close, then you are obligated to keep it going on until someone wins properly, if that makes sense. Imagine if that amazing Nadal/Federer match at Wimbledon had been decided with a fifth set breaker. That would have been tragic. Actually, remember the final at Rome in 2006, decided with a fifth set breaker. The match was five hours already, but it deserved longer. Someone wins the breaker, for sure, but the match is left with a strange unfinished feel...

*

Meanwhile, Tomas Berdych is looking in good form, which is interesting, because we haven't seen that for a while. Maybe that win in Tokyo was a harbinger of good things to come. Rainer Schuettler isn't a schlep - he is, we must remember, a Wimbledon semifinalist - but Berdych totally owned him. I'd like to see Berdych do well. He's a good indoor player, I do believe - remember that year when Federer won four Masters events and Nadal won four, and then neither of them played Paris? Berdych won it. I'm not saying I necessarily want him to replicate that - we all know I want Federer to win, to take out the double, especially as he hasn't won any Masters events this year - but it'd be nice to see him do well.

*

Same thing with my boy Marin Cilic, who had a good win as well, beating Olivier Rochus in straights. Rochus might not be the mightiest player on the circuit, but Cilic is being consistent and not taking any weird losses, and that's all I can ask of him. This kid is on the way up, big time.

*

Someone I thought was on the way up but keeps losing early, which is disappointing, is Alize Cornet, who lost to Alona Bondarenko in Zurich. It was another final set breaker - damn those breakers - but really, come on, Alize. Let's see you making good on all that talent!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Mutua Madrilena Masters Madrid (Madrid)

*

Mardy Fish def. Steve Darcis, 6-1 6-4

Simone Bolelli def. Nicolas Almagro, 7-6 (7-4) 6-1

Gilles Simon def. Igor Andreev, 4-6 6-1 7-6 (9-7)

Marin Cilic def. Olivier Rochus, 6-3 7-5

Tommy Robredo def. Andreas Seppi, 7-6 (7-5) 3-6 6-3

Tomas Berdych def. Rainer Schuettler, 6-1 6-2

*

*

Tennis.com Zurich Open (Zurich)

*

Maria Kirilenko def. Daniela Hantuchova, 7-5 6-2

Victoria Azarenka def. Amélie Mauresmo, 6-2 6-1

Alona Bondarenko def. Alizé Cornet, 1-6 6-3 7-6 (8-6)

Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly

I'd like to dedicate this post to my friend Erin who, when I was discussing this issue with her the other day, reminded me of the old adage: you give your heart to Fred Astaire but you keep your body for Gene Kelly.

*

I never thought I'd liken Marat Safin to Gene Kelly, but there you go. Roger Federer and Fred Astaire is more understandable... the way Roger dances around the baseline is almost Astaire-like at times.

*

It's always difficult for me to see these two play against each other, because I love them both so much. Federer will always, always be my favourite... but Safin has got his Safin-ness, and I love him too. I'm married to Roger, but sometimes I have an affair with Marat.

*

So like I said, watching them is difficult. Their matches are the only matches in which I don't quite wholeheartedly go for Federer... I mean, I'm going for him, but there's that tiny 1% of my heart which would love to see Marat get through... It was the 99% that got satisfied, and I was glad about it. And Marat has a lot to be proud of in this tournament. I've said it before, but I'll say it again: it is so, SO great to see him achieving new milestones in his career when people have started to count him out.

*

Watching Roger and Marat is also easier than other matches, because at least I know one of my boys is sure to get through. I wish, I WISH that it could be both of them. I would kill for a Federer/Safin final. But we don't get everything we want in life, alas.

*

Although Federer won and won convincingly - as you would expect of the man who hasn't lost on grass since 2002 and hasn't lost a set on the stuff this year - Safin actually played quite well in parts. The first set was maybe not so good, but the second set was really great. He played deep, and he was devastating at net - Federer couldn't pass him at all. His wingspan is so big and his size is so intimidating that he totally dominated there. He took the net away from Roger completely - Roger lost more points than he won at net, which is very unusual for him. Marat also served pretty decently as well. Although unforced errors crept into his game in spurts - he would hit five gorgeous winners, and then five stupid errors - there were shades of 2005. For a man that has always professed to hate grass, I think he played just swell.

*

Now - can he back it up? I'm certain he can, if he thinks he can. Marat is all about his headspace, and hopefully this will give him confidence. It certainly should - he's never been to the semis of Wimbledon before! I think this means that he joins that exclusive club of people who have been to the semis at all four majors... I know Roger's done it (obviously), Djokovic has done it (grrr) and Nalbandian has for sure... there are probably more, but they're the ones that occur to me off the top of my head. Even Rafa hasn't done it - he's never made it past the quarters of the US Open, to my knowledge. But Marat's done it.

*

He said he wants to be seeded for the US Open, and I think that's a good goal for him. He is clearly capable of playing and beating seeded players - he took out Seppi, Wawrinka and Lopez as well as the big scalp of Djokovic. He's back in with the big boys: even Roger, God of Grass, didn't look entirely comfortable against him. Marat's ridden back into town... let's hope he doesn't ride straight back out again. He's scheduled to play Bastad next week - good God, that's clay, isn't it? I don't know if that is QUITE the best idea... but considering I don't think he really expected to make it beyond the second round here, he might pull out to rest up for Toronto and Cincinatti, which are, of course, on his favourite surface.

*

For someone who professes to love Roger best of all, I sure do talk a lot about Marat, hey.

*

But I do love Roger best of all, let's face it. I was cheering for him last night, much as I love Marat, and I would do it again. Him winning his sixth Wimbledon title would make my year, and he can totally do it. He didn't play quite as well as he did against Ancic, but I think Safin is a more unsettling player. You never know what's going to happen with Marat... he could do something stupid or he could hit a brilliant winner. At least with Rafa, Roger's going to know what's coming. Rafa's brilliant, but that brilliance is almost predictable... you can predict that he's going to be brilliant. Marat is either a total genius or a severe disappointment - often both, several times, in the same match.

*

So Roger didn't play quite as well, but he was serving very well indeed - winning 92% on second serve, which is just totally crazy - and cleaning the lines with constant regularity. And much as the Channel 9 commentators were all like, 'oh, he's vulnerable, oh, he sucks, etc etc etc,' I would like to point out that at no point did Safin serve for the set in that match. Because Rafa was hardly playing at his Rafa-like best.

*

I like Rafa. A lot. I really do. But let's face facts... now he's the villain. This match, this court, this whole damn institution is Federer's, and I for one am not ready for a changing of the guard.

*

All credit to Rainer Schuettler. He played a great match, and he really hung in there, despite the fact that he must have been buggered after that marathon with Clement. If he'd won that second set... well, I still think he'd have lost the match, but it would have made it a hell of a lot more interesting. I really liked the way he played Rafa. Tactically, it was smart. He was playing inside the baseline a lot of the top, cutting off the impact of the Crazy Rafa Topspin (tm.) And he wasn't afraid to come in or to draw Rafa in, despite the mad excellence of the Rafa pass and the certainly not half badness of the Rafa volley. I've never seen someone try to play Rafa like this, and it certainly must have been a task and a half, what with the speed and power at which Rafa belts the ball, but Schuettler did it very well. And his angled returns into the backhand court were very nice also. Some interesting things to think about.

*

But we're now at that part of the tournament where I start tossing around the word 'destiny' and the other one hundred and twenty six guys fade into the background (even Marat.) It's the rematch. The gladiatorial showdown. Federer. Nadal. #1 and #2. The match that was always going to happen.

*

And I'm going to tip Federer. IN THREE DAMN SETS.

*

*

Wimbledon Results - Day #11

*

Men's Draw

*

Roger Federer def. Marat Safin, 6-3 7-6 (7-3) 6-4

Rafael Nadal def. Rainer Schuettler, 6-1 7-6 (7-3) 6-4

Sister Act

First of all, I would like to apologise for the title of today's post. It was, like the results of the women's semi finals, an exercise in inevitability.

*

But let's talk about boys. I don't know if Rainer Schuettler is quite the player (or Man) that Federer, Nadal and Safin are, but he certainly put in a very Man-like performance. Odd, isn't it, that the least anticipated of the four quarter finals is the one that was the best match, in the end? Who on earth would have picked Arnaud Clement and Rainer Schuettler to get to a quarter final? Both sort of one-Slam wonders, in their way. One Grand Slam final each between them, one loss to Agassi apiece. What a great result for the thirtysomethings!

*

It was an awesome match - a real classic. 8-6 in the third... Clement had a match point, which Schuettler saved. As far as nailbiting tennis goes, this was it. I love a good five set match, especially when I don't really mind who wins. If it's Federer going to five sets, I'm a nervous wreck - I much prefer a three set blowout, for the sake of my nerves, if nothing else! (The one exception to this rule is the Federer/Safin semi from the Australian Open in 2005 - because both players played such amazing tennis than winning was pretty much irrelevant.) But when I'm not particularly bothered about the result, I love the challenge of it, the gladiatorial struggle of it all. And this was a real gladiatorial match - and Schuettler was the gladiator that came out on top.

*

As a Classics student, I just wounded myself mortally with the historical inaccuracy of that metaphor.

*

Gladiatorial as Schuettler might have been, I don't think he stands much chance against Rafa, however... that one might just be a massive blowout. Schuettler has got to be tired from that marathon match, and Rafa is just playing so well... Rafa in three easy ones. Likewise Federer... though slightly more difficult ones. You can never count Marat out. But judging by his presser yesterday, I think Marat has counted himself out. He said that to beat Federer you need to run round like a rabbit and get everything back... like Rafa. If Marat believed he could do it, I think he's totally capable of giving Federer a run for it - though I think Roger would still come out on top. But it might be tighter...

*

This match is wonderful and difficult all at the same time... because Federer is my favourite, he's The Man, he's the best thing ever. But Marat is... well, he's Marat. And I love him very dearly. But Roger is Roger! And of course I'm going for Roger. But I want Marat to do well too... why, oh why, wasn't he in the other side of the draw?

*

Of course, then he wouldn't have beaten Djokovic... if only those two quarters had just been switched! Then Safin could play Nadal, though I'm really fond of Rafa, I could feel free to go for Marat. And then Roger could play Schuettler and all my loyalties would be solved!

*

Sigh.

*

The story of yesterday, of course, was the Williams sisters. Gee, I was shocked. Their run to the final was in no way a story of tedious inevitability. Cough cough.

*

I was glad to see that Zheng Jie at least gave Serena a bit of a run for it in the second set, and she should be very proud of how she played. I don't think she was ever going to be any threat to Serena on grass, but she tried, and she acquitted herself very well.

*

Now, I don't want to say that Dementieva didn't try, because she was clearly trying her hardest. But I would like to point out that she was in fact seeded above both Venus and Serena here - and this isn't a seeding based purely on ranking, but also on past grass court results. But Venus totally wiped the floor with her. I have no idea how she managed to stay with Venus through that second set. How has she got to #5 in the world with a serve like that? And that's the improved version... honestly, all she does is tap the ball into play. I lost count of how many return winners Venus cracked. Even on the first set, Venus was almost standing on the service line to receive. How does Dementieva ever manage to win a match when she has no serve? It reminds me of Camille Pin, actually, who totally would have beaten Sharapova in the first round of last year's Aussie Open if she'd had anything that even resembled a serve.

*

Dementieva does have a good return game, I will grant you, and she had break points on a number of Venus's service games in that blowout first set, so it's not like she was totally out of it the whole time. It's not like serve = tennis. You need to have more than that. But surely you should have something that's at least a tiny bit of a weapon. Look at Rafa Nadal. His service is excellent now, but even in previous years, when it was one of the lesser weapons in his arsenal, it was still not something to be taken lightly. Sometimes I wondered why Dementieva just didn't dink the ball over the net to begin the point. It might have had the same effect. It's fluff. Her serve is the fairy floss of the WTA. There was a great line in Alix Ramsay's article about the match:

*

'Dementieva won the toss and elected to serve, which did seem a little like a lemming booking a trip to the white cliffs of Dover for its summer holidays.'

*

Too true. Ramsay also made reference to Dementieva's infamous comment before her final at the US Open against Kuznetsova, where she said that her serve was her secret weapon. Why? 'Sveta will think it's a drop shot.' Not too much has changed, really.

*

Venus, to her credit, played well - not her best, but solidly. Compared to her sister, her tennis fashion has had relatively little press this tournament - in fact, the only publicity it really has had is through Nadia Petrova wearing EleVen designs - but I really like her tennis dress. Simple, but kind of interesting, too. And isn't it terrible that I've just started about tennis fashion instead of her tennis game? Shame on me.

*

I think there's a litmus test for a lot of players where you can gauge how hard they're trying in a match. For Rafa Nadal, it's the sweatiness of his hair. For both Venus and Serena, it's how much they shriek... and both were pretty quiet today. Venus especially.

*

So it'll be an interesting couple of days at chez Williams. People have been asking them constantly if playing in a final damages their relationship or whatever. I can see why they ask it, but really, it's pretty self evident. They're sisters. Of course they both want to win for themselves, but they're still sisters... and they're still in the doubles together. They don't exactly need to scout each others' game. They know each other so well... and that'll make the final very interesting. They're mirrors of each other, in many ways. Overall, I might give Serena a slight edge as a player all round, but I like Venus to win this one... in three sets. Tight sets. Possibly two tiebreaks and a marathon third. But I would not really put any money on the match either way.

*

What I would put money on is them winning the doubles. The Channel 9 commentators consistently say that if the Williams girls played more tournaments they would be #1 and #2 in singles. This, I think, is unfair, but I don't think it's unfair at all to say that if they played more doubles, that would be the top team in the women's game. They're seeded #11. That's a bit of a joke, really. Shows that the Wimbledon seeding system isn't totally infallible.

*

But the really interesting question, and the note on which I'll leave you... are the Williams parents going to go for Venus or Serena?

*

*

Wimbledon Results - Day #10

*

Men's Draw

*

Rainer Schuettler def. Arnaud Clement, 6-3 5-7 7-6 (8-6) 6-7 (7-9) 8-6

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Venus Williams def. Elena Dementieva, 6-1 7-6 (7-3)

Serena Williams def. Zheng Jie, 6-2 7-6 (7-5)