One rainy week down at Wimbledon, one more rainy week to go. Thus far things have gone pretty much according to plan at the Big W. Top guys are beating up on everyone; top gals are doing much of the same. Only real surprise first week is that we had few days of NO RAIN! But onto the players…
Roger Federer is well on course to the semifinals. After Tommy Haas bailed today with an ab problem, Fed now faces the winner of Janko Tipsarevich and Juan Carlos Ferrero. Regardless of who wins that one – I’ll tab Tipsy – Federer wins in straights putting him in the semifinals where he should face Andy Roddick in that semi.
Actually, there is another surprise. Just how lousy Roddick looks. Ok, lousy may be strong, but he’s not looking like a world beater. And I think if his match against Paul Henri Mathieu was played on any surface other than grass P-Mat takes him down. On grass the Frenchman still might, but I think Roddick will pull thru setting up a showdown with Gasquet for a semifinal berth. Should that match happen it would be the best contest of the quarters, but while Gasquet is the superior player overall I am not convinced of his ability to return Roddick’s serve and his handle the situation of being in his first Major quarterfinal. That said I’ll stick with Andy.
Onto the rain-drenched bottom half, which is far more of a mixed bag. At the top you got Nikolay Davydenko against Gael Monfils to play David Nalbandian or Marcos Baghdatis. I think Monfils should get thru, and in the second match…I’ll lean ever slow slightly with Nalbandian, who then takes out Monfils. Gotta hand it to Nalbandian, the guy’s fat, only shows at Slams but is incredibly talented. And I mean incredibly. Wish he would just put in the time.
I like Hewitt to emerge and then take out Nalbandian. Canas should present little trouble to Lleyton while Djokovic is indeed a tougher task, but the Aussie should get by. A 100% Kiefer would beat Djoko, but I don’t think the German can win after having been off the circuit for a year.
In the bottom quarter, I still think Rafael Nadal looks vulnerable to guys Robin Soderling and Jarkko Nieminen, who should edge Mikhail Youzhny. Either way, I still like Berdych to get through that last quarter beating Hyung-Taik Lee and then Wayne Arthurs, who continues his Cinderella run with a victory over fellow 35+ Jonas Bjorkman. (For Pete Sampras fans, or Pete himself, again, if guys like Jonas and Wayne can go this far, how far would he go. Certainly have to wonder, and I really beat Pete is wondering himself. But that’s for another blog post!).
So that leaves my original final four of Fed beating Roddick, Hewitt beating Berdych and then in the Fed destroying Hewitt for the title.
As for the much-discussed Fed outfit. I was fine with the jacket last year, but this year the whole ensemble of the sweater, pants, luggage, etc., is getting to be too much. You want to bring a few racquets, jam a few shorts and shirts into a bag, etc, and walk onto the court, that’s fine. But two bags and a suit? I thought Fed was boarding a yacht or something. In light of the weather Fed, how about a yellow rain slicker and an umbrella. Maybe thrown on some galoshes with that swoosh. Maybe next year.
Like the men, the women’s draw is also going according to form. I still think the Justine Henin-Serena Williams winner will take the title. I still like Henin to pull that out, and \complete her career Slam maybe over Maria Sharapova in the final. Maria is not at her best, but let’s face it, she still reached the French semis on her worst surface so if she pull that result on the clay she should do better on the grass.
Also keep an eye on that 16-year-old Tamira Paszek. I saw her at the French and she’s got a wicked backhand. A future Top 10 for certain in the next 18 months, probably sooner.
Despite all the rain, and some inconsistent, jerky, ESPN converage, we did get to see a great week of tennis. Henman-Lopez, Henman-Moya. Davydenko-Guiccione and the run of Wayne Arthurs, which we really didn’t see but it is a great story!
Now let’s focusing on getting this rain out of the way.
http://www.tennis-x.com/
Monday, July 2, 2007
Federer, Henin, Rain Wimbledon Winners
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Wimbledon — Last Minute Previews
I know I’m a little bit late with my previews, and it’s been a while since I posted here, but I’ve been reporting for TennisReporters.net and TennisInfo.be last week from the Ordina Open in Rosmalen, where numerous rain delays almost pushed back the finals to Sunday. For an exclusive interview with Jelena Jankovic, head over to TennisReporters.net.
Now then, time to take a look at the draws for what most people call the biggest tournament in tennis.
THE GENTLEMEN
First Quarter
For the first time in his career, Roger Federer enters Wimbledon not having played a warmup event on grass. Former greats such as John McEnroe and Pete Sampras have regretted their decision to the do same, when they were consequently bounced out of SW19 before finals day. Still, it would be insane to bet against the Swiss not making the semis.
Semifinal pick: Roger Federer
Second Quarter
Forget about the clay, Andy Roddick is back on his favorite surface and ready to do some damage. The No.3 is coming off a win in Queens and has been drawn in the lightest section of the tournament.
Semifinal pick: Andy Roddick
Third Quarter
This is where things get interesting. Nikolay Davydenko, David Nalbandian, Marcos Baghdatis, Lleyton Hewitt and Novak Djokovic are the seeds to watch, but don’t look past dangerous floaters such as Gael Monfils, Max Mirnyi and Ivo Karlovic. Who to pick from this section? Forget about Davydenko, the Russian hasn’t even won a handful of matches on grass in his career. I’m liking Hewitt’s chances, if he can get past Novak Djokovic in the fourth round. The 2002 champion will face either Baghdatis, Nalbandian or Monfils in the quarters and his experience should get him past that hurdle.
Semifinal pick: Lleyton Hewitt
Fourth Quarter
Rafael Nadal will have a much tougher road to travel should he make it to another Wimbledon final, compared to last year’s draw. The Spaniard opens against Mardy Fish and is scheduled to meet his nemesis Mikhail Youzhny in the fourth round. I like the Russian’s chances, if he is no longer bothered by his lower back injury, and he should be able to best Tomas Berdych or possibly Jonas Bjorkman in the quarters to advance to his second major semifinal, after reaching the last four at the US Open last year.
Semifinal pick: Mikhail Youzhny
It’s turning out to be a fairly good draw for Hewitt, who won’t meet Federer before the final this time. Hewitt should win against Youzhny, and the Aussie might take a set off Federer in the championship match, but the grass courts belong to the Swiss No.1, who will emulate Bjorn Borg’s five consecutive titles won at Wimbledon.
Champion: Roger Federer
THE LADIES
First Quarter
If you liked the Roland Garros women’s draw, you’re going to love this one. Justine Henin and Serena Williams highlight the top quarter of the draw, just as in Paris. Serena was flat in her match against Henin at the French, but I’m liking the American’s chances at the lawns of the All England Club. The winner of the tournament will likely come again out of this match, but I think Serena’s power game will have more impact on the fast surface, and so Henin will have to wait another year for her career Grand Slam.
Semifinal pick: Serena Williams
Second Quarter
Jelena Jankovic and Anna Chakvetadze are the highest seeds in the second quarter, and although the Russian has a tricky third round opponent in Michaella Krajicek, I don’t think the Dutchwoman will be able to take last week’s Ordina Open champion out. Jankovic and Chakvetadze should both reach the quarterfinals, in what would be a replay of their final in The Netherlands last Saturday. Since Jankovic will be playing for the tenth straight week, I’m liking Chakvetadze to pull the upset.
Semifinal pick: Anna Chakvetadze
Third Quarter
Can we say Amelie Mauresmo is back to her old self? The 2006 Wimbledon champion played an excellent event in Eastbourne last week, where she narrowly lost in the final to Justine Henin. Mauresmo feels comfortable on grass and has a great draw to the semis. I don’t think Ana Ivanovic is skilled enough on the lawns yet to take her out in the quarters.
Semifinal pick: Amelie Mauresmo
Fourth Quarter
We have two potential semifinalists in this quarter. Venus Williams and Maria Sharapova will do battle on what is considered to be both players’ favorite surface, in the fourth round of The Championships. I’m thinking Sharapova will avenge her 2005 loss at Wimbledon to Venus and advance to the last four. The second-seeded Russian has had some good match practice in Birmingham, where she was edged by Jelena Jankovic in the final. Venus on the other hand hasn’t shown much all year, and even though she has the ability to surprise everyone and make a run to the final, I’m favoring Maria.
Semifinal pick: Maria Sharapova
Anna Chakvetadze is a gifted player, but Serena Williams should comfortably take her out in the semis. I believe Mauresmo will beat Sharapova in a 2006 Wimbledon semifinal rematch, because the Russian could start feeling her shoulder again after the busy weeks she’s had. In the final, I’m going with Serena to win it all.
Champion: Serena Williams
Let's talk about Rafa
K, this is the peak of the grass-court season, and we're not supposed to be thinking or talking about Rafael Nadal, who owns the European spring, right? After all, he's just about all we've discussed for the past three months, and this is Wimbledon time -- Roger Federer time.
Rafa Fatigue is a real phenomena, no doubt about it. But it's a dangerous one, especially for diehard Federer fans who dismissed Nadal's run to the Wimbledon final last year as some sort of fluke, facilitated by an easy draw. For all those doubters, I have just two words: Bjorn Borg.
You'll remember that Borg dominated the French Open, much like Nadal now dominates that event. But you also know that Borg dominated Wimbledon (he won the French Open and Wimbledon back-to-back on three occasions, and he culled five Wimbledon titles in all). He did so with precisely the same gifts Nadal has: awesome concentration and fighting spirit, a fidelity to his game despite the presumed disadvantages of having to play it on grass, outstanding athleticism (needed for chasing down balls and adapting to bad bounces) and all-around solidity off the ground. The only thing Borg had that Nadal lacks is a great serve.
Remember, very few people win baseline struggles with Nadal on any surface, while Borg had to contend with attacking players at Wimbledon -- they were, in fact, the only guys who beat him there once Borg got dialed-in on grass. But back in the day, the grass was faster and so were the balls (they changed after a few of those mid-1990s' rock fights between Pete Sampras and Goran Ivanisevic), and today almost all the players are baseliners. The bottom line is that it's never been easier for a baseliner to win Wimbledon that it is today. Advantage to Nadal.
The real issue with Nadal is whether he wants to win Wimbledon. A legion of great clay-court players failed to make winning Wimbledon a priority, but Nadal is a different breed of cat. The bad news for Federer and company is that Nadal is like an Indian war pony when it comes to an appetite for grass. (Can't you picture him astride one?) He's dedicated, determined and he has a great attitude. They asked him the other day about the court speed and his reply was basically: "Baloney. I've played here for four years and it's always been the same. Who cares?"
This guy isn't worried about the court, one way or another, or about the mind games. When asked what tactics he might adopt against his next opponent, a raw-boned, big-serving Swede, Robin Soderling, he replied: "Tactics? Not much tactics. Just try the best in every match, no? The tactics is try to return the ball the first time and, after, try to play more aggressive as you can, no?"
That "tactic" will take Nadal far; perhaps all the way to the title.
TENNIS.com
When the grass wasn't greener
Never content with the sport as it is, tennis fans, writers, players and pundits have a complaint for every season. Sometimes it's just a two-week problem, as is the case each year during Wimbledon. Once upon a time, the grass was too fast and needed to be ripped out and replaced with a hard court. But in the last two or three years, we've come full circle. Now the yearly mantra is about how the grass game has been killed because the surface is too firm and slow.
OK, no one wants Wimbledon to become a cow-pasture version of the French Open. And the chance, once a year, to see the serve-and-volley game employed effectively is a treat. But I recently watched the DVD production of the match that fans point to as the apex of Wimbledon tennis: the 1980 final between Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe. I'm sure you know all about this classic and it's 34-point tiebreaker, but have you sat through the whole thing lately?
The match deserves its place in history, both because of the personalities involved and the unbelievable tension and drama. But for the tennis itself? Not so much. After two weeks of play, the court wasn't so much lawn as it was a dirt floor. With their small-headed wooden racquets, neither guy could blast the ball the way the men do today, yet rallies were nonexistent because the ball skidded erratically off the "grass." Borg and Mac both shanked dozens of makeable returns, and the idea that it was "classic contrast of styles" is false: Borg was forced to go away from his baseline game and rush the net so he wouldn't have to deal with the bounces. Let's just say his volleys were never a thing of beauty (but they were effective).
Today the grass is firmer, less bumpy, and nearly full throughout the two weeks. While it plays something like a fast hard court, to say that you can't serve and volley on it is wrong. The men rarely serve and volley anywhere now, and they don't have time to revamp their games immediately after two months on clay. Blame the lack of a grass-court season for the demise of vintage grass tennis, not the surface itself.
Watching this week, I've felt like the elements that make grassball (not to be confused with dirtball) unique and dramatic are still in place. Even a nominal mismatch between Rafael Nadal and Mardy Fish was tight and tense most of the time. Each set came down, like grass-court matches always have, to just a few lucky breaks and well-taken chances by Nadal in his return games.
This is why we love grass tennis, and what makes it such a terrific contrast with the clay season just past. What's really changed is the quality of play, which has only gone up since Borg and Mac and the War of 18-16. That's something every fan and pundit should applaud and enjoy.
TENNIS.com
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Wimbledon - hitting cans cljsters
Ths is Kim Clijsters at the practice courts practicing her serve and hitting cans!!!!!!!!!
AMAZING
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SINGLES AND DOUBLES IN TENNIS.
Singles, the greatest strain in tennis, is the game for two players. It is in this phase of the game that the personal equation reaches its crest of importance. This is the game of individual effort, mental and physical.
A hard 5-set singles match is the greatest strain on the body and nervous system of any form of sport. Singles is a game of daring, dash, speed of foot and stroke. It is a game of chance far more than doubles. Since you have no partner dependent upon you, you can afford to risk error for the possibility of speedy victory. Much of what I wrote under match play is more for singles than doubles, yet let me call your attention to certain peculiarities of singles from the standpoint of the spectator.
A gallery enjoys personalities far more than styles. Singles brings two people into close and active relations that show the idiosyncrasies of each player far more acutely than doubles. The spectator is in the position of a man watching an insect under a microscope. He can analyse the inner workings.
The freedom of restraint felt on a single court is in marked contrast to the need for team work in doubles. Go out for your shot in singles whenever there is a reasonable chance of getting it. Hit harder at all times in singles than in doubles, for you have more chance of scoring and can take more risk.
Singles is a game of the imagination, doubles a science of exact angles.
Doubles is four-handed tennis. Enough of this primary reader definition.
It is just as vital to play to your partner in tennis as in bridge. Every time you make a stroke you must do it with a definite plan to avoid putting your partner in trouble. The keynote of doubles success is team work; not individual brilliancy. There is a certain type of team work dependent wholly upon individual brilliancy. Where both players are in the same class, a team is as strong as its weakest player at any given time, for here it is even team work with an equal division of the court that should be the method of play. In the case of one strong player and one weaker player, the team is as good as the strong player can make it by protecting and defending the weaker. This pair should develop its team work on the individual brilliancy of the stronger man.
The first essential of doubles play is to PUT the ball in play. A double fault is bad in singles, but it is inexcusable in doubles. The return of service should be certain. After that it should be low and to the server coming in. Do not strive for clean aces in doubles until you have the opening. Remember that to pass two men is a difficult task.
Always attack in doubles. The net is the only place in the court to play the doubles game, and you should always strive to attain the net position. I believe in always trying for the kill when you see a real opening. "Poach" (go for a shot which is not really on your side of the court) whenever you see a chance to score. Never poach unless you go for the kill. It is a win or nothing shot since it opens your whole court. If you are missing badly do not poach, as it is very disconcerting to your partner.
The question of covering a doubles court should not be a serious one. With all men striving to attain the net all the time every shot should be built up with that idea. Volley and smash whenever possible, and only retreat when absolutely necessary.
When the ball goes toward the side-line the net player on that side goes in close and toward the line. His partner falls slightly back and to the centre of the court, thus covering the shot between the men. If the next return goes to the other side, the two men reverse positions. The theory of court covering is two sides of a triangle, with the angle in the centre and the two sides running to the side-lines and in the direction of the net.
Each man should cover overhead balls over his own head, and hit them in the air whenever possible, since to allow them to drop gives the net to the other team. The only time for the partner to protect the overhead is when the net man "poaches," is outguessed, and the ball tossed over his head. Then the server covers and strives for a kill at once.
Always be ready to protect your partner, but do not take shots over his head unless he calls for you to, or you see a certain kill. Then say "Mine," step in and hit decisively. The matter of overhead balls, crossing under them, and such incidentals of team work are matters of personal opinion, and should be arranged by each team according to their joint views. I only offer general rules that can be modified to meet the wishes of the individuals.
Use the lob as a defence, and to give time to extricate yourself and your partner from a bad position. The value of service in doubles cannot be too strongly emphasized since it gives the net to the server. Service should always be held. To lose service is an unpardonable sin in first-class doubles. All shots in doubles should be low or very high. Do not hit shoulder-high as it is too easy to kill. Volley down and hard if possible. Every shot you make should be made with a definite idea of opening the court.
Hit down the centre to disrupt the team work of the opposing team; but hit to the side-lines for your aces.
Pick one man, preferably the weaker of your opponents, and centre your attack on him and keep it there. Pound him unmercifully, and in time he should crack under the attack. It is very foolish to alternate attack, since it simply puts both men on their game and tires neither.
If your partner starts badly play safely and surely until he rounds to form. Never show annoyance with your partner. Do not scold him. He is doing the best he can, and fighting with him does no good. Encourage him at all times and don't worry. A team that is fighting among themselves has little time left to play tennis, and after all tennis is the main object of doubles.
Offer suggestions to your partner at any time during a match; but do not insist on his following them, and do not get peevish if he doesn't. He simply does not agree with you, and he may be right. Who knows?
Every doubles team should have a leader to direct its play; but that leader must always be willing to drop leadership for any given point when his partner has the superior position. It is policy of attack not type of stroke that the leader should determine.
Pick a partner and stick to him. He should be a man you like and want to play with, and he should want to play with you. This will do away with much friction. His style should not be too nearly your own, since you double the faults without greatly increasing the virtues.
