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.

That Feeling

That's it. I am officially giving up on what was once the Davydenko quarter of the draw. Every time I pick someone to come through to the semis, they lose. Kolya went. A-Rod went. And now Mathieu and Tursunov have both been scuttled. No matter what happens, there is going to be an unseeded player in the semi - either Cilic, Tipsarevic, Schuettler or Clement. Not names you expect to see in a Grand Slam semi final, eh? Cilic is the only other player I think I've mentioned in this quarter prior to the mass exodus, so I'm going to go with him as my tip. Of course, this means he will lose instantly now.

*

I would say that Rafa must be cheering, as this quarter is in the same half of the draw as his, but he has a few tough ones to get through before he gets there. That's the one quarter where the seeds have basically held true the whole way through. No matter what happens, Rafa is at least going to have a tough quarter final, provided he gets through his round of sixteen match. He's playing Mikhail Youzhny, who has been a bit of a boogeyman for him in the past. There was the quarters of the US Open two years ago, for one. There was the final of Chennai this year, where Youzhny won bagel, breadstick. And they met at this stage in Wimbledon last year, and it was a close fought five set affair. So this match is going to be very interesting, I think.

*

Not that I would bet against Rafa, or anything... though don't expect me to take my own advice later in this piece. He looked very impressive against Kiefer, who is definitely no slouch on grass. I was very impressed with his performance. He did very well indeed. Kiefer didn't give up, either - Rafa just accelerated away in those last two sets, even though he took that spectacular fall... that one was a doozy. So well done, Rafa. Tough times await, but I don't think anyone would be doubting his ability or his drive to reach the final. And who knows? There is always the chance that Youzhny will split his head open with his racket again... that was an amusing moment. Straight to the pool room.

*

The winner of the Nadal/Youzhny match will face the winner of Gasquet/Murray, and that is going to be seriously intriguing. Richou's coming off a truly terrible spell, but he played very nicely last night in taking out Gilles Simon, and he seems much happier on the grass than he did at s'Hertogenbosch last week. Murray was also very impressive against Haas, even though he dropped a set. He has the home crowd advantage, though I don't think that's as a big of a motivation thing for him as it was for Henman, back in the day. Murray has never been beyond the fourth round of a Slam, though - actually, it will be interesting to see whose hands that plays into. Gasquet is hardly King of the Slams, but he has gone deeper, with that semi and I think maybe a quarter here and there, and so he has a modicum of experience. But Murray hasn't, and maybe so he has the motivation.

*

Of all the fourth round match ups, the Gasquet/Murray clash is the hardest one to call. They're ranked pretty closely - not much separates them at all. They're both a bit injury prone - you could have a great drinking game with that match! A shot every time someone calls the trainer. Both are capable of beautiful tennis. (Did anyone else see that incredible passing shot of Murray's in the first set last night? The one where he was outside the doubles alley and flicked it down the line back into court? It was sweet.) And Andy and Richou even look the same. So it's incredibly difficult to call.

*

I'm going to go with Murray, but just barely. I think he might want it a tiny bit more, and I think he's in slightly better form. And also I have a tiny hunch. But I am totally prepared to be wrong on this one.

*

I am going to be slightly controversial, however, and call a Youzhny victory over Rafa. I would not be surprised AT ALL if I am wrong. In fact, I don't think I want to be right. This is based on a feeling, and nothing more. But there is clearly something about Youzhny's game that troubles Rafa. I haven't watched Youzhny play enough to tell you what it is. But there's something, something that is not nothing. I think the longer the match goes, the more it is going to favour Rafa, however, so if Mikhail is going to win, it will necessitate him getting off to a good start. Intellectually, all the signs do point to Rafa to win. Emotionally, I want Rafa to win, even though he is perceived as such a threat to my beloved Roger Federer. But I just have this FEELING...

*

And who can tell what is going to happen in Wimbledon this year? If Rafa gets through Youzhny, he will face a very tough match in the quarters, no matter who gets through. If he gets to the semi, I don't think there's too much doubt of him making the final... but look at what happened with Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. That quarter in particular is maybe the most interesting section of the draw, because there are so many possiblities.

*

So, the quarter finals. Yesterday I picked Federer/Ancic and Safin/Baghdatis. From the bottom half, I'm going to say Youzhny/Murray (or Nadal/Gasquet, or Nadal/Murray, or Youzhny/Gasquet... you can't make me choose!) and Tipsarevic/Cilic. I don't really have too much faith in any of my picks in the bottom half, but we'll see, we'll see.

*

The women's draw is a very interesting place to hang out as well. I'd like to send a fond farewell to Dinara Safina, who played very bravely but eventually went out against Shahar Peer. I guess the Safin/Safina semi final dream is not to be. Dinara is still about in the doubles though, so it's not all over for her by any means. She was probably the biggest seed to fall yesterday, though it wasn't like a massive shock upset or anything - not like Ivanovic. But, oh golly oh gosh, etc, etc, Jelena Jankovic came close. Sometimes watching her play makes me cringe, because she's injured ALL THE TIME. Seriously, I don't think I've ever seen a match in which she hasn't played under some injury cloud. And with her knee, I don't like her chances. With Ivanovic gone, I bet she likes her chances, but one again I find myself saying that I just have this feeling...

*

Yesterday I picked Szavay/Vaidisova and Radwanska/Serena Williams as my top half quarters. In the bottom half, I'm going to pick Dementieva/Petrova - Dementieva will be too strong for Peer, I feel, and Petrova has just been playing so marvellously I don't think she'll have much problem with the Sharapova-slaying tuxedo-hating Alla Kudryavtseva. And then I'm going to pick Venus Williams/Tanasugarn. That's right, Jodi's calling another upset. Tanasugarn is a smart woman and she is going to send Jankovic sprawling all over the court if she senses even a hint of weakness in that knee. And who knows what kind of upset Alisa Kleybanova could pull? I don't see her getting past Venus, but I don't think even Venus can outhit this young woman.

*

And I'm keeping my eye on the juniors as well, and I'd like to just mention two young Aussies that did well. Bernard Tomic, of course, the top seed, won his match convincingly, but what was perhaps more impressive was the effort of Isabella Holland, winning a three set marathon match. Maybe there is some hope for Australian tennis after all...

*

*

Wimbledon Results - Day #6

*

Men's Draw

*

Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Kiefer, 7-6 (7-3) 6-2 6-3

Andy Murray def. Tommy Haas, 6-4 6-7 (4-7) 6-3 6-2

Richard Gasquet def. Gilles Simon, 6-3 6-3 6-7 (3-7) 6-3

Janko Tipsarevic def. Dmitry Tursunov, 7-6 (7-1) 7-6 (7-3) 6-3

Mihail Youzhny def. Radek Stepanek, 7-5 6-7 (5-7) 6-4 6-7 (4-7) 6-3

Rainer Schuettler def. Guillermo Garcia-Lopez, 6-2 6-3 6-4

Marin Cilic def. Paul-Henri Mathieu, 6-7 (5-7) 6-3 6-4 7-6 (8-6)

Arnaud Clement def. Jurgen Melzer, 4-6 6-3 6-4 6-4

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Jelena Jankovic def. Caroline Wozniacki, 2-6 6-4 6-2

Venus Williams def. Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez, 6-1 7-5

Elena Dementieva def. Gisela Dulko, 7-6 (7-2) 7-5

Nadia Petrova def. Victoria Azarenka, 7-6 (13-11) 7-6 (7-4)

Shahar Peer def. Dinara Safina, 5-7 7-6 (7-4) 8-6

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Marina Erakovic, 4-6 6-4 6-4

Alla Kudryavtseva def. Shuai Peng, 6-3 1-6 6-4

Alisa Kleybanova def. Ai Sugiyama, 6-4 6-4

The Italian Job

Well, well, well. I think I can safely say that Wimbledon this year is the most unusual Grand Slam we've seen in quite a while. My 'dead cert' for the women's semi finals, Ana Ivanovic, has gone crashing out to Jie Zheng, who is more famous for being a doubles player than anything else. And it wasn't a very dignified loss, either. Ivanovic was just never in it. It was Sharapova mk 2. And once again I find myself saying that this quarter of the draw is now wide open.
*
Who is going to be my new semis tip? Hmmm... if we went with seeds, it would be Chakvetadze, but she hasn't been very impressive this year. I'm going to go with Agnes Szavay, the young Hungarian. She's got a great game, and it's about time she made a run for the semis. In the second quarter, the Kuznetsova quarter, there are a couple of possiblities. Mattek aside - even though she did just knock out last year's finalist Marion Bartoli - any player there stands a chance of getting to the semi.
*
But first, let me do my quarter final picks for the top half of the women's draw. I think we'll see Szavay vs Vaidisova (depending on how well Vaidisova plays - neither she nor Chakvetadze have been impressive of late, so that could potentially be a fourth round match of very poor quality.) And even though Kuznetsova has looked pretty good this tournament, I'm going to pick Agnieszka Radwanska in that one to come up against Serena Williams.
*
One final word on women's tennis. I know that everyone is talking about Venus and Serena, but Jelena Jankovic must really, really fancy her chances now.
*
Right. Men's tennis. Back to the comfort zone. I was very pleased with the way this all panned out. Federer was lethal over Gicquel, which is just the way I like it. If one counts out the very first game of the match, where he was broken, this was an almost perfect third round match. He had Gicquel in trouble on serve nearly every single game. He won convincingly in straight sets - but not SO convincingly that one could accuse him of peaking too early. He was just right. The headline on the Wimbledon website said 'Federer romps to easy victory.' This was the final paragraph:
*
'It was Federer's 38th consecutive win at Wimbledon and one so comfortably achieved on his favourite court with nine aces, 34 outright winners and a first serve percentage of 72 that he might have been wearing carpet slippers. John McEnroe described the sight as "a master at work".'
*
That brought a smile to my face. I wish I could have seen more of the match - of course, since it was on at the same time as the Hewitt match, most of it wasn't broadcast on Australian television.
*
This is something I find endlessly annoying, but I doubt it will ever change. Hewitt will now come up against Federer in the next round, though, so at least I can be pretty much guaranteed that one will be shown! This might prove to be Federer's toughest test yet, but I don't think there is any cause to be fearful. Federer has owned Lleyton for the last few years, and I don't see much sign of that changing.
*
To Lleyton's credit, he played an excellent match against Bolelli today. It was very clean tennis from him - though I'm not sure how much of that was due to him hitting the lines versus Bolelli making errors before Hewitt had the chance to. I'm not particularly enamoured of Hewitt, but one thing I do like about him is that he never tanks a game. He has a real point by point mentality, and I think that's very important in tennis. You rarely see Hewitt give up in a tennis match, even if he's pretty much down and out (not that he was today!) and that's pretty admirable.
*
He also has a pretty decent tennis IQ, which is something I realised watching his match today. He knows how to use the topspin lob or the ball looping high over the net to give himself time to reset himself if he's out of court. He hit some really nice winners today, forehand and backhand, crosscourt and down the line. Bolelli was giving him a lot of opportunities, to be fair, but Hewitt wasn't missing. He pretty much dismantled Bolelli - and I haven't seen Hewitt dismantle an opponent in quite some time. So that was nice for him... but I think we're going to see the reverse of it on Monday! Hewitt will be the one dismantled by the mighty Federer Express.
*
Going back to Bolelli, I was not very impressed with him at all. I don't know whether it just wasn't his day or whatever, but his game seemed to be composed of flair and not much else. His first serve was pretty sweet... when he got it in. He hit some outrageous winners... when they went in. And mostly, they weren't. Having flair is all very well - look at Federer, King of Flair! - but it needs to be consistent. And there ought to be times when there is at least a Plan B, an ability to be able to resort to percentage play. I'm all for redlining your game, but it did nothing for Bolelli. Hewitt played very well, and I don't want to take that away from him, but Bolelli did nothing for me.
*
And has anyone else noticed that he kind of looks like Andy Roddick in a wig? Like, eerily so from some angles? Maybe it's just me. One thing I did like about him was his shirt. It had piping round the shoulders in Italian colours. I liked that. That one gets a Jodi Wimbledon Fashion Endorsement (tm), along with Roger's cardigan and Serena's trenchcoat. MaSha's tuxedo gets NO endorsement - though I have to say that the worst crime against fashion this week has come from Ernests Gulbis. Impressive as his game was against Nadal was, someone needs to tell Swanboy that black underpants and white shorts is never attractive.
*
One person who looks good in whatever he wears is Marat Safin, and excuse while I scream out DAVAI MARAT! Three matches in a row for the first time this year - that's something to warm the cockles of your heart (and the sub-cockle regions.) Seppi played well, too - the second set is testament to that - but Safin rose to the occasion and outplayed him. It was simply splendid. There were some spectacular Marat-cool-losing moments, like that forehand shot that went rattling down the stairs in the stadium! - but Marat has got his head in the game. (Clearly he's been watching that basketball scene in High School Musical...) Marat is back - and what a time to pick for it! And he has got to pick up some serious rankings points for getting to the round of sixteen - how well did he do in Wimbledon last year? Let me check... oh. Of course. Third round, lost to Federer. Okay, so maybe not THAT many rankings points (yet) but that's still something. I'd dearly love to see Maratski up towards the top of his game.
*
It's just so wonderful to see him playing WELL again. Seppi, unlike his compatriot Bolelli, really put up a fight. He's ranked higher than Safin - he's seeded here - but Marat always looked like the better played. C'mon, Marat. Davai. Wouldn't it be awesome to see Marat seeded at the US Open, which I think is his favourite Slam?
*
And I'd just like to send out a farewell to yet another one of the top eight seeds who went out today - though he went down fighting, unlike Djokovic, Kolya, Roddick and LameDave before him. Vale Ferru. You fought bravely.
*
And so my quarter final picks for the top half of the draw run thusly: Federer vs. Ancic. Hewitt will be no match for the Mighty Fed (tm), and while Verdasco reached the final at Nottingham and clearly has some game on grass, I wouldn't bet against Super Mario. And then Safin vs. Baghdatis. Feliciano Lopez is another one of those Spaniards with the good grass game, but I wouldn't bet against Marcos, and though I really like Stan Wawrinka a lot, I think Marat's on a roll now...
*
*
Wimbledon Results - Day #5
*
Men's Draw
*
Roger Federer def. Marc Gicquel, 6-3 6-3 6-1
Marat Safin def. Andreas Seppi, 7-6 (7-5) 3-6 6-6 (7-3) 6-4
Mario Ancic def. David Ferrer, 6-4 6-4 6-7 (5-7) 7-6 (7-3)
Lleyton Hewitt def. Simone Bolelli, 6-1 6-3 7-6 (7-2)
Fernando Verdasco def. Tomas Berdych, 6-4 6-4 6-0
Marcos Baghdatis def. Simon Stadler, 7-6 (7-2) 6-4 6-2
Stanislas Wawrinka def. Mischa Zverev, 7-5 6-1 retired
Feliciano Lopez def. Bobby Reynolds, 6-4 7-5 4-6 6-4
*
*
Women's Draw
*
Serena Williams def. Amelie Mauresmo, 7-6 (7-5) 6-1
Jie Zheng def. Ana Ivanovic, 6-1 6-4
Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Barbara Zahlavova Strycova, 6-2 6-4
Agnieszka Radwanska def. Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova, 6-3 6-2
Anna Chakvetadze def. Evgeniya Rodina, 6-4 6-3
Bethanie Mattek def. Marion Bartoli, 6-4 6-1
Agnes Szavay def. Anabel Medina Garrigues, 7-6 (7-5) 2-6 6-2
Nicole Vaidisova def. Casey Dellacqua, 6-2 6-4

Swan Lake

Apparently 'Gulbis' means 'swan' in Latvian. I don't think he looks anything like a swan, nor is his game especially swanlike, but I thought it was amusing anyway.
*
Swanlike or not, win or lose, I was very impressed with the way young Ernests played. A while ago, I gave him a couple of years before he became really good. I'm revising that now to a year. Of all the young players I've ever discussed on this blog, I have to say that he is the one with the most promise. If he is not top ten, or at least top twenty within a year, I will eat an item of my own clothing.
*
All he needs is a tiny bit more mental stability. He's a little bit like Robin Haase in that sometimes he panics on the forehand side and goes for too much, though he does it far less often than Haase does. The first set, where he beat Nadal 7-5, was impeccable. He has a high-risk, red line game, an all or nothing, winner or error style. All he has to do is tighten up just a tiny bit. Just a few more winners than errors, and Rafa could easily have lost that third set, and then I think the match could have had a whole different complexion.
*
There's not much of Gulbis - he's 6'3" but only 76kg, which really isn't that much - but hot damn, that kid is strong. He's this tall, gawky nineteen year old, and yet he's hitting the ball like Roddick. I have never, ever seen anyone beat Nadal so consistently with sheer pace. It was insane. And he was hitting the lines a LOT, especially in that first set. He serves out of a tree. And - again, especially in the first set - he was allowing Rafa no rhythm. Consistently, he was pinning him three, four, five metres behind the baseline, just by the heaviness of his groundstrokes.
*
He's an out and out baseliner, yet what I really liked was that he was willing to come to the net. He's not the best volleyer, but he's not bad, and he can definitely improve easily with a little more experience and maturity. He served and volleyed a few times, which I really liked. And he had some excellent clutch-serving - that is, being down in a service game, and coming up with the big first serve ace or unreturnable to get himself out of it.
*
To be honest, I don't know if we've seen a talent this big since the rise of Richard 'Baby Fed' Gasquet. And I think this kid might be better than Richou, to tell the truth. Already, he seems to have better mental stability than Richou. After Nadal won the second set, it would have been easy for Gulbis to fall off in the third, but he didn't - and if a couple more of those errors had been winners, then he could have easily taken a two sets to one lead. And then I don't know if I would have fancied Rafa's chances in getting out of it.
*
Rafa didn't play his best, but I think a lot of that might be because Gulbis didn't let him. Rafa likes to dig in, extend the point, and often he wins points through his opponents making a mistake (though he does have his fair share of winners as well.) Especially in the first set, Gulbis was shortening the points - coming in to the net, which was just awesome. Even though he lost, I was mightily, mightily impressed with Ernests Gulbis. He will be seeded here next year, mark my words.
*
Not so with Andy Roddick. Nalbandian, Davydenko, Djokovic and now Roddick. The Federer quarter and the Nadal quarter both have the top two seeds intact, but the Djokovic and Davydenko quarters are now virtually empty. Janko Tipsarevic is a great player, sure, but I didn't think he was going to take out Roddick - not on grass. Maybe the loss of Djokovic, which made him the hope of Serbia, gave him some heart. Who knows? But whatever happened, that quarter, like the Djokovic quarter, is now wide, WIDE open.
*
Baghdatis was my pick for semi finalist in that second quarter. In the third quarter, I'm going to to tip Dmitry Tursunov, providing he keeps his head in the game. He's always been consistent at Wimbledon - two third rounds, two fourth rounds, I think - and it's sort of his turn to go deeper. I think I previously picked Mathieu, but Tursunov has a better grass game in my opinion. Cilic is another outside possibility. And who knows? Maybe Arnaud 'le cle' Clement can make a splash. It's an open quarter. It's anyone's game.
*
This has been a seriously weird second round. In the women's game too - bye bye MaSha! Alla Kudryavtseva played brilliantly, but Sharapova played DREADFULLY. Seriously, she was awful. Cringeworthy. Yuri'll be a-scolding her, mark my words. With Sharapova gone, there is a HUGE chance for Dinara Safina. Hell, there was a huge chance for her when Sharapova was still there. Wouldn't it be nice if Safin and Safina could both reach the semis? I'd like it!
*
Third round action tonight. Here's cheering for Federer and Safin!
*
*
Wimbledon Results - Day #4
*
Rafael Nadal def. Ernests Gulbis, 5-7 6-2 7-6 (7-2) 6-3
Janko Tipsarevic def. Andy Roddick, 6-7 (5-7) 7-5 6-4 7-6 (7-4)
Andy Murray def. Xavier Malisse, 6-4 6-2 6-2
Dmitry Tursunov def. Chris Eaton, 7-6 (7-2) 6-2 6-4
Richard Gasquet def. Sebastien Grosjean, 6-2 6-2 retired
Mikhail Youzhny def. Stefano Galvani, 4-6 6-4 6-3 3-6 6-3
Rainer Schuettler def. James Blake, 6-2 6-7 (8-10) 4-6 6-4 6-4
Nicolas Kiefer def. Martin Vassallo Arguello, 6-0 6-3 6-1
Tommy Haas def. Tommy Robredo, 6-4 6-4 6-3
Marin Cilic def. Jarkko Nieminen, 6-4 3-6 6-3 6-7 (6-8) 7-5
Jurgen Melzer def. Jesse Levine, 4-6 6-2 3-6 6-4 6-1
Guillermo Garcia-Lopez def. Nicolas Almagro, 6-3 3-6 5-7 6-1 6-2
Arnaud Clement def. Benjamin Becker, 7-6 (9-7) 7-6 (7-3)

Paul-Henri Mathieu def. Jeremy Chardy, 6-3 7-5 7-6 (7-1)

Radek Stepanek def. Viktor Troicki, 6-7 (1-7) 6-7 (3-7) 6-3 6-1 6-2

Gilles Simon def. Agustin Calleri, 5-7 6-2 6-3 6-4

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Alla Kudryavtseva def. Maria Sharapova, 6-2 6-4

Venus Williams def. Anne Keothavong, 7-5 6-2

Dinara Safina def. Hsieh Su-wei, 6-3 6-2

Jelena Jankovic def. Carla Suarez Navarro, 6-1 6-3

Gisela Dulko def. Lindsay Davenport, walkover

Alisa Kleybanova def. Daniela Hantuchova, 6-3 4-6 6-1

Shahar Peer def. Emilie Loit, 6-3 6-4

Victoria Azarenka def. Sorana Cirstea,6-1 6-3

Nadia Petrova def. Mara Santangelo, 6-4 7-5

Marina Erakovic def. Julia Goerges, 6-2 7-6 (7-5)

Elena Dementieva def. Timea Bacsinszky, 4-6 6-3 6-3

Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez def. Sania Mirza, 6-0 4-6 9-7

Ai Sugiyama def. Flavia Pennetta, 7-6 (7-5) 2-6 6-2

Caroline Wozniacki def. Aleksandara Wozniak, 6-1 6-1

Shuai Peng def. Sybille Bammer, 7-6 (9-7) 4-6 6-3

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Vera Zvonareva, 7-6 (12-10) 4-6 6-3

Happy Being A Hippo

Once upon a time, in a faraway land, Marat Safin was asked whether he fought with himself on court. His reply?

*

'I'm not fighting with myself. Oh, my God. That's how I am. You know, the story of the hippo? The hippo comes to the monkey and said, listen, I'm not a hippo. So, he paint himself like a zebra. He said but he's still a hippo. He said but look at you, you're painted like a zebra but you are a hippo. So then he goes, you know, like I want be a little parrot. So, he put the colours on him and he comes to the monkey and said but, sorry, you are a hippo. So, in the end, you know, he comes and said I'm happy to be a hippo. This is who I am. So, I have to be who I am and he's happy being a hippo.'

*

Well, I, for one, am very glad that Marat is happy being a hippo - because I have never loved him so much in my life. Day #3 at Wimbledon was pretty much my ideal day of tennis. I could not have asked for better results. An impressive yet comfortable straight sets win for Federer over a potentially tricky opponent, and an absolute drubbing of Novak Djokovic by Safin the Hippo. It was... ah, it was beautiful.

*

Who knew Maratski still had that kind of tennis on tap? Djokovic did not play his best, certainly, but I would certainly be happy to put money on the fact that Safin would have won even if he had. Marat has been so scratchy lately - he said himself in his post match presser he can't really remember the last time he won two matches in a row - that although I was hoping for it desperately, I didn't really expect much of him. But hey, hey, hey. There's some tennis in the Safinator yet.

*

Seriously, some of the tennis he played was vintage stuff. Some of the shots were reminiscent of the semi final he played against Federer at the Australian in 2005, which I think is easily the highest quality tennis match that has been played in the last twenty years, if not the whole Open Era. Safin's game has always been unusual in that it is based around a sweet backhand rather than a heavy forehand, and he hit some beautiful shots off his favourite wing in this match. For example, take that one he hit to go up 15-40 in the last game of the match, that sick, SICK backhand down the line (aka 'the Lily O'Dwyer.') That one drew a 'phwoah!' (spelled phonetically) from me - and I've seen so much tennis in my time that there's not much that does that any more. The player that hit that looked like the Safin of yore. It was great.

*

Safin will play Seppi next, and if plays like this, there is no doubt he can win. Of course, with Marat, playing like that is never a certainty... but he was very impressive against Fognini in the first round and now against Djokovic here. C'mon, Marat. Go for three in a row! Davai!

*

Safin conducted his press conference in his usual laconic smile - Marat is, as he as always been, still a hippo. The strawberries are still too expensive, he says. There is still not enough dessert. He would have gone to Dinara's final in Paris, but she didn't send him the charter. And he didn't let Djokovic get away with much, and I respect that. Djokovic said this in his presser, when asked whether this match was a case of him playing badly or Marat playing well:

*

'It was mostly me.'

*

And sure, Djokovic did not have his best day. His double faults in particular hurt him badly. But how dare he try and take the credit away from Safin? Marat had this to say, when told that Novak had said that he had played badly as opposed to Marat playing well:

*

'Yeah, well, he's a nice guy, a great answerer and great for you guys. I think he scored some points over there by saying that, yeah, he played well and everything. But he had small chances. He didn't take them. Whenever I had a chance I went for it, and I just played, like I said, solid, took my chances.'

*

Just to clarify, because I think the way I've phrased things might be a little unfair to Djokovic. He did say that Safin played well. He didn't say that he didn't. But he did say that the result came about because he played badly.

*

Hmph.

*

Compare this to the guy that says, and says repeatedly, that you can't take anything away from the other guy, because he was trying his best. Guess who.

*

Federer, of course, and while we're on the subject, his win against Soderling was very impressive. He wasn't in top gear, nor was he playing God Tennis (tm), but then again, he didn't to. He did exactly what he had to, and he dismantled Soderling's game with ruthless efficiency. Soderling had a brief rebellion in the third set when he broke the Federer serve after a lackadaisical game from Roger, but Roger wasn't having any of that. I'm convinced that he waited till he was set point down to launch his charge just to see if he could. You know, like chess players that let themselves get into bad situations just to see if they can get out of it.

*

And so it was very very good. Remember Soderling's match last year? The one against Rafa that started on the middle Saturday and didn't end till the second Wednesday, by the end of which the two guys thoroughly hated each other (and still do, by all reports.) That match went five days. Today? Federer dismissed him in two hours. Soderling has a good game on grass so it's a shame for him that he had to be drawn so close to the Maestro. But these things happen. Just like it happens that Safin got drawn so close to Djokovic.

*

Federer didn't let Djokovic get away with much in his presser either. He said this (translated from Swiss German):

*

'If Novak says he’s tired then it’s most likely that the pressure is getting to him – I’ve played as much as he has recently. He’s automatically going to be under increased pressure, but when you lose, you just have to accept it. I wasn’t as consistent as he was when I was 20, 21 – he’s been incredible. And somehow you expect him to lose early at some point, but all credit to him for being so consistent in Grand Slams up until now.'

*

Ah, Roger. Polite yet pointed all at the same time. A genius on and off the court.

*

There were some lovely articles on the Wimbledon website today that I would thoroughly recommend - Drew Lilley (of blog fame) wrote one about Federer's fluency on and off the court, discussing how great Roger is for conducting his press conferences in about ninety different languages; and a lovely match report from Alix Ramsey. Both seemed to me to be a little more true than some of the other stuff the media has been saying. Alix Ramsey wrote an article after the Hrbaty match the other day that directly addressed this media phenomenon of the vulnerable Federer, and it finished with this brilliant sentence:

*

'Yes, there must be a lot of men sitting nervously in the locker room who would love to be as vulnerable right now as Roger Federer.'

*

Perfection.

*

The loss of Djokovic - and of LameDave Headbandian the round before - has really opened up that section of the draw, as they were the big seeds in that quarter. So now I have to pick a new semi finalist! Oh no! I am distraught! Feel my pain and agony!

*

(That was a joke, in case I haven't made my loathing of Djokovic clear enough.)

*

I don't think you can go past Marcos Baghdatis. Even with Djokovic and Headbandian still in the quarter, he was a legitimate threat, because his grass court game is very very excellent. I would put good money on him reaching the semis now, repeating his run from 2006. The only two players I can really see challenging him are Safin, if he keeps up this sudden regression to 2004-05, and Wawrinka, if Stan has a good day. Beyond that... let's just say I would be very, very surprised if anyone that is not one of these three reaches the semi.

*

So we're going to have TWO random semi finalists now... if random means someone that is not Federer, Nadal or Djokovic. It's not like A-Rod and the Bags, my picks for those spots, are rubbish players - it's just that tennis is such a dominated game at the moment. It'll be nice to see the two big boys, providing they get through, which I'm very sure they will, playing some different guys.

*

And I can't not say anything about that Ivanovic match, at the risk of totally forgetting women's tennis exists again. She was so, so lucky with that let cord. She's a nervy player traditionally, and I think the pressure might have got to her a bit. However, in the end, I think this kind of marathon match will be good for her. She knows she can dig it out at the end when it counts. So on the whole, I think the Dechy match will be a positive experience for her.

*

I don't like her tennis dress, though. Not a fan. It's better than Sharapova's little see through tuxedo ensemble, but it's still not good. I do like Serena's coat, though. I don't know if I'd wear it on a tennis court, but I like it. And I like Roger's cardie, too - not as much as the blazer of the past two years, but I guess there's only so many other things you can do!

*

Also on women's tennis - go Casey. The young Miss Dellacqua had a great win over Pauline Parmentier, and here's hoping she can back it up again against recently scratchy Nicole Vaidisova.

*

Well, I think that might be enough of a ramble from me for the day. To summarise: Federer good (very much so.) Djokovic bad (extraordinarily so.) Ivanovic lucky (ridiculously so.) Safin...

*

...hippo.

*

*

Wimbledon Results - Day #3

*

Men's Draw

*

Roger Federer def. Robin Soderling, 6-3 6-4 7-6 (7-3)

Marat Safin def. Novak Djokovic, 6-4 7-6 (7-3) 6-2

David Ferrer def. Igor Andreev, 3-6 6-3 6-4 6-2

Marcos Baghdatis def. Thomas Johansson, 6-4 6-4 6-4

Lleyton Hewitt def. Albert Montanes, 7-6 (7-4) 6-0 6-2

Tomas Berdych def. Victor Hanescu, 6-7 (5-7) 7-6 (8-6) 6-1 6-2

Mischa Zverev def. Juan Carlos Ferrero, 6-4 6-4 2-1 retired

Marc Gicquel def. Ilia Bozoljac, 4-6 5-7 7-6 (7-1) 7-6 (7-0) 6-3

Fernando Verdasco def. Olivier Rochus, 7-6(7-4) 6-7 (5-7) 6-1 6-1

Stanislas Wawrinka def. Juan Martin del Potro, 7-6 (7-5) 6-3 7-5

Mario Ancic def. Philipp Petzschner, 6-1 6-4 6-7 (1-7) 4-6 6-3

Andreas Seppi def. Florent Serra, 6-3 6-7 (4-7) 6-2 6-7 (5-7) 6-4

Simon Stadler def. Thomaz Bellucci, 3-6 6-3 6-1 6-7 (5-7) 8-6

Feliciano Lopez def. Roko Karanusic, 6-3 6-3 6-4

Simone Bolelli def. Fernando Gonzalez, 7-6 (10-8) 7-6 (9-7) 3-6 7-6 (7-4)

Bobby Reynolds def. Frank Dancevic, 4-6 7-6 (12-10) 6-4 6-4

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Kateryna Bondarenko, 6-2 6-3

Ana Ivanovic def. Nathalie Dechy, 6-7 (2-7) 7-6 (7-3) 10-8

Jie Zheng def. Elena Baltacha, 6-2 7-5

Anna Chakvetadze def. Edina Gallovits, 6-4 6-2

Serena Williams def. Urszula Radwanska, 6-4 6-4

Anabel Medina Garrigues def. Francesca Schiavone, 3-6 7-5 9-7

Nicole Vaidisova def. Samantha Stosur, 6-2 0-6 6-4

Agnieszka Radwanska def. Marta Domachowska, 6-1 6-3

Agnes Szavay def. Monica Niculescu, 5-7 7-5 6-2

Evgeniya Rodina def. Elena Vesnina, 6-1 7-6 (7-0)

Marion Bartoli def. Tatiana Perebiynis, 6-2 7-5

Amelie Mauresmo def. Virginia Ruano Pascual, 4-6 6-1 6-1

Bethanie Mattek def. Vera Dushevina, 7-6 (8-6) 6-4

Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova def. Li Na, 6-2 6-4

Elena Dementieva def. Maria Elena Camerin, 6-3 6-7 (7-9) 6-3

Casey Dellacqua def. Pauline Parmentier, 1-6 6-2 6-3

Barbora Zahlavova Strycova def. Alona Bondarenko, 6-3 3-0 retired

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