And Finally, In The 'Completely Stupid' Category...

It's Davis Cup week. Yawn. At least until Friday, there's going to be pretty much fat nothing to write about. Except the INEVITABLE GLORIOUS RUN of my main man Nicolas Mahut in Cherbourg (antijinx). He is the second seed in the singles (after Grigor Dimitrov) and the top seed in the doubles with Edouard Roger-Vasselin. And they just won their first round doubles match. So... yeah. Awesome.

But due to this very little 'actual tennis' thing I have to write about, I thought I would write about this. It's a study. Possibly one of the worst studies of all time. The formula it uses analyses and tallies up how many wins players had over other 'quality players', regardless of arena, and then churns out a Greatest of All Time.

The GOAT, according to this study of stupidness? Jimmy Connors.

We all know where I stand when it comes to GOATness. If one has to pick, I'm Team Federer forever. But even if this survey had come out and said that yes, Federer is the greatest of all time, their methodology is clearly more than a little specious. Did you know that Federer has only, according to this, won 39 quality matches in his career? So that's eight victories over Rafa, thirteen over Djokovic, six over Murray, eight over Agassi... that's 35. Oh! one over Sampras. Make that 36. Chuck in a few others, and hey presto! Roger Federer has never won anything else ever.

And that's not even starting on the Rafa stats. He's only won 21 matches of quality. Because that's how you win five Roland Garros titles, bitches.

Surely when results like this came out of the study - Connors at #1, followed by Lendl and McEnroe - they should have realised it was a bit, how shall we say it... not very good? I mean, those dudes were great, and they did great things, but the greatest? I think not. If they're the results you're getting, your scale is wrong, bro.

I don't know if it is possible to quantify a Greatest of All Time. But if it is, this is not the right way to go about it.

I wonder how the system decides what a 'quality win' is, as well. Does Federer's victory over Andy Roddick in Wimbledon in 2009 count as a quality win? Because it was pretty freaking spectacular. But Roddick has been his bunny for a while now, so I'm sure that twenty-odd wins against Roddick can't be counted in those 39 wins he's apparently had. There's no regard to situation either, so matches like Roger's AO win over Baghdatis probably doesn't count.

I hope this 'prestige ranking' thing doesn't catch on. Because I am telling you right now that I think it is stupid. And you should all listen to me. Just because.

One Small Rankings Spot, One Giant Leap for Murray

Before I begin, I would like to point out something I forgot yesterday - this is the 501st post on Tennis From The Backseat! My my, we have come a long way!

*

Back to the tennis, the reason for those 500 previous rambles (well, mostly). It's official - the four year reign of the Hispano-Suisse domination machine in the top two spots of the rankings will come to an end at the end of this week. Rafael Nadal, after about a year in the top spot, is going to slide to #3, and Andy Murray is going to step up into the #2 position.

*

This is very unusual and it's going to take a lot of getting used to. Everyone knows you find Federer and Nadal on opposite ends of the draw to each other. It's just the way it works. Now we have - gulp - the prospect of Federer/Nadal semi finals, which I find personally very troubling Not because I don't believe Federer can beat him - I do - but because it's just not how it works.

*

As to whether it is an accurate reflection or not... look, with Rafa still shaky on his knees after that layoff and with Murray playing the way he has been, I think it probably is an accurate reflection. But if one is to look at their careers, well... you're going to take Rafa's resume all the way. I don't think Murray will be able to hold down the #2 spot if Rafa finds his form again. To come back from injury and make it to the quarters of a major event is not a bad result at all. And unless his knees are seriously bung, then I think we'll see Rafa back where he belongs - in the top two.

*

Kudos to Murray, though - many have tried, all have failed, when it comes to breaking into these hallowed positions. Djokovic was ten points from taking down Federer at the end of last year, but he never quite managed it. Murray is the first man to break the stranglehold in what feels like an age - it is a shame it had to happen on the back of injury.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Rogers Cup (Montreal)

*

Andy Murray def. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, 6-4 7-6 (10-8)

Juan Martin Del Potro def. Andy Roddick, 4-6 6-2 7-5

*

*

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

*

Dinara Safina def. Flavia Pennetta, 6-2 6-0

Jelena Jankovic def. Elena Dementieva, 7-6 (7-2) 0-6 7-6 (8-6)

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

Deserve It!

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

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

*

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

*

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

*

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

*

*

Today's Results

*

Barcelona Open Banco Sabadell (Barcelona)
*

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Djokovic Gravy Train

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hang on there. When did Djokovic jump to within ten points of Federer in the rankings? How did that happen?

*

Well, I suppose I know how it happened - Federer lost points, because he won last year's Masters Cup, and Djokovic gained points, because he bombed out in round robin last year. But still - what? How on earth did that happen?

*

Granted, Federer hasn't had the bestest year ever this year, but he made it to three Slam finals and a semi, winning one Slam. Djokovic also won a Slam, but made only two semis and a second round (gotta love that Safin smackdown!) I suppose this is an indication of how little tennis is actually Slams. To be #1, you have to be consistent, week in, week out. Federer won no Masters Series crowns this year - and maybe that's where it tells. We see this with the Williams sisters, too - they play for Slams, not rankings, and as a result, they aren't as high up the ladder as they should be. Still, at least Djokovic is still behind the great man, even if it is only by ten points - and try gaining points at the Aussie Open, Novak. Just TRY.

*

One place he might gain points, however, is at the Brisbane International, the newly established tournament replacing the ATP tournament in Adelaide and the WTA tournament on the Gold Coast. Actually, there was a story on the Tennis Australia website today that enraged me. The title is 'Two Djokovics for the Price of One!' Yes, that's right - Novak has bought little brother Marko into another tournament... though at least it's only in doubles. Ire, ire, rage, rage. I posted a while back about Marko in Bangkok, and how it was unfair he got carded in. I am anti-riding on someone else's gravy train. Did you ever see Dinara Safina using Marat's fame to her advantage? If anything, she seemed kind of annoyed about it. Marko has been carded into the junior Aussie Open draw as well. I say but this - I hope he plays Tomic, and Tomic eats him for breakfast.

Mixed Feelings

There is no denying that today belongs to Rafael Nadal. I wanted Federer to win singles gold to mark the end of his golden age (the first of them, anyway!) but perhaps it is more appropriate for Rafa to open his reign with gold. He deserved it, thoroughly. He is playing amazing tennis right now. Welcome to the top, Rafa. You belong here.

*

Not that Roger isn't going to get it back. He is. I have no doubt. I think that doubles gold has kindled something in him. He was having such a blast playing with Stan, just relaxing into his game. He may not have been 'back' yet, per se, but he is coming. He will be back. Because even if Rafa is #1 now, he has a while to go before he becomes Federesque. It must be so hard for Rafa, having someone like Roger to look up to - but wonderful too. Who could be a better example?

*

(Someone Djokovic should think about looking up to, methinks.)

*

It was a bit disappointing to see Safina win silver in Beijing - but she's beaten Dementieva so much this year that maybe it was just Elena's turn! Silver is still a wonderful achievement, so go Dinara! An all-Russian podium - that's something else! And that's not including Sharapova or Kuznetsova. Safina is arguably playing better than anyone else this year, and she's still the #4 Russian. And look at Cincy - Petrova won there, another Russian. What does that say about Russian tennis for women? And why hasn't it quite worked for the men?

*

Not that there aren't excellent male Russian players - there are! - but they seem sketchier than the girls, less steady. There is no greater head case in the men's game than Marat Safin. And look at Tursunov, and even Youzhny and Andreev. There is so much talent there, but the men don't seem to have their heads in the game. I used to use Davydenko as my example of a steady Russian male tennis player, but I can't any more - now that he's all sick of tennis and stuff (disgust!) Still, his lack of steadiness isn't due to him being a head case, just having a rubbish temperament. Le sigh.

*

Going back to women's tennis, they have also had a change of #1 - it's Ivanovic that's gone back up. I don't pretend to understand - I don't follow women's tennis enough to know who's gaining and losing points at specific times. She and Jankovic have both already qualified for Doha at the end of the year - hey, that's a thought. If Sharapova is out for the US Open, etc, does that mean that she won't qualify? I mean, that's working on the assumption that she'll be better by Doha, but she stands a real chance of missing out. I know in doubles there is or has been a clause that if you win a Slam you get to go, but that certainly doesn't happen in men's singles, and so I assume it doesn't happen for women. I don't like Sharapova, but it would be a crying shame if she missed out, because she's such an excellent player. And that final last year with her and Henin was fabulous. It would be very sad if she didn't have the opportunity to defend that.

*

Meanwhile, I have a new proposition for Olympic tennis in London. What do they use the tennis venue for after the tennis is done? Nada. Therefore, they should stretch the tennis over two weeks - singles one week and doubles the next. I think doubles hurt some of the singles players in Beijing - watch me carefully not mention Federer's name - and that would solve that problem. And also, they could play mixed doubles in that doubles week! If mixed doubles is in Slams, it should be in the Olympics - and tennis needs more medal opportunities. The Federers and Nadals of this world are never going to be able to equal Phelps's eight gold medal record, simply because there aren't enough medals available in tennis. I'm not suggesting changing the standard rules or format or anything so you could win eight gold medals in tennis, but surely mixed doubles is a legitimate Olympic sport. Besides, it would be rad to see men and women playing together. I personally would love to see Federer playing mixed for Switzerland with Patty Schnyder. I think they'd be a fabulous team. And how about Rafa and Anabel Medina Garrigues? Djokovic and Ivanovic, Tipsarevic and Jankovic? The Bryans brothers with the Williams sisters? I think there are some awesome possibilities. Stan and Timea? They would be really cute.

*

And how about Juan Martin del Potro? Four titles and counting. That is an achievement Federer would have been proud of at the height of his glorious reign. He is going to be the serious challenger for the US Open that no one saw coming!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Games of the XXIX Olympiad (Beijing)

*

Men's Draw - Singles

*

Rafael Nadal def. Fernando Gonzalez, 6-3 7-6 (7-2) 6-3

*

*

Women's Draw - Singles

*

Elena Dementieva def. Dinara Safina, 3-6 7-5 6-3

Vera Zvonareva def. Li Na, 6-0 7-5

*

*

Women's Draw - Doubles

*

Williams/Williams def. Medina Garrigues/Ruano Pascual, 6-2 6-0

Yan/Zheng def. Bondarenko/Bondarenko, 6-2 6-2

*

*

Legg Mason Tennis Classic (Washington)

*

Juan Martin del Potro def. Viktor Troicki, 6-3 6-3

*

*

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

*

Nadia Petrova def. Nathalie Dechy, 6-2 6-1

*

*

Pilot Pen Tennis (New Haven)

*

Men's Draw

*

Mischa Zverev def. Florent Serra, 6-2 7-6 (8-6)

Ivo Minar def. Nicolas Mahut, 5-7 6-3 6-3

Albert Montanes def. Nicolas Devilder, 7-6 (7-5) 7-5

Dudi Sela def. Donald Young, 6-4 6-2

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Tsvetana Pironkova def. Bethanie Mattek, 7-6 (7-4) 0-6 6-0

Olga Govortsova def. Alisa Kleybanova, 6-0 6-2

Game Over, Game On

Honestly, Rafael Nadal, I don't know what to do with you. You win when I want you to lose, and then you lose when I want you to win. I feel a bit betrayed. Of all the people to lose to, did it have to be Novak Djokovic?

*

What I'm now faced with is a final between two of my most disliked players on the circuit, including the #1 on that list, and with Rafa certain to become #1 in the world. Could things really get much blacker for me?

*

No, not really. And so the only way is up. The victory over Lapentti yesterday meant that Rafa will become #1 sometime in the next few weeks - I think after the Olympics, no matter how he and Roger perform there. That means that the glorious reign of Federer comes to an end after 237 weeks. Not a bad run. No one else has ever done better. And perhaps, in order to appreciate this streak, it had to come to an end.

*

And it might just a herald a renaissance. This is 1996, and Federer, like Sampras, is a champion. The first Golden Age of Roger Federer is coming to an end. The second might just be about to begin.

*

And how is this for a symbolic turning point? On the 8th of August, 2008, his 27th birthday, Roger Federer will carry the Swiss flag in the Opening Ceremony of the Beijing Olympic. He might lose the #1 spot, but I think an Olympic gold medal would alleviate the pain of that considerably. And hey, he can always get it back. How about a US Open victory? That'd be nice. And the Masters Cup. For so long, Roger has been maintaining. Now he'll be chasing, hunting - and if that doesn't put some fire in his veins, I don't know what will.

*

Watch out, Rafa. Roger's coming home, and he ain't pleased. This is not game over. This is game on.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Western and Southern Financial Group Masters (Cincinatti)

*

Novak Djokovic def. Rafael Nadal, 6-1 7-5

Andy Murray def. Ivo Karlovic, 6-4 6-4

*

*

Rogers Cup (Montreal)

*

Dinara Safina def. Victoria Azarenka, 6-0 2-6 6-3

Dominika Cibulkova def. Marion Bartoli, 4-6 6-4 6-3

*

*

PS. Go Dinara!

Um, Guys, It's Over

Can I just say one thing? Does it not seem a little pointless having claycourt tournaments AFTER Roland Garros is over? Because it seems pretty damn silly to me.

*

I suppose, by that token, you could say having US hard court tournaments in March and April is pretty stupid when the US Open is in September... but hell, that's hardly sensible either. But really... the week after Roland Garros, some fool players are back out on the red stuff.

*

...why?

*

I mean, what is the point? Let me put myself into the mind of a professional tennis player here. I've just played two, long exhausting months on clay. Wimbledon, a grass court tournament, arguably the most important tournament of the year, is in two weeks. I want to do well. And so I go and play a warmup tournament on... clay?

*

Maybe I'm being too naive. Maybe I'm putting myself in the perspective of a Federer or a Nadal, someone so firmly cemented at the top of the rankings that points are kind of irrelevant. Maybe these tournaments are for the claycourters to gain some extra points because they don't like grass, or whatever. That's the only reason for it I can think of. Looking down the list at Warsaw, there seem to be a lot of claycourters... Robredo, Granollers, Monaco, Montanes, Canas. But... Davydenko? Kolya, what are you doing, man? I don't know if he has a favourite surface, but I don't think claycourting is going to help him AT ALL. Why isn't he at Queen's, or in Halle?

*

You're going to have to wait a little longer for my proposed human interest stories, as I'm in kind of a hurry today. But tomorrow, I promise you. And I promise you that tomorrow I won't say tomorrow as well.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Artois Championships (Queen's Club, London)

*

Olivier Patience def. Sam Querrey, 7-5 5-7 6-4

Fernando Gonzalez def. Richard Bloomfield, 7-6 (7-5) 6-3

Mardy Fish def. Eduardo Roger-Vasselin, 6-1 6-4

Andreas Seppi def. Arnaud Clement, 6-3 4-6 6-1

Simone Bolelli def. Frank Dancevic, 2-2 retired

Nicolas Mahut def. Feliciano Lopez, 6-3 6-7 (4-7) 7-6 (7-4)

John Isner def. Kevin Anderson, 7-6 (7-5) 6-4

Xavier Malisse def. Daniel Evans, 6-1 6-1

Ivo Minar def. Bobby Reynolds, 6-1 7-5

Ivo Karlovic def. Joseph Sirianni, 6-3 6-2

Andy Murray def. Sebastien Grosjean, 2-0 retired

Mario Ancic def. Fernando Verdasco, 7-6 (8-6) 6-4

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

*

*

Gerry Weber Open (Halle)

*

Jan Vacek def. Scott Lipsky, 3-6 6-3 6-2

Fabrice Santoro def. Rainer Schuettler, 7-6 (7-4) 6-4

Marcos Baghdatis def. Jan Hernych, 6-4 7-5

Mikhail Youzhny def. Dmitry Tursunov, 6-3 6-1

Nicolas Kiefer def. Robin Haase, 4-6 6-3 6-2

Steve Darcis def. Olivier Rochus, 6-1 6-4

Michael Llodra def. Ivan Ljubicic, 6-7 (6-8) 7-6 (7-5) 7-5

Tommy Haas def. Radek Stepanek, 6-7 (0-7) 7-6 (7-3) 6-4

James Blake def. Bjorn Phau, 6-4 6-1

*

*

Warsaw Orange Open (Warsaw)

*

Nikolay Davydenko def. Pablo Cuevas, 6-3 6-2

Christophe Rochus def. Gilles Simon, 6-1 3-6 6-3

Fabio Fognini def. Guillermo Garcia-Lopez, 7-5 0-6 6-4

Santiago Ventura def. Boris Pashanski, 6-4 6-2

Guillermo Canas def. Luis Horna, 6-2 6-7 (5-7) 6-4

Marcell Granollers def. Michal Mertinak, 7-6 (7-2) 6-4

Juan Monaco def. Jerzy Janowicz, 6-4 6-3

Albert Montanes def. David Skoch, 7-6 (7-4) 6-4

Oscar Hernandez def. Sergio Roitman, 3-6 6-4 6-0

Wayne Odesnik def. Ricardas Berankis, 6-4 6-3

Tommy Robredo def. Michal Przysiezny, 7-5 6-2

*

*

DFS Classic (Birmingham)

*

Petra Cetkovska def. Meng Yuan, 6-2 6-1

Marta Domachowska def. Margit Ruutel, 6-4 6-4

Camille Pin def. Anastasia Rodionova, 7-5 7-6 (7-2)

Kateryna Bondarenko def. Anne Keothavong, 6-3 6-2

Samantha Stosur def. Sabine Lisicki, 6-3 6-4

Melinda Czink def. Vania King, 6-2 7-6 (7-4)

Virginia Ruano Pascual def. Milagros Sequera, 6-3 6-7 (3-7) 6-1

Marina Erakovic def. Stephanie Dubois, 6-4 6-4

Casey Dellacqua def. Julie Ditty, 7-6 (7-5) 6-2

Nathalie Dechy def. Severine Bremond, 7-5 6-2

Michaella Krajicek def. Tatiana Poutchek, 6-2 6-1

Melanie South def. Sybille Bammer, 6-3 7-5

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Tamira Paszek, 6-1 6-0

Bethanie Mattek def. Aravane Rezai, 6-1 6-4

Ekaterina Makarova def. Angelique Kerber, 6-7 (3-7) 7-5 7-5

*

*

Campeonatos Internacionales de Tenis Femenino de Espana (Barcelona)

*

Sara Errani def. Lourdes Dominguez Lino, 6-3 6-2

Lucie Safarova def. Leticia Costas, 6-2 6-1

Arantxa Parra Santonja def. Maite Gabarrus-Alonso, 6-1 6-3

Ekaterina Ivanova def. Tathiana Garbin, 4-6 7-5 6-3

Maria Kondratieva def. Catalina Castano, 7-6 (9-7) 4-6 6-0

Stephanie Cohen-Aloro def. Dominika Cibulkova, 6-5 retired

Edina Gallovits def. Julia Vakulenko, 6-2 0-6 6-3

Carla Suarez Navarro def. Alicia Molik, 6-2 6-4

Maria Kirilenko def. Lilia Osterloh, 6-0 2-0 retired

Welcome to Thunder Dome

Two men enter. One man leaves.

*

Okay, the 'men' in question here are Ana Ivanovic and Dinara Safina, but the Mel Gibson reference still stands. There is no arena in modern sport so fiercely gladiatorial as that of a Grand Slam final. Two players enter, their only weapons their racquets, their skills and their minds. Only one can leave a champion.

*

In this case, it was Ana Ivanovic. I was going for Dinara Safina, and I really thought that she had the game to win, but Ivanovic really was due. A third Grand Slam final loss - especially a final she was expected to win - might have been catastrophic for her career, particularly as regards her mental stability. She hasn't been the strongest player mentally in the past, and the last thing she needed was a monkey on her back. And even though she is younger than Dinara, as a top-echelon tennis player I would make her senior, and it really was Ana's turn. This has been coming for a while.

*

Even though I was gunning for Dinara, I like Ana and I like the way she plays. It was always going to be interesting to see how she performed on this court after she froze up so totally against Justine last year. (Speaking of Justine, what the hell was she doing there? Wasn't the whole point of her retirement that she was sick of tennis? Or am I missing something? Go figure.) Both players started nervously - understandably. I wasn't surprised when Dinara dropped her first service game, and I wouldn't have been surprised if Ana had dropped hers. But no. She overcame it. She held on.

*

I take nothing away from Dinara Safina. She is a fine, fine player - as I have elaborated ad nauseam over the past few days! - and I think there are more Slam finals, and maybe even victories, in her future. I liked her chances today, because she has been so tough mentally over her past matches. And she was tough again today. But she was outplayed, short and simple. This match was always going to hang on Ivanovic's racquet, and on her nerves. She has bigger weapons than Dinara, but the test was her mind. She has been to two Slam finals (Roland Garros last year against Henin, and the Australian this year against Sharapova) and she has never yet won a set.

*

Until today.

*

It is only fitting, I suppose, that Ivanovic assume the heavy mantle of world number #1 with a Slam title to her name. With Justine gone, there are not many Slam winners in the top five (not compared to the men's game.) Sharapova has three, Kuznetsova has one, Dementieva has been to a final. Jankovic has never made it. It's a few places down to the Williamses, who have about fifteen between them. But now Ivanovic has one, and I would not be surprised to see her add more soon.

*

It will be interesting to see how Dinara backs up after this final, as well. She has moved into the top #10 on the rankings, and if she keeps her level of play up, she can move higher. Although she lost today, she has beaten three of those top five in this Slam. Sharapova, Dementieva and Kuznetsova all fell to her, and Dinara has really showed that she has got guts and nerves. She might not have broken through as early as Marat, with his US Open win as a teenager in 2000, but if Dinara can accept her loss and see her run to the final as what it really is - totally magnificent - she is going to be something else. I would not be surprised to see Dinara making an assault on the top five come the hardcourt season. In fact, she only has second round points to defend at Wimbledon - if she can translate her awesome claycourt game to the grass (which is certainly possible - we have seen Rafa Nadal do something like it in the past two years) - she can totally launch herself up there now. Ivanovic may have won today, but she might have to start watching her back - Dinara's a-coming.

*

Actually, on a bit of an aside, I would love to see Dinara play mixed doubles with her brother at Wimbledon. I don't know if the chances of that are very high, but I think they'd be a good duo... although they might destroy a record number of racquets between them.

*

But today belongs to Ivanovic. She is the one who left Philippe Chatrier (aka Thunder Dome) crowned champion and world number #1. She is, in my mind, the favourite to win Wimbledon - to do a Borg, as it were. Ana Ivanovic deserves this win.

*

The person I really feel sorry for is Jelena Jankovic, to tell the truth. She's a wonderful player, one of the finest that Serbia has ever produced... and she had to be around at the same time as Ivanovic, who is younger, and has beat her to the punch when it comes to winning a Slam and becoming world number #1. But we can't say it wasn't like Jelena didn't have her chances. She looked a cert to make it through to the final in the third set of her semi against Ana. But it was Ana who rose to the occasion, and it is Ana Ivanovic who is now, undoubtedly, the world number #1 for women's tennis.

*

I don't think there can be any doubt that the two girls who reached the final thoroughly deserved to be there. Dinara, after her run at Berlin and her constant presence in the round of sixteen and the quarters, was due a breakthrough, and she has been one of the form players this season. And Ivanovic demolished her opponents before she was tested by Jankovic - a test she passed by showing the grit and the nerve of a champion and not just the instincts of a frontrunner. So congratulations, Dinara. Congratulations, Ana. I think we'll be seeing these two meet in Thunder Dome again.

*

*

Roland Garros Results - Day #14

*

Women's Draw

*

Ana Ivanovic def. Dinara Safina, 6-4 6-3

Office Relationships

I'm a pretty avid Federer fan, and I consider myself pretty attuned to the way he plays his matches. So is it just me, or did he seem a bit... angry tonight?

*

Maybe angry isn't the right word. Frustrated? Maybe just pissed off. He certainly seemed more annoyed than usual. I mean, it's not like he suddenly metamorphosed into Safin or anything like that. He just seemed a bit more... vocal than usual. He doesn't give a lot away, normally, but he was yelling and berating himself like no one's business. He does this in his matches anyway, but usually only once or twice a match. He was over-yelling. And he's normally so polite to officials. He was a bit snippy with one when HawkEye was taking its sweet time. 'How long is it gonna take?' he snapped. Not un-Roger, but not exactly Roger.

*

Jim Courier raised a good point in the commentating, and I think it was corroborated by the post-match interview. Federer came into this tournament with his #1 ranking under threat. If he crashed out before the semis and Rafa won the Open, then he would lose the top spot. Now that he's through and beaten Blake, he's secure, but if he had lost against Tipsarevic... I don't even want to think about it.

*

But there's so much added pressure on Federer. No wonder he's been playing a bit patchy. Last year, he won three Slams and the Masters Cup, got to the final in the fourth slam and won two Masters Series trophies, and still his #1 spot in under threat? Rafa had a great season, but he won one Slam and three Masters Series trophies, and was beaten in the semis at the Masters Cup. How does than even compare?

*

Like Courier said, how does that seem fair? Roger apparently wasn't aware of it, and I can see how that would piss you off big time and put so much added pressure on you, especially as a surprise. In the interview, he asked Courier how much longer he'd secured the top spot for, and Courier said a few weeks, and Roger said he thought it'd be way longer than that. The #1 spot means so much to him especially with his record - I would love to see him take out Sampras's record of 286 weeks, particularly if he could do it consecutively!

*

But I seriously don't get how that ranking system works. I mean, I get how it works, but how does that happen? One guy has this amazing year, and another has a pretty good year, but nowhere near as good, and yet the ranking is so close? I mean, it's not close... there's still a good thousand points between them, but because Roger can't gain any points because he's defending the title, and Rafa can because he lost in the quarters last year... It's Federer 7180 to Nadal 5780 at the moment. Federer's untouchable now he's in the semis... but how can one tournament close a gap that big?

*

Because the gap is that big. That's one thing I hope Novak Djokovic realises. I really hope Federer issues a beatdown on him. Djokovic has been playing well - I can't deny it - but he really needs a thrashing!

*

Speaking of Djokovic... what was with the sudden fatigue at the end of his match today? Because getting tired at the end of what was a pretty comprehensive straight sets victory... what is that? Djokovic is the only man to ever retire from a Wimbledon semi-final. His reason? Fatigue. Sure, on that occasion he'd had two long grinding five setters against Hewitt and Baghdatis, which he'd backed up on because of the rain. But since when is this an acceptable excuse for a tennis player? I'd hardly like to accuse the #3 player in the world of being unfit, but that is just not good enough. Wimbledon, sure. But today? Three sets. Three easy sets. And Ferrer was really not playing so well. If Djokovic pulls that against Federer, he'd get pounded into the ground.

*

Djokovic has faced Nadal in two semis in Slams in his career, one of which was that Wimbledon semi where Djokovic retired. The other was at the French, and as if Nadal is going to lose there. I hope that, this year, they play in the semis of the US Open. Because I would love to see a balls to the wall five setter between those two. Not at the Australian Open, because that would mean it was the final and Federer MUST beat Djokovic - I won't have that upstart winning! - but at the US, or on some hardcourt. Anywhere. Because before Djokovic talks about tumbling Federer, I'd worry about Nadal. Just because he's a claycourt specialist doesn't mean you can leave him out of the equation.

*

I'd be interested to know what Nadal and Djokovic think of each other as people. Federer is lovely, but I get the feeling he doesn't really like Novak, while he and Rafa get along fine. But Djokovic and Nadal are closer in age, and in points... if I were Rafa, I would get really annoyed at Djokovic basically overlooking me. I don't know how much Rafa lets this affect him - he and Novak don't have a common language, I think, so I don't know how well they understand each other. But surely he must know. I'm curious. Do they eyeball each other with loathing? Do they blank each other? Or do they say hi in the corridor and then do their own things?

*

Or, hell, do they go out for dinner together and paint each others' toenails?

*

I'd love to know what goes on behind the scenes with tennis players. Federer seems to be pretty well liked - he refers to some of his close friends on the tour being Tim Henman and Stefan Koubek in his blog from Tokyo 2006 - and Dmitry and Marat seem to have some friendship going on, and Carlos Moya and Rafa have their whole mentor thing, and then there's the matey deal with Rafa and Feliciano Lopez... but then you get the Sharapovas of this world. Does anyone else get the feeling that she hates everyone and everyone hates her? Like, she refuses to associate with them so she can hate them with impunity on court?

*

It could be really unhealthy. This people basically travel together 11 months of the year, year in, year out. Surely they must have friends?

*

I know they all have their girlfriends and teams or whatever - Roger travels with Mirka Vavrinec, his girlfriend, wherever he goes, for example - but surely they must make friends? I hope they do. It would be sad to think of their locker room, 128 players at the beginning of the tour, none of them speaking to each other.

*

From what I've read, that's not the case. They're playing jokes and throwing tennis balls at each other and hiding each others' bags... well, Dmitry Tursunov does! But I hope they have recreation together as well. Jim Courier has asked both Roger and Rafa about playing videogames... they like playing tennis games and occasionally playing as each other (as in, Roger likes playing with the Rafa avatar and vice versa.) I'd like to think that, every once in a while, Roger and Rafa sit down to their video games together.

*

*

Australian Open Results - Day 10

*

Men's Draw

*

Roger Federer def. James Blake, 7-5 7-6 (7-5) 6-4

Novak Djokovic def. David Ferrer, 6-0 6-3 7-5

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Ana Ivanovic def. Venus Williams, 7-6 (7-3) 6-4

Daniela Hantuchova def. Agnieszka Radwanska, 6-2 6-2