The Holy Grail

The first matches are being played at Wimbledon as we speak - Roger Federer has just walked out onto the court. It is somehow right that he is playing first on Centre Court, even though last year was Rafa's. Wimbledon is his ground.

*

Lu Yen-hsun (Rendy) is a tough match-up, but I'm excited for this match. I don't have much to say yet - I'm going to have to do this blog at night instead of in the morning just for the sake of my sanity, otherwise I will have no sleep and will turn into a zombie, so I might be posting at some pretty weird times, so I apologise.

*

What I really want to reflect on is what Wimbledon means. All four Slams are very important, but Wimbledon is somehow special. I don't know what it is about this tournament, given that it is played on possibly the least significant surface in tennis - sure, three of the Slams used to be on grass, but it's played on so little these days it's almost ludicrous. But still the grass of Wimbledon remains sacred.

*

Wimbledon has a poet in residence. What other tournament could possibly do that?

*

There is a weight of tradition at Wimbledon that you don't get anywhere else. The Aussie Open is fun and sunny, Paris down and dirty, the US Open like a rock concert. But Wimbledon is the tennis they played of old. Maybe it is because grass is such an antiquated surface. Would Roger Federer whip out a blazer/cardy/waistcoat at any other tournament?

*
It's special.

This ramble isn't very coherent. I apologise. But it's something I'd like to keep reflecting on over the course of this tournament. What is it that makes this tournament so different? Why is Wimbledon the Holy Grail?

Nice Guys Finishing First

You know who I've missed - and who I think the tennis world has missed? Marcos Baghdatis.

*

I assume he's been having injury troubles, because I haven't seen him around for a while. This is a crying shame, because not only is he a nice player to watch, he just brings so much extra flair to the court. Maybe I'm a little biased, being Australian and thus privy to the massive Greek crowds that support him so vocally at the Aussie Open, but he really brings a lot of personality to the table, with his big cheeky smile and effervescent attitude. The world needs more players like Marcos.

*

I say all this on account of Marcos suddenly turning up again in s'Hertogenbosch and winning a match - a good one too, knocking out second seed Tommy Robredo. I mean, sure, Tommy Robredo is Spanish, not Rafa and thus probably allergic to grass (even if David Ferrer won the title here last year) and Marcos is a former Wimbledon semi-finalist, but whatever. Marcos has been away for a while (I think he was in the first round of Roland Garros, but I don't really remember) and it's nice to see him win one.

*

The same thing is true, to a lesser degree, of Ivan Ljubicic. He's played some excellent tennis this year after a big slump, and it is totally great to see him playing well. He's an excellent statesman of the game and probably one of the most eloquent tennis players I've ever seen, and I like it when nice people do well. It makes the world seem a little bit fairer.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

Men's Draw

*

Marcos Baghdatis def. Tommy Robredo, 7-5 6-2

Benjamin Becker def. Fernando Verdasco, 7-5 7-6 (7-4)

Michael Llodra def. Kristof Vliegen, 6-2 6-3

Dudi Sela def. Igor Kunitsyn, 6-4 6-3

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Dinara Safina def. Anna-Lena Groenefeld, 6-0 6-3

Alona Bondarenko def. Stefanie Foretz, 6-4 6-7 (1-7) 6-3

Nathalie Dechy def. Dominika Cibulkova, 6-3 3-6 6-3

Flavia Pennetta def. Ksenia Pervak, 6-1 6-1

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Iveta Benesova, 6-3 6-1

Yanina Wickmayer def. Sorana Cirstea, 6-4 6-3

*

*

AEGON International (Eastbourne)

*

Men's Draw

*

Frank Dancevic def. Igor Andreev, 7-6 (8-6) 6-2

Julien Benneteau def. Mikhail Youzhny, 4-6 6-5 6-4

Fabrice Santoro def. Robby Ginepri, 4-6 6-4 6-1

Ivan Ljubicic def. Joshua Goodall, 6-3 7-5

Guillermo Garcia-Lopez def. Yen-hsun Lu, 6-4 6-7 (0-7) 7-6 (7-3)

Janko Tipsarevic def. Brydan Klein, 7-6 (7-5) 6-1

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Li Na def. Elena Baltacha, 6-2 7-5

Agnieszka Radwanska def. Urszula Radwanska, 6-1 6-1

Anna Chakvetadze def. Jelena Jankovic, 6-7 (5-7) 6-3 6-2

Marion Bartoli def. Gisela Dulko, 6-3 6-1

Sybille Bammer def. Anne Keothavong, 6-3 6-2

Anabel Medina Garrigues def. Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez, 6-3 6-7 (4-7) 6-1

Caroline Wozniacki def. Alisa Kleybanova, 6-3 6-2

Ekaterina Makarova def. Jarmila Groth, 7-6 (9-7) 6-1

Amelie Mauresmo def. Vera Zvonareva, 6-3 1-6 6-3

Vera Dushevina def. Ai Sugiyama, 6-7 (6-8) 7-5 6-4

Aleksandra Wozniak def. Svetlana Kuznetsova, 6-0 6-3

Second Year Blues

So I was messing round on the ATP website, minding my own business, when I came across this piece of alarming ranking information under the 'big movers this week' section. Ernests Gulbis - down 29 places.

*

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

*
I thought about it and it made sense - Gulbis reached the quarters of Roland Garros last year and did not much of anything this year - and then I thought about it some more and I got mad. Ernests, what gives, dude? What's going on?

*

His year started with a bang - beating Djokovic in his first outing of the year in Brisbane - but since then he hasn't been able to string two wins together. It's been an embarrassing string of first and second round defeats for the guy who's supposed to be one of the future big guns of our game. I mean, sure, I understand about second year blues - last year was the year that Ernests announced, 'here I am, I have talent, fear me, fear me!' and sometimes it's hard to follow it up, but this is just ridiculous. He lost to Alberto Martin yesterday. On grass.

*

That's right. Alberto Martin. On grass.

*

Ernests. Pull yourself together. Spank your inner moppet, whatever. Just win two matches in a row. That's all I'm asking. Two in a row. If you want to go on and make it three or four or whatever, that's fine, but let's walk before we can run, eh?

*

*

Today's Results

*

Gerry Weber Open (Halle)

*

Mischa Zverev def. Tomas Berdych, 3-6 6-2 7-6 (10-8)

Benjamin Becker def. Rainer Schuettler, 6-4 2-6 6-4

Philipp Kohlschreiber def. Dmitry Tursunov, 6-4 7-6 (8-6)

Tommy Haas def. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, 6-3 7-6 (7-3)

Lukas Lacko def. Harel Levy, 7-6 (8-6) 6-2

*

*

AEGON Championships (Queen's Club)

*

Andy Murray def. Andreas Seppi, 6-1 6-4

Gilles Simon def. Grigor Dimitrov, 7-6 (9-7) 7-6 (7-5)

Nicolas Mahut def. Marin Cilic, 7-6 (7-1) 7-6 (7-4)

Ivo Karlovic def. Julien Benneteau, 7-6 (9-7) 6-7 (4-7) 6-2

Juan Carlos Ferrero def. Paul-Henri Mathieu, 6-4 6-4

Guillermo Garcia-Lopez def. Gilles Muller, 7-6 (7-3) 6-3

Mikhail Youzhny def. Marcos Baghdatis, 64 76(3)

Lleyton Hewitt def. Frederico Gil, 3-6 6-2 6-2

Steve Darcis def. Alberto Martin, 6-2 6-4

Xavier Malisse def. Rik De Voest, 7-6 (9-7) 7-6 (7-5)

*

*

AEGON Classic (Birmingham)

*

Aleksandra Wozniak def. Olga Govortsova, 6-4 6-4

Sania Mirza def. Anne Keothavong, 6-1 7-6 (7-5)

Stefanie Voegele def. Ekaterina Makarova, 6-3 3-6 6-2

Naomi Cavaday def. Tamarine Tanasugarn, 7-6 (7-5) 2-6 6-4

Roger Federer World

Somewhere out in the sky in that vast belt of rocks between Mars and Jupiter, is the newly christened Rafael Nadal asteroid. Until a few days ago, it was known as the 128036 asteroid. Its new name is a little cooler, methinks.

*

Apparently it was named as a tribute to 'one of the greatest tennis players of all time.' I assume that means they're waiting till they find a suitably lovely planet before giving it the name of THE greatest tennis player of all time. I'll be one of the first in the line when the rocket flies with the first human emigrants to Roger Federer World, let me tell you. Now wouldn't that be a fine place to live?!

*

Actually, that would be a great place to live. Imagine a world where everyone lived like a Federer. It would have a charter based on fairness and niceness and politeness. It would be a planet based on fair play and good sportsmanship - and, of course, genius and beauty. Though of course, if everyone was like Roger, maybe he wouldn't be so special. But Roger Federer World would be a wonderful place. No Djokovics there.

*

Four tournaments for men going on this week - and again, three of them (Kitzbuhel, Amersfoort and Umag) are on clay. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. Why, ye players, why do you play on the clay? I would be heading straight to Indianapolis, where they are sensible and play on hard courts - and also are located in North America, where the tour pretty much lives for the next little while (Olympics aside.) But the top seeds in Indy are James Blake, Gilles Simon, Dmitry Tursunov and Sam Querrey. The cutoff for direct admission is 169. Hardly the most distinguished field ever.

*

Let's check out the stats on the three clay tournaments. In Kitzbuhel (which got rained out today), the top four seeds are Andreas Seppi, Rainer Schuettler, Agustin Calleri and Potito Starace. Last direct acceptance at 156. In Amersfoort, we have Marc Gicquel, Jose Acasuso, Steve Darcis and Marcel Granollers (all of whom receive first round byes... badness) with a last direct acceptance at 157. And in Umag, the top four dudes are Fernando Verdasco, Ivo Karlovic, Carlos Moya and Igor Andreev, and the last direct acceptance is 137.

*

Now, none of the top TOP guys are playing this week (though interestingly, Ivan Ljubicic is the #5 seed in Umag, and he did used to be a top TOP guy not so long ago) but still, the fact remains that Indy has the lowest direct acceptance of all the tournaments. Why would you not make a run for it? Is the schism between claycourters and the others really so pronounced? Are claycourters so good on clay and so rubbish on everything else that they'll endanger the rest of their season just to rack up points on the red stuff?

*

I just do not understand. Surely, if you are a claycourter, you want to practice on hardcourts so you can do well at the US Open, yesno? But I suppose you would also want to stick to what you're good at so as to maintain your points... but it just seems so bizarre to me. I know there is a big difference between clay and hard courts, but is it really that pronounced? Why, WHY is there such a demand for clay tournaments?

*

And why clay? Why not grass? Is it just a matter of what people have grown up on? But look at Federer. He grew up on clay, and while he is obviously the second best player on it in the world, it's still his least favourite surface. And there are SO MANY claycourters. I can only think of one specific grasscourt player off the top of my head, and even then, he rarely makes that much of an impact - it's Nicolas Mahut, by the way. And Roland Garros is great and all, but it's Wimbledon that is really the holy grail of tennis - always has been, always will be.

*

Back in the day, when Rod Laver won his Slam, three of the four Slams were on grass, with Roland Garros the exception. What happened between then and now? When did people go off grass?

*

The only post-Wimbledon grass court tournament (to my knowledge, anyway) is Newport, which Fabrice Santoro won last week. But there's clay tournaments pretty much the whole year round - you have the South American swing right after the Australian Open, where you have Vina del Mar and a whole host of other tournaments. This is in the leadup to Indian Wells and Miami - so why play clay? Then you have Estoril and the European clay swing, which is the swing that makes sense, as it leads up to Roland Garros. But then there's Warsaw - which Davydenko played and won this year, and then went on to promptly lose in the first round of Wimbledon. And still now, clay everywhere! You can hardly get away from the stuff!

*

If it was one clay tournament and three hard court ones, then maybe it would make more sense. But you cannot tell me that three quarters of the players on the tour are specialist claycourters. I refuse to believe that.

*

I know I have flogged this dead horse about nine hundred times, but it just does not make any sense to me at all. Quite apart from anything, the Olympics are coming up, and they are not on clay. Oh no, they are not.

*

Any answers welcomed. Because surely, if three quarters of the players on the tour are clay courters, three quarters of the tour would be played on clay. The important tournaments, anyway. But no. We have one claycourt Grand Slam and three Masters Series events, all crammed into one quarter of the season. That would be one quarter, not three. Whereas the hard courts get two separate seasons and two Slams. I know the Australian and the US are different surfaces, but they're both hard, when it comes down to it.

*

So what the hell is going on, Kitzbuhel, Umag, Amersfoort? Jodi demands to know. Why the clay? WHY?

*

*

Today's Results

*

Dutch Open Tennis (Amersfoort)

*

Martin Vassallo Arguello def. Alberto Brizzi, 6-4 6-3

Alberto Martin def. Yuri Schukin, 7-6 (10-8) 6-4

Teimuraz Gabashvili def. Thierry Ascione 6-2 7-6 (7-1)

Christophe Rochus def. David Marrero, 7-5 6-2

Thiemo de Bakker def. Adrian Cruciat, 7-5 6-4

*

*

ATP Studena Croatia Open (Umag)

*

Fabio Fognini def. Ricardas Berankis, 6-3 6-2

Boris Pashanski def. Gianluca Naso, 6-3 2-6 7-6 (11-9)

Roko Karanusic def. Francesco Piccari, 6-2 6-2

Mathieu Montcourt def. Antonio Veic, 6-4 6-2

Filippo Volandri def. Flavio Cipolla, 6-1 6-4

*

*

Indianapolis Tennis Championships (Indianapolis)

*

Gilles Simon def. Nicolas Mahut, 6-2 3-6 6-3

Dmitry Tursunov def. Igor Kunitsyn, 6-3 7-5

Benjamin Becker def. Kristian Pless, 6-3 6-4

Joseph Sirianni def. Mikhail Ledovskikh, 6-3 1-2 retired

Yen-hsun Lu def. Justin O'Neal, 7-6 (7-2) 7-6 (14-12)

*

*

Bank of the West Classic (Stanford)

*

Sybille Bammer def. Olga Govortsova, 7-5 6-2

Alisa Kleybanova def. Elena Vesnina, 4-6 6-2 6-3

Ai Sugiyama def. Alexa Glatch, 6-2 3-6 7-5

*

*

Gastein Ladies (Bad Gastein)

*

Zhang Shuai def. Joanna Sakowicz, 7-5 6-2

Tereza Hladikova def. Yevgenia Savranska, 6-4 2-6 7-6 (7-4)

*

*

And today in Stars of the Past, Stars of the Future: Marin Cilic.

*

Marin Cilic must seem like the boogeyman for Paul-Henri Mathieu. They have met in four consecutive tournaments now, and while the first match went the way of the Frenchman, since then, it has been all Cilic. This nineteen year old Croat took out Mathieu in the third round of Wimbledon, and now, on clay, has taken him out in Bastad. Mathieu was the defending champion, and this loss to Cilic will probably see him fall out of the top twenty. Cilic is that kind of player.

*

Cilic has been rising quietly through the rankings. He made no spectacular leap like Jeremy Chardy, no one big Slam finish that sent him soaring up. Just solid consistency - which, one would think, is a pretty good asset for a player of his age. Like Chardy, he was in the fourth round of Slam this year - beating his bunny Mathieu ensured that - but it wasn't really a surprise. Cilic is rising so steadily and solidly that no one has really seen him coming.

*

How long will this continue? Are we going to look up in two years time and find a twenty one year old Marin Cilic in the top ten, challenging at all the Slams? Where did he come from? we will wonder. But he will have been there all along - a steam train heading up the rankings, a tortoise to Chardy's hare. But one expects that it is Cilic, rather than Chardy, that will have the longer career.

Thoughts on Day Zero

Why is it, WHY IS IT, that one of the most commonly asked questions in press conferences this week, to just about any player, has been 'Can Federer win Wimbledon?'

*

Um, let me think. Gee, this is total rocket science. He won a grass court final last week without dropping a set, or dropping serve. He made it to the final of Roland Garros the week before - which is better than the other one hundred and twenty six guys who took a loss there. He's got a fifty nine match win streak on grass courts. He hasn't lost on grass since 2002. He's only been taken to five sets once. Oh yeah, and he's won Wimbledon FIVE TIMES BEFORE.

*

So, with that in mind, do you think he can win it?

*

Forgive me for having some faith in the man who has time and time again proved himself to the most consistent (and, in my opinion, the out and out best) player in tennis history.

*

Greg Sharko puts it better on his preview of the draw (on ATPtennis.com) when he asks the question, 'Can anyone stop the king of grass?' To which I would reply, 'Well, nothing's impossible, but you might need to put a blindfold on Federer. And possibly break his leg. And even then, the other guy would have to have a hell of a day.'

*

There is this mystique that surrounds Rafa on clay, this sort of aura - kind of a psych out. People think he is unbeatable, and so he is unbeatable. And he totally deserves it - I'm not saying that he's not! But Federer's prowess on grass is comparable to Rafa on clay, if not better, and yet he doesn't quite have the same mystique. Not this year, anyway. But I think he just might earn it back...

*

Let's have a look at Federer's run through the draw. He starts off tonight with Dominik Hrbaty, who I think is ranked somewhere in the #200s now, though he used to be up there... he has a career high ranking of #12, in fact. Beyond that, I can't tell you much about him other than that he once more a really stupid shirt at the US Open... it had sort of half moon cutouts over his shoulder blades. Lleyton Hewitt beat him after being down and when asked how he did it, replied (possibly paraphrased), 'I couldn't stand losing to a guy in a shirt like that.'

*

Second round is maybe Soderling, who has been playing well of late - was it him that went through World Team Tennis at Dusseldorf without losing a match? He could be a bit tricky, but the maestro will prevail, obviously, to take on probably Monfils - though Nishikori, the Japanese teenager, could be a dark horse in that little section. Actually, anyone of those four guys (also including Marc Gicquel and Chris Guccione) has third round potential. None of them is a match for the mighty Fed, though!

*

The round of sixteen looks like being either Hewitt or Gonzalez... though Haase, the up and coming Dutchman, might be due for a breakthrough. I don't know what his game is like on grass, though. Gonzalez isn't really a grasscourter - though his forehand is a great grass weapon! - so Rog would probably have little trouble there. Hewitt might prove more troublesome, but he does have that injury... and let's face it, Lleyton is not what he once was.

*

Ferrer seems the most likely quarter finalist, and this is where matches might start getting a bit harder. Ferru has been playing so well of late, and he has that grass court title from s'Hertogenbosch... but one grass court title doesn't really compare to ten, now, does it! Federer in four, if you ask me... or three, if he's really smacking it well. Berdych is also a possibility, but he doesn't seem to be that in form... Kohlschreiber and Ancic (and maybe Llodra) could be the surprise packets in this section. But none of them is a match for Roger.

*

Then in the semis it gets interesting. Novak Djokovic is seeded to reach the semis here, and, much as I hate him, I wouldn't be surprised if he, you know, does. This would give us a rematch of that horrible Australian Open semi. But I think it might be a good thing. He'd never admit it, but Federer works best when he has a little extra motivation, and revenge is a dish best served cold. Remember at the Australian Open last year when Djokovic and Federer met in the round of sixteen, and Djokovic was talking big beforehand, and Federer came out and absolutely crushed him. It isn't really fair to count Djokovic out, but I would not be at all surprised to see that happen again. Where there's a will...

*

And then, the final. See qualms re. using the word 'destiny,' but let's just say I would not be AT ALL surprised to see a Roger/Rafa match here. And this time, it'll be Roger who comes out on top.

*

Let's have a look now at Rafa's potential road to the final. He opens against Andreas Beck, who had a pretty decent run at Halle, considering his ranking, but shouldn't prove too much trouble for Senor Nadal... though we can never forget the infamous Kendrick Incident of 2006. Rafa has historically not played his best in the early rounds at Wimbledon, so who knows? maybe Andreas will do all right. I wouldn't bet on him, though.

*

The second round could be Gulbis, which would definitely be tricky. We all know how good Gulbis is going to be... and the other potential opponent here for Rafa is Isner, and I would not like to be facing his serve on grass, no sirree! This round could be a potential pitfall for Rafa, but I think he'll come out of it relatively unscathed, to face probably Kiefer in the next round (or maybe Benneteau.) That one should prove a little easier, methinks... though you can never count Kiefer out when he's having a good day.

*

The round of sixteen will probably be either Stepanek or Youzhny. Youzhny has been a bit of a boogeyman for Rafa in the past (and absolutely crushed him at this year's final in Chennai, bagel, breadstick) so that could be a very interesting match. Likewise, Stepanek the Dalek has suddenly become all good, despite his weirdness, so he could give Rafa a tough match too. Man, I hadn't realised how difficult this side of the draw is for Rafa! I still like him to come through, though. He isn't #2 for nothing.

*

If the seeds hold true, it'd be Gasquet in the quarters... but let's face it, Richou has not got his head in the game at the moment. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we saw Murray there, or maybe Gilles Simon... and you can never count out Sebastien Grosjean on grass. Fabrice Santoro is also a possibility. This little section, actually, might be the weakest in the whole draw, considering Richou has his head in the clouds - so I like Rafa to come through this one pretty easily (much as I would like to see Sebastien make a run for it!) Then it would probably be Davydenko in the semis. Other options here include Roddick, Tursunov, Blake, Mathieu or even Ljubicic, but I like the consistency of Kolya's game. He hasn't played a lead in tournament on grass, though, which could prove a bit silly - why, Kolya, why did you go and play fricking Warsaw? Rafa to come through that match to the final, which I have covered.

*

Actually, let's examine that Kolya quarter and have a look at his run to the semis. He has Benjamin Becker (no relation) in the first round, which could be a bit of fun... if this were best of three I might tip Becker-no-relation for an upset, but over five I think Kolya will be stronger. either Bjorkman or Clement in the second round, which I think Kolya would come through, though either of these veterans would give him a run for his money! Then probably Ljubicic in the third round, which could get REALLY interesting... think back to Roland Garros a few weeks ago, when Ljubicic came back to beat Kolya in five? Psych? Maybe. I don't know if Kolya is vulnerable to that sort of thing, though. He seems so steady...

*

That would give us probably Mathieu or maybe Nieminen in the round of sixteen - though Jeremy Chardy is in this section, as is Marin Cilic, either of whom could pull an upset. I like Kolya to come through nonetheless. Then probably Roddick in the quarters, given past grass court form. (Challengers include Tursunov, Blake and maybe the dark horse Tipsarevic.) That match could go either way... but based on present form and injuries and whatnot, I'd tip Kolya - barely - to go to a semi... where he would meet Rafa and lose.

*

The remaining quarter of the draw is the Djokovic quarter. He opens against Michael Berrer, who isn't a slouch on grass, but who I think Novak will dispatch pretty easily (unfortunately.) The second round could prove harder if Marat Safin makes it through his match with Fognini - and oh boy, how I would be cheering for the big Russian! Marat is historically not the best grasscourter, however, and his consistency (something Djokovic unfortunately has in spades) leaves something to be desired. Still, an upset is certainly possible here.

*

Seppi looks likely for the third round, though I would not count out Yen-hsun Lu of Chinese Taipei, who has been doing very well in Challengers of late. Either way, it seems like Djokovic would come through all right. That would give us probably Wawrinka in the round of sixteen (Querrey might be the dark horse in this section) and I don't mind Stan's chances... if he plays as well as he's capable, Novak might have a wee bit of trouble. But then again, if Novak plays as well as he's capable, then...

*

In the quarters, it looks like either Nalbandian or Baghdatis - either of whom is very capable of giving Djokovic a run for it... actually, I really like Baghdatis's chances. He has a great grass court game. He and Djokovic had a marathon five set match last year at Wimbledon which Djokovic won, though they both pretty much had to be carried off the court by the end of it. Karlovic is also in this section, and Igor Kunitsyn could be a dark (well... very dark) horse. Let's say Novak wins... he would go through to the semis, where he would face Federer, and would get destroyed. Hurrah.

*

There's my general analysis of the quarters - and I will shut up in a minute, I promise! Just a few first round matches which I think could be very interesting...

*

Marc Gicquel vs. Kei Nishikori: Gicquel just made it to the final of s'Hertogenbosch. Nishikori is the youngest player in the draw, a real star of the future. This match could go all the way.

*

Lleyton Hewitt vs. Robin Haase: Haase announced his arrival by beating Ljubicic at the Australian Open and has posted pretty decent results since. Hewitt, coming back from injury, could be in some strife.

*

Tomas Berdych vs. Evgeny Korolev: Korolev is just looking for a breakthrough, and Berdych, while he is an awesome grass courter when he is on song, has been off with Richou in fairy-land of late. Could go to five sets.

*

Fernando Verdasco vs. Philipp Kohlschreiber: The Nottingham finalist vs. the Halle finalist. Five hours is possible, if not probable.

*

Michael Llodra vs. Mario Ancic: It is a fool who doubts Mario Ancic on grass. It is a fool who doubts that Michael Llodra has got some serious game going on this year. If Verdasco/Kohlschreiber is five hours, this one could go six.

*

Florent Serra vs. Yen-hsun Lu: Lu is slowly creeping up the rankings without anyone really noticing... but does he have the game to unsettle the steady Frenchman? I reckon he does.

*

Thomaz Bellucci vs. Igor Kunitsyn: Bellucci has had some great Challenger results on clay, so it will be interesting to see how that translates to grass. And Kunitsyn is on the verge of... something.

*

Andy Roddick vs. Eduardo Schwank: Schwank did the best of all the Argentinians at Roland Garros. He has had some great Challenger results - but can he translate that onto grass? I don't see him beating Roddick, but I can see him troubling him for sure.

*

Jeremy Chardy vs. Frederico Gil: Two young guys, hungry to make a breakthrough. Chardy has done it to an extent at Roland Garros - can it be the young Portuguese guy this time?

*

Jonas Bjorkman vs. Arnaud Clement: Two veterans on the tour. A sentimental match to watch, more than anything else. But you can never count them out... remember, Bjorkman was in the semis here two years ago.

*

Nikolay Davydenko vs. Benjamin Becker: Becker-no-relation has got some game. This is Kolya's first grass court match for the season. I smell five sets.

*

Guillermo Canas vs. Tommy Haas: Neither of these guys is seeded? Are you kidding me?

*

Andy Murray vs. Fabrice Santoro: It's always fun to watch Marat Safin's most feared player, the French wizard... he could upset Murray easily if Murray doesn't pay enough attention.

*

John Isner vs. Ernests Gulbis: Isner's huge serve is terrifying. But Gulbis has got the game to neutralise it... and how will he back up his Roland Garros effort?

*

I promised a while back that I'd shut up. And I will - after I say this.

*

Federer is going to win Wimbledon. And all ye who have doubted him... watch out. Because the King is going to reclaim his throne for the sixth year running, and he is going to do it in STYLE.

Ole!

Eastbourne, June 1972. Andres Gimeno of Spain wins the title. No Spaniard has won a grass court title since.

*

..until last week, when Rafa Nadal won Queen's, and now there's seemingly an avalanche of Spanish guys winning on grass.

*

I say avalanche. I mean two. We have Rafa at Queen's and now Ferru at s'Hertogenbosch. Even though I haven't actually seen the matches, I have been SO impressed with Ferru this week. He said in his post-match presser that 'of course' clay is still his favourite surface, but I wonder whether or not he should think about revising that. I love Ferrer's game on hard courts - and it's not like he hasn't been successful with it, either. He didn't have to make it to the final of the Tennis Masters Cup last year (which he did) to prove he's got game. And now that he's found his feet and has been so dominant this week on grass, I think we might just have the makings of a spectacular all-round player here.

*

I'd be watching my back, if I were Nikolay Davydenko. David's a-coming.

*

It'll be interesting to see how Ferru backs this up at Wimbledon. I don't think playing through to the final will affect him in terms of fatigue at all - look at his insane leadup to Roland Garros! The fact does remain, though, that Ferru was the top seed here this week, and it wasn't like Gicquel was really a tough match up for him. Gasquet was the real grass court danger man in the draw, and he got bumped off early... though that said, you can never underestimate Ancic on grass, and Ferru dealt with him with aplomb. But if Ferru can back this up at Wimbledon against top notch quality players, then... watch out. Vamos.

*

Let's see whose quarter he's going to be in at Wimbledon... here we are. He has a potential quarter final match up with Federer. I don't see him getting past that one - and we all know who I'd be supporting in any case - but I like his chances of making it that far. He could have maybe Andreev in the second round and Ancic in the third... and perhaps Berdych in the fourth. All difficult matches, but if Ferru plays the way he's been playing, he could take out any of those guys in straight sets.

*

I'm going to save my full draw analysis for tomorrow, which is the English tennis summer's equivalent to Australia's Boring Sunday. Think of that as a sneak preview... because my draw analyses are sought after worldwide, and stuff. Oh yeah.

*

Meanwhile, I was two from two on finals, because Dr Ivo won over Verdasco in Nottingham, saving a match point along the way. Hey, imagine if Verdasco had won! That would make it THREE Spanish titles! More on that in a minute... back to Dr Ivo. I have this image of him in my head, which I am positive is wrong, of him as this big, sort of dopey guy, all serve and nothing else. In fact, it must be wrong, because serve and serve alone will not let you win a tennis match. And I think that the notion of a dumb professional tennis player is obviously erroneous - tennis is a test of intelligence and psychology as much as anything else.

*

Is this the curse of the big server, to be pigeonholed like this? I remember it happened a bit to A-Rod when he first came on the scene. I think it happens to Guccione too. To what extent is it warranted and to what extent is it totally unfair?

*

I suppose that's one of those matters that can only be settled on a case by case basis.

*

Now to Verdasco. Big kudos to him for making it to (and almost winning) the final. Honestly, these Spanish boys... they're coming from everywhere! What are we going to do with them?

*

I suppose the most interesting question is why no Spanish players have been particularly good on grass historically. I guess it's as simple as the fact that these guys grow up on clay and hardly ever play on grass... but hey, so did Federer, and he plays okay on grass. Just okay. Not like, brilliant or anything. It's not like he's the best player EVER on grass or anything like that.

*

So why now? Is the Nadal-Ferrer-almost-Verdasco almost trifecta a hint of things to come, or is it a fluke?

*

Perhaps we will find out at Wimbledon. Remember how there were five French guys in the round of sixteen at Roland Garros? Somehow, I don't think the Brits are going to repeat the feat... so maybe the Spaniards are the ones to keep an eye on!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

David Ferrer def. Marc Gicquel, 6-4 6-2

*

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Dinara Safina, 7-5 6-3

*

*

Slazenger Open (Nottingham)

*

Ivo Karlovic def. Fernando Verdasco, 7-5 6-7 (4-7) 7-6 (10-8)

*

*

International Women's Open (Eastbourne)

*

Agnieszka Radwanska def. Nadia Petrova, 6-4 6-7 (11-13) 6-4

An Unlikely Eight

Well, don't we have an unlikely set of semi-finalists in s'Hertogenbosch? And in Nottingham? Nottingham less so, but these are a bunch of guys you wouldn't expect to see, say, in the second week at Wimbledon (mostly.) So... it's interesting.

*

This may be a testament more to the calibre of players playing this week more than anything else - Federer, Nadal and Djokovic all conspicuously absent, along with grasscourt heavyweights like Roddick and Hewitt. The one man who was playing this week that I would normally put money on to reach the second round of Wimbledon, Richard Gasquet, got knocked out early. But consider this: Rafa Nadal, who has reached the final of Wimbledon for the past two years, has only just won his first grasscourt title. That says something about how difficult it is to do well on grass. So it will be interesting to see which two of these eight walks away with the prize.

*

Let's look at Nottingham first. In the first semi final we have Gael Monfils, recent French Open semi finalist, and Ivo Karlovic, defending champion. I'd venture to say that whoever wins this semi will win the match. It's hard for three set matches to be real throwdown affairs - there is only so long a match like that can go on for. (That is why five set matches are so preferable, in my opinion... they're gladiatorial, and they're amazing tests of endurance, both mental and physical.) Dr Ivo will have the edge with his monstrous serve - we must remember the close shave that Rafa had with him over at Queen's - but Monfils has such flairs of unpredictable brilliance. If Monfils plays like he does in the first and second sets of his semi at Roland Garros against Federer, I'd back him. Otherwise, I might have to come down on the side of Dr Ivo's dull but effective percentage tennis.

*

In the other semi we have Fernando Verdasco and Marin Cilic. Verdasco is the higher seed - he's seeded #3 - but I've been quite impressed with Cilic of late. His win at the Australian Open over Gonzalez was nothing short of remarkable, and as he grows in confidence, I think he's going to be a real danger. However, Verdasco has a psychological advantage over him, I think. They played in the semis of St Petersburg last year, a match which Verdasco won. But Verdasco's quarter-final win over Simon seems much scratchier than Cilic's win over Johansson... so I think I'm going to go for the underdog in this one. So my pick for the Nottingham final is Karlovic/Cilic.

*

Now, in s'Hertogenbosch, we have four players that are really not grasscourters... Gicquel, maybe, but definitely not the other three. We have Ferrer against Del Potro, and Gicquel against Canas. You've got to back Ferru for the title - especially after he had such a great victory over Ancic, who definitely is a grasscourt player. Del Potro is good, but he isn't exactly Captain Grass, and he has a long way to go before he becomes the player he has the talent to be. He's only a littl'un... not in stature, obviously, but in age, certainly. So I'm saying Ferru, and Ferru easily, because he's awesome and in form and a cool guy, and stuff. Vamos Ferru!

*

The other one will be interesting. I think people often fall into the trap of categorising Willy Canas as a claycourter because he's Argentinian, but his best results have come on hard courts. That doesn't make him a grasscourter, but I think it makes him more of one than, say, Nicolas Almagro. I can't say I know a whole lot about Gicquel... I do remember that, ah, incident with him and Benjamin Becker's serve at Halle last year, wherein he ended up in a lot of pain and, although he beat Becker (and that pesky 129km serve, hehehe) he had to retire against Nieminen. I think every man that was watching that day must have winced in unison.

*

Just for that, I'm gunning for Gicquel, because I feel sorry for him, and also because I don't like Willy very much. So Ferru/Gicquel for the s'Hertogenbosch final.

*

But it's odd, isn't it? Karlovic is probably the closest to a grass courter we have in either of these semis. It's heavy on the Latins, and that's a bit unusual, when it comes down to it. Not that it's bad, but it's definitely weird.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

David Ferrer def. Mario Ancic, 6-4 7-6 (7-4)

Juan Martin del Potro def. Arnaud Clement, 2-6 6-3 6-1

Guillermo Canas def. Viktor Troicki, 6-2 6-2

Marc Gicquel def. Jurgen Melzer, 6-3 6-4

*

Elena Dementieva def. Sorana Cirstea, 6-2 6-4

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Michaella Krajicek, 3-6 6-3 6-4

Alona Bondarenko def. Anna Chakvetadze, 6-2 3-6 6-2

Dinara Safina def. Katerina Srebotnik, walkover

*

*

Slazenger Open (Nottingham)

*

Gael Monfils def. Vince Spadea, 7-6 (7-4) 6-2

Ivo Karlovic def. Andreas Seppi, 6-3 3-6 6-4

Fernando Verdasco def. Gilles Simon, 6-3 2-6 6-3

Marin Cilic def. Thomas Johansson, 6-1 6-2

*

*

International Women's Open (Eastbourne)

*

Samantha Stosur def. Caroline Wozniacki, 7-6 (7-3) 6-4

Nadia Petrova def. Ekaterina Makarova, 6-4 6-3

Agnieszka Radwanska def. Gisela Dulko, 7-5 7-5

Marion Bartoli def. Alisa Kleybanova, 6-3 6-3

Dalek

Again, not much to report. I really am a shallow, shallow fan. Expect me to start rambling like the Queen of Rambling once Wimbledon starts, but for now, these posts probably aren't going to be too long.
*
Radek Stepanek, top seed at Nottingham, pulled out of his match because of a rib injury. Somehow, I found it difficult to care. There's something about Radek Stepanek which just sort of weirds me out. I'm not sure what it is, and it's probably totally unjustified. (And yes, it does date from before he beat Federer in the quarters at Rome.) Maybe it's something to do with his string of high profile girlfriends who are much prettier than he is... Martina Hingis... Nicole Vaidisova... despite the fact that he's, well, weird looking. (Or maybe it's because his name sounds like 'dalek.')
*
It's kind of weird that I don't like him, because he's a serve-and-volley player, and I love a bit of the ol' serve-and-volley. But his game is... weird. Or maybe it's just him, and that weirdness sort of contaminates his game. I don't get it.
*
I know pretty much nothing about Stepanek, beside the serve-and-volley thing and the girlfriend things. So why do I get so weirded out? Maybe it's because I like Martina Hingis and I feel wronged on her behalf. (Though why she was going out with a man so weird looking is beyond me.) They got engaged in November 2006 but split up in August 2007, though they promised to remain good friends. According to Reuters, they were the 'highest profile couple in tennis.' I wonder if that's true?
*
Actually, I wonder who is the highest profile couple in tennis? Is it Radek and his new girl, Nicole Vaidisova? Gael Monfils and Dominika Cibulkova? Tomas Berdych and Lucie Safarova? Carlos Moya and Flavia Pennetta? (Are they still together?) Andre Agassi and Steffi Graf, obviously, but they're retired now, so I don't know if they really count. My personal favourite is Roger Federer and Mirka Vavrinec - hey, she used to play, they're a couple! It must be a pain for ATP players and WTA players to make it work - they're hardly ever in the same part of the world. I mean, there are a few joint tournaments, but outside the Slams, there really aren't that many - Sydney, Estoril, s'Hertogenbosch, off the top of my head. But not a lot, certainly.

*

To tell the truth, I'm more interested in tennis friendships than in relationships. I'd love to know who hangs out with who. I was pretty surprised when I was reading Rafa's blog from Roland Garros in 2007 to find that Rafa and David Nalbandian (Headbandian) are playstation buddies - along with Ferru, subject of yesterday's blog. I wish I knew more about who hung out with who. It would be... interesting.

*

(I wonder who hangs out with Stepanek, considering he's so weird and all.)

*

*

Today's Results

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

Arnaud Clement def. Marcel Granollers, 6-7 (6-8) 6-3 6-3

Juan Martin del Potro def. Rainer Schuettler, 7-6 (7-3) 7-6 (7-5)

Guillermo Canas def. Rohan Bopanna, 6-2 6-4

Viktor Troicki def. Ivan Ljubicic, 5-7 6-4 7-6 (7-5)

*

Elena Dementieva def. Sara Errani, 6-3 7-5

Sorana Cirstea def. Mariya Koryttseva, 7-6 (7-3) 6-4

Katerina Srebotnik def. Yung-jan Chan, 6-4 6-3

Michaella Krajicek def. Sania Mirza, 6-2 6-2

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Ashley Harkleroad, 4-6 6-4 7-5

*

*

Slazenger Open (Nottingham)

*

Gael Monfils def. Julien Benneteau, 3-6 6-4 6-2

Ivo Karlovic def. Sam Querrey, 7-6 (7-3) 7-6 (16-14)

Andreas Seppi def. Eduardo Schwank, 6-1 4-6 7-6 (9-7)

Gilles Simon def. Samuel Groth, 6-7 (1-7) 6-4 6-4

Fernando Verdasco def. bobby Reynolds, 6-2 6-3

Marin Cilic def. Alex Bogdanovic, 6-4 6-4

*

*

International Women's Open (Eastbourne)

*

Caroline Wozniacki def. Svetlana Kuznetsova, 6-2 6-2

Samantha Stosur def. Amelie Mauresmo, 1-2 retired

Ekaterina Makarova def. Vera Zvonareva, 6-3 6-3

Gisela Dulko def. Olga Govortsova, 6-1 6-7 (3-7) 6-2

Alisa Kleybanova def. Aravane Rezai, 6-3 5-7 6-3

Marion Bartoli def. Sybille Bammer, 6-3 6-0

Iron Man

Again, not much to report this week... none of the really big boys are playing, which has meant my interest has dropped significantly. I think this makes me a pretty vapid tennis fan, really... no Roger, no Rafa, I lose interest. And it's not that there aren't good players playing this week - Ferrer, for one, Gasquet, for another. I'm just shallow.

*

Not that Richou, baby Fed, will be playing any more this week... he went down badly to Marc Gicquel. Not that he lost heavily - it was tight - but he lost to someone he shouldn't have. He is ten times the player that Gicquel is, especially on grass. What a shame. Richou is SO off his game. He needs to sit down with that basketball game scene in High School Musical if you ask me... because his head is NOT in the game.

*

Disclaimer: I loathe High School Musical. Just so you know.

*

David Ferrer is through, however, which is good. I saw him practice at the Australian Open this year, and damn can that boy scramble! (Not only that, he is rather nice looking... hence the standing and watching!) I would venture to say that he is the best returner on the circuit. I mean, there is always the Federer exception, and Djokovic (curse his name!) might give him a run for his money, but Ferrer really is fabulous. I'm not sure what his grass game is - I'm still not sure, what with not actually watching his match in s'Hertogenbosch, but I'm going to keep an eye on him at Wimbledon.

*

Before the French Open started, I picked Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Ferrer as my semi finalists. I have no way of proving I did this because I wasn't blogging at that stage, so you'll just have to take my word for it, but still, I came pretty close! The big three are pretty much a given, and Ferrer was only one match away... I don't know if I'd back him at Wimbledon, but I really am very interested to see how he holds up. His most powerful weapon is the return, and grass is so fast, so I guess returning is harder (hence the points generally being so shorter) so if he can push his super-returningness into service there, he will be superb. Superb!

*

He once described himself as the 'worst top hundred player of all time.' Now that he's #5 in the world, I think we can say pretty comprehensively that this is not true. I love Ferru's game. And he seems like such a nice kid as well. Actually, I would love to see him play doubles with Rafa - just for kicks. I think their games would be highly complementary - and they are the numbers #1 and #2 Spaniards, so it would be all nice too. Nadal has played with Robredo before, but I don't know if he's played with Ferru... I think they'd be awesome. In fact, if Rafa and David stay healthy, I think Spain is a dead cert for the Davis Cup this year. There are some awesome teams in the semis - the US are always strong, with Roddick and Blake and the Bryans, and the Russians are tough, and the Argentinians maybe the favourites, but I really think that Spain is untouchable if they have all their players. Can you imagine? You've got Rafa and Ferru for the singles, you have Robredo as well, and if it's on clay, you have Almagro too, and you have all those other guys about, like Verdasco. How can you compete with the depth of Spain?

*

One of the other things I like about Ferru is that he is virtually untireable. Seriously, the guy is like the Energiser bunny. He has to be one of the fittest guys on tour (again, the Federer caveat in place!) He reminds me a bit of Hewitt back in the old days - he just doesn't stop. He played seven or eight straight weeks of tennis leading up to and including the French, I think - he played Valencia, Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome, Hamburg and I think Dusseldorf before Roland Garros, in which he reached the quarters. And it wasn't like he didn't go deep into these tournaments - he won Valencia, reached the final in Barcelona and was up there in nearly all of those tournaments. "Ferru" means iron in Catalan, and this man deserves that title more than anyone on the tour, in my opinion.

*

And he seems to be such a lovely guy, too. He's blogged for the ATP a couple of times. He's not exactly the golden pen, but he comes across as so sweet. So go David! I'd love to see him win s'Hertogenbosch - and go deep at Wimbledon too. Vamos!

*
*
Today's Results
*
Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)
*
Mario Ancic def. Steve Darcis, 6-2 6-4
David Ferrer def. Massimo Dell'acqua, 6-2 7-6 (7-3)
Jurgen Melzer def. Igor Andreev, 6-4 1-6 6-1
Marc Gicquel def. Richard Gasquet, 7-5 7-6 (8-6)
*
Sorana Cirstea def. Maria Kirilenko, 7-5 6-4
Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Kateryna Bondarenko, 6-3 6-3
Dinara Safina def. Camille Pin, 6-1 6-4
Anna Chakvetadze def. Angelique Kerber, 6-3 3-6 7-6 (7-1)
Alona Bondarenko def. Marina Erakovic, 3-6 6-4 6-3
Alona Bondarenko def. Iveta Benesova, 6-4 4-6 6-4
Yung-jan Chan def. Sofia Arvidsson, 7-5 7-5
*
*
Slazenger Open (Nottingham)
*
Radek Stepanek def. John Isner, 6-3 6-2
Vince Spadea def. Alexander Slabinsky, 6-1 7-5
Gael Monfils def. Chris Guccione, 7-6 (7-4) 6-4
Eduardo Schwank def. Frederik Nielsen, 6-3 6-3
Gilles Simon def. Donald Young, 6-1 6-4
Samuel Groth def. Jamie Baker, 7-6 (9-7) 6-3
Fernando Verdasco def. Marcos Daniel, 6-4 7-6 (7-3)
Thomas Johansson def. Kei Nishikori, 7-5 retired
Alex Bogdanovic def. James Ward, 6-3 6-4
*
*
International Women's Open (Eastbourne)
*
Caroline Wozniacki def. Tsvetana Pironkova, 6-3 6-2
Ekaterina Makarova def. Vera Dushevina, 6-3 6-0
Olga Govortsova def. Nicole Vaidisova, 6-2 6-4
Virginie Razzano def. Kaia Kanepi, 6-3 6-4
Alisa Kleybanova def. Melanie South, 6-4 6-4
Sybille Bammer def. Alla Kudryavtseva, 7-6 (11-9) 1-6 7-5
Nadia Petrova def. Li Na, 6-2 6-7 (5-7) 6-3

Baby Fed

I don't get it. If you're a tennis player, and you're playing Wimbledon next week, and you want to play a tournament this week... why would you go all the way to the Netherlands when you can play in Nottingham?

*

I mean, I guess it would be a bit unfair to all the people in s'Hertogenbosch if no one went there and everyone went to Nottingham instead. It just seems like an odd decision. But I guess it's not that far... if Rafa can go home to Mallorca to play golf when he was already right in England, then going to the Netherlands is nothing. Being Australian, I guess I forget about how small Europe is.

*

And maybe it's to do with the type of grass or something... like the way Halle is played on the same type of grass as Wimbledon but Queen's on a different type.

*

Okay, so I have very, very little to write about today.

*

So I'm going to write a tiny bit about Richard Gasquet. He is playing in s'Hertogenbosch, so it's totally relevant and everything! Actually, he was what got me musing about playing in s'Hertogenbosch versus Nottingham... he won Nottingham once (or was it twice?) but he's playing s'Hertogenbosch... I wonder why? At least it's not like last week with Warsaw and the clay... and I'm rambling again.

*

So. Richou. I like his grass court game a lot. Actually, I like his game a lot, and he had a good win over Rochus (who, we must remember, once had six match points against Federer at Halle, so he's no slouch on grass.) He's just so intensely disappointing, because he could be so much better if he'd just get his head in the game.

*

I don't think there's any doubt that Federer is the most talented player on the circuit, but Richou has got insane amounts of talent too. He needs an epiphany, like Federer had against Squillari back in the day. If he could just sort out his brain, he could be amazing. If he actualised his potential... if he just could... Richou is, when it comes down to it, more talented than Djokovic. But Djokovic has realised his potential, whereas Richou hasn't. I mean, sure, Richou has a few titles and that semi final at Wimbledon last year, but if he lived up to what he was capable of, he could bump off Djokovic easy. He could be challenging Rafa. But he just isn't all there in the head.

*

The thing I like about Richou's game is that there is so much of it - game, I mean. He used to be called 'Baby Fed' and I can see why - he has an allcourt game that is not dissimilar to that of the Master. It's just inconsistent. I heard a piece on Radio Roland Garros with Roger Rasheed, who said that he'd like to coach Gasquet and shake him up a bit. I don't know if Rasheed is the right man for the job - we all know what I think of his commentary skills! - but Richou could use a good shake up. In my opinion.

*

Richou withdrew from the French Open citing injury. This is totally uneducated, but I think it was mostly in his head. If he does the same thing at Wimbledon - I don't think he will, but if he did - I'd never forgive him. I'd really like to see him defend his semi-final points - and he is totally capable of doing it. If only he can keep his head in the game.

*

Sorry about that mostly incoherent ramble... not my best ever entry! But I really would like to see Richou make his breakthrough. Not at the expense of Federer, of course, but if he's on the other side of the draw, I'd totally love him to make the final!

*

Speaking of players I like, Carlos Moya is out of Wimbledon, which saddens me. I like Carlos a lot... though if there was one Grand Slam he's not going to do as well at, it's probably Wimbledon... he's not exactly the king of grass. So get well soon, Carlos, and see you on the hard courts!

*

And Dinara Safina - who is definitely still in Wimbledon - won her match in s'Hertogenbosch today. Davai Dinara!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

Juan Martin del Potro def. Fabrice Santoro, 6-3 6-1

Guillermo Canas def. Mischa Zverev, 5-7 6-3 6-3

Massimo Dell'acqua def. Fabio Fognini, 7-6 (7-4) 6-2

Arnaud Clement def. Benjamin Becker, 6-3 3-6 6-4

Marcel Granollers def. Kristof Vliegen, 6-0 1-0 retired

Rohan Bopanna def. Martin Verkerk, 6-7 (8-10) 7-6 (7-2) 6-4

Viktor Troicki def. Denis Gremelmayr, 6-3 7-5

Ivan Ljubicic def. Robin Haase, 6-3 7-6 (7-5)

Marc Gicquel def. Matwe Middelkoop, 6-4 6-1

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

*

Sara Errani def. Anne Keothavong, 7-6 (7-5) 6-2

Dinara Safina def. Pauline Parmentier, 6-4 6-1

Sania Mirza def. Flavia Pennetta, 6-4 6-3

Michaella Krajicek def. Ai Sugiyama, 6-1 5-7 7-6 (9-7)

Marina Erakovic def. Alexis Gordon, 6-1 6-1

Angelique Kerber def. Klara Zakopalova, 6-4 3-6 6-4

*

*

Slazenger Open (Nottingham)

*

Julien Benneteau def. Simone Bolelli, 6-1 6-4

Ivo Karlovic def. Jonas Bjorkman, 6-3 6-4

Sam Querrey def. Alejandro Falla, 6-3 6-4

Bobby Reynolds def. Nicolas Mahut, 7-5 4-6 6-4

Dmitry Tursunov def. Yen-hsun Lu, 7-5 6-4

Marin Cilic def. Paul-Henri Mathieu, 1-6 6-4 6-3

*

*

International Women's Open (Eastbourne)

*

Samantha Stosur def. Katie O'Brien, 6-4 6-3

Amelie Mauresmo def. Alize Cornet, 6-1 4-6 7-5

Li Na def. Casey Dellacqua, 6-2 6-4

Nadia Petrova def. Shahar Peer, 6-2 6-2

Gisela Dulko def. Tathiana Garbin, 3-6 6-4 6-2

Aravane Rezai def. Victoria Azarenka, 6-2 retired

Messrs Sunday

Those crazy boys are at it again. Roger and Rafa, those crazy final kings, are at it again.

*

Remember 2005, when there basically wasn't a title that wasn't won by one of those two? Good times, good times. That year was the year of Rafa's ascendancy, his first French Open, when he cemented himself as #2 in the world. And he hasn't looked back.

*

Let's start with Rafa, who, even though he is #2 and has won lots of stuff (including the Match We Do Not Speak Of), is still the apprentice Mr Sunday. His match was the harder of the two, obviously, being as he was playing against Novak Djokovic. (A friend and I have started referring to him as Novak, Prince of Lies... just an aside.) This one had the potential to go the distance. Obviously, it didn't, but it wasn't for lack of trying.

*

Of course, I haven't actually SEEN this match, so I am going off scores and stats here. This one could have gone either way - actually, no. That's a lie. Rafa was the one who came through when it counted, therefore he deserves it. Tennis really isn't about how many points you win, it's about when you win them. It is totally possible for a player to win more points but then lose the match - think of the Dubai final in 2006! There was only one point separating Rafa and the Djoker at the end of the first set - 50 points to 49 - but it was Rafa who won that point when it counted.

*

I am aware that my inner Fedfan should be horrified at the notion of Rafa winning a grass court tournament when he has, for the last two years, been Roger's biggest competition on grass. But I have the faith. There has been a lot of commentary around about how Roger's hold on Wimbledon is slipping and how he won't win it this year. Forgive me if I put my faith in the man who has won 59 straight matches on grass courts, including five Wimbledon titles, and is the greatest tennis player of all time. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

*

And I like to see Rafa doing well. Quite apart from anything else, I want to see him pulling away from Djokovic in the points race... although not enough to will him to a Wimbledon victory (not over Federer, anyway.) And it's not like Djokovic doesn't have points to defend at Wimbledon. He made the semis last year. And grass court tennis is the most cutthroat of all the surfaces. Lose a few points at the wrong time, and the set is gone. And it only takes three sets to win a match. This is part of what makes Federer's grass court achievement so marvellous.

*

Roger was never going to not win that match against Kohlschreiber last night. He was in total control the whole time. He has gone the whole week without dropping a set, and, more impressively, without dropping his serve. This is the best possible week he could have hoped for after the Match We Do Not Speak Of. If a week this brilliant will not shut critics up, then I don't know what will.

*

Of course, speaking as a baby amateur critic myself, there is very little that can change you once you form an opinion... it is possible (like my changing attitude to Rafa) but not likely... I can't ever see myself changing my viewpoint on Djokovic. Not unless he like, attains world peace or something. And even then, I'll probably think he stole the idea off Federer.

*

So Mr Sunday and his matador apprentice both proved why they are the best players in the world this week. Both backed it up from the Match We Do Not Speak Of, and both thoroughly deserved their wins. I have a feeling that the tennis this coming week will not be half so interesting... neither Rafa nor Roger is playing, but as we know, that has never stopped me talking about them. Bring on Wimbledon! Where, I believe, we will once more see a match between the Messrs Sunday... with the Master coming out on top this time!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Artois Championships (Queen's Club, London)

*

Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic, 7-6 (8-6) 7-5

*

*

Gerry Weber Open (Halle)

*

Roger Federer def. Philipp Kohlschreiber, 6-3 6-4

*

*

Orange Warsaw Open (Warsaw)

*

Nikolay Davydenko def. Tommy Robredo, 6-3 6-3

*

*

DFS Classic (Birmingham)

*

Kateryna Bondarenko def. Yanina Wickmayer, 7-6 (9-7) 3-6 7-6 (7-4)

*

*

Campeonatos Internacionales de Tenis Femenino de Espana (Barcelona)

*

Maria Kirilenko def. Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez, 6-0 6-2

*

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

David Ferrer def. Jesse Huta Galung, 6-2 6-3

Steve Darcis def. Florent Serra, 7-5 6-3

Mario Ancic def. Ivo Minar, 6-1 7-6 (7-0)

Rainer Schuettler def. Michael Berrer, 6-7 (4-7) 6-4 6-4

Igor Andreev def. Grigor Dimitrov, 6-1 6-3

Jurgen Melzer def. Victor Hanescu, 6-7 (11-13) 6-2 6-4

*

Camille Pin def. Elena Vesnina, 6-2 6-3

Saturday Night's All Right For Fighting

The top three men in the world all played last night - Federer in Halle, Nadal and Djokovic in Queen's. All three won. All three did it in straight sets. I feel like I should be going somewhere with some sort of comparison between the three of them, but as I haven't seen the matches, I can't really do that, can I?

*

So I wrote myself into a bit of a hole there. Let's start again.

*

Halle, Germany. Federer roared past Nicolas Kiefer, 6-1 6-4. I was able to see a few points - just a few - on a highlights reel, and from those few points, I'm calling it. My boy is back in town. That forehand down the line he hit from about ninety four kilometres out of court... (the score was 4-1 Federer in the first set, Kiefer serving)... that was, to quote some commentators, a 'sick shot.' That's the kind of god tennis that got Federer where he is today - the sublime movement, the total control, the absolute knowledge of court positioning... it's incredible.

*

Whenever I think of Nicolas Kiefer, there are two moments in particular that always spring to mind. One is that rally against Sebastien Grosjean in Australia where he threw his racquet during (I think) a diving volley at the net, which completely put Spaz off, which meant Kiwi won the point, even though it was horrendously unfair. I hesitate to say that Kiefer did it on purpose, but it would have been good sportsmanship to concede the point, at least. With Kiwi off the circuit for a year, I haven't seen him play enough to form a well-rounded opinion of him, but this didn't exactly canonise him in Jodi's Hall of Tennis Saints.

*

My second Kiwi memory is from that same tournament - Australian Open 2006, one of my favourite tournaments ever. The semi final, Federer versus Kiefer. Federer hits a first serve, misses. He sits a second serve. It's a kick serve ace. It has so much pop on it that it skids into about Row H. It has widely been recognised as the best second serve of all time. Kiwi had this great bemused look on his face. I laughed mightily.

*

Federer might not have hit the best second serve of all time in his match against Kiefer today, but he did serve well. Actually, his service has been rock solid all week - he hasn't been broken once. And that isn't for lack of opportunity. Both Baghdatis and Kiefer have had him at 0-40 down. He's fought back to deuce. Don't quote me on this, but I think both Baghdatis and Kiefer had ad in during those deuce games. Federer has saved every break point against him. And that is pretty swell.

*

The French Open final is in the past. Federer has said that in his pressers, and we can see that it is totally true. Federer might not have played one of the Nadals of the world on grass yet, but this is a different player than the one that stepped out onto Philippe Chatrier on Sunday. This is Roger Federer, who has won Wimbledon five times. This is the king.

*

Rafa has also been acquitting himself well over in Queen's - not as well as Roger, perhaps, but considering Rafa is the King of Clay and Roger is the King of Grass, the expectations are not quite the same. I know a lot of Federer fans have been praying for him to lose this week in Queen's, but I like to see Rafa doing well. If there is one tennis player in the world who has managed to make me totally change my opinion of him, it is Rafa. He had a very handy win against Andy Roddick. Roddick is an excellent grasscourt player, but I'm beginning to think that the day of Roddick might be beginning to pass. Either that, or that injury is still bugging him. Or he's suffering lack of match play... actually, that is a very credible explanation. He had a bye in the first round, then Fish retired against him after a set, and then Murray didn't even walk onto the court. Not the best Wimbledon preparation that Roddick could have hoped for.

*

I feel a bit sorry for Andy, actually. Remember back in '03, when he was the next big thing? He and Federer were racing for the #1 spot. Juan Carlos Ferrero was hanging about then as well, and he had a bit of the mystique that Roger and Rafa have now. Federer won Wimbledon and the Masters Cup, but Roddick won the US Open, and he finished the year #1. But then on February 2, 2004, after winning the Australian Open, Roger Federer became #1, and he has held that ranking every week since.

*

Who ever would have thought that that US Open would be the only Slam Roddick would ever win? He's been to the final of a couple more - Wimbledon '04 and '05, and the US Open in '06 - but he has fallen to same man in all three of those finals. Roddick made a charge to be re-recognised at the beginning of '07. He played Federer in the semis of the Australian, and everyone thought it would be this huge barnburning popcorn match. It was a popcorn match (for me!), but in a different way. Federer destroyed Roddick. He put him down like a dog.

*

It isn't that Roddick has been playing badly over these last few years. He is still an excellent player, and he has held his spot in the top ten pretty solidly. It's just that everyone else is better. What kind of career might Roddick have had if he had not existed at the same time as Federer? I don't think Nadal and Djokovic as players have had particularly large impacts on his career - certainly not the way Federer has - but their results have relegated Roddick to being #4, #5, #6, #7.

*

A lot of people assume I don't for some reason, but I actually quite like Andy Roddick. I think he has a great attitude. He's very funny, he respects Federer (which gets you a lot of bonus points in my book!) and he has an excellent attitude. He can take a loss like a man and doesn't become arrogant when he wins. I feel sorry, for his sake, that he had to exist in such an era as this: the Federer era, the return of a golden age of tennis.

*

Looking at it from a Fedfan point of view, though, it is hard to be sorry. Federer's domination of Roddick (and, in particular, the Roddick serve) has been one of the hallmarks of his domination of the game. But I will always wonder: what would have Roddick been like without Federer?

*

How on earth did I get onto Roddick? Oh, that's right, Rafa. Rafa beat Roddick last night, and now he is in the final. And oh! how I will be cheering for him to win. Because he is playing the man who bumped off Lleyton Hewitt and Andy Murray as my least favourite tennis players of all time.

*

I can't remember the last time I cheered for David Nalbandian in a tennis match. I think it might be just before never. But I was cheering for him last night. We all know my feelings on Novak Djokovic.

*

Unfortunately, my cheering didn't work. Djokovic crushed Nalbandian. LameDave totally showed up. But let me put this question out there: if GoodDave had shown up and had gone up 6-1 in the first set and a break in the second, would Novak have suddenly discovered an injury? An ingrown hair on his left shin, maybe? An urge to sneeze? Or perhaps he might retire because this particular match was mussing up his hair.

*

Obviously, I exaggerate a little there, but my point still stands. If I asked that question about pretty much any other tennis player, it would be incredibly insulting. About Djokovic, it is perfectly valid. Think of Monte Carlo, the semi against Federer. Djokovic was fine, apart from the fact he was being beaten. So he retires.

*

Let us look at his career history of retirement. His ATP career is only a couple of years old. He has retired something like nine times. I can think of at least four off the top of my head - Roland Garros '06 (against Rafa), Wimbledon '07 (against Rafa), Umag '06 (against Wawrinka) and Monte Carlo this year. Now let us look at Federer's career history. He has been around a whole lot longer than Djokovic - his career is three or four times as long. And how many times has he retired?

*

Not once.

*

'Roger Federer does not retire,' Federer said once (possibly slightly paraphrased.) 'Otherwise he doesn't walk out on the court.' And he has stuck to it.

*

Think back to the Masters Cup in 2005 - the final, against David Nalbandian. Nalbandian won a five set thriller. Federer was basically playing on one leg, and yet he still went on, playing five hours, even staging an almost-comeback from 4-0 down in the fifth.

*

Now put Djokovic in that position. I think it is safe to say that Djokovic would never have even played the tournament.

*

And that is one of the things that is always going to separate these two. Even if Djokovic does become #1 in the future, he is never going to be the champion Federer is, not if he maintains this kind of attitude. To be fair, Federer's zero retirement thing is pretty unusual, and I'd have understood a few. But Djokovic is just out of hand. Guess what, Novak? You can't retire your way to #1.

*

Not that Djokovic retired last night, or this discussion has anything to do with Queen's... where Djokovic, unretiring, beat LameDave Nalbandian 6-1 6-0. He will face Rafa Nadal in the final. But his retiring complex is just one of the myriad aspects of his personality that I dislike.

*

I don't like Nalbandian very much either, of course... he of the monosyllabic press conferences. But I will say this for him: he provides many opportunities for amusing nicknames! Not only do we have GoodDave and LameDave, but there is also FatDave floating around. (Not that David is fat. I defy anyone to find a fat tennis player. But sometimes certain photographic angles can make him look that way.) Then there is always Dayveeeeed Nalbaaaaaaaandiaaaan... no other tennis player has a name it is so fun to stretch out! My personal favourite at the moment, courtesy of Drew Lilley's Roland Garros blog, is Headbandian... because he wears headbands.

*

Well, I think it's funny.

*

Two finals tonight. In Halle, Roger Federer vs Philipp Kohlschreiber... who I always find underwhelming. I am hoping tonight to find Federer overwhelming instead. And in Queen's, Rafael Nadal versus Novak Djokovic. #2 against #3.

*

I don't think it will come as any surprise to hear that I will be shouting 'Vamos Rafa!' and 'Hopp Roger!' at the top of my lungs!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Artois Championships (Queen's Club, London)

*

Rafael Nadal def. Andy Roddick, 7-5 6-4

Novak Djokovic def. David Nalbandian, 6-1 6-0

*

*

Gerry Weber Open (Halle)

*

Roger Federer def. Nicolas Kiefer, 6-1 6-4

Philipp Kohlschreiber def. James Blake, 6-3 7-5

*

*

Orange Warsaw Open (Warsaw)

*

Nikolay Davydenko def. Fabio Fognini, 6-2 6-3

Tommy Robredo def. Juan Monaco, 6-4 6-4

*

*

DFS Classic (Birmingham)

*

Kateryna Bondarenko def. Marina Erakovic, 6-3 6-2

Yanina Wickmayer def. Bethanie Mattek, 7-5 7-6 (7-2)

*

*

Campeonatos Internacionales de Tenis Femenino de Espana (Barcelona)

*

Maria Kirilenko def. Stephanie Cohen-Aloro, 7-5 6-3

Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez def. Nuria Llagostera Vives, 2-6 6-3 6-1

Smiley Happy Marcos

Like most Australians, I have some very fond memories of Marcos Baghdatis. If there is one tennis tournament I will remember till the day I die, it will be the Australian Open 2006, because that is when I went from being a follower of tennis to the insane true believer that I am now. For me, the tournament was all about Roger Federer (surprise, surprise): coming back from injury, he wasn't playing especially well, and yet he still found a way to win... and he cried at the end, which made me cry too... but I've written about this before (I think the post was called 'Why I Love Tennis', if I haven't gushed enough about Federer to put you off him for life.) But for the rest of Australia, the tournament was all about Marcos Baghdatis - and even for me, the tournament would not have been the same without him.

*

The first time I remember hearing about Marcos Baghdatis was in about the second round of that auspicious tournament. He was playing out on one of the back courts - Court 17, I think - and Channel 7 did one of their brief feature stories on it in their Australian Open news, because there were so many people out there cheering for Marcos. Melbourne has a massive Greek community and Marcos, who apparently has cousins among them, was their poster boy. It was a little unusual for a player who wasn't an Aussie to get such vociferous support - actually, I remember the Channel 7 newscaster yelling out 'Aussie Aussie Aussie! Oi Oi Oi!' in a vague pretence at competition and cringing, because it was just so awful. But it was a cute story. Cypriot player has many fans.

*

But no one expected the Cypriot player to do quite so well.

*

I remember sitting down to watch the round of sixteen Roddick/Baghdatis match thinking it was going to be a blowout. Federer had drawn someone hard in the round of sixteen - Tommy Haas - and I was wishing he could have faced someone like Marcos instead. (Rafa was out that tournament and back in those days, Roddick was the #3, so he was the second seed - and speaking of Roddick, people have pretty much retired him to the semis at Queen's. He's played about three sets of tennis in three matches - or 'matches,' as the case may be.) It was late in the afternoon. I'd just come back from work and I vividly remember standing at my stove in my little college room, watching it over my shoulder as I was cooking dinner. Props to the underdog, I remember thinking - maybe not exactly in those words, but something to that effect. He took a set off Roddick.

*

Marcos did win the first set, but got blown away by Roddick in the second - I think it was 6-1 or something like that. In my naivete, I thought that meant Roddick was going to get back on track. But no... Marcos took another set off Roddick. And then another. And that meant... oh, wait, the match.

*

Everyone was shocked. The Cypriot fans exploded. But Roddick was not especially in form, so, as upsets go, it could have been worse. So the little guy pulled an upset. These things happen.

*

But then he backed it up.

*

It took him five sets, but Marcos took out Ivan Ljubicic, who, unlike Roddick, was in form. Australia started to realise that this kid could be huge. But next up was David Nalbandian, and no one expected Marcos to win that one. Nalbandian was too good, too solid, too experienced.

*

And Marcos took him down. He came back from two sets to love down and took out David Nalbandian. (And may I just note that, pursuant to previous discussions about David Nalbandian, it was not LameDave that showed up that day.) And then he was in the final.

*

And Australia just got out of control.

*

For the past few years, the Australian Open has been the one that's had a random finalist. Hewitt/Safin back in 2005 was a pretty normal final as finals go, but since then we've had Baghdatis, Gonzalez and Tsonga. But there has been nowhere near the hype round Gonzalez and Tsonga that there has been round smiley happy Marcos. I don't know whether it's just because Marcos does have something resembling an Australian connection or whether it's just because he's so likeable. I like to think it's because he's so likeable. But Australia pretty much tried to adopt him.

*

Actually, they did try to adopt him - literally. There was all this 'oh no! Marcos Baghdatis's brilliant tennis career is going to be cut short by compulsory military service!' stuff, and I think it ended up with the premier of Victoria offering Baghdatis Australian citizenship. Marcos did the equivalent of backing slowly away from the crazy person with his hands in the air and saying no thanks. No one had thought to ask Marcos his opinion before they tried to solve his life.

*

And then, the final. I have such fond memories of this match, although I was on absolute tenterhooks throughout it. I shut myself away. I didn't want to be with anyone else while I watched it. Unfortunately, that was while I was a duty student at college and I happened to be on call that night - but luckily, no one called. I had been pulling for Marcos all through the quarters and the semis, but he very much took second place to Federer. I never cried over a Marcos match. I wept over Federer's.

*

(Yes, I am lame.)

*

Marcos took the first set. Federer looked shaky. Marcos went up a break in the second. Australia cheered, I wept. But then Federer broke back, and broke again, and then the third and fourth sets were a showcase of Roger Federer God Tennis. Marcos didn't have a shot.

*

I will always remember the presentation of the Australian Open 2006. Mostly I will remember it because Federer cried, and I cried too (again, see 'Why I Love Tennis') but I remember Marcos as well. Arguably, that was a match of the two best smiles in the tennis universe. And it was just lovely.

*

Why the Marcos-reminiscing, you ask? Well, last night in Halle, there was a rematch of that Australian Open final. It was a quarter final this time, on grass, and only best of three, but those two lovely, smiley men faced off again.

*

Federer won. He usually does. The Australian Open 2006 has taught us this. And Marcos hasn't been playing his best of late. But whenever I see these two men playing, I am reminded of that immortal final - of the great champion that captured my heart, and the smiling Cypriot that captured the nation's.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Artois Championships (Queen's Club, London)

*

Rafael Nadal def. Ivo Karlovic, 6-7 (5-7) 7-6 (7-5) 7-6 (7-4)

David Nalbandian def. Richard Gasquet, 6-4 3-6 7-6 (7-3)

Novak Djokovic def. Lleyton Hewitt, 6-2 6-2

Andy Roddick def. Andy Murray, walkover

*

*

Gerry Weber Open (Halle)

*

Roger Federer def. Marcos Baghdatis, 6-4 6-4

Nicolas Kiefer def. Michael Llodra, 4-0 retired

Philipp Kohlschreiber def. Robin Soderling, 6-4 7-6 (7-4)

James Blake def. Andreas Beck, 7-6 (7-4) 7-6 (7-5)

*

*

Orange Warsaw Open (Warsaw)

*

Nikolay Davydenko def. Evgeny Korolev, 6-4 6-2

Fabio Fognini def. Guillermo Canas, 7-5 7-5

Juan Monaco def. Marcel Granollers, 6-4 6-3

Tommy Robredo def. Oscar Hernandez, 4-6 6-2 6-2

*

*

DFS Classic (Birmingham)

*

Kateryna Bondarenko def. Petra Cetkovska, 7-6 (7-3) 6-2

Marina Erakovic def. Alona Bondarenko, 6-4 7-5

Yanina Wickmayer def. Melanie South, 6-4 6-3

Bethanie Mattek def. Nicole Vaidisova, 6-3 6-0

*

*

Campeanatos Internacionales de Tenis Femenino de Espana (Barcelona)

*

Nuria Llagostera Vives def. Sara Errani, 2-6 6-2 6-3

Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez def. Lucie Safarova, 6-2 4-1 retired

Stephanie Cohen-Aloro def. Ekaterina Ivanova, 6-2 6-1

Maria Kirilenko def. Edina Gallovits, 7-6 (7-3) 6-1