Rafael Nadal’s outspoken criticism of the ITF and ATP continued this week as Rafa and Spain dusted off France 4-1 to reach the Davis Cup final. This time also specifically criticizing the scheduling of Davis Cup events immediately after slams:
“It is unacceptable that two big events like a Grand Slam and a Davis Cup semi-final are so close. An evolution in the calendar must be made or we might get to a place where we might not want to be. Evolution, revolution, same thing. They don’t want to change anything. You can’t always just think about the personal benefit. It seems as if those in charge aren’t aware. Chances of strike? We don’t want to get there. We want to play. But if it’s a fight about something that we think is fair, something would have to happen. Sometimes the only way to make things happen is to choose strong action.”
On one hand, it’s hard to disagree with him. That season is far too long is a fact. That it’s unbelievable that the top players have to play 6/7 best of 5 singles matches one week and then immediately travel to another country, possibly change surface and and then face the possibility of playing 3 more 5 setters is also a fact. And so Rafa finally standing up and taking control off-court as he does on the court is completely the right thing to do.
But another fact is that two years ago, the top twenty players – Rafa and Roger among many other notables – voted on whether the Davis Cup ties should be moved to the week after slams. The vast majority voted for it. As far as I know, they weren’t forced to sign at gunpoint, and so when Rafa is chucking blame at every professional tennis governing body and his dog for ‘thinking about the personal benefit’ ahead of the players’ welfare, it makes it hard to really take him seriously. They were given every opportunity to say ‘no’ and look to find a different solution, but for whatever reason, they didn’t.
Another thing Rafa has spoken about is the scheduling system and the amount of mandatory events each player is required to play every year. But once again, even with all the restrictions and requirements, the top players can still play a perfectly balanced schedule. Just look at Novak’s schedule pre-Davis Cup. It’s just that Rafa doesn’t choose to. For example if the schedule so demanding and draining, why did he play this year in the only non-mandatory masters event, Monté Carlo, which also happens to be played at the very beginning of the busiest and most grueling stretch of the season? There’s also the case of him (and Novak) flying down to Colombia right after their Indian Wells final to participate in a lucrative exhibition. Again, it’s hard to really take his pleas and criticism serious when he really doesn’t practice what he preaches.
But even so, let’s hope that this really is the beginning of change on both the ATP and hopefully the WTA too. What I really want to see changed is the transition from clay to grass, as it’s truly the most abysmal part of the calendar. Every year fans and journalists discuss the possibility of lengthening the grass season to give players more rest time between the two slams and the chance to spend longer on the least physically damaging surface there is, and every year absolutely nothing happens. There’s also the huge issue of surface homogenisation, and if I see one more traditionally fast hard court this year playing like there’s a thick layer of imaginary quick sand on it, I willbreak down.
Rafa is clearly standing up, sounding the klaxons and rallying the troops. We’ll soon see whether these are just empty words or if Rafa and the rest of the gang have the conviction to follow through and help usher in lasting constructive changes to professional tennis.
Yesterday, history repeated itself as yet another one of Serena Williams’ US Open outings ended in outburst and shame. This year’s events certainly weren’t anywhere close to what unfolded two summers ago, and rather than being threatening, she turned into a hysterical half-crying half-ranting mess. But it was still bad, and naturally the reaction has been overwhelmingly negative.
What surprised me most wasn’t the actual outburst, but the fact that she really appeared to believe that Eva Asderaki – one of the best umpires in the game – was part of some conspiracy deliberately out to get her and “screw her over”, as she so eloquently put it. It was just insane paranoia.
But then again, if you really think about what has gone on in her career, can she really be blamed for thinking that the whole tennis world is conspiring against her?
Throughout the years of her career we have seen Serena the victim of an unprecedented amount of incidents and drama. We all know the story of the Williams sisters and how they rose to the top of the game their own way; defying the traditional country club barriers of race, social class and the traditional process that most go through to get to the top. For that reason, from the age of 10/11/12 people have been rooting against her, hoping that she would fail and the hype surrounding her would be nothing but hype.
And that was before she even made it onto the main tour. Since she has established herself as one of the best and greatest players ever, incidents involving her as the victim have come thick and fast. In 2001, Venus withdrew from their Indian Wells semifinal match long before their match. However, the WTA decided to wait until only minutes before they were due to go on-court before announcing it. The crowd then booed (which may or may not have been racially motivated) a 19 year-old Serena in the final. Though she admitted in her autobiography that as a teenager, having to stand there and watch as 16,000 of her own people booed her for doing absolutely nothing wrong was one of the most painful moments of her life, she stayed classy.
In 2003, we watched as Serena’s bitter rival Justine Henin resorted to dirty gamesmanship and cheating in order to triumph over Serena at the French Open. Henin’s coach Carlos Rodriguez later claimed that she would have owned up to any player but Serena. The same match also saw her left to effectively left call her own lines and continually stop points as the linespeople made abysmal call after abysmal call against her. Williams was then booed off Philippe Chatrier in tears, bursting into fresh tears in the press conference. Even so, she complimented Henin’s play through the tears; she stayed classy.
A year later came yet another controversial incident in the quarterfinals of the US Open against Jennifer Capriati, which has become infamous for being the match that ushered in the era of electronic line-calling. It was a farce and a joke, with bad calls coming in all sets with completely different linespeople. She could have easily lost her mind – and it was so bad that no one would have really blamed her for doing so – but to her credit she once again didn’t put a single foot out of line. In parts of the match she looked completely exhasperated and other parts she looked ready to cry, but she always stayed classy.
These are only a few of the countless incidents involving Serena over the years, and it’s why I can’t help but think that – without condoning her awful behaviour towards Shino Tsurubuchi in 2009 and Eva Asderaki this year – Williams seems to have just reached her breaking point. She was never angry and it was so rare to see her even politely complain, let alone insult an umpire. But after 13 years of inexplicably hostile crowds, racist hecklers, lying and cheating opponents and so on, she has finally broken, and all that anger suppressed and pushed deep down in these incidents throughout the years is rearing its ugly head all at once.
One incident that really re-affirmed this to me was when Serena played Jelena Jankovic in Rome last year. In the tiebreak, Serena was leading 5-2 when she was distracted and put her hand up to ask for more time. Jankovic only saw the hand after she served and immediately launched into a tradmark moan and groan towards the umpire as only she can. Meanwhile, you could see Serena standing there watching the exchange, squinting while looking nervous and rattled. She then lost a shaky 5 points in a row to lose the match and instead of showing her frustration at losing such a tight match and big lead, the very first thing she did was make a bee-line for Jankovic in order to make sure Jankovic knew she wasn’t trying to cheat, infamously telling her ‘I would never cheat you like that; I’m not Justine’. Many criticized her words and for not having gotten over the 7 year-old incident, but I was more touched. Even seven years down the line, the wounds of that event were still raw and painful; and rather than breaking her racket at losing a big lead and tight match, she wanted to first make sure that Jankovic knew she wasn’t trying to make her feel that way too.
So often we look at Serena with her bulging muscles and brash American swagger and just assume that she brushes off those incidents without a care in the world, but without sounding all sentemental and cliché, underneath the muscles and confidence is a normal person inside. Her recent behaviour has been ugly, unpleasant and horrible, but really, was this all a matter of when rather than if?
Let’s just hope that with time, she can let this anger and paranoia go and revert back to the sporting and non-complaining Serena Williams that, though rarely spoken about, has defined the vast majority of her illustrious career.
Yesterday, Sam Stosur demolished Serena Williams 6-2 6-3 in a dramatic but routine championship to capture the very first Grand Slam of her career at Flushing Meadows.
On her feelings after the match:
“Yeah, I’m still kind of speechless. I can’t actually believe I won this tournament. I guess to go out there and play the way I did is obviously just an unbelievable feeling, and you always, you know, hope and you want to be able to do that, but to actually do it, is unbelievable.”
On her tactics against such a tough opponent:
“Well, I think me being able to go after her second set serve, obviously she’s got a huge first serve. If she had not quite on, you get slight chances there on her second. Today I was able to step in and hit my favorite shot nearly off every single one and really put her under pressure every time she missed a first serve. I think that was big. Maybe that made her feel a little more pressure to start making more first serves and it’s a little more difficult. And on serve I felt like my percentages were good. I hit the right spots at the right time and tried to vary it as much as I could. Probably felt like she didn’t get a clean hit on a lot of my balls. As soon as I got opportunities to go for winners or set myself up, I did it. I guess you can always go into a match having your tactics, but you’ve got to execute them. Today I was able to do it very well.”
On Serena sitting next to her and chatting after the match:
All of a sudden, yeah, turned around and she was right next to me, which is kind of unusual. No, she was great, actually. She just said, How do you feel? Are you really excited? It’s unbelievable. I played really well. Yeah, I was really surprised to, you know, see her sitting next to me at that moment in time. I guess it, you know, shows what a nice person she is and what a true champion she is of the sport. To be able to separate the result a few minutes later and be able to come over and congratulate your opponent I thought was pretty classy.
On all the sacrifices made early in her career:
“My story is probably no different to many others, but when I was younger, no doubt my family gave up a lot. My parents especially and my younger brothers probably and my older brother probably got dragged through the tennis clubs more often than not when they didn’t necessarily want to. But I’m lucky that I had a really supportive family. They saw that I had this dream and drive and determination to be a tennis player, and, you know, obviously none of us knew if that was ever gonna pay off. Lucky for me, I had that support behind me. Playing all those small tournaments and, like you said, I’ve slept in train stations and stayed in dodgy hotels and done the hard yards through many places, and it awful pays off in the end. I’d do it all over again if I had to.”
I’ve really warmed to Stosur recently. She is, of course, one of the most understated and quiet players on tour, but at the same time for me, there is just a little something about her personality that is charming. And the way she stepped up against Serena and delivered one of her career performances on such a big stage was nothing short of stunning.
We all saw how she fell apart in Paris last year and she could have easily fallen into a routine of straight sets slam final blowouts like so many before her, but she stepped up to the plate and maximized her game in probably the biggest match of her career. She deserves only respect. Let’s just hope that, unlike her other first-time slam champion counterparts, she can build on this form in the coming months.
Three years ago, Andy Murray and Rafael Nadal met in the semifinals of the US Open for the first time. Nadal was scared, and he had reason to be as the Scot dispatched of him in straight sets. Many believed it to be Murray’s ‘coming out party’ to start challenging for and winning slams. After all, he was by far etter than Nadal on hardcourts, at least on par with his contemporary Novak Djokovic and had a good. Right?
Three years later, and it hasn’t quite gone to plan. Nadal has improved immeasurably on hardcourts, Djokovic and Murray aren’t even comparable these days and at least Federer’s tennis is certainly on-par with the other two. And Murray? Murray seems almost to be in tennis limbo. This year he has recorded the best slam year of his career and he is far better than almost every player below him. However, in those four slams and 21 match wins, he has only one top 10 win to show for it and the gap between him and the big 3 – both mentally and gamewise – is wide, and steadily widening.
What has forever baffled me about Murray is that he talks so much about his fitness – putting on weight, losing it, putting it back on, changing his diet – and yet every single time he goes up against Nadal he doesn’t even attempt to put that fitness to the test, instead playing a risky uber-aggressive style of tennis aimed at shortening the points. Even after his loss to Nadal, a match which didn’t appear to take much physical toll on him at all, he spoke about going off and working hard to improve his fitness in order to be better equipped the nest time he play. But why? It makes no sense. And when Mark Petchey did suggest ways to improve his game, Murray became visibly annoyed and finished the interview answering with disinterested, monotonous answers.
The explosive style he did try against Nadal, for him, is not sustainable for so many reasons. Firstly, because his forehand is so awful (relative to the rest of his game), and so is his focus and mental strength. Playing that brand of tennis, not only must you have to have conviction and focus throughout the whole match, but you need to understand that you will inevitably make some errors while playing such risky tennis. But when he is mentally (and sometimes physically) beating himself up after every point, it just doesn’t work. Moreover, you just can’t go 5 matches playing uber-defensive tennis and then come up against a 10-time slam champion and attempt to execute a completely different style of play. It just doesn’t work.
One of the biggest talking points of Andy Murray in recent times has been his mental strength and attitude. He has become notorious for his mid-match running commentary – the expletives, the anger, the snark and sarcasm. It can often be funny and many believe it to be endearing, but it’s still a big issue. It’s the type of thing you see in under 14/16 junior events until the players get older and realise how stupid they sound and how much kick a player gets out of seeing them torture themselves. Andy is now 24 years old, the fourth-best tennis player on the planet and yet he still does it day in, day out. At one point they showed an aerial view from above the stadium and while towelling off, Rafa was just staring straight down the other end as Murray swore at and berated himself. Even if he was losing and playing badly, it must give Rafa so much confidence and comfort to see his opponent always so on-edge mentally.
So where does he go from here? Novak has shown that it is possible to completely turn your career around in a small space of time. But Djokovic has also shown that he is willing to take on board criticism, understand and improve the problematic parts of both his game and, well, simply be positive. Murray has done none of the above. Sure, many often say that it’s just part of his personality and something he can’t change or be blamed for, but it could be that these character traits do end up holding him back from ever winning a slam.
We’ve heard from Wozniacki’s twitter page about her countless rendezvous with “her friends” – the Williams sisters – and after Serena Williams’ 6-2 6-4 victory over Wozniacki, her dad Richard decided to repay some of the grovelling compliments that Wozniacki has given to his daughters over the last few years.
“It was a nice fight, said Richard Williams. Caroline Wozniacki is one of the finest players I’ve seen since Martina Hingis… Tonight Serena was lucky to win, and I hope she can maintain the good momentum against Samantha Stosur, who she lost to in French Open.”
“I see her as one of my daughters”, he says, looking intently at the questioner. “When Serena was sick after her blood clot, she came and visited her. I will never, never forget what she did. What care she showed. She is like an adopted daughter to me.” says the older gentleman with something that looks like a tear in the eye hook.[/b]
Hilarious stage directions from the Ekstra Bladet journalist. Granted, Richard hugs and kisses 90% of the players and probably likens most of them to being his adopted daughters, but this is still nice. Venus was always surprisingly quick to take Wozniacki under her wing from a young age, even playing doubles withher back in 2008. It’s clear that there is a lot of respect and admiration between the two families. It’s nice.
After squandering double match point to Novak Djokovic in an epic fifth set for the second successive year at the US Open, an unimpressed Roger Federer refused to hand out free compliments to his rival, criticizing his approach to the match from double match point down.
“I didn’t hit the best serve. But it’s just the way he returns that. It’s just not — a guy who believes much, you know, anymore in winning. Then to lose against someone like that, it’s very disappointing, because you feel like he was mentally out of it already. Just gets the lucky shot at the end, and off you go…”
…..
“Confidence? Are you kidding me? I mean, please. Look, some players grow up and play like that. I remember losing junior matches. Just being down 5 2 in the third, and they all just start slapping shots. It all goes in for some reason, because that’s the kind of way they grew up playing when they were down. I never played that way. I believe in hard work’s gonna pay off kinda thing, because early on maybe I didn’t always work at my hardest. So for me, this is very hard to understand how can you play a shot like that on match point. But, look, maybe he’s been doing it for 20 years, so for him it was very normal. You’ve got to ask him.
“
Recently, I’ve really begun to see huge parallels between Roger and Serena. We all remember Serena’s infamous “lucky shots” comment on Henin here four years ago and this is in the same vein. Much like the media whirlwind that Serena caused after this, it’s easy to call Federer “classless” and a “sore loser” (not that most of the media, who eat out of the palm of his hand, will) after this, but to me, his candidness is refreshing.
It may lead him to be reactionary after tough losses as he is here, but he speaks his mind 100% of the time and he isn’t afraid to give his own unbashed opinion on any given subject, even badmouthing his opponent if he sees fit. The idea that a player must “give credit” after losses has always disturbed me. Tennis is so much about mental strength and belief, and part of what makes him and many others such great champions is believing that no player has the better of him, and regardless of whether it’s true, he’ll go to bed thinking that Novak simply got lucky, and he’ll strive to right that wrong the next time the play. And of course, who doesn’t love a bit of bitchiness? You then look at Rafa, who for half this year has been lamenting about how tough it is to play Djokovic and find weaknesses in his game. Even though he will always go out and try his hardest, from where I’m standing he is losing these matches before they’re even played.
The funny thing is, to an extent, I actually agree with Federer’s comments. As he went match point down, the first thing I thought after seeing Djokovic’s reaction was “Novak has given up”. He walked to the deuce court shaking his head and smiling humourlessly, clearly disgusted and angry at the 25k people in the crowd who were roaring their support for Federer, rudely cheering Djokovic’s errors just as loud as Federer’s winners. And the return was certainly a split-second decision without much prior thought behind it.
However, being a champion is knowing, when your back is against the wall, when to close your eyes and trust your instincts and when to use your brain and common sense to dig you out of holes. Djokovic trusted both his brain and instincts so well in that final set. The return was not “luck”; he is the best returner on the planet and if anyone is capable of making such a shot off a first serve, it’s Novak Djokovic. And there’s no doubt that he has made similar shots in his career. Much like last year, he did close his eyes instinct simply took over, but unlike those juniors that Federer so diligently described, Djokovic’s risk-taking only lasted only one shot. Even though there was still one match point, Djokovic clearly sensed a shift in momentum, and from that point onwards he completely tightened up his game, smartly looking to prolong the rallies and asking Federer if he really had the balls to close him out after what happened exactly a year ago on that same court. Needless to say, he didn’t.
2011 has seen an unprecedented year at the slams from the big four. In the sixteen semi-final spots available this year, only two have been filled by players outside of that charmed square. And even those two were the result of Nadal injuring himself early in his Australian Open quarterfinal and Federer choking a two-set lead in his Wimbledon semifinal. The monopoly continues in Flushing Meadows.
Roger Federer vs Novak Djokovic
We all know what happened the last time these two men met. That finger twirl from Roger after he took out Novak at the French Open wasn’t just elation at reaching the final of the French Open. He showed off because he knew that he had ended the Djokovic winning streak and killed the hype surrounding it, and he was so pleased with himself for doing so.
And it’s this that makes matches between these two so exciting; they’re not friends and nor do they pretend to be (*cough* Rafole). It’s not just a final of the US Open at stake when these two play. it’s also bragging rights. And with two grown, red-blooded men who openly dislike each other, that’s probably an even bigger motivation for both today.
Federer has been playing so well this fortnight, and just as people were almost beginning to hold Tsonga as the favourite after his two recent victories over the GOAT, Fed simply shook his head, flicked his hair, laughed, and then proceeded to dish a beatdown on Tsonga. Djokovic hasn’t been quite so good, with his play far too passive – particularly against Tipsarevic and Dolgopolov. But the Serb has become such an incredible big-match player this year, so expect that all to change today.
Rafael Nadal vs Andy Murray
Three years ago, Andy Murray came of age as he defeated Rafael Nadal in this very round of the US Open in four sets. It was huge. So huge that I still vividly recall Mark Petchey’s triumphant “HE DID IT, HE’S IN THE FINAL!!!!1!” as the Scot put the final nail into Nadal’s 2008 US Open coffin. It seemed like Murray had finally arrived and even if he lost in the final, he had risen to Nadal’s level and the slams would soon follow.
Three years later, Nadal has immensely improved on all surfaces, finally conquring both hard court slams and doubling his Grand Slam tally with five more. Meanwhile Murray’s tally still stands at zero and his only big-time performance against a ‘big 4′ player in a slam came in his retirement vicory over Rafael Nadal in the quarters of Australia in 2010.
For those reasons, this match-up is advantage Nadal. After a slow start, he seems to be playing great this week, with the days of wetting his pants at the mere mention of Novak Djokovic’s name possibly over.
That’s not to say that Murray doesn’t have a chance though, and if he looks to get the first strike in and can keep his forehand together, opportunities will open up. But he’ll need to show so much more resilience and mental strength than at Wimbledon this year when he fell apart from a set and break up after only one bad point.
Yesterday, after the numerous complaints and threats from the top ATP players, the USTA finally decided to listen to them. They decided to reschedule the final two days of the event, with the two semifinals on Saturday and the women and men finishing on Sunday and Monday respectively. Sounds good, right?
Wrong.
The problem is that to cater for the men’s demands, the women have been shunted aside instead. Now with the new order of play, the female players be forced to play their semifinals in the evening, the winners completing all their press obligations that come with reaching a slam final before a quick turnaround the very next day to play the final. And in addition, it means that only one semifinal will even appear on Arthur Ashe, with Stosur once again dumped onto grandstand.
Naturally, there has been outrage from around the tennisphere. Judging by the hilarious use of her CAPS LOCK, Sam Stosur certainly wasn’t pleased with the decision.
And neither was WTA CEO Stacey Allaster;
“We believe that both women’s semifinal matches merited being scheduled on Arthur Ashe stadium at times that would allow our athletes to be best prepared for a great women’s final on Sunday.”
The USTA recognized the criticism they were recieving and interestingly chose to respong with an official statement. A tidbit being;
“Though not ideal, by beginning the Kerber-Stosur match at 6 p.m., we can provide an opportunity for some of our fans to watch that match.”
The keyword being “some”. Just as I said after Stosur and Kirilenko were moved, it shouldn’t just be “some”. It should be all fans who are given the opportunity to watch these great athletes in the semi-final of one of the greatest events in tennis – both those who bought tickets to Women’s semifinal day expecting to see two matches, and those watching on their TV sets at home.
Moreover, as Allaster pointed out, it’s not just about the fans. It’s also about the two athletes who are US Open semifinalists and deserve to be treated with the respect that has been given to the other six. This latest move from the US Open is nothing but disrespectful.
Last year, Feliciano Lopez famously branded this event the ‘US shit Open’, and after the last two weeks which have seen embarrassment after embarrassment for both the organisers and event in general, it’s hard not to agree with him.
After Tuesday’s Day and Night sessions were completely washed out, today brought similar woes as rain threatened to completely throw off the US Open’s schedule and only around 10-12 minutes of play was managed before the players were carted off-court and play was eventually suspended. In a desperate attempt to get players on-court and the fourth round finished, officials decided to put the players on-court during a brief window where the heavy rain became the lightest drizzle. Needless to say, the players were unhappy.
Yesterday, after two fairly dull and routine mens straight-setters, the USTA decided to move the final match – Maria Kirilenko vs Sam Stosur – off Arthur Ashe and to another court. After moving it, they decided that essentially telling them that they were disposable and nothing but a side-show was not enough, and decided to fool around a row by changing the court they intended the match to be played on at least 3-5 games; first Armstrong, then Grandstand, 17 and back again. It was nothing but a complete shambles.
So what did Maria Kirilenko and Sam Stosur do?
They simply shrugged their shoulders and put on one of the matches of the tournament. And it was amazing. First Stosur struck with 5 games of perfect attacking tennis. Then Kirilenko dug deep and fought back by stepping in to take Stosur’s serve early and attempting to rush to the net at every opportunity (something she did some 51 times in total throughout the match.). The pair then clashed heads in the ‘breaker of the year, with Kirilenko saving 5 match points (including two through challenging her shots that were called out) and taking her 6th set point in front of a roaring crowd. By the third set it was clear that Kirilenko was mentally fried, and though she once again fought with every fibre of her being, it was Stosur who remained more composed to seal the incredible match up and advance to yet another slam quarterfinal.
The saddest thing about all of this is that it represents the viscous circle that tennis is stuck in. Unlike 6-12 years ago, the men’s game is clearly more popular that the women’s. But when the organisers are so willing to treat all but the WTA’s big three stars as nothing but a little sideshow, it hurts the game even more. It’s special moments like these that make people life-long fans of both the sport and the players involved, and instead of being broadcast on US TV in its entirety and held in front of 22k screaming (and screaming is an understatement to the the noise made by only 5000 people on Grandstand.) fans as it should’ve been, it was pushed to the small Grandstand court and was only available online in most territories while most TV sets showed Andy Murray demolishing a self-destructing Feliciano Lopez. It’s just not good enough.
