The Rules Around Second Chances

So an interesting thing happened in Doha the other day. I'm a couple of days behind the pace, but... oh well. Mario Ancic's retirement was worth it.

Cautionary note: today I am writing about the WTA. I know I don't do this a lot, so proceed at your own peril. The likelihood of me saying a number of things which are wrong is high.

Okay. So this interesting thing that happened in Doha. Lucie Safarova beat Agnieszka Radwanska in straight sets. This was an upset (technically), but is not the interesting thing. No, I'm being all tennis-nerdy and referring to one weird call in particular.

Let me set the scene. The players! Radwanska and Safarova! The umpire! Kader Nouni! The stadium! Mostly empty, because it is Doha! And what happened is this.

Aga and Lucie are rallying, valiantly hitting the ball each to each. Safarova hits the ball to Radwanska. Radwanska has a play on the ball, but does not hit it, on account of the linesperson yelling OUT! Unfortunately for Aga, that linesperson also yelled CORRECTION! a split second later.

No matter, it seems. Aga challenges, hoping that the ball will be out and the point will thus be hers. But the ball is good. A let, it seems, should be played. But no! Kader Nouni awards the point to Safarova. And Aga gets maaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.

This one ended up with the tournament referee coming out to clarify the ruling, something which I think I've only seen once before (and hey, Nico, if you ever read this, do you want to explain the ruling in that match against Troicki to me? because I didn't understand it). The ref came down on Kader's side, which Aga obviously didn't like. And I don't blame her, because I totally understand her point of view.

The situation, as I understand it, was this: because Radwanska challenged the call, she thus forfeited her chance at playing a let, because she couldn't have two chances to win the point. I don't think Kader Nouni explained this particularly well to her - it took me a while to even begin to understand what he was saying. I totally see Aga's perspective on this - she was there, she had a play on the ball, the out call was interference, so it should be a let. And it would have been a let - had she not challenged. But no, because she challenged, the point had to be decided one way or another.

I certainly wasn't aware of this rule, and it doesn't seem like Aga was either. I've heard several criticisms of the interactions of HawkEye with actual umpiring, and it seems like this was one. This is clearly a pretty obscure rule, which doesn't have much call to be used... or does it? It seems like this situation would happen a lot, now that I think about it. Was Kader Nouni upholding the letter of the law where most umpires do not? I've never seen this ruling before and it seems like it would be pretty common - surely players challenge things all the time and lets are played? I can't put my finger on any particular instances of it at the moment, but it must happen. And I don't remember any players being particularly upset at their opponent being given Nouni's 'two chances' to win the point.

Aga clearly wasn't aware of this rule, otherwise it seems unlikely that she would challenge. It seems like a lot of players would be more reticent to challenge if this rule were employed more commonly. So does there need to be a clear delineation of the rules around HawkEye? Should Kader have told Aga before she challenged that if she was wrong she was forfeiting the point? Or should this rule - which obviously exists, because the tournament referee upheld it - be changed, so that Aga would get her let?

Thoughts?

Short Statements on Skill

Well, we pretty much have our final four. We have Caro and Kimmie and Sam and Bepa. And really, they didn't have to do so much to get there.

The only really significant match of the round robin stages - that counted anything in terms of psychological winnage, in any case - was Stosur over Wozniacki. And then she had a bit of a comedown when she lost to Lena D, even if it was in a third set breaker.

But let's stay on topic here. This has been a stunningly dull world tour finals, even by WTA standards. It's just been a big fat pile of nothing, really. Looking forward to 2011, I really hope they can lift the standard, because it's really just a whole big pile of not good.

And that is all I have to say about that.

Consistency Isn't Everything

People are falling all over themselves to make Caro Wozniacki's ascension to #1 okay. I can't count the amount of 'oh, but she's so consistent' etc I have read overnight. And sure, points wise, she is #1. Points don't lie.

But come on. Seriously.

You thought Jankovic and Safina were weak #1s? Safina made three Slam finals! Jankovic made one too! I know Woz has made one, but it doesn't count towards her current points count. She's only won one Tier 1 event, for heavens' sakes.

I'm not saying that Serena deserves to be #1. While she is clearly the best player in the world, if you haven't played - not her fault, obviously, but still - your name's not in the game. You have to be in it to win it, etc. But look at players like Zvonareva. Look at Clijsters. They're achieving real grown up results without playing week after week after week. Sure, they have taken a couple of weak losses, but they've followed them up with some big results.

There is a lot to say for consistency. But consistency in lower level tournaments? Consistency born of simply playing a lot? I know Caro works hard - no one is going to deny that - and consistency is something lacking on the WTA tour. But there's something seriously whack when this kind of consistency gives you a #1 ranking. Bring back Dinara.

The Oncoming Storm

It's hard to let go of the Slam year. 2010 is, for all effects and purposes, over. We have learned what we are going to learn over the best of five sets thing, and now it's time to phone it in till the end of the year.

Or, if you are that way inclined, pick up some points, and that would not be the worst thing in the world ever to do, Mr I-Would-Be-Ranked-6-if-I-hadn't-won-the-Australian-Open.

And it's a time when we should be reflecting on what we've learned, but I'm not very reflective. Instead, I'm restless.

What have we learned? Well, we have learned that Rafa Nadal is a force to be reckoned with, and outside of being that guy that always denies Federer at the most inopportune times, we need to start talking about him as a great player in his own right. We have learned that Andy Murray might not, contrary to popular belief, ever win a Slam. We have learned that when Serena's out of the mix, just about anyone can win a WTA Slam... but when she is in the mix, you have to pull out something pretty special to beat her.

These are all valid lessons to have learned, but even though the year is effectively over, I have the feeling that we're not quite done with 2010 yet. Rafa has year end #1 all sewn up and I wouldn't be betting against Serena on the women's side, but there's the sense that there is something coming. Surprises are in store.

There's a storm coming. I couldn't tell you what it is, whether it will be for the ATP or the WTA or both, or whether I am just making this up, but I have the feeling that 2010 isn't quite finished yet. We may not have the big tournaments left to warrant it, but there are still a few surprises left in store for us this year.

The Asterisk Problem

It really hasn't been a good news weekend so far. There's a hung parliament in Australia, Tony Abbott might end up being the Prime Minister, Serena and del Potro are definitley out of the US Open...

I won't subject you to my whinging on Australian politics, but if you want whinging about the absence of these two key figures from the year's last Slam, then you have come to the right place. I don't believe in the concept of the asterisk - you know, when someone wins but it's with reservations because of something that happened, like Amelie Mauresmo in Australia in 2006 when Justine Henin retired in the final - but the US Open is just not going to be the same without these two.

We kind of already knew del Potro wasn't going to be there, so this is hardly surprising. And ordinarily, I wouldn't really be too bothered. I managed to get through all of Roland Garros and Wimbledon without missing Delpo at all (in fact, sometimes I'm pretty sure I forgot he even existed). But New York is a different matter. He's a defending champion. And while that has its own mystique but doesn't actually necessarily mean anything given the field, I find that we do miss him more on hard courts. He's a bigger force here than anyone else. You never know what's going to happen when Delpo steps on court. And I think that level of volatility will be missed.

But the real shocker is, of course, Serena.

I didn't expect this one, and I spent some time going 'oh no, both defending champions are out' until I realised that Serena was not, in fact, the defending champ. I just sort of assume she won something if I can't quite remember who won at that moment (sorry, Kimmie) and that, right there, is one of the reasons she'll be missed. In Serena, you always know you have a Slam contender. Sometimes, given the nature of the WTA, she's the only Slam contender you have. One of the things I like most about Serena is that she wins things, she doesn't just lose last. And that is what I am afraid is going to happen at the US Open.

Of course, we could have another Clijsters or Schiavone fairy tale victory. Who knows what will happen? It will definitely be a surprise and that will be exciting. But without Serena - and, for that matter, without Henin - I'm a little worried the WTA will be she who loses last, not she who wins.

WTA WTF (again)

I kind of wish I hadn't used the headline 'WTA WTF' yesterday, because I want to use it again today. Serena, really?

Come on, Serena. I haven't always been your biggest fan and that you don't peak till the Slams, but I thought I could count of you to keep some semblance of normalcy in this wacky tournament, particularly as pretty much everyone who might be considered competition is out already.

But no. Not to be.

And so we're left with Venus... Jankovic... a few other randoms... and one Sam Stosur.

At this point, I think I might be picking Jankovic to win the tournament, but what a shot for Sam Stosur. She made relatively quick work of Patty Schnyder at the moment and is looking fierce. She's been one of the form players this season - even though 'form' basically constitutes 'losing last' for the WTA these days (though Sam has been playing genuinely well) and a win here in Madrid would not only be HUGE for her career, it would catapult her with a whole ton of momentum into Roland Garros and, I believe, the top five.

Now there is a bit of something.

WTA WTF

Can I get a what what for Madrid and the ladies? Seriously, WTA, I know we've had our issues, but I know you can do better than this.

Let's review. I'm pretty sure the Williams sister may just well be the only seeds left standing after Wozniacki and Dementieva went tumbling out. Safina gone. Henin. Kuznetsova. Sharapova. Name a name, and they're gone.

Actually, that's not strictly true. Jankovic is still there - and much I like to watch Jankovic when she's playing well, she's not exactly the player I want to set my hopes on as a bastion of reliability. So we have the Williamses and Jankovic and...

...and unexpected SAM STOSUR IS UNEXPECTED.

It was just last month when I was reading about Stosur getting into the top ten in Australian Tennis Magazine and how this was the most massive thing ever omg she was ranked #10!!!!1!!! Well, register this. If she does super well at this tournament, she could be in the top five by the end of it. The top freaking five.

Let's compare to this the boys for a minute. This is like Marin Cilic, relatively recent top tenner (currently sitting at #11) suddenly finding himself in the top five. To get there, he'd have to leapfrog Tsonga, Verdasco, Soderling, Roddick, Davydenko and del Potro. Just have a look at those names there. There may only be two Slam titles between the lot of them, but look at those names. You just couldn't do that.

But that is what Stosur is on the verge of doing. She played superbly well to beat the excellent recent Rome winner in Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez. Truth be told, if she can beat MJMS, she can beat just about anyone. She's got one thing going that the rest of the field are lacking at the moment, which is that one thing the WTA has had problems with for a while now - consistency.

It's been a long time since I've thought an Aussie had a genuine chance at a Slam title. But you know what, Sam? Roland Garros needs to watch out for you.

What We Have Learned

There are tournaments going on this week - shout out to my man Peter Luczak for pulling an upset in Chile - but let's face it, no one really cares about them at the moment. It is over, but it is still, as always after a Slam, all about the Australian Open.

So let's have a look back at what we learned from this Slam, the first of 2010, and what it tells us about the year.

Let's start with the ladies. What has Australia taught us? Well, it's taught us that someone who stepped away from the game for the better part of two years can come back and reach the final. Actually, scratch that. We learned that last year when Kim Clijsters won the US Open. Justine Henin's run to the final here merely reinforced it. Not that there is anything 'mere' about Justine - her performance was mighty. She is truly talented and she has pulled off some truly spectacular results.

But there is something deeply wrong about a tour where players can come back so quickly and so hard and overcome nearly every possible obstacle in the way. If there wasn't a Serena Williams in the world, then Justine Henin would have pulled this off. The tour hasn't set out to make things easy for the Belgians, obviously, but the fact remains that both Kim and Justine have been able to pull it off, and that really, in an elite sport, shouldn't happen. There are very few women who are legitimately Slam contenders at the moment - Serena, Venus if the tournament begins with 'Wimble' and ends in 'don', Sharapova if she catches fire, Kuznetsova if she avoids erratic performers. For Kim and Justine to skip immediately into that top pool... well, that's fabulous for them, and an amazing achievement, but in a tour that was up to scratch, it really shouldn't have happened. People shouldn't be able to sail right back to the pinnacle of elite sport bam! like that.

So allez Belgium! And huge congratulations to Serena, who is really the one person holding up her end of the WTA bargain. Everyone else... lift your game. Please.

To the men now, where things are much brighter. I think the women's game looks so dull nowadays because men's tennis is undoubtedly in a golden age. Before the tournament, people were saying there were legitimately twelve contenders for this Slam. I would have narrowed it to eight - Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, del Potro, Davydenko, Roddick and Tsonga - but the fact remains that there are a lot of excellent players at the moment, champing at the bit to reach the upper echelons. There is talent and amazing tennis everywhere.

But what did Australia teach us?

It taught us that Roger Federer really still is a cut above the rest.

Don't worry, I'm not going to turn this into another slurred wineglass-waving ramble on how amazing Federer is... I think I've done that enough over the past few days! But my personal bias aside, he is one of the safest bets in modern sport. He hasn't lost before the semis in a Slam since 2004. Two thousand and freaking four. That is a long time ago. With this victory, he has now won a Slam every year for the past eight. And, oh yeah, he has sixteen Slams, which is more than anyone ever.

He was tested in this tournament by people who were definitely form players coming in - Davydenko, Murray, even Tsonga. He had a totally unenviable first round draw in Andreev. And every time - every time he was under pressure, he came up trumps. What really came to the fore in this tournament was his mental strength - yet another part of his spectacular game that is underestimated. You cannot overstate the value of calm under pressure, and that is where so many of the other men in the draw fell down.

Another thing that came to the fore was just how tough the game of tennis is. We saw Rafa's knees give on him. We saw Jo Tsonga and Marin Cilic burn out because of too many long, long matches. We saw Djokovic drive himself to vomiting... though the Djokovic constitution never seems to have been particularly hardy. This highlights, once again, the amazingness of Federer, because he just really hasn't had these problems. Whether it's fitness, or good scheduling, or just good luck... or a combination of all three! - the fact remains, and was reinforced by this tournament, that Federer, quite simply, is betterer. And the field has got a lot of chasing to do.

Mr Milkshake Brings All His Game To The Yard

Honestly, if any of the blokes on the ATP tour served like the girls on the WTA, they would be laughed out of the game. Honestly, how is it possible to serve at 40%ish with 97378409238 double faults and still win matches?

Urgh. But no more whinging about the WTA for today. I have done that time and time again over the past few days. (It is bad, bad, bad. Just in case you hadn't gathered my views on this by now. I am declaring myself Belgian when it comes to women's tennis).

Instead, let's talk about Peter Luczak.

I watched him fall down the rankings last year. When he fell down to #160ish, I gave up following him... and thus did not notice when he crept back up again, higher than ever. And let me tell you, I think it's going to climb higher, even if he takes a bunch of first round losses, because he's going to get into main draw tour events and get points points points. Not that I think he's going to take a bunch of first round losses. Because Mr Milkshake has GAME.

I was there in Brisbane last Saturday when Berdych absolutely pummelled Roddick for a set. I watched that match where he had his foot on Federer's neck last year. I know he's a headcase, but I also know he's extraordinarily talented and can play amazing stuff. This makes him kind of tricky to play, because if he's on fire there's not much a guy can do about it but wait it out, keep your calm and hope the storm breaks.

And that's exactly what Peter Luczak did today. I'm putting him on my official 2010 Late Bloomer list with Andrey Golubev - though in Mr Milkshake's case, it's a little later! Golubev is 22, but Luczak is 30. But seriously, Pete has never played better. He got killed in the first set because Berdych caught alight. But he didn't lose his head, steadied himself in the second and then ran off with the third.

Berdych is ranked fifty-odd places higher than Luczak, so even with the home court advantage and Berdych's headcaseness, you'd pick him to win. But Luczak's age is, I think, one of his strongest points. He is mature on court now. He plays calm tennis now, and that calmness, that serenity, that knowledge that he is at his best, has done him so much good. I wouldn't be surprised to see Mr Milkshake did what Chris Guccione did a few years back and make a surprise run to the final. If he can beat Berdych - the highest ranked player in the draw - I think he can beat anyone in the draw.

Just When You Thought It Was Safe...

Just when you thought it was safe to say nice things about the WTA...

...Sydney happens.

Honestly. It's a new year, new decade, and we've just seen one of the greatest women's matches of the latest five years. You'd think that this might be enough to restore some semblance of order to the permanent misrule that is women's tennis. But no, in the first couple of days of Sydney we've lost three of the eight seeds and come so close to losing another one it's just not funny.

Sigh, WTA. No wonder players like Clijsters and Henin can come back and pummel you into submission. If JuJu had played this tournament, I would have backed her for sure.

We lost Vera Zvonareva to injury - seriously, is this girl ever going to sort her injury woes out? That makes it sound like it's her fault, which it's obviously not, but she retires hurt so often it makes one think she's coming on court hurt to begin with. The mummy bandages don't exactly belie that assumption either. Maybe she needs to sit out for a while until she's completely healed - though who knows how long that could be?

Then Jelena Jankovic lost to Agnes Szavay, a qualifier. I used to think that Szavay would be a real big thing one day. I've since changed my mind, and this match doesn't really alter that at all. Szavay played some great stuff, sure, but JJ really lost it. I'd like to blame this one on first-match-of-the-season yips, but it's too much of the same to do so. Pull yourself together, JJ.

And then Caroline Wozniacki lost a match she never should have lost to Li Na. I know Li Na is one of the girls who pulls upsets, like, every four seconds, but Wozniacki was all over her in the first set. And then... watch that tumbleweed go past. Caro needs to get herself some grit, stat. That's all I'm saying about that.

Victoria Azarenka went through, but she came OH SO VERY CLOSE to going out to Sabine Lisicki. As I'm pretty sure Lisicki will be top ten soon (if she can keep her error count down - that's her Achilles heel) this isn't quite so bad, but still... oh, and Nadia Petrova lost to Kimiko Date Krumm, making it two first round exits in two weeks (even if the first one was to JuJu). Come on, WTA. Pull yourself together.

We have Dinara Safina and Serena Williams in action today. Let's just say I won't hold my breath.

Anyone-Can-Win (Because Everyone-Can-Lose)

We've had our first three matches in Doha. In a tournament which is anyone-could-win because everyone is certainly capable of losing, any result is, by nature, interesting. But there was one I thought was especially interesting, and that was Venus being beaten by Dementieva.

In terms of ability, this is hardly surprising. Both Venus and Elena are exceptionally talented, and Elena, when she's firing, can take just about anyone. Look how much trouble Serena - an in-form Serena - had taking her out in Wimbledon: far more trouble than she had taking out Venus, that's for sure. But one always associates the Williams fire with Venus, the desire to win the big ones, plus the fact that she's the defending champion, and Elena is usually classed among the headcases. Because, you know, she is one.

But Elena didn't go all headcase on us today - and, I would like to point out, she fought her way back from the brink of defeat. From one set down, she won the second set breaker eight points to six and then roared away in the third. That shows admirable grit and, given that Elena isn't usually a player one associates with grit, a nice surprise. Well done.

In the other matches, Serena triumphed over Sveta in two close sets and Azarenka pummelled Jankovic into submission. I was really hoping Sveta could pull her match out but I guess Serena probably had a wee score to settle after Roland Garros which might have fired her up a bit. Azarenka making mincemeat of Jankovic is not surprising to me. I really don't think Jankovic belongs here this year. It should be Clijsters, man, it should be Clijsters. (Not that Azarenka has been especially impressive of late either, but she looked good today... all the compliment I'm prepared to pay her).

I'm going to be very interested to see who brings the goods to the table and qualifies for the semis in both groups. Like I said, it's anyone-can-win because everyone-can-lose, so no matter who wins, I think it's going to be a little surprising. What I do hope is that someone, you know, wins the tournament, instead of just not losing. Let's end the WTA year on a high!


Today's Results

Sony Ericsson Championships (Doha)

Victoria Azarenka def. Jelena Jankovic, 6-2 6-3
Serena Williams def. Svetlana Kuznetsova, 7-6 (8-6) 7-5
Elena Dementieva def. Venus Williams, 3-6 7-6 (8-6) 6-2


St Petersburg Open (St Petersburg)

Jeremy Chardy def. Petru-Alexandru Luncanu, 6-2 6-2
Igor Andreev def. Potito Starace, 6-4 6-2
Sergiy Stakhovsky def. Evgeny Korolev, 6-4 6-3
Horacio Zeballos def. Yuri Schukin, 7-6 (11-9) 6-3
Illya Marchenko def. Fabio Fognini, 6-4 6-1
Michail Elgin def. Mikhail Kukushkin, 6-3 6-3
Andrey Kuznetsov def. Marcel Granollers, 6-7 (4-7) 7-6 (8-6) 6-4
Oleksandr Dolgopolov Jr. def. Robby Ginepri , 6-2 1-0 retired


Bank Austria Tennis Trophy (Vienna)

Radek Stepanek def. Lukasz Kubot, 6-4 6-1
Philipp Kohlschreiber def. Dieter Kindlmann, 6-1 6-3
Feliciano Lopez def. Andreas Haider-Maurer, 6-4 6-4
Jurgen Melzer def. Marco Chiudinelli, 7-6 (7-4) 7-6 (12-10)
Michael Berrer def. Steve Darcis, 6-3 6-2
Jan Hajek def. Andreas Seppi, 7-6 (7-4) 5-7 6-3
Marin Cilic def. Alejandro Falla, 6-2 6-3


Grand Prix de Tennis de Lyon (Lyon)

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga def. Kevin Kim, 7-6 (7-5) 7-6 (7-5)
Ivan Ljubicic def. Martin Vassallo Arguello, 6-3 6-4
Benjamin Becker def. Paolo Lorenzi, 6-2 6-3
Albert Montanes def. Fabrice Santoro, 6-4 6-4
Michael Llodra def. Lamine Ouahab, 6-1 6-2
Marc Gicquel def. Jerome Haehnel, 6-1 6-4
Kevin Anderson def. Simon Greul, 6-4 4-6 7-6 (7-3)
David Guez def. Rajeev Ram, 6-2 6-4

Not Good Enough

I think I might hate the WTA. Seriously. This is not good enough. This is nowhere in the vicinity of good enough. This is so far away from good enough that people have forgotten what good enough looks like, and it's become some mythical holy grail that people go in quest of.

Last week, we saw all the top six seeds fall in the first round. We're not quite there yet, but we're not far off. Venus Williams lost to Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova - again. I love Pavs, so I'm not complaining, but really, Venus? Really?! What's that?

And then Dinara Safina lost to Zhang Shuai. Not Peng Shuai. Zhang Shuai. I'm sure I'm not the only one going 'huh?' right now.

I wrote about a month ago in defence of Dinara. I'm still not quite ready to give up on her, but I'm certainly not far off either. I'm allowing her the off-season to prove herself, to fix her serve and to come back with determination. I don't want to enter into this whole 'real #1' debate, but she's not showing herself worthy of the ranking at the moment. Problem is, no one's showing themselves worthy of it, and so she's clinging onto it by default at the moment.

But this has got to stop. This WTA nonsense has got to halt right now. I understand the off season is approaching and they're probably all tired. Well, guess what? That's not an excuse. It's simply not good enough. If the top blokes can keep it up, then so can the women. If they're too tired to play, they should do what Ana Ivanovic did and gracefully call it an end to the season so they can go away and regroup. Because this top ten debacle has got to stop.


Today's Results

China Open (Beijing)

Men's Draw

Novak Djokovic def. Victor Hanescu, 6-3 7-5
Marin Cilic def. Igor Andreev, 6-4 6-4
Philipp Kohlschreiber def. Ivo Karlovic, 7-6 (8-6) 4-6 6-1
Juan Carlos Ferrero def. Nicolas Almagro, 7-5 7-6 (7-3)
Tommy Robredo def. Benjamin Becker, 6-2 6-1
Julien Benneteau def. Marcos Daniel, 6-3 6-4


Women's Draw

Zhang Shuai def. Dinara Safina, 7-5 7-6 (7-5)
Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova def. Venus Williams, 3-6 6-1 6-4
Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Anabel Medina Garrigues, 6-2 6-1
Li Na def. Lucie Safarova, 4-6 6-0 6-4
Aleksandra Wozniak def. Alize Cornet, 7-6 (7-0) 6-4
Alona Bondarenko def. Sara Errani, 6-3 6-3
Nadia Petrova def. Alla Kudryavtseva, 6-1 5-7 6-2
Daniela Hantuchova def. Carla Suarez Navarro, 7-5 6-2
Francesca Schiavone def. Sabine Lisicki, 6-0 1-0 retired
Alisa Kleybanova def. Yanina Wickmayer, 5-7 6-3 6-3
Vania King def. Galina Voskoboeva, 6-4 6-3


Rakuten Japan Open Tennis Championships (Tokyo)

Gael Monfils def. Marsel Ilhan, 6-2 6-4
Stanislas Wawrinka def. John Isner, 6-4 6-4
Marco Chiudinelli def. Dudi Sela, 4-6 6-1 6-4
Simon Greul def. Martin Vassallo Arguello, 4-6 6-4 6-2

A Question Of Consistency

I'd just, for a moment, like to compare the tournament in Kuala Lumpur currently to the one in Tokyo. Look at the semi finalists. In Kuala Lumpur, we have the top four seeds into the semis, wham bam thankyou ma'am - Davydenko, Verdasco, Soderling and Gonzalez. And the top six made it to the quarters, the only 'wild' cards being Youzhny and Gasquet, and, let's face it, they're much higher quality than their rankings would have you believe.

Tokyo has redeemed itself a bit - Jankovic vs Sharapova is a very respectable final - but you've got to think that the tournament organisers are breathing a sigh of relief after the total mess they had earlier in the week. And still, even though it's Jankovic/Sharapova, that's the #7 seed against someone unseeded. That's certainly not top four in the semis.

Not that there's anything wrong with some upsets and unpredictability. But the way the WTA is playing at the moment, the top girls can't win a match. They're almost underdogs when they go into a match - sometimes it feels like the real leaders of the tour are the ones in the #20-#50 range: ie. the ones doing the upsetting. Being in the top ten is almost a curse at the moment, it seems.

The point I am trying to make, I guess, is the hugely different consistency level across the two tours. In the men, the top four in the semis is pretty standard. Sure, it may be a little predictable sometimes, but people are showing they earn their spots. The WTA... the ranking system seems like a bit of a Russian roulette. And I don't know how long this can keep up before we see a complete change of the guard in the top ten.


Today's Results

PTT Pattaya Open (Bangkok)

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga def. Marco Chiudinelli, 6-7 (7-9) 6-3 6-4
Gilles Simon def. Evgeny Korolev, 4-6 6-3 6-4
Jurgen Melzer def. Andreas Beck, 6-4 6-2
Viktor Troicki def. John Isner, 7-6 (7-3) 6-2


Proton Malaysian Open (Kuala Lumpur)

Nikolay Davydenko def. Gael Monfils, 6-3 6-3
Fernando Verdasco def. Richard Gasquet, 7-5 6-4
Robin Soderling def. Tomas Berdych, 6-2 6-2
Fernando Gonzalez def. Mikhail Youzhny, 6-3 6-4


Toray Pan Pacific Open (Tokyo)

Jelena Jankovic def. Li Na, 6-4 6-3
Maria Sharapova def. Agnieszka Radwanska, 6-3 2-6 6-4

Comebacks in the Not-Golden Age

Nothing as major as the seed bloodbath we saw yesterday, but another big women's name made the long journey out of the tournament today - Victoria Azarenka, one of the widely touted next best things, goneski. Now, readers of this blog will know I am pretty much totally anti-Azarenka due to her repellent attitude, but this really is a shame. This means that over half the women's top twenty seeds are out. What kind of tournament is that?

This is why comeback makers like Clijsters and Sharapova have such a chance at this tournament. The players that are theoretically the top players are sweeping themselves under the carpet before they even come close to playing these comeback queens. (That said, Clijsters vs Venus in the round of sixteen is totally mouthwatering, and I am coming out right now and saying that Kim Possible is going to take it. Oh yes.)

Then we look at the blokes, and the top ten is totally intact (Rafa is still battling Nicolas Kiefer as I write this, but he's looking in decent shape), and we've only lost two top twenty seeds en route to the round of thirty two (that I noticed, anyway - Ferrer and Wawrinka). The dudes are stepping up to the plate like they should. This is testament to the totally different places men and women's tennis are in at the moment. Men's tennis is in a Federer-led golden age, where we have incredible depth and talent floating around (any world where someone who is playing as sharp as Roddick is right now can be ranked less than #1 is a pretty amazing world). And women's tennis... is not in a golden age.

To say the least.

That said, I think the result of the US Open on both sides is going to be very interesting. I think there are six major contenders on the men's side (some more major than others) and they are ranked one through six in the world. On the women... Serena has to be the favourite, and then there's Venus, and it's trendy to leave Dinara out of the mix, but after my post yesterday we all know I'm a Safina believer, and she's still there, which is more than can be said for some of her compatriots... maybe C-Woz, and definitely Sharapova and Clijsters. There are contenders... just not the usual suspects.

Bit of a change of subject now... one guy - who I don't think will win the US Open, but who put in a tremendous effort today - who deserves a shoutout is Taylor Dent. His game is boring as hell but he fought tooth and nail against Ivan Navarro today and came out on top. Though I hate fifth set breakers. They seem so... arbitrary. Give me an epic fifth set any day of the week.


Today's Results

US Open (Flushing Meadows)

Men's Draw

Andy Murray def. Paul Capdeville, 6-2 3-6 6-0 6-2
Juan Martin Del Potro def. Jurgen Melzer, 7-6 (10-8) 6-3 6-3
Jo-Wilfried Tsonga def. Jarkko Nieminen, 7-5 6-3 6-4
Gilles Simon def. Thomaz Bellucci, 6-3 6-2 6-4
Fernando Gonzalez def. Josselin Ouanna, 6-4 6-7 (5-7) 6-3 6-4
Gael Monfils def. Andreas Beck, 6-3 7-5 6-3
Marin Cilic def. Jesse Levine, 4-6 2-6 6-0 6-3 6-0
Tomas Berdych def. Horacio Zeballos, 6-3 6-7 (3-7) 7-6 (7-2) 6-2
Jose Acasuso def. David Ferrer, 6-3 3-6 1-6 6-3 6-2
Juan Carlos Ferrero def. Philipp Petzschner, 1-6 3-6 6-4 6-2 6-4
Julien Benneteau def. Viktor Troicki, 6-1 3-6 6-1 6-0
Nicolas Almagro def. Robby Ginepri, 6-7 (9-11) 6-2 6-3 4-6 6-4
Taylor Dent def. Ivan Navarro, 6-4 5-7 6-7 (1-7) 7-5 7-6 (11-9)
Denis Istomin def. Nicolas Lapentti, 2-6 6-4 4-6 7-5 7-6 (7-4)
Daniel Koellerer def. Pablo Cuevas, 3-6 6-2 6-1 6-4


Women's Draw

Serena Williams def. Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez, 6-3 7-5
Venus Williams def. Magdalena Rybarikova, 6-2 7-5
Vera Zvonareva def. Elena Vesnina, 6-2 6-4
Francesca Schiavone def. Victoria Azarenka, 4-6 6-2 6-2
Flavia Pennetta def. Aleksandra Wozniak, 6-1 6-1
Li Na def. Maria Kirilenko, 6-4 6-2
Daniela Hantuchova def. Vania King, 6-2 6-2
Kim Clijsters def. Kirsten Flipkens, 6-0 6-2

In Defence of Dinara

There are three players in the women's top ten who are widely considered to be Slamless wonders - Jelena Jankovic, Elena Dementieva and Dinara Safina. Elena's been around for about 7957934875 years and though she's reached the odd final, she's never taken the prize. Jelena made the US Open final last year and has been ranked #1, but no cigar. Dinara is the current #1 and has made three finals, but has only ever come away with the cookie tray.

All three players - maybe Dementieva a very little less, but certainly Jankovic and Safina, as they've both spent considerable time ranked #1 - are thought to need a Slam to validate their careers. And Safina, given as she's crumbled in three Slam finals and is the current #1, is bearing the brunt of that pressure at the moment, but you can bet the other two feel it as well.

Everyone's been ragging on Dinara Safina this year. Why is she #1? they ask. She has no spine. She crumbles in finals. She relies too much on her coach, who is the captain of her anti-cheer squad. Bitch bitch, moan moan. I read an article yesterday called 'What Makes A Champion? Don't Ask Safina'. She may be #1 at the moment and the #1 seed, but no one is picking her to win this tournament. Dementieva and Jankovic would both have been picked above her.

All three of these players played today. Two lost, one won. And guess who it was that won.

Dementieva lost, rolled over by American teenager Melanie Oudin on Arthur Ashe. And then right after her, Ashe saw Jelena Jankovic go down in a third set breaker to Yaroslava Shvedova.

Safina struggled. She went three sets against a player which her ranking states she should beat easily, Kristina Barrois. Similarly, she came heartbreakingly close to losing to young Aussie Olivia Rogowska in the first round. And everyone's picking on her for not playing that well.

But you know what no one's picked up?

She still won.

She was down a break and nearly a double break in that final set against Rogowska. And sure, Rogowska was nervous, and is not yet the player Dinara is, but Dinara stuck it out. She didn't give up, which must surely be tempting at that point. She held her nerve. She gritted it out. And she won.

She's not playing that well at the moment. I'm not going to deny that. Her serve is all over the place and she's missing shots she should make. But that can be fixed. She can play her way into this tournament. As long as she gets that W on the board, that's all that matters. Because there is one thing that has not deserted her, and it's the thing that has left her in the past on the big stage.

She hasn't lost her steel.

When she started coming up in '08, when she had that big win in Berlin and made the final of Roland Garros, that was what got her there. It was her determination, the 'you'll have to shoot me to win' mentality. And when she's been in the Slam finals, that's what's left her - most evident in that 'why am I such a chicken?' moment at Roland Garros this year.

But right now? She's playing bad, and she's still finding a way to win. And that, I feel, says something very important about Dinara Safina. That is the quality of a champion.

Roland Garros this year, when she made the final, she pretty much cruised there. If she makes it to the US Open final this year - and with Jankovic and Dementieva out of her section, her chances are improving - she will have had to fight to get there. I'm not saying she'll win it - but I bet that she'll show up.

So while most everyone else is condemning her, I still believe in Dinara Safina. Her brother yesterday came out vociferously in her defence and I back him up 100%. Dinara does have what it takes. Because she loves the game and she's got grit - and there's fight in here, and if nothing else, that is what she has brought to the table this tournament.

So there it is. I am a Safina believer. And I think she just might do me proud.


Today's Results

US Open (Flushing Meadows)

Men's Draw

Nikolay Davydenko def. Jan Hernych, 6-4 6-1 6-2
Fernando Verdasco def. Florent Serra, 6-3 6-0 6-3
Robin Soderling def. Marcel Granollers, 2-0 retired
Tommy Robredo def. Guillermo Garcia-Lopez, 6-2 4-6 6-2 6-4
Tommy Haas def. Robert Kendrick, 6-4 6-4 7-6 (7-3)
Sam Querrey def. Kevin Kim, 7-5 6-7 (6-8) 6-4 6-4
Jesse Witten def. Maximo Gonzalez, 6-7 (3-7) 6-4 7-5 6-2
Marco Chiudinelli def. Mikhail Youzhny, 2-6 7-6 (7-4) 6-4 6-3


Women's Draw

Dinara Safina def. Kristina Barrois, 6-7 (5-7) 6-2 6-3
Melanie Oudin def. Elena Dementieva, 5-7 6-4 6-3
Yaroslava Shvedova def. Jelena Jankovic, 6-3 6-7 (4-7) 7-6 (8-6)
Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Anastasija Sevastova, 6-4 6-2
Caroline Wozniacki def. Petra Marticm 6-1 6-0
Nadia Petrova def. Julie Coin, 6-4 7-6 (7-3)
Sara Errani def. Patty Schnyder, 7-5 6-2
Zheng Jie def. Alize Cornet, 1-6 6-3 6-3
Anastasia Rodionova def. Sabine Lisicki, 6-3 3-6 7-5
Sorana Cirstea def. Stephanie Dubois, 6-4 5-7 6-4
Gisela Dulko def. Alona Bondarenko, 6-4 6-0
Yanina Wickmayer def. Peng Shuai, 2-6 6-1 6-4
Kateryna Bondarenko def. Shenay Perry, 6-1 6-1
Petra Kvitova def. Tathiana Garbin, 6-1 6-3

The Contenders

I could do a proper draw analysis for the US Open - who my picks are for each quarter, yada yada yada. But truth is, I don't know if there's too much point at the moment. It seems to me right now that there are four, possibly five, leading contenders for the title - and it might better befit us to analyse them than how they'll get there.

Starting at the top, the man himself, Roger Federer. He's won New York five times in a row and he's looking for number six, and - yeah, I know I said I wasn't going to do a fullblown draw analysis - he has a pretty friendly draw, with some of his longtime bunnies being the major seeds in the area. That said, everyone at this level is a danger, so I don't think RF is going to be complacent.

Complacency is the popular thought at the moment for what might stop Roger - he's done so much and now has babies on board... surely he can afford to rest on his laurels a bit? But this is not Roger's style - I can't think of anyone less complacent in the world. I think Roger's going to be just fine in New York, and if I were going to make a pick - which I'm not, because I'm pretty sure it's a jinx - Roger would be it.

The one man I think has a real, genuine shot at stopping Roger before the finals is Andy Roddick. The quarter final match up between him and Djokovic is probably going to be the best quarter match up of the lot, and I don't see Novak coming out alive (he was my mystery fifth man contender). Roddick has whipped Djokovic good the last few times I remember them meeting, and I would not be at all surprised to see him cruise into the semis with the loss of a very small amount of sets. I would claim that he has played better tennis this year than ever before in his life - he was very unlucky not to walk away with Wimbledon, where it took the greatest of all time to beat him. Federer/Roddick is my semi pick on this side, with Federer the victor - but I think Roddick is going to impress again.

Then we have the other side. Everyone's talking about Rafa's knees - that said, I would be very surprised not to see him make the semis on grit and talent alone. He has the added bonus of being fresh and being slightly under the radar, which we know he likes. I would kill to see another Murray/Nadal semi after the spectacular matches these two have put up. This is, in my opinion, one of the greatest rivalries in the sport at the moment, and it's not talked about nearly enough. I think their games match up in a really interesting way. Watching them play is always intriguing and I'm picking Nadal to come through the third quarter, purely in the hopes of seeing this match...

...because I'm definitely picking Murray to come through on that side. I'm not a massive Murray fan, but I like what I've seen from him this US Open series. He's bringing some good stuff on court - the only questionable element might be his fitness, which has let him down a bit in the past - but unless it gets super hot, I think he'll be fine. He wants a Slam to validate him, and he's going to be pulling out the stops.

But we all know which team I'm on in the end, and on which side I'm coming down, even if I can't say for fear of divine retribution.

On the women's side, I don't think there's any point doing any analyses at all, with the... ahem, interesting state of the tour. You'd put good money on a Williams to win it, but only because they come to the party at Slams and everyone else is running rather mojo-less at the moment. I would really love someone random to win this tournament - possibly one of the three great Slamless top ten girls, Safina, Dementieva and Jankovic. Or one of the comeback queens, like Clijsters or Sharapova. Or even an up and comer, like Wozniacki or Lisicki (though not Azarenka, on account of I find her irritating and I am biased that way). The challenge I'm throwing down to the women this week is this - surprise me. I want at least one match where I am genuinely impressed and I want someone to win the damn tournament, not just not lose seven matches. Savvy, ladies?


Today's Results

Pilot Pen Tennis (New Haven)

Men's Draw

Fernando Verdasco def. Sam Querrey, 6-4 7-6 (8-6)

Brave New World

We really had a great week of men's tennis last week - and come to think of it, the week before was pretty great too. We had the top eight in the semis in Montreal and the top four in the semis in Cincinatti, with arguably the two top contenders for the US Open crown, Roger Federer and Andy Murray, each bagging a title. Heading into the US Open next week, I think we can say that there is active excitement.

And then there's the women's game.

Meh.

I feel really bad saying that. I want to like women's tennis. I really do. And I've enjoyed women's tennis a lot in the past. But does anyone else get the feeling that the only reason people win tournaments at the moment is because everyone else loses first?

And then the Williams sisters, Serena especially, come out at Slams and blow everyone away. But then they barely even show up to anything else, which is totally lame. This is why Dinara Safina, Slamless as she is, is still ahead of Serena and Venus in the rankings. Because she is - sorry, Dinara, you know I love you, but at this moment it's true - better at not losing than everyone else on the whole.

I want to see struggles. I want to see blood and sweat and tears. I feel like the guy at the end of Brave New World, when he's all like, 'I want Shakespeare and pain and hope and...' a whole bunch of other stuff. There is nothing there in the women's game at the moment. If it were possible for no one to win a tournament, I reckon that would be going on right now. Because I cannot name a single player who has really stepped up to the plate.

This is why I would not be at all surprised if Kim Clijsters wins the US Open. Because she, at least, has got a little somethin' somethin' going on.

Ladies, I'm throwing down the challenge. I don't expect you to catch up to the menfolk immediately, not considering the golden age of men's tennis we're in at the moment, but at least bring something. Win matches, win tournaments, by winning, not by not losing till the end.

Play tennis.

It occurs to me that that actually sounds incredibly insulting. I don't intend it that way, nor do I wish to disrespect the amazing athleticism of the girls on tour. But something is missing - some drive, some determination, something - that is making the entire WTA tour suffer in this incredible torpor. I want vivacity. I want life. So bring it, ladies - and let's play ball!


Today's Results

Pilot Pen Tennis (New Haven)

Men's Draw

Taylor Dent def. Ivan Ljubicic, 6-3 6-4
Florent Serra def. Steve Darcis, 6-3 6-3
Paul Capdeville def. Jarkko Nieminen, 7-5 6-3
Janko Tipsarevic def. Fabio Fognini, 7-5 2-0 retired
Leonardo Mayer def. Denis Istomin, 6-2 6-4
Marc Gicquel def. Martin Vassallo Arguello, 6-3 6-4
Simone Bolelli def. Christophe Rochus, 6-3 6-4
Potito Starace def. Mischa Zverev, 6-3 2-6 6-3
Pablo Cuevas def. Andrey Golubev, 6-3 6-4
Kevin Kim def. Teimuraz Gabashvili, 6-4 5-7 6-3
Bjorn Phau def. Benjamin Becker, 2-6 6-2 6-3
Robert Kendrick def. Frederik Nielsen, 6-3 7-5
Frederico Gil def. Marcos Baghdatis, 6-4 6-3
Yen-hsun Lu def. Guillermo Garcia-Lopez, 6-2 6-2
Jose Acasuso def. Maximo Gonzalez, 6-1 6-7 (7-9) 6-2


Women's Draw

Anna Chakvetadze def. Nadia Petrova, 0-6 7-6 (7-4) 6-4
Sybille Bammer def. Anabel Medina Garrigues, 7-5 6-4
Alona Bondarenko def. Meghann Shaughnessy, 4-6 6-3 7-5
Agnieszka Radwanska def. Roberta Vinci, 2-6 6-2 7-6 (7-5)
Virginie Razzano def. Patty Schnyder, 6-3 3-6 6-3
Elena Vesnina def. Gisela Dulko, 7-6 (8-6) 6-2
Iveta Benesova def. Varvara Lepchenko, 4-6 6-2 6-1
Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova def. Ekaterina Makarova, 6-3 6-3
Magdalena Rybarikova def. Francesca Schiavone, 6-4 6-4

Creme (but not de la creme)

I know the WTA tour is basically a cesspit of despair at the moment, a land of headcases and nut jobs and total freakouts and injuries, etc. All this aside, we have had some pretty surprising winners over the past few weeks.

*

Like Marion Bartoli. What was that? She plays the weirdest tennis in the history of the world and I've pretty much considered her a one-Slam wonder since Wimbledon 2007, where she didn't even win the Slam. What was with her beating Venus? That was just bizarre. I don't get it.

*

And now Flavia Pennetta! No disrespect to the Flavinator, because I have epic kudos for her, but surely there are people in this draw who should have eaten her for breakfast. But no... Flavia won LA. I was very disappointed that she beat Sam Stosur in the final - I thought Sam should have pulled that one through. All credit for Flavia - and Marion - for coming through tough draws, but still...

*

...this should not be happening.

*

In tournaments where the creme de la creme are playing, the creme de la creme should be winning. End of story. Instead, Marion Bartoli and Flavia Pennetta, who are creme, but not de la creme, if you know what I mean, are winning and the creme de la creme are being beaten early. I don't get it... I suppose it makes things a bit interesting, but it's also very disappointing.

*

So what will happen this week? There's an interesting question. Because if Marion and Flavia are winning, then I think the WTA is primed for a run like Juan Martin del Potro had last year. Who's it gonna be, ladies? Who's gonna step up and play hardball?

*

*

Today's Results

*

Rogers Cup (Montreal)

*

Mikhail Youzhny def. Marin Cilic, 4-6 7-6 (7-4) 6-1

Frederic Niemeyer def. Igor Kunitsyn, 7-5 6-1

Rainer Schuettler def. Florent Serra, 6-4 6-0

Igor Andreev def. Dmitry Tursunov, 5-5 retired

Paul-Henri Mathieu def. Guillermo Garcia-Lopez, 7-5 0-6 6-1

Jeremy Chardy def. Yen-hsun Lu, 6-7 (5-7) 6-3 6-4

Peter Polansky def. Bruno Agostinelli, 6-3 7-6 (8-6)

*

*

Western and Souther Financial Group Women's Open (Cincinatti)

*

Roberta Vinci def. Tatjana Malek, 6-4 6-1

Patty Schnyder def. Gisela Dulko, 6-4 6-0

Lucie Safarova def. Iveta Benesova, 6-3 7-6 (9-7)

Olga Govortsova def. Ekaterina Makarova, 6-1 6-3

Aleksandra Wozniak def. Carla Suarez Navarro, 6-0 6-3

Melinda Czink def. Alize Cornet, 6-3 6-2

Ana Ivanovic def. Melanie Oudin, 2-6 6-1 6-1

Anna-Lena Groenefeld def. Virginie Razzano, 6-3 3-6 6-4

Victoria Azarenka def. Kaia Kanepi, 6-3 7-6 (7-2)

Kateryna Bondarenko def. Magdalena Rybarikova, 6-2 6-2

An Exercise in Predictability

Talk about totally predictable. In the quarter-finals in Barcelona we have the #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7 and #9 seeds. The one odd man out is Radek Stepanek, #9 seed, who knocked out the #8 seed, Stan Wawrinka, last week's Federer conqueror. How long has it been since we saw a tournament fall so cleanly?

*

It's not a bad thing that we rarely see a clean fall of the draw like this - unlike the WTA, where it is a symptom of the headcaseness sweeping the top #10. In the ATP, it shows the level of depth - because there is a huge level of talent going all the way down through the top twenty... maybe even the top fifty or hundred. We usually see some of that top echelon through - you can generally bet at least two of that top four make it through, if not three or all of them - but the rest of the quarter/semi finalists? Could be anyone.

*

One thing did surprise - and disappoint - me in Barcelona, though. I've talked before about clay being a leveller - you have more specialist players on this surface than on any other, who really come into their own on the red stuff. And the captain of the dirtballing crew - Rafa aside, who totally transcends the title of captain and has become something like an emperor or a god - is Nicolas Almagro, the Prince of Clay. And what has he done so far this season? Big fact nothing.

*

He went out to David Nalbandian in the round of sixteen - who promptly handed his quarter final match to Rafa in a walkover with a hip injury. So, although no one can gainsay the prowess of Nalbandian, this has been Almagro's turf for quite some time now. And Dave beat him. On one leg. Something's not quite right with this picture.

*

Perhaps I'm expecting too much of Almagro. I'd never make this kind of demand on him in any other part of the season. But he has brought so much in the previous couple of seasons - c'mon Nicolas, bring it back and bring it on!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Barcelona Open Banco Sabadell (Barcelona)

*

Rafael Nadal def. Christophe Rochus, 6-2 6-0

Fernando Verdasco def. Tomas Berdych, 7-5 5-7 6-4

Nikolay Davydenko def. Feliciano Lopez, 7-6 (10-8) 3-6 6-4

David Ferrer def. Potito Starace, 4-6 7-5 6-2

Fernando Gonzalez def. Juan Monaco, 7-6 (8-6) 6-3

Tommy Robredo def. Igor Andreev, 4-6 6-2 6-3

David Nalbandian def. Nicolas Almagro, 6-3 6-4

Radek Stepanek def. Stanislas Wawrinka, 6-4 1-6 7-5

Deserve It!

Well, it's official - I've missed covering it for a couple of days, but it's time now: Dinara Safina is the women's world number #1.
*

Anyone who reads this blog knows I am a big Dinara fan, so I thought I would be happier about this. Truth is, Dinara may be #1 in the numbers, but the best player in the world out there in the moment is Serena Williams and that's just the way it is. I know everyone knows this, so I'm not going to harp on about it.

*

What I want to know is this: what kind of effect will becoming #1 have on Dinara herself, whether it's just a fluke of numbers or not? We've seen a couple of players react in different ways to assuming the top spot - one only has to think back to the incredible slide of Ana Ivanovic last year after she won the French Open, became #1 and fell into an incredible funk afterwards. That title - the notion of being the best in the world - has a tangible effect on a player. When Roger Federer was #1, he was largely invincible for a lot of that time. So what will Dinara do?

*

Dinara is already is a bit of a funk. I don't think anyone would deny that. What I would really like to see is for this to pull her out of it. We're off the hardcourts and onto the clay, where her big run came last year. So Dinara, you may not be deemed worthy of the #1 spot now, so here's your challenge. Become worthy. Because you've got the game and you've got the skills and you have everything you need to deserve this spot. Do it. Deserve it.

*

Someone who does deserve his #1 ranking at the moment is Rafael Nadal, who cruised through in Barcelona. Actually, nearly all the seeds in Barcelona came through - Gasquet and Soderling were the only casualties. But I think we're set up for a good tournament in Barcelona - I don't doubt that Rafa will win it, but I'm really gunning for Nando Verdasco to come through his half of the draw and continue his excellent run. Rematch of the AO semi!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Barcelona Open Banco Sabadell (Barcelona)
*

Rafael Nadal def. Frederico Gil, 6-2 6-2

Fernando Verdasco def. Nicolas Lapentti, 7-5 6-3
Nikolay Davydenko def. Arnaud Clement, 7-6 (7-2) 6-2

Fernando Gonzalez def. Jose Acasuso, 6-4 6-4

Tommy Robredo def. Gaston Gaudio, 7-6 (8-6) 6-1

David Nalbandian def. Igor Kunitsyn, 7-5 6-4

Stanislas Wawrinka def. Mikhail Youzhny, 7-5 6-1

Radek Stepanek def. Janko Tipsarevic, 7-6 (7-2) 6-0

Nicolas Almagro def. Juan Ignacio Chela, 3-6 7-6 (7-4) 6-3

Christophe Rochus def. Richard Gasquet, 6-1 6-7 (2-7) 6-3

Potito Starace def. Robin Soderling, 7-6 (7-5) 2-6 6-2

Tomas Berdych def. Oscar Hernandez, 6-2 4-6 6-3

Feliciano Lopez def. Santiago Ventura, 2-6 6-4 6-3

Juan Monaco def. Daniel Gimeno-Traver, 7-5 6-4