Over the past week, it has been stressed so often that the only thing standing in the path of Serena and her sixth Australian Open is herself and injury. So, in a way it should come as no surprise that injury is exactly what has struck. And not just any old injury, but an eerily similar ankle sprain to the one that wrecked her entire Australian season last year. Though she eventually continued and hilariously managed to inflict a double-bagel on Edina Gallovits-Hall despite the injury, it is still certainly still a large concern, as she later stressed.
Q. The fact you came in with no crutches on is a good start for us. How is the leg?
SERENA WILLIAMS: I haven’t had enough time to assess it yet. Saw the doctor again. We’re just gonna see how it is in a few hours from now.
Q. So Thursday is too early to call, whether you can play Thursday?
SERENA WILLIAMS: Oh, I’ll be out there. I mean, unless something fatal happens to me, there’s no way I’m not going to be competing.
I’m alive. My heart’s beating. I’ll be fine.
Q. When you went over, did it remind you of Brisbane last year?
SERENA WILLIAMS: Absolutely. It reminded me a lot of Brisbane. I thought, Oh, not again. But, you know, I’ve had such a good year that I don’t think it’s anything negative. I just think that I was definitely a little bit in shock and I was thinking, I hope it’s not as serious, because it was really serious last year.
Q. Is there any pain or swelling there now?
SERENA WILLIAMS: Obviously there’s pain. Obviously there’s swelling. So it’s going to be really important to see how the next few hours unfold.
It reminded me a lot of Brisbane. I thought, Oh, not again. But, you know, I’ve had such a good year that I don’t think it’s anything negative. I just think that I was definitely
It’s easy to forget that Serena also sprained her ankle during doubles at the US Open last year which also threw that title campaign into doubt. That’s three sprained ankles in essentially one year. If there is ever a time for Serena’s team to ensure that her own footwork or movement isn’t heightening the likelihood of these ankle sprains, now is probably it.
However, if one thing is certain, it’s that without the extensive taping on Serena’s ankle, the injury would have been dramatically worse. Why don’t more players protect themselves by protecting their ankles?
As the draw previews were pumped out earlier this week, a couple of Americans suggested that Steve Johnson could pose a considerable threat to Nicolas Almagro. I laughed. Though he eventually qualified handily, it was only a handful of days ago that he pitifully choked at least three times before barely scraping past 758-ranked 16 year old Thanasi “The Kid” Kokkinakis 6-4 6-7(4) 17-15 in the first round of qualies. In what world could he ever rise from that level to challenging the 10th seed within a week?
Well, apparently on planet Earth, as he pushed the Spaniard all the way to five entertaining sets, producing some quite spectacular shotmaking throughout. None, however, were more outrageous than this exhibition of rapid reflexes and deft touch as he turned an unlucky net cord into a winning shot on game point. Stellar.
By now, all draws have been studied and previewed to within an inch of their lives. People have made their predictions and picks – some bold, others predictable – and are all set and ready to go. But, hey, there’s always room for one more.
Adrian Mannarino France
24 years-old
#170
As with seemingly every other male French tennis player on the planet (well, not all of them. Sorry Gilles), Adrian Mannarino falls under the ‘incredibly entertaining yet ultimately harmless’ category of tennis player. He has variety, a quick mind, a delightfully effortless and style of play and both his tennis and hair are the source of endless entertainment and confusion in equal measure. After an abominable 2012, it appears the flairsome Frenchman has arrived in 2013 with a completely clean slate and fresh mind. Already he has captured his first challenger title in Noumea and has carried this momentum with him into Melbourne, qualifying without the loss of a single set, with two beatdowns in his final two qualifying rounds.
He efforts have hardly been rewarded, however, with a disastrous first round match against fifth-seeded Juan Martin Del Potro on the horizon. But if his two previous meetings with Delpo are anything to go by – a win at Queens in 2011 and an extremely tight four-setter at this venue last year – his imaginative tennis should provide more problems for the title contender. And if not, he’ll still entertain. Watch him. That’s an order.
Ricardas Berankis Lithuania
22 years-old
#110
Pocket Rocket is perhaps the most unintentionally inappropriate nickname in the history of unintentionally inappropriate nicknames, but what else can we call young Rikkie B? He stands at somewhere around 4ft1 yet is capable of serving in excess of 130mph, thanks in a large part to his distinct service motion – the motion uncoiling at the speed of light as his stocky legs launch him clear into the hair. The rest of his game is interesting too, with the talented Lithuanian armed with speed around the court (I said he was 4ft1, after all), an impressive forehand and a penchant for variety.
Since breaking the top 100 back in 2011, the former junior US Open champ has been plagued by a myriad of frustrating injures which have sidelined him during his most important development period and left him floundering while the Raonic, Dimitrov, Tomic, Harrison generation consolidated their places in the top 100. However, he is back and has been slowly regaining his old form and more. He qualified as the second seed with aplomb and has been handed a winnable first round against good ol’ Sergiy Stakhovsky. Should he defeat the mouthy journeyman, the ever-funky Florian Mayer will likely await with the chance to show off his skills on the big stage against a looming Andy Murray in the third round. Watch him too.
Daniel Brands Germany
25 years old
#120
Ah, the Brandwagon. The most mindlessly delusional fan following in tennis…until it wasn’t. Against all odds and despite those ironic declarations from fans of future ATP glory, Daniel Brands’ year kicked off in immense style as he braved his first ATP semi in Doha, defeating Chardy and a returning Monfils to cap off the second best week of his career. Brands previously held a reputation as a player who, at 6ft5, relied mostly on his serve, but he showcased the best of his thunderous forehand and deft touches at the net en-route to his Doha semi-final.
There hasn’t been a let-up since his surprise run. After a tight three-setter in the first round of qualies, the German strolled through his remaining two in straight sets. He has been placed in perhaps the most interesting early section of all, with a first round battle against Klizan and the ever-humble Bernard Tomic a potential second-rounder. Realistically, all three could advance to a third round match with Roger Federer. Only time will tell which player does.
Jennifer Capriati. What is there to say that hasn’t already been said about this woman? She stands as one of the greatest, most talented and divisive players in a generation bursting at the seams with greatness, talent and controversy. In her wildly scattered 14 years on tour, the American amassed a total of three Grand Slam titles, an Olympic Gold Singles medal, 17 weeks at number one and countless classic victories (and losses) against the greatest players over two separate generations.
It’s tough, however, to pinpoint her single her most memorable moment. Was it her supernova rise up the rankings while barely a teenager? She made her tour debut on the WTA tour in 1990 aged 13 and immediately stormed to the final of two of the first three events before reaching the semis of her first Grand Slam in Paris. A year later she broke into the top ten, and in the following year dispatched of Sanchez-Vicario and Graf – the top two players in the world – to take the Olympic Gold in Barcelona aged 16. Not too shabby.
Of course, there’s also that small issue of the “c” word. We’ve all heard about her famed comeback – the burnout, the shoplifting arrest, the marijuana possession, that mug shot, her resulting lengthy break and the desperate struggle (and initial failure) to regain anything resembling previous form, the reporters who smugly wrote her off. She could have easily allowed herself to swept away into the tsunami-sized wave of burnt out young prodigies. But she didn’t. She persevered, slowly building her way back to the top. After completely falling out of the rankings in 1994 and failing in her initial comeback a year later, she picked up her first Grand Slam win in 5 years at the 1998 Wimbledon. A lowly title and #23 finish followed a year later. A slam semifinal and top 15 finish in 2000. And finally, the fairy tale was completed in 2001 as she eased past second-ranked Davenport and top-ranked Hingis in succession to capture her first slam title in Australia. But you already new that all.
Two of Capriati’s single most memorable moments were her famed epic slam finals. The first at Roland Garros in 2001 when a young Aussie Kim burst into relevance by reaching her first slam final. Despite the young Belgian matching both Capriati’s supreme athleticism and power with ease, there was no panicking to be seen from the reigning Australian Open champion as she was swiftly delivered a shock first set breadstick. Instead, she embraced the challenge, putting her head down and finding her range to level up the match. By the third, both women were in full-slugfest mode with their lightning-fast movement, intricate footwork and spectacular shotmaking simultaneously cancelling each other out and enhancing the other. The third set wore on well into overtime, with Capriati twice serving for the title while a resilient Clijsters pegged the American back each time. But eventually the champion‘s extra grit and mental strength proved the difference between the two and she edged out the title..
Capriati’s third and final slam title would come in Australia the very next year in conditions so difficult that the heat practically radiated through the television set and left Capriati even pissier and more vexated than her, well, usual pissy and vexated self. Hingis raced up a set and break, looking ripe for her sixth slam title. In response, Capriati dug deeper than ever before, first hunting back the break before fighting off multiple match points. Her effort was painfully visible as she collapsed into the linesman chairs between most points, but she refused to succumb, saving yet another match point and spectacularly surviving the second set tiebreak. Before long, the script was flipped on its head as Hingis ditched her trademark overly self-confident and carefree demeanour and retreated back into the shade, panting, exhausted and defeated. The 2002 Australian Open may have proved to be Capriati’s last great victory, but she saved the best til last.
None of this answers the original question, however. Probably because she herself is far more interesting than the titles she collected. She’ll always be remembered as the complex figure she cut – the tennis player whose game was not defined simply by defence or offence, the person who paradoxically stood as the ultimate role model in the art of never giving up, yet was notorious for her vulgar attitude and behaviour. In other words, Jen-Cap will be remembered as Jen-Cap.
Though often a critic of many of the WTA players on tour, when asked about the supposed lack of depth on the WTA during yesterday’s press conference, Martina Hingis’ reaction to the suggestion that there is no depth on the WTA in 2012 was very telling.
Are you serious? Are you kidding? I mean, now with the great matches we see, Lisicki played already against Kuznetsova. That was a great match. Now she plays Sharapova and it was a great match. I don’t know.
First rounds, come on. How about Djokovic killing everyone in the first three rounds or Federer not losing a set, more than three games in a set.
I mean, it’s just sometimes that’s the way it is. If champions are champions, they’re well‑prepared and they’re going to play well from the beginning.
I hear no lies.
Sharapova was actually asked an identical question last week, and it is hilarious that for most of the last three years, the WTA has seen such a myriad of different players of different ages, gamestyles and nationalities breaking through into the later stages of Grand Slams. And yet the one rare time that the semifinal lineup is filled with only Grand Slam Champions and top 5 players, it automatically means that the sport has no depth.
Though they attend the events and act the part, it’s tough to believe that many of the people who ask such questions truly pay much attention the sport they are paid to write on.
It is probably not often that Roger Federer gets starstruck and nervous from merely being in the presence of a person, but judging by the amount of nervous smiling on show from the GOAT, sitting down in the ESPN studio to chat with Rod Laver was one of those rare moments.
Late in their titanic four-set battle, Tomas Berdych and Nicolas Almagro found themselves in an entertaining exchange which finished with Almagro drilling a ball so hard at his opponent that the seventh-seed ended up in a heap on the ground. The incident was not quickly forgotten by Berdych, and after clinching the match he made his thoughts on Almagro’s body-blow clear by refusing to shake the Spaniard’s hand at the net.
To say the crowd didn’t take kindly to Berdych’s actions would be the understatement of the century.
This whole incident was the epitome of overreacting. Did Almagro need to smash the ball straight at Berdych? Probably not. Should Berdych have shaken Almagro’s hand? Of course. The biggest overreaction, however, came from the clearly intoxicated crowd who put Roland Garros to shame as they booed mercilessly during Berdych’s on-court interview. Even worse still, as he attempted to carry out his Eurosport interview, a man nearby interrupted the interview, repeatedly shouting at Berdych and calling him a “prick”. An appalling overreaction for what was still a relatively minor incident.
It’s easy to hate on Bernard Tomic; He’s young, he’s talented, he carries with him an air of quiet (and sometimes very loud) arrogance, he stupidly drives a car so ridiculously flashy and OTT that the law only permits him to use it to and from practice, and as of today we can see that he also appears to already be reaping the rewards of fame romantically.
We were all given yet another reason to do so yesterday when the confident teenager belittled Fernando Verdasco – his first round performance – during his press run.
“It’s a winnable match for me. It’s not one of those big names, like a big seed [...] He beat me once in Brisbane I think when I was 16 up there. That was when he was on his run, playing well. I think, you know, the last six months he hasn’t really done much. I think it’s a good time to play him.”
As harsh and overconfident his comments appear, Tomic is only regurgitating what most knowledgeable tennis fans have been saying for a long time now. And in an era where players are so willing to play the tired ‘PR game’ in order to stay on the right side of the media, Tomic’s comments are quite refreshing.
Whether or not he can actually back up this talk by upsetting the former Australian Open semifinalist is another question however; one we’ll soon know the answer to and be able to jurge accordingly.
Barely over a week after she already infamously announced her dislike for tennis, Serena Williams took the most unsurprising U-Turn in the history of the world, yesterday proclaiming her “love” for the sport once again;
“I just love the sport so much; I love trophies and I love hanging them up, and I love the competition. This is what I love. This is my job and you get to do something that.. you travel the world, and you don’t get to do that often so it’s pretty cool.”
The hoopla over Serena’s comments in Brisbane were beyond comical. Not only were they not even remotely bad or shocking, but after spending the last thirteen years watching Williams use press conferences as anything from venting/therapy sessions to simply letting her crazy out and having a hoard of people listen to speak absolute gibberish, you would think they would know to take most of what the champion says with a pinch of salt.
Needless to say, I’m sure Serena had quite the chuckle over this whole episode.
Right off the back of the calendar, rankings and Davis Cup drama that we spent so much time on in the fall of 2011, Rafael Nadal has opened up yet a new can of worms by suggesting that the amount of hardcourt events should be cut due to the effects the courts have on tennis players’ bodies;
“The only negative thing about tennis, if I have to say one, is that the competition is too much”
*he says after spending the last three months complaining about every aspect of professional tennis he could possibly complain about*
“The calendar makes the sport too hard; the hardcourts are too aggressive on the body. I really believe that can change. Without health, (performance) is impossible… I am not saying that we don’t have to play in this type of courts, but thinking about health, I don’t see footballers on the hard like this. I don’t see the basketballers playing on the hard like this. All the sports that have aggressive movements are playing on softer surfaces. This surface, in my opinion, is very bad for the lower back, for the knees, for all of this. It makes me scared for my body for the future.”
On one hand Nadal actually has a point; with every passing year, tennis is taking more and more of a toll on the body. At this point, it feels like the sport is screaming out for just a slight return to simpler times when the Grass season was actually a season, rather than there being just two tournaments squashed between two slams. After all, a more prominent grass season would have great benefits from an entertainment point of view as well as the good it would do to players’ bodies.
However, hardcourts are hardcourts and will always play a pivotal and the most important role on the tour. What makes them so dangerous on the body isn’t their mere existence, but rather the (selfish) decision from the tennis governing bodies to slow practically every single hard court in the world over the last decade.
The solution of speeding up the courts is an simple one, but would Nadal really ever agree to a move that – though it would benefit him physically – would likely have less favourable consequences for his game and results? Yeah… no. And so once again it appears, probably not even intentionally, that Rafa wants to have his cake and eat it too.
All that said, it has been quite refreshing to see Nadal so candid and open about his issues with the tour, rather than sitting back and hiding behind the language barrier and his whole ‘quiet and humble’ persona. Despite common sense sometimes evading him and personal bias clouding his judgement at times, he has brought up some important points and his heart is certainly in the right place.
