A Piece Of Cake...?

I've been writing about cake a lot this week. In case you hadn't noticed. This is probably due to two things: firstly, Rafa's half of the draw has been a big ol' cupcake, and secondly, cake is delicious.

Given the subject of this blog - you know, like, tennis and stuff - I'm going to write about the former again today. But cake IS delicious. That is my endorsed position.

So. Cake. Rafa's draw. I want to say that I've been unfair, that I branded this side as cupcake-y out of some malicious impulse deep in my soul or something. But I don't think it's true. On paper, this side of the draw is as cupcake-y as you get. Let's look at Rafa's draw so far. De Voest. Sweeting. Devvarman. Karlovic. Of them, Devvarman is the only one even ranked in the top hundred.

Cake. Rafa's having it, Rafa's eating it... someone said 'let Rafa eat cake!' and Rafa took that cake and - oh. Wait.

In the first two rounds, Rafa was jamming cake down like he was never going to eat a cake again. But then he played Devvarman. And Devvarman played him good, yo. You can see yesterday's blog post for my round up of just how well Devvarman played. I think I called him a cupcake with teeth. Which is actually a little unfair, because even though on paper, this looks like a cake-y match up, Somdev didn't play like cake AT ALL.

But you want an object lesson in a cupcake who didn't play like a cupcake? What's the weather like up there, Dr Ivo?

Ivo Karlovic is a problematic player. Right now, he's ranked way down in the #200s or something, which - you know, CAKE. But even when he was inside the top hundred, it always seemed strangely irrelevant to put a number ranking on Dr Ivo. If you could win the tiebreaks, then you would win the match. Because eight or nine times out of ten, Dr Ivo would take you to the tiebreak. He's the first word in one-dimensional games - not necessarily because the rest of his game is noticeably crap (it's so beige I can't remember how he plays, really) but because his serve is so good that it eclipses everything.

But he's coming back off injury and Rafa is #1, so... piece of cake, yeah?

How about NO. How about Dr Ivo played Rafa so hard - 23 aces! - that there was every possibility that Rafa would go down, that even this cupcake-y draw could defeat the world #1, pull him down like quiksand into a giant morass of cake?

Wow. I took that metaphor a little far. That is a disturbing mental image.

Rafa was extremely lucky to win this match. That was what I was trying to say. It basically hinged on one point - if Karlovic had got the minibreak in the third set breaker, then he would have won, end of story. Rankings are irrelevant for Karlovic because he can beat anyone if they can't deal with his serve. And although Rafa did reasonably well, it still almost wasn't enough.

And yet, on paper, Karlovic should have been yet another cupcake on Rafa's plate. Tennis can always, always surprise you.

A Bizarre Image Which Will Haunt Your Nightmares

Sometimes cupcakes have teeth.

(How is that for a weird mental image?)

We had what has to be one of the best night session lineups in the history of ever in Indian Wells tonight - Rafa playing first, Roger playing second. It does not get any better than that, end of story. And their opponents? Cupcake #1 and Cupcake #2. But these cupcakes... they were the kind with teeth. They weren't quite haggis vindaloo, but they were the kind of cupcakes you'd choke and splutter on. These cupcakes played well above their rankings. And good on them both.

Rafa's cupcake was Somdev Devvarman, he who had a pretty sweet Davis Cup win over Janko Tipsarevic a little while ago and who is in pretty good form. Still, if you're opponent's Rafa, you're essentially a cupcake by default. But Somdev really, REALLY did not play like one. I don't know if there's any gooey, moist cupcake in the world anywhere in the world who can serve at 75%. Them's some good numbers, yo.

Devvarman was ranked #100 the last time I checked... which, to be fair, was round about the same time as the Commonwealth Games, so it's a while. I assume it's changed a bit. But no matter where he's ranked, I feel pretty confident in saying that he is going to move up soon. He's playing with real confidence right now - with teeth, in fact. He's sinking them into matches and, like a tiger shark, not letting go. Rafa got him in straights today, but they were tight ones. A little experience was all Somdev was needing - Rafa won both sets on a crucial break right at the end. If he plays a few more tournaments the way he played this one, Somdev won't give up those breaks any more.

Roger had the one cupcake left in his haggis vindaloo draw... though you wouldn't have been able to tell. Harrison plays differently from Devvarman - his style is less 'sink your teeth in' and more 'I HAVE NO FEAR'. Aside from a few opening nerves, he appeared almost wholly undaunted by the situation. Federer, who is capable of winning cupcake-y factors on daunt factor alone, was a little taken by surprise with this, I think. Harrison is only eighteen years old (I think... he's a teenager anyway), but he demonstrated both today and yesterday against Milos Raonic that he's capable of playing at a much higher level than his age. He has the emotional maturity, I think, that a lot of juniors are lacking. Or that's what it looked like to me, anyway.

These two cupcakes, even though they both lost in straights, both put up excellent performances. The same can not be said for Vile Troicki, who is supposed to be a good player and who got sent to the bakery by Djokovic. Djokovic is playing amazingly at the moment - ain't no one gonna deny that - but for serious, Viktor? That's just silly.

Also silly was the fact that I was right - Gasquet really is a bit of a contender in this tournament, capable of stringing wins together against anyone if he doesn't think too hard and no one's looking. Despite what I said yesterday, I fully expected him to lose today. I think Andy Roddick did too, so the result came as a bit of a rude shock...

Karlovic, Robredo and del Potro all came through in the cupcake half of Rafa, while Stan Wawrinka will join Gasquet and Djokovic in Roger's haggis vindaloo side. I was super pleased with Stan's results today. I'm not going to be surprised if he enters the top ten again this year. I will also not be surprised if Berdych leaves it. Will anyone?

Indian Summer

I suppose I should talk about Davis Cup today. But in another installment of my mindblowing Cherbourg coverage, can I get a F%^& YEAH NICOLAS MAHUT? He is in the final there, where he will meet top seed Grigor Dimitrov. Nico won this tournament last year, so for points purposes, I would really like him to win it again, but I am very happy that he's a finalist full stop. My man Nico is on fire, and don't you forget it.

Right. Davis Cup.

The most interesting tie - to my mind, anyway - is this one between Serbia and India. From the outset, you might think that this is the most boring of all the ties - I know I certainly did. But even though the Serbs are pretty much on top now, the Indian dudes have BROUGHT IT like whoa. And without Bhupathi and Paes, which is a massive handicap.

Let's recap. Day One singles, first rubber. Viktor 'vile' Troicki lines up against Rohan Bopanna, whom he is expected to beat easily. Troicki is not exactly the captain of the consistency bandwagon, but this looks like an easy one for him. Right?

WRONG.

Bopanna takes him to five. It all seems smooth sailing for the first two sets, but the worm, oh, how it turns! This match so, SO easily could have gone Bopanna's way. And we all know how I feel about Troicki, so I wish it did.

Oh well. It's only natural for a team to get the yips a little, n'est-ce pas? And Serbia came away with the point anyway, so surely we are headed right down 5-0 blowout lane from here. Right?

WRONG.

Janko Tipsarevic walks out on court against Somdev Devvarman. And walks off three sets later a defeated man.

Would that be 1-all? Why YES, it would be. And it so, so easily could have been 2-0 India. A few points Bopanna's way, and...

The Serbs pulled out the doubles on Saturday, but it was a tight, tight thing - 12-10 in the fourth set tiebreaker. And you really, really have to wonder what would have happened if Bhupathi and Paes had been there...

This is basically an object lesson in don't underestimate the underdog. I think the Serbians have been that underdog for so long that adjusting to being the top dudes might have messed with them again. And much as they love the home crowd, probably playing in Serbia - after what happened the last time they played in Serbia - was intense, intense pressure. Last time it was glory, and now the populace expects no less.

But let's be realistic. This one wasn't all on the Serbian racquet. The Indian dudes have played OUT OF THEIR FREAKING MINDS awesome. Bopanna and Devvarman have a lot to be proud of here. And you know what? It's not over yet. And I, for one, will be cheering for Team India all the way.

The other really intriguing tie going on is Croatia vs Germany, where Marin Cilic pulled out an absolute heartbreaker against Florian Mayer only to have Germany take the next two points. But Croatia, with their singles team of Cilic and Dodig, are more than capable of getting two points on the morrow by taking out Kohlschreiber and Mayer respectively... we shall see, we shall see. Oh, and Karlovic beat that fast serve record of Andy Roddick's. Well done, Dr Ivo.

Disappointment of the Davis Cup week is obviously Russia. What an awful performance. Kudos to him for pulling out the win, but no one should really be losing to Joachim Johansson right now. (Out of interest, why didn't Sweden field Nick Lindahl? I thought that was, like, the whole reason he defected.)

Oh, and before I go - MASSIVE shoutout to Jelena Dokic, who is in the final of Kuala Lumpur, where she will take on Lucie Safarova. This is a crazy-excellent result and I hope she is SUPER proud!

Where Is The Wildcard For Awesome?

Dear Tennis Australia and all ye in charge of giving out wildcards -

I get it, OK? You want to give your discretionary wildcards to Australians. You want to support homegrown tennis and build a Davis Cup team and whatever. I totally understand.

But it doesn't mean I have to like it. And while you may have done a service to Australian tennis (such as it can be said to be), you have done a disservice to tennis overall. Because - as you have heard very loudly over the last few days - the tennis community has been pushing hard for one thing. One wildcard.

We wanted a wildcard for Nicolas Mahut.

I know he's not Australian. I know he's not exactly an up-and-comer. I know he's not going to play Davis Cup for you. But what he is is PURE 100% AWESOME. And we wanted him to have a chance.

Tennis is gladiatorial. Mahut is a gladiator. He played an eleven hour match - how many of your other wildcard contenders could claim to have the legs to do that?

Tennis is entertainment. Um, were you watching the Hopman Cup? Mahut put on a dress and walked out there and entertained his heart out. You want tennis to be watched? You want tennis to be popular? You want to encourage kids to pick up a racquet? You want to entertain them. You need a showman. In short, you need someone like Mahut.

Wildcards are for those who might do something with them. Two words: Hopman Cup. Mahut beat Potito Starace, ranked almost a hundred places higher than him, and pushed Andy Murray very, VERY hard. You want someone who might actually win a match or two? How about Mahut?

Wildcards are for those who deserve to catch a break, who deserve a shot. Look at Kim Clijsters and Justine Henin. Clijsters got a wildcard to the US Open in 2009, Henin to the Australian Open in 2010. Both players who needed a chance. And look how that turned out. Now, I'm not saying that Mahut would have gone on and won the Open if he'd been given a wildcard. But honestly, what more does he need to do? This one is on his own tennis federation as well - Rufin in the US, Paire here... why does Mahut get NO recognition?

There is a reciprocal wildcard arrangement with France and with the US. A wildcard is given to Asia, in the spirit of the Australian Open being the Grand Slam of the Asia Pacific. One is given to the winner of the Australian Open playoff. And four are discretionary. Paire. Harrison. Devvarman. Matosevic. Ebden. Luczak. And, as of yesterday, Ball and Tomic.

It would be very, very easy for me to take potshots at Ball and Tomic - Tomic in particular. But it's been done and it's been done eloquently, and so I will refrain. (Except to say that, REALLY, Tennis Australia, you thought it would be a better idea to give a wildcard to a kid who complained that his centre court match went on past his bedtime than to a man that played eleven hours without complaining?) Instead, I have an alternative proposal.

I propose that every year, one of the discretionary wildcards is set aside to be the Wildcard For Awesome.

This is the wildcard that does not care about some kind of Davis Cup developlement ideal, that's not dangled above the head of misbehaving youngsters like some kind of delicious biscuit. This is the wildcard for someone who has proved, time and time again, that they are awesome. Maybe they... I don't know, have been injured and don't qualify for protected ranking. Maybe they've had a bad season and are on their way back. Maybe they're just very entertaining and obvious fan favourites. Maybe they played a GODDAMN ELEVEN HOUR TENNIS MATCH and survived.

There is only one criterion - that the recipient of this wildcard be AWESOME.

I have very much enjoyed being the captain of the Good Ship #wildcardformahut - which has now become #supportmahut. As I write this, Mahut has just won his first qualifying match - a 6-0 6-1 win in about 45 minutes. He is well on his way to the main draw - one down, two to go. I'd much rather he didn't have to go through this qualifying rigmarole, but now that he has to, he has started off his campaign with style.

I am sad that #wildcardformahut didn't work, but one thing it did do was draw the attention of the tennis community to a player who really is genuinely 100% awesome - as a player, as an entertainer, and as an all round cool dude. Nicolas Mahut, there is a whole bunch of people out here who think you are basically the Lord of Awesome. And even though we didn't succeed in getting you a wildcard into the main draw, I hope some ripple of the #wildcardformahut campaign reaches you - because we want you to know just how awesome we think you are.

Medals. And Stuff. Whatever.

Last post on Commonwealth Games tennis, I swear. I still loathe it with a fiery passion, but I should probably talk a little about how it turned out.

It was pretty much the Anastasia Rodionova show, which is not unsurprising, because she was pretty much the highest ranked player there. She won singles gold over Sania Mirza - in what was a surprisingly good match, though it wasn't particularly high quality - and then doubles gold with Sally Peers. She also got silver in the mixed doubles with Paul Hanley - they lost to a pair of Scottish players I have never heard of.

It's a pretty sad story for Commonwealth tennis when Australia is winning pretty much all the medals, which is essentially what happened. There were a few for India - I was, I confess, glad to see that Somdev Devvarman won gold for his nation (it at least made their ridiculous inclusion of tennis worthwhile) - and Sania Mirza, of course, won silver, but Australia won a ridiculous amount of medals in this event. Rodionova, as mentioned, won gold in the women's singles, and Sally Peers won bronze. Greg Jones and Matt Ebden (still a big Ebden fan, in case anyone was wondering - love his game) won silver and bronze. Then there was gold in the women's doubles, as well gold in the men's doubles. Oh, and also silver in the women's doubles.

Let's face it - Australia is not currently one of the world's tennis powerhouses. We have some good up and coming players, but we can't even get into the world group for Davis Cup. And yet we managed to win all this stuff. It's ludicrous.

Congratulations to all medallists. I mean that sincerely. I wouldn't want my ranting about the inclusion of the sport in the games to reflect badly on your achievements, of which you should be very proud. But seriously, Commonwealth Games? How about we stick to what we're good at next time?

CommCrap

Yesterday, we talked about Andrey Golubev, who is awesome. Today, we're going to talk about something which is decidedly un-awesome.

That's right, we're talking Commonwealth Games tennis.

Now, I understand why Comm games tennis is so dodge. Not that many awesome players come from the Commonwealth, to begin with. Sure, there's Murray and Stosur, but beyond that...? not so much. And it's at a stupid time for the few awesome players there are, and they have pretty much zero incentive to play, apart from some faint sense of nationalism. So surprise, surprise - guess what? they didn't choose to play. Which leaves us with a draw where Somdev Devvarman and Anastasia Rodionova are the top seeds, essentially rendering it meaningless as any kind of major tennis achievement.

I understand all these things. All these things were predictable things, quite outside of the whole furore with security in Delhi. And this begs the question - why the f*ck is tennis in the Commonwealth Games at all?

I'm a big fan of tennis in the Olympics. But you know what? That's because the field is awesome and people have an incentive to play. No one is really going to come to the Comm games, because it's not a productive use of their time nor is it good for their rankings. Tennis in the Comm games is, quite simply, a big fat waste of time.

I know India put it in in the hopes that Sania Mirza could win a medal. Here's hoping that at the next Comm games, it comes straight back out again, because it is spectacularly useless.

Leave It In Brisvegas

Let us not begin today's blog with sour things. Let us instead begin with happy news - congratulations to Dominik Hrbaty and his girlfriend, now fiancee, on their engagement! Apparently he proposed right after he and Dominika Cibulkova won the Hopman Cup, which is really cute. So big congratulations!

*

Right, more sour things. I have discovered the source of Radek Stepanek's power, to which Fernando Verdasco fell victim yesterday, joining a first-set-winning-but-match-losing club with Robin Soderling and Richard Gasquet. It is his shirt. Has anyone ever seen tennis wear more ugly or more mesmerising? I don't know why he thought it would be a good idea to wear a shirt made out of a picnic blanket, but it seems to have worked for him - all three of these players have become hypnotised by it. Or perhaps the horror of it just overcame them. Who can tell?

*

Shirt aside, the match between Verdasco and Stepanek was really a good one, especially the third set, when Stepanek got two breaks up and then Verdasco pulled one and nearly both back. There was some absolutely insane shotmaking from both players (I still blame the shirt) and it was just really good fun to watch. Tennis matches can be good that way, when you aren't especially invested in them (though I was, anyone can tell, pulling for Nando!) You can really appreciate the tennis in and of itself.

*

That said, I hope Stepanek's sudden run of good form doesn't translate to him being this year's surprise finalist. I don't think I would like that. Le's leave it at Brisvegas.

*

And how about Mr Marin Cilic, winning his second title - though it was a struggle against Somdev Devvarman, the wildcard playing out of his skin. But nice one, Marin, flying the Star flag!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Brisbane International (Brisbane)

*

Radek Stepanek def. Fernando Verdasco, 3-6 6-3 6-4

*

*

Chennai Open (Chennai)
*

Marin Cilic def. Somdev Devvarman, 6-4 7-6 (7-3)

*

*

Medibank International (Sydney)

*

Serena Williams def. Samantha Stosur, 6-3 6-7 (4-7) 7-5

Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Peng Shuai, 3-6 6-1 6-3

Agnieszka Radwanska def. Sybille Bammer, 6-4 6-3

*

*

Moorilla Hobart International (Hobart)
*

Tsvetana Pironkova def. Patty Schnyder, 6-2 6-4

Alona Bondarenko def. Monica Niculescu, 6-4 2-6 6-2

Iveta Benesova def. Tamarine Tanasugarn, 7-5 7-5

Petra Kvitova def. Sally Peers, 6-0 6-0

Magdalena Rybarikova def. Kateryna Bondarenko, 4-6 7-6 (8-6) 6-1

The Worm Effect

What is it about the Worm? I've watched both his quarter and semi final showings at the Brisbane tournament, and both times he's been getting his arse kicked heavily in the first set, only to somehow turn the tables in the second two sets when he really has no right to. He did it to Soderling and then he did to Gasquet. Does he only kick into action in the second set? What's with it? And why do these guys let him do it? They're both quality players - what exactly is going on? It doesn't look like he lifts his level of play that exponentially - the wheels just sort of fell off for Robin and Richard. Is this Worm Effect a documentable phenomenon? I don't get it.

*

The final of this tournament is going to be interesting, though I doubt it's going to be anything resembling the cracking Djokovic/Tsonga rematch the organisers were clearly hoping for. Stepanek against Verdasco. Verdasco has been looking very very good (unlike his belaguered girlfriend) and he's in the doubles final as well... so will tiredness come into play? One would hope not - and anyone, he's Spanish, and they don't seem to ever get tired (Rafa and Ferru, anyone?) But what will happen with the Worm Effect? Nando shouldn't rest too easy if he claims the first set without breaking a sweat - beware that evil worm!

*

The women's final was last night, and it was pretty anticlimactic, considering some of the awesome matches we've had this week (like Mauresmo/Coin - that was fabulous!) Victoria Azarenka absolutely pounded on Marion Bartoli. I'm still not keen on Azarenka after her behaviour in her match against Gajdosova, but you have to admire her consistency. And man, Marion Bartoli is a weird tennis player. Whenever she was at net I just wanted to pry her left hand off her racquet. Playing two-handed volleys just killed her - she had next to no reach as well as far fewer options. Two-handed backhand, sure. Two-handed forehand, weird, but if it works for you... two-handed volley was just bad. What is next? Two-handed serving? Bartoli's service action seems to change every single time I see her play. At the moment it seems to be comprised of so many elements that it's pretty bizarre just watching her prepare to throw the ball up - one of the commentators said she found it almost hypnotic, and I totally agree.

*

And how about the Chennai final? Cilic versus Devvarman, the wildcard? Whoever wins there it'll be good. Sure, Devvarman got there via a Schuettler walkover, but whatever. It's always good to see a total random in the final, particularly if they're a local total random... and always good to see one of the Stars as well! We've had a reasonable week, me and my Stars - we have Cilic in a final, Nishikori in the quarters and Gulbis taking out Djokovic. Not bad, eh?

*

Oh, and Dementieva beat Vesnina in the Battle of the Elenas, and Murray beat Roddick in the Battle of the Andies. I bet no one saw those wins coming. At all. Ever. I am stunned and surprised.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Brisbane International (Brisbane)

*

Men's Draw

*

Fernando Verdasco def. Paul-Henri Mathieu, 6-2 6-1

Radek Stepanek def. Richard Gasquet, 2-6 6-2 6-4

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Victoria Azarenka def. Marion Bartoli, 6-3 6-1

*

*

Chennai Open (Chennai)
*

Marin Cilic def. Marcel Granollers, 6-4 6-3

Somdev Devvarman def. Rainer Schuettler, walkover

*

*

Qatar Exxonmobil Open (Doha)

*

Andy Murray def. Andy Roddick, 6-4 6-2

*

*

ASB Classic (Auckland)

*

Elena Dementieva def. Elena Vesnina, 6-4 6-1

*

*

Josh's Tennis Tips

Focus: Backhand

Today's Tip: One hand or two?

*

When you start playing tennis, you need to decide if you are a two handed or one handed player for a backhand. You should try to do the one that feels best for you! Do not try to do the most stylish or best looking one.