Serial Sportsman

The results of the ATP awards are out for another year, and once again, my man Roger Federer has cleaned up. Not only is he Player of the Year (which we knew, because, hello, rankings) but he was also voted Fan Favourite and won the award for sportsmanship as well. That award is named after Stefan Edberg because he won it five times in eight years, or something similar.

Roger's now won it six times in a row.

I read an article the other day about a guy who said that he didn't love Roger, even though he recognised the awesomeness of Federer tennis, because he basically regarded Roger as a serial gamesman. He cited examples like the whole Britain not winning a Slam in 150,000 years comment as evidence of the fact that Roger engaged in gamesmanship and was somehow allowed a free pass because his tennis was so awesome. (And then - slightly off the point, but still - went on to say that Roger was OMGarrogant because he remarked that he was a 'talented' player. Roger admitted he was talented? OHNOTHEGO! Spew.)

To refute that, the notion that Federer is a gamesman who gets wins by messing with his opponents and playing dirty, I think you have to look no further than this award. It isn't people on the outside voting for this one - it's Roger's peers, the guys he sees day in, day out... you know, the guys that would get really, really pissed off if he was some kind of serial gamesman. But no. Six times in a row.

Ain't no one can claim that Roger Federer is a bad sport or some kind of bad example. Not in my book.

For me, that sportsmanship award is the most telling when it comes to statesmanship, but I don't think you can overlook the Fan Favourite award as well. People don't necessarily vote for Roger in this award because he is the best player in the world, even though he is. They vote for him because he is Roger, good example, good player, good guy. Tennis could not have a worthier king.

Weaving A Tangled Web

It occurs to me that I never once mentioned that major controversy that happened a couple of days before the end of the tennis event in the Olympics. I got so caught up in the Swiss doubles victory that I forgot about it entirely. So let's talk about it today.

*

The story: Fernando Gonzalez and James Blake are facing off in a match. The winner of the match is guaranteed a medal, the loser will have to play off for the bronze. It's getting tight. Third set, the drama, the drama. Blake hits a shot that goes out. Gonzalez is at the net, shies away. The ball goes out. Blake swears it ricocheted off Gonzalez's racquet, Gonzalez said it didn't. The match continues. Blake, unsettled, loses. The drama, the drama.

*

Now, I haven't seen the replays or anything, so I have no opinion on whether or not Gonzalez touched the ball. In fact, I might have even described the situation wrong, but it's roughly correct at least. So what do you do in a situation like this?

*

Let's put ourselves in Blake's shoes. You want this match, yeah, you want it bad, and you could swear it came off the other guy's racquet. I wouldn't even consider the option that Blake lied - that would just be terrible sportsmanship, and I don't think James Blake is that kind of guy. Could your eyes deceive you? Possibly. But does it happen too quick for you to able to tell? Probably.

*

But you might hear it, you might see the ball change direction. I have no idea what level of perception tennis players have out there. How much do they listen, how much do they rely on their eyes? What feasible chance does Blake have to be sure?

*

Now, let's consider Fernando Gonzalez. He definitely doesn't want the ball to have hit his racquet. Again, I doubt he would have lied - though his post match comments were certainly a bit dodgier than Blake's, if that makes sense. He said something along the lines of not being 100% sure of what had happened. Now, I'm sure it would be hard to see or hear the ball, with the speed and maybe the crowd and stuff, but surely you'd be able to feel it? Those guys hit the balls like a rocket. How can you be not sure?

*

But I'm not fully acquainted with the circumstances, and if Gonzalez says he's not sure, then I'm sure he's not sure. There aren't many players - or any, really - on the circuit that I would ever think capable of full-out lying. I wonder if the fact it was Gonzalez on the other side of the net influenced Blake at all...? I'm not aware of any dislike or anything between them, but imagine if this had happened when Blake had been playing Federer. Blake has come out and talked about his respect for Federer on numerous times. If Roger said he didn't hit the ball, I'm pretty sure Blake would believe that Roger didn't hit the ball. But it was Gonzalez. So was this an influence?

*

The upshot of all this is that I have no idea, and in fact, no opinion about what happened. I'd be prepared to take both guys at their word, and I would severely doubt that either one is deliberately lying. But it's interesting. I'm generally impressed with the high level of sportsmanship and lack of gamesmanship on the ATP tour, but they can't all be perfect. Could you live with yourself if you won something under false pretences? A lot of people would go a long way for an Olympic medal. Maybe I'm idealistic, but I just can't believe that either of these guys would deliberately lie about this.

*

There is today's tangled moral issue. I am taking my position firmly on the fence. What does everyone else think?

*

It's one of those dull weeks of tennis before a major tournament again. The US Open starts next week, which will be big fun and very interesting and stuff, but this week is pretty dull. The only real tournament is New Haven (men and women), and due to the Olympics, none of the big guns is playing. The top seed is Nando Verdasco, and while he's a good player, he's not a world-changer. For the women, it's Anna Chakvetadze (is she not ranked higher than Zvonareva? Why wasn't she at the Olympics? Or did she genuinely not qualify?) So this might be one of those uninspired blog weeks, unless we have some more interesting issues. I suppose I could always talk about McEnroe's exclusion at some point... putting me about a week behind the news!

*

Juan Martin del Potro is not playing, although he was originally scheduled to... but I think that's a smart move. You don't want to come into a Slam having played two solid weeks of tennis - because if he was here, he would stand a great chance of winning. And if you had a streak like that, you'd want to take it in to the US Open. If he's in the right part of the draw, he stands a good chance of being the random semi finalist. Actually, I'd like him to be in Djokovic's quarter, so he can pull a Safin. He's currently at #17, so he could potentially meet one of the big guns in the third round... wouldn't that be interesting?

*

It occurs to me that del Potro is only twenty, and is totally only at the beginning of his career, though he seems to have been round for a while. I am now officially adopting him into the Tennis From The Backseat Stars of the Future program. Currently, he's my star performer - so Ernests and Marin might need to move over! Or, alternatively, they need to do some serious shining!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Pilot Pen Tennis (New Haven)

*

Men's Draw

*

Fernando Verdasco def. Dudi Sela, 6-4 6-4

Potito Starace def. Jiri Vanek, 6-2 7-6 (9-7)

Denis Gremelmayr def. Marcos Daniel, 3-6 6-3 6-3

Olivier Rochus def. Evgeny Korolev, 6-4 6-4

Steve Darcis def. Vince Spadea, 7-5 5-0 retired

Fabio Fognini def. Nicolas Lapentti, 6-4 4-4 retired

Guillermo Garcia-Lopez def. Chris Guccione, 7-5 6-3

John Isner def. Igor Kunitsyn, 6-4 6-4

Wayne Odesnik def. Sebastien Grosjean, 7-5 6-4

Luka Gregorc def. Ramon Delgado, 6-2 3-6 6-0

Robby Ginepri def. Luis Horna, 7-6 (7-4) 6-2

Arnaud Clement def. Thomaz Bellucci, 6-4 6-4

Viktor Troicki def. Alex Bogomolov Jr., 7-5 2-6 6-1

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Patty Schnyder def. Jill Craybas, 6-4 7-6 (7-2)

Alizé Cornet def. Nicole Vaidisova, 6-3 7-6 (10-8)

Caroline Wozniacki def. Dominika Cibulkova, 7-6 (9-7) retired

Katarina Srebotnik def. María José Martínez Sánchez, 6-7 (4-7) 6-3 6-2

Casey Dellacqua def. Virginie Razzano, 6-3 6-1

Sorana Cirstea def. Alla Kudryavtseva, 4-6 6-3 7-5

Sara Errani def. Mallory Cecil, 6-2 4-6 7-6 (7-1)

Crashing Down To Earth

Three from four on my semi final picks, which is not too bad at all, really. Not as impressive as my eight from eight in the Roland Garros quarters, but pretty good nonetheless. We have Ferrer/Gicquel in s'Hertogenbosch and Karlovic/Verdasco in Nottingham. I had picked Cilic over Verdasco, but Fernando got him good in the end. It was an easy victory. But even I can't pick them all... because I'm so qualified to be able to pick them all and stuff.

*

Long story short: I'm picking Ferru and Dr Ivo as my winners. Reasons... pretty much what I wrote yesterday.

*

Meanwhile, I totally only just realised that Dmitry Tursunov, a favourite of mine, had been playing in Nottingham... but although I didn't remember him losing, he wasn't in the finals. So I did some digging to see what had happened to him, and, lo and behold! excluded. He chucked a hissy fit during his doubles match, stormed off court, and ended up being disqualified in singles.

*

This presents me with a dilemma. I do not like this kind of behaviour. I don't condone it. If it had been Djokovic chucking the nana, I would be outraged at his reprehensible conduct. But it's Dima... a player I like, a player who is probably my second favourite after Federer. And my first instinct is to make excuses for him.

*

I don't want to do that. That's one of the things I admire about Roger so much - he never makes excuses for himself, even when he has them (glandular fever, anyone?) I don't know the full story about what went on in that doubles match with Haggard, but I don't know if it really matters. Is it ever acceptable for a player to do something like that - to storm off the court, to forcibly halt play?

*

I like Marat Safin as well, and it cannot be denied that that figures into his game sometimes. Not one of the more attractive aspects of his game, to be sure, but it's there. My new girl favourite, Dinara (who is in the final in s'Hertogenbosch!) is not adverse to stopping play every once in a while. Hell, look at the amount of time violations Rafa has accumulated in the last few years? But none of them, to my knowledge, have ever stormed off court.

*

So how do I, as a fan, reconcile this with a player I like? If it were Djokovic, I would slam him and damn him. That I can say unequivocally. Dima has behaved shockingly - even though I don't know the full situation, I think it is fair for me to make that statement. I don't want to slam him and damn him, but I cannot - will not - make excuses for him either. Dima is a funny guy with an appealing game and a blog that I think has brought a lot ot the tennis world. But how can I allow this to excuse him?

*

Dima does not get a free pass from me just because I like him. Much as I would like to justify what he did, I can't - not within my definition of sportsmanship, anyway. So what do I do? How do I, as a fan, deal with this?

*

It is tempting to say that I am spoiled as a fan of Federer, who never puts a foot wrong and who has won the annual sportsmanship award about, oh, I don't know, twenty million times or something. Dima is only human. But so is Roger. So is everyone else on the tour. I mean, sure, they're allowed to make mistakes. No one can take that right away from anyone. But this was... it was a pretty big mistake, Dima.

*

It's not like I'm going to suddenly demote Dima on my list of favourite players or anything, or suddenly throw him with Djokovic in the cesspit of tennis evil. But this raises issues beyond this case - and even beyond tennis. How do fans cope when their idol puts a foot wrong? What do you do when your hero makes a mistake? How do you reconcile the man in your mind with the evidence of his flaws?

*

Of one thing I am very sure. As people should have to face up to their own bad behaviour and not hide behind excuses, so we, as fans, should not make excuses. Personal preference does not accord anyone a get out of jail free card. And so I will be keeping an eye on Dima for the next little while. If nothing else, this incident has made me cautious of who I put my faith in, because you never know when they might come crashing down to earth.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

David Ferrer def. Juan Martin del Potro, 7-6 (7-4) 6-1

Marc Gicquel def. Guillermo Canas, 3-6 6-0 6-4

*

Dinara Safina def. Elena Dementieva, 6-3 6-2

Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Alona Bondarenko, 6-2 6-4

*

*

Slazenger Open (Nottingham)

*

Ivo Karlovic def. Gael Monfils, 7-6 (7-4) 7-6 (7-4)

Fernando Verdasco def. Marin Cilic, 6-3 6-1

*

*

International Women's Open (Eastbourne)

*

Nadia Petrova def. Samantha Stosur, 6-3 6-3

Agnieszka Radwanska def. Marion Bartoli, 7-5 6-3

Conquistador

When Rafael Nadal won the Roland Garros final against Roger Federer last year, I distinctly remember the Roland Garros commentator being able to say nothing more than, "Rafa Nadal, Rafa Nadal, Rafa Nadal." I was very preoccupied at the time with being sad about Federer losing, and so they might have said other stuff that I've forgotten about, but that one stayed with me. I pictured the commentator sitting there and shaking his head in disbelief at what this twenty-one year old had done. Because, as we often forget, Rafa is very young. He's been around forever, but today was his birthday: his twenty-second birthday. Rafael Nadal, three time Grand Slam champion, most dominant #2 player ever and arguably the greatest claycourter of all time, is younger than I am. (By less than a year, sure - but if you compare what I have achieved in my life to what Rafa has, the difference is pretty pronounced!)

*

People are always talking about the 'Big Three' in men's tennis: Federer, Nadal and Djokovic, and about how Djokovic is rising so fast and about how Federer had better watch his back. If one of these three tennis players could be called the forgotten member of the Big Three, it's definitely Nadal. When he was the only real challenger to the Federer dominance, people were talking about him all the time. Now that there's a new guy, people tend to forget about Rafa a little bit.

*

They shouldn't. No one should ever, ever forget about Rafa Nadal.

*

I am, above all things, a Federer fan, and I think there has been a point in every Federer fan's life where they have hated Rafa with a fiery passion. I know I used to dislike him vehemently, especially in 2006, when Federer's emotional victory at the Australian Open turned me from a person who liked tennis into an avid follower. This was the claycourt season when, for the first time, it seemed like Roger had a real chance at winning the Slam. One man stood in his way. Rafa Nadal. And that kid is some roadblock.

*

It is not Novak Djokovic who has stopped Federer winning the Slam. There has only ever been one man who can claim to have stopped the inexorable Fed-Express. Rafa Nadal.

*

These were the days when Rafa, who was very young, nineteen, twenty, used to celebrate like a crazy monkey on court when he won, after every point, whether it was a winner or a mistake of the opponent. For me, attracted to the calm, gentlemanlike demeanour of Federer, this was the nail in Rafa's coffin. 'Vamos' was possibly my least favourite word - after maybe Lleyton's interminable 'c'mon.' And then there was the constant, smothering presence of Uncle Toni - so smothering that even Federer, the eternal sportsman, accused him of oncourt coaching.

*

But then something happened. Rafa grew up.

*

As one of the top players in the world, it is Rafa's duty to be a statesman and a spokesperson for tennis. In those early days, when he was just a big kid, dancing around and Vamosing on court, there was the phenomenon of 'Rafamania,' but there were also an equal amount of people that disliked him. But over the years, we have seen Rafa mature incredibly. He has assumed the mantle of statesman, as international representative for tennis, calmed down, cooled down, and dug his heels in. Often, those crazy-monkey celebrators, the precocious kids, are flashes in the pan.

*

Not Rafa.

*

This kid is here to stay.

*

I'm not sure when I started liking Rafa. Early last year sometime, maybe. It was, like Rafa's growing up, such a gradual process that I barely noticed it happening. But Rafael Nadal is an excellent role model, in my opinion, for young tennis players. He is a brilliant player. He has held down that #2 spot for 150 weeks now. He has won three Roland Garroses and reached two Wimbledon finals. And he is still humble, still real. This is the boy who brought his mother as his date to the Laureus Awards. This is the boy who still lives in the same building as his family when he is at home in Mallorca. This is the boy who never assumes, never makes excuses, and can take it like a man when he loses.

*

I could go on a tangent here and say that this attitude is the result of the influence of Federer on the game as well as Rafa, but to place Federer in the role of Obi-Wan might be taking away a little from Rafa. Federer has been an excellent influence on the game in terms of humility and decorum, but Rafa got where he is all by himself. You can't count Rafa out, can't brush him aside. Ever.

*

I often say that Novak Djokovic has got some lessons to learn from Roger Federer. He has some to learn from Rafa Nadal, too.

*

These two will meet in the semi finals of Roland Garros. The #2 ranking is on the line. Djokovic comes into it off a good tournament, though his quarter final against Ernests Gulbis was a struggle at worst, and scratchy at best - a match that went over three hours. Rafael Nadal is coming off five matches where he has conceded only twenty five games. His opponent in the quarter finals, Nicolas Almagro, has been described as a claycourt bandito. He leads the circuit this year with the most wins on clay, including titles at Acapulco and Costa do Sauipe. Rafa himself conceded that Almagro is someone that could beat him on clay.

*

Today, the third of June 2008, on his twenty-second birthday, Rafa Nadal beat Nicolas Almagro 6-1 6-1 6-1.

*

I won't lie. I desperately want Roger Federer to win this year's French Open, to complete the set of Slams for his career, to fill that missing spot on his trophy shelf. But if Rafa Nadal wins, for the fourth year in the row, then I don't think I'll be that disappointed - because there is nobody, NOBODY, that can say this kid doesn't deserve it.

*

Happy birthday, Rafa.

*

*

Roland Garros Results - Day #10

*

Men's Draw

*

Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Almagro, 6-1 6-1 6-1

Novak Djokovic def. Ernests Gulbis, 7-5 7-6 (7-3) 7-5

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Ana Ivanovic def. Patty Schnyder, 6-3 6-2

Jelena Jankovic def. Carla Suarez Navarro, 6-3 6-2

Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Victoria Azarenka, 6-2 6-3

Kaia Kanepi def. Petra Kvitova, 6-3 3-6 6-1

Tribute to a Fallen Hero

I am destroyed.

*

I am sitting with my laptop on my lap as I write this, and I had to retype the previous sentence about seven times because I am shaking with sobs. I'm trying hard not to cry onto the keyboard, but I can't help it. I am destroyed. I am destroyed.

*

Of all the people to lose to, why Djokovic? Why Novak Djokovic? When Federer loses to Nadal, it's hard to take, but Rafa is lovely, so I can come to terms with it in the end. When he loses to randoms like Volandri and Canas, it's hard, but I can get over it.

*

But not Djokovic. Not Djokovic.

*

Novak Djokovic rubs me up the wrong way. There's an arrogance about him that makes me grit my teeth. This was supposed to be a beating, like the fourth round of the Open last year, when Djokovic was shooting off his mouth and Federer put him in his place. I don't know what happened.

*

Well, I do know what happened. Djokovic beat Federer, fair and square. There is no question that Djokovic was the better player tonight. I don't want to make excuses for Federer, since he never does for himself, but that was not the Federer of Grand Slams past out there. That was the Federer that has walked out to face Rafael Nadal in the final of Roland Garros for the past two years, the Federer with fear. Or at least so it seemed to me. Because Federer, even if he was trying his best (which he will undoubtedly say in his interviews) did not play his best out there. He was inhibited, playing within himself, letting Djokovic pin him to the baseline, rarely coming in, not mixing it up, and worst of all (for him) his forehand, the best shot ever in men's tennis, failed him. He made a ridiculous amount of unforced errors compared to his usual. And he was not Federer the frontrunner. When he was frontrunning, he dropped back. He... wasn't there.

*

Or maybe he was. But he... this was Roger, but it was not the normal Roger.

*

I noted a while back that he was over-vocalising in some of his matches, against Blake especially. He was almost under-vocalising in this one. For the first two and a half sets, he was silent. And Djokovic played crazy-good. He's really been the form player in this tournament - even though I dislike him immensely, I cannot deny it - and he came out all guns blazing. Much as I hate him, I have to say it: Djokovic deserved to win this match.

*

Though that doesn't mean I won't be gunning for Tsonga with every inch of my being come Sunday night. Or that I'll stop crying anytime soon.

*

It's easy to hitch yourself to a star. To pick a player and follow them because they win, and so you're rarely disappointed. To be, essentially, a fairweather fan. I'm sure, through no fault of his own, Roger has lost a fan or two tonight. Likewise, I'm sure Djokovic has gained some. Everyone loses sometimes. Everyone wins sometimes. And I'm sure this isn't the beginning of some massive downward slump for Federer or anything like that. Djokovic or no, he is still the greatest player in history. He has won twelve Slam titles and countless other accolades, and no one can take that away.

*

But watching Federer lose brings back into sharp focus, for me, why I admire him so much. It is not because he wins, but because he is such a great ambassador for the sport. Watching him play - though not tonight, obviously - is like watching poetry in motion. But that is not why he is so wonderful.

*

Can you imagine a better man to be a spokesperson for tennis - or, indeed, anything? He is charming, clever, a polyglot, and above all, really, really nice. This is a man who represents sportsmanship in its purest forms: he never denigrates an opponent, whether he wins or loses. He will never take away an opponent's triumph. He resists his beatification as a virtual tennis saint. He is, by his own admission, 'just Roger' and what he brings is 'all he's got.' He is humble. He is real. And yes, I love it when he wins, and it destroys me when he doesn't. But that doesn't change anything.

*

This man is still the greatest tennis player to have ever played. And, more importantly, he is possibly the most wonderful man ever to pick up a racquet, in all aspects of his life. Win, lose, retire, that will never change. You can take a victory away from Federer, but nothing will ever take away what Federer is. He is the greatest. He is the most tremendous athlete of our age. He is the model to which all sportspeople should aspire. And moreover, he is an excellent example of humility and fair play - qualities which are relevant not only in tennis but in life.

*

Erin suggested to me that I write an article about life lessons I have learned from Roger Federer. The first lesson? Winning isn't everything. And when you lose, you have to take it on the chin, and then move on.

*

Djokovic will get his dues. And if he wins the Open, congratulations. But at this point in his career, he is not half the man Roger Federer is. And until he has proved to me that he has these qualities, this inner strength... Roger has still won.

*

This is one fan Roger Federer has not lost, and will never lose, because he is, quite simply, a champion, on and off the court, in tennis and in life.

*

*

Australian Open Results - Day 12

*

Men's Draw

*

Novak Djokovic def. Roger Federer, 7-5 6-3 7-6 (7-5)

Just Not Cricket

What was I thinking, saying anything even vaguely nice about Lleyton Hewitt yesterday? He might have a all right top spin lob, but his behavior in and after his match against Chris Guccione was terrible.

*

What a princess! Going on and on about how he could sympathise with the Australian cricket team because of 'ordinary' umpiring! To launch a tirade of abuse like that at the umpire in the second set breaker - well, THAT just wasn't cricket, Lleyton. But what's worse, I think, is that he came out and said after the match that he was the better player, even though he lost.

*

How dare he say something like that?! Chris Guccione played a fine match. Sure, his game is a little one-sided - it depends very heavily on his massive serve - but he got the job done. Guccione won, fair and square. Sure, some of the calls might have been a little bit dubious, but I don't think the whole match swung on them or anything like that. There was one call - I think it was at 3-2 in the second set breaker - where Hewitt thought the ball had bounced twice before Guccione got to it, and proceeded to abuse the umpire at length on the point.

*

Guccione, on the other hand, thinks he did get to the ball. And wouldn't he be in a position to know?

*

Just because you clearly have a problem with sportsmanship, Lleyton, doesn't mean that you should question everyone else's. If Guccione says he got to it, then I think you should believe he got to it.

*

Meanwhile, what a win for Dmitry Tursunov! I couldn't watch it, because of gainful employment, but I was watching the scores the whole time, and oh! was I cheering (on the inside.) Tursunov ranks No. 2 on my list of favourite tennis players (after, of course, the wonderful Mr. Federer) and I was so pleased! I'm going to the men's final on Saturday, and I can't think of anything better than to see Dmitry play! The top three seeds are out of the tournament - the highest (and only, I think) remaining seed is Tomas Berdych at No. 4 - and so I *

think Dmitry has a real chance.

*

(And if anyone wants to read a tennis blog that's actually amusing, Tursunov's ATP blog is hysterical!)

*

*

Today's Results

_

Medibank International (Sydney)

_

Men's Draw

Dmitry Tursunov def. Richard Gasquet, 3-6 6-3 6-4

Tomas Berdych def. Gilles Simon, 7-6 (7-3) 6-2

Agustin Calleri def. Carlos Moya, 6-3 6-4

Chris Guccione def. Lleyton Hewitt, 7-6 (7-4) 7-6 (7-2)

Sebastien Grosjean def. Fernando Verdasco, 6-3 6-4

Evgeny Korolev def. Ivo Minar, 6-2 6-3

Radek Stepanek def. Andreas Seppi, 7-5 2-6 6-4

Fabrice Santoro def. Steve Darcis, 6-1 6-3

_

Women's Draw

Justine Henin def. Kaia Kanepi, 6-2 6-0

Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Francesca Schiavone, 6-4 6-0

Nicole Vaidisova def. Jelena Jankovic, 6-4 4-6 6-4

Ana Ivanovic def. Katarina Srebotnik , 6-3 3-6 6-2

_

_

AAMI Classic (Kooyong)

_

Marcos Baghdatis def. Nikolay Davydenko, 6-4 4-6 6-1

Andy Roddick def. Ivan Ljubicic, 6-3 6-0

Marat Safin def. Andy Murray, 6-1 6-4

Fernando Gonzalez def. Brydan Klein, 7-6 (7-3) 6-4

_

_

Heineken Open (Auckland)

_

First Round

David Ferrer def. Oscar Hernandez, 6-1 6-2

Juan Monaco def. Thomas Johansson, 6-3 6-4

Juan Carlos Ferrero def. Jesse Levine, 6-4 6-1

Xavier Malisse def. Jarkko Nieminen, 7-6 (7-3) 6-3

Michael Llodra def. Hyung-taik Lee, 6-1 6-4

Marin Cilic def. Tomas Cakl, 6-4 6-3

_

Second Round

David Ferrer def. Sergio Roitman, 6-1 -7-6 (7-2)

Florian Mayer def. Juan Ignacio Chela, 6-3 7-6 (9-7)

Juan Monaco def. Olivier Rochus, 6-3 6-3

Juan Carlos Ferrero def. Jurgen Melzer, 6-3 7-6 (8-6)

Julien Benneteau def. Nicolas Almagro, 6-4 2-6 6-2

Philipp Kohlschreiber def. Marin Cilic, 6-3 6-7 (5-7) 6-4

Michael Llodra def. Albert Montanes, 6-3 6-4

Nicolas Massu def. Xavier Malisse, 6-4 6-4

_

-

Moorilla Hobart International (Hobart)

_

Vera Zvonareva def. Elena Vesnina, 6-3 6-3

Flavia Pennetta def. Sania Mirza, 7-5 1-6 6-3

Ashley Harkleroad def. Edina Gallovits, 6-4 6-4

Eleni Daniilidou def. Casey Dellacqua, 6-4 7-5

Mummy's Girl

Tennis is a whole lot about personality, if you ask me. It's very indicative of what kind of person someone is. I mean, it's not like you can determine whether or not someone likes brussel sprouts from the quality of their forehand volley, but you can get sort of a general overview. And, as in real life, sometimes you don't like them. And that's what has happened with me and the Williams sisters - Serena in particular.

_

She might be a lovely person in real life. My opinion is, as always, totally uneducated. But the way she bellows during her matches... the way she continually looks to her mother... the way she bounces her racquet off the court... I don't like it. There was one point in her match today with Alicia Molik (a match Williams was, I might add, winning quite comfortably) where Molik hit a bunt backhand that Serena couldn't get to. What did Serena do? Dropped to her knees and said, 'it's not fair.'

_

Well, grow up, Serena. It is fair.

_

I think it might be the continual looks to her mother that get me the most. There was one point today where she was looking towards her mother a lot and one of the commentators commented that it obviously meant she wasn't happy about something. What kind of attitude is that? 'Oh dear, it's not going all my way, what should I do, Mummy?' I detest this kind of - well, I don't want to call it coaching, but it is, in a way. Rafael Nadal does it well, constantly looking up at his coach Uncle Toni. In fact, he's done it so much so in the past that Federer, who has won the annual ATP award for sportsmanship about five hundred times in a row, complained that Nadal was being coached. I could be wrong, but I didn't see Molik look towards Nicole Bradtke for advice once today. Why is Williams conducting herself this way?

_

On top of it all, she was WINNING. Easily. She punished Molik. So why the whinging?

_

On a happier note, Chinese Taipei came through and beat Argentina 3-0 last night, which is awesome! And well done to Peter Luczak (aka. Mr. Milkshake) in his match against Mardy Fish today, where he played some great tennis, even though he lost.

_

_

Today's Results

_

Hopman Cup (Perth)

_

Chinese Taipei def. Argentina 3-0

Lu Hen-tsun def. Juan Ignacio Chela, 6-3 6-4

Hsieh/Lu def. Chela/Dulko, 3-6 6-4 10-4 (match tie break)

_

USA def. Australia 3-0

Serena Williams def. Alicia Molik, 6-2 7-6 (9-7)

Mardy Fish def. Peter Luczak, 7-6 (7-5) 7-6 (12-10)

Williams/Fish def. Molik/Luczak, 6-2 6-3

_

Czech Republic def. India, 2-1

Lucie Safarova def. Sania Mirza, 6-2 4-6 6-3

Tomas Berdych def. Rohan Bopanna, 6-4 6-0

Mirza/Bopanna def. Safarova/Berdych, 6-3 6-2

_

Argentina vs. Serbia 1-1

Gisela Dulko def. Jelena Jankovic, 6-7 2-0 ret.

Novak Djokovic def. Juan Ignacio Chela, 6-2 6-3

_

France lead Chinese Taipei, 1-0

Tatiana Golovin def. Hsieh Su-wei, 6-1 6-1

_

_

Mondial Australian Women's Hardcourts (Gold Coast)

_

Li Na def. Nicole Vaidisova, 6-3 6-3

Shahar Peer def. Dinara Safina, 4-6 6-1 7-6 (10-8)

Patty Schnyder def. Amélie Mauresmo, 6-4 6-4

Victoria Azarenka def. Dominika Cibulkova, 6-1 3-6 6-3

_

_

ASB Classic (Auckland)

_

Marina Erakovic def. Vera Zvonareva, 6-3 2-6 7-6 (7-5)

Tamira Paszek def. Maria Kirilenko, 6-1 6-3

Aravane Rezai def. Katarina Srebotnik, 6-1 6-3

Lindsay Davenport def. Sara Errani, 6-3 6-3

_

_

Next Generation Adelaide International (Adelaide)

_

Lleyton Hewitt def. Jose Acasuso, 6-2 6-2

Jarkko Nieminen def. Frank Dancevic, 6-4 6-1

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga def. Ernests Gulbis, 6-3 6-2

Vince Spadea def. Mischa Zverev, 6-3 7-5

_

_

Qatar Exxonmobil Open (Doha)

_

Nikolay Davydenko def. Fabrice Santoro, 6-3 6-3

Andy Murray def. Rainer Schuettler, 1-6 6-0 6-1

Ivan Ljubicic def. Janko Tipsarevic, walkover

Philipp Kohlschreiber def. Filippo Volandri, 6-4 6-1

Dmitry Tursunov def. Nicholas Kiefer, walkover

Thomas Johansson def. Michael Berrer, 6-3 7-5

Stanislas Wawrinka def. Christophe Rochus, 6-2 7-5

Agustin Calleri def. Hyung-taik Lee, 6-3 6-1

_

_

Chennai Open (Chennai)

_

Mikhail Youzhny def. Edouard Roger-Vasselin, 75 16 62

Xavier Malisse def. Jurgen Melzer, 76(3) 62

Florent Serra def. Kristof Vliegen, 75 46 76(3)

Carlos Moya def. Alexandre Kudryavtsev, 63 67(4) 62