Federer entertains, Kyrgios doesn’t. Baby Zverev and Daddy Lendl - UBITENNIS
Connect with us

Editorial

Federer entertains, Kyrgios doesn’t. Baby Zverev and Daddy Lendl

Federer prevailed over Kyrgios in straight sets. The top women keep on losing: Kerber, Garcia, Kvitova and Ostapenko are all out. With only 3 top ten players left, are we headed towards another Stephens-Keys final?

Published

on

Roger Federer (zimbio.com)

FLUSHING MEADOWS – The most anticipated matches of the round of 32 were the 30th chapter of the Venus and Serena saga and the blockbuster encounter between Roger Federer and Nick Kyrgios, whose three previous clashes were all decided by a tie-breaker in the final set.

 

The match between the two legendary sisters was an absolute flop with Serena hitting winners from every corner of the court and Venus missing left and right. If this kind of match had been played twenty years ago, many would have talked about how Richard Williams could have decided the outcome by telling their daughters that the winner didn’t have to spend too much energy in preparation for the next round. Such rumours emerged multiple times at the beginning of the sisters’ careers, but the sisters themselves and their dad always denied that the results were decided in the locker room and not on the court.

MAGNIFICENT FEDERER… SELF-ABSORBED KYRGIOS

The match between Federer and Kyrgios wasn’t worth the ticket price either. Federer was magnificent and played beautifully throughout the entire match. It was probably one of Roger’s best performances of the year. On the other hand, the match was one-way traffic in the Swiss’ favour. After Kyrgios failed to convert five break-point opportunities at 3-3 in the first set, Federer ran away with the match.

A few people argued about how disrespectful it was to schedule Federer’s match early in the afternoon, but the American organizers did what they obviously do best: Selling more tickets and attracting the biggest TV audience. An afternoon slot with Roger guaranteed a much bigger audience compared to Saturday night, when the younger fans typically go out to bars, restaurants and clubs.

The weather wasn’t a problem for the older of the two contestants as the temperature significantly cooled down comparted to the heat of the previous days. The conditions were ideal for both the players and the spectators.

FEDERER’S MAGICAL SHOT

At one point, the Swiss maestro played a passing shot for the ages, a jaw-dropping, around-the-net-post forehand winner that left both Kyrgios and the audience in disbelief. Besides all the records and Grand Slam titles, that particular shot reminded everybody why Roger Federer is a living legend.

Truth be told, Roger’s jaw-dropping forehand pass wouldn’t have materialized if Kyrgios had been a less self-absorbed exhibitionist. Kyrgios paid the price for attempting a fancy, low-percentage drop shot when he could have hit a normal forehand in the open court.

The two biggest surprises of the day were the elimination of the top German players. The women’s tournament lost No.4-seed Angelique Kerber, who fell to Dominika Cibulkova. In the men’s event, No.4-seed Alexander Zverev lost to his older countryman Philip Kohlschreiber.

THE LADIES WILL HAVE A FOURTH GRAND SLAM CHAMPION IN 2018

After the French Open champion Simona Halep and the Australian Open winner Caroline Wozniacki were upset earlier in the tournament, the defeat of Wimbledon queen Angelique Kerber opened the door to a fourth Grand Slam champ in 2018. In the men’s tournament, all three 2018 Slam champions Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are still in the draw and it is very unlikely that one of them will not walk away with the US Open trophy next weekend. I personally think that Djokovic will win the title, even if Federer was impressive against Kyrgios and Nadal showed that he’s in for a fight during his four-hour marathon with Khachanov.

THE PROBLEMS OF YOUNG ZVEREV AND THE EXPERIENCE OF OLD LENDL

World No.4 Alexander Zverev has reached only one Grand Slam quarterfinal in 14 attempts so far in his young career. It is certainly not a very good record for someone that has been ranked among the best players in the world for the past couple of years. It is clear how Zverev crumbles under pressure and underperforms at the Slams, unlike in the regular tour events. Ivan Lendl was added to Zverev’s team to help him with this psychological block. The Czech champion won 8 Slams and competed in other 11 finals in his legendary career, but he reached his first final at the 10th attempt and won his first title at the 17th.

At 58 years of age, Lendl could be Zverev’s dad and explained to his young pupil that “it is a process… The results will come in 2019.”

ONLY THREE TOP TEN PLAYERS ARE LEFT IN THE WOMEN’S DRAW

Angelique Kerber was not the only top ten player to lose on day six. No. 6-seed Caroline Garcia lost to Carla Suarez Navarro, whose one-handed backhand brought back memories of the great Justine Henin. No. 5-seed Petra Kvitova lost to Aryna Sabalenka and No. 10-seed Jelena Ostapenko was dominated by Maria Sharapova. The highest seed left in the bottom half of the draw is No. 14 Madison Keys, who seems poised for a repeat of last year’s final against Sloane Stephens. In Keys’ section of the draw, watch out for Naomi Osaka, who has been devastating so far. Yesterday the Japanese rising star double bageled Sasnovich 6-0, 6-0.

IS THE NEW LOUIS ARMSTRONG STADIUM A GRAVEYARD OF CHAMPIONS?

Since world No. 1 Simona Halep officially inaugurated the new Louis Armstrong stadium with a shocking defeat against Kaia Kanepi on day one, five more Grand Slam champions have been upset on that same court: Muguruza lost to Muchova, Wozniacki was upset by Tsurenko, Kerber was defeated by Cibulkova and Kvitova was sent home by Sabalenka. Many superstitious players will not want to play on that court from now on. The same situation haunted court No. 2 at Wimbledon for many years, until it was rebuilt in 2009. Connors, McEnroe, Sampras, Stich, Cash and many other champions suffered shocking defeats on that court.

TODAY’S TOP MATCHES 

Anderson-Thiem and del Potro-Coric are the most interesting matches of the day. Serena is also facing a tough opponent – the big hitting Kaia Kanepi from Estonia.

Ubaldo Scanagatta

(Article translation provided by T&L Global – Translation & Language Solutions – www.t-lglobal.com )

Editorial

A new documentary, and the rekindling of Serena Williams’ tryst with 2018 US Open destiny

Published

on

Serena Williams, 2019 US Open, Patrick Mouratoglou
Photo Credit: US Open/USTA

It’s almost a year since Serena Williams got embroiled in a war of words with chair umpire Carlos Ramos in the 2018 US Open final. The subject is yet to ebb entirely from memory though. The first episode of ESPN’s new documentary series Backstory – featured on the incident involving the 23-time Grand Slam champion – does its bit to ensure that on the eve of the 2019 US Open, attention is centred on what occurred a year ago.

 

Titled Serena vs the Umpire, the episode is an extrapolation of the match’s progression and what transpired within it. It presents facts through the pros and cons of Williams and Ramos’, and also of Patrick Mouratoglou’s actions that charted the match. Yet, in spite of this, the program makes Williams out as the wronged one.

First, by her coach, Mouratoglou, who displayed his commitment as a mentor by using hand signals to try and guide her. Then, by Ramos who penalised her for the Frenchman’s infraction. Without heeding her vehemence that she was not a party to her coach’s decision-making. The narrative of the program puts it out that regardless of Williams’ behaviour that saw her scream and rant at the umpire and call him a liar and thief, she did not deserve to be termed as the pariah of the match.

The program’s one-sided leaning does not change the problematic aspects of Williams’ and Mouratoglou’s behaviours. Williams, in protesting her innocence about receiving (and accepting) coaching, did cross the line with her aggressiveness. There was – and is – no denying her disrespect towards the authority on the chair officiating the match. And, rationales like the momentousness of the occasion getting to her do not justify her stance at all. Rather, they hinted at her being ill-equipped to handle the scenario in what turned out be the proverbial repeating of history, at the same tournament.

Mouratoglou’s near-immediate (after the end of the match) admission that he tried to help her – and his maintaining to do so, even now – also debilitates Williams’ position. The 49-year-old’s statements about what he thought was Ramos’ inability in letting the match spiral out of bands, is a bemusing segue as well.

“Ramos’ job is also to keep the match under control. He totally lost control of the match, completely, because he reacted with emotions. And he’s not supposed to — he’s a chair umpire, he’s not a player,” Mouratoglou said. Ironically, had Ramos lashed out emotionally instead of abiding the rules, the repercussions would have been far serious for Williams for name-calling him and for continuously challenging his authority.

Mouratoglou’s comments are revealing of how the program does not consider the ramifications of that fracas for Ramos.

Since the International Tennis Federation’s (ITF) rules do not permit Ramos from speaking to the media – including to ESPN for this program – the 48-year-old has been short-changed as he cannot present his point-of-view countering the acclaimed coach. Also, in the year that has almost gone by, the veteran official’s on-court calls have been scrutinised and compared with his umpiring of that match. Moreover, Ramos will not be umpiring any of Williams’ matches at Flushing Meadows in 2019. All of these are indicative of how Ramos’ professionalism has been denigrated.

Players have the right to request to not have certain umpires officiate their matches and many have done so for reasons of their own. The avoidance of the tension between such a player and umpire is undeniably a positive to come out of the move. Yet, what does it leave the umpire with, since, irrespective of how a player behaves with the official, the latter does not have the same means to put forth his officiating preference.

Speaking of preferences, proffering his concluding thoughts on the match, Mouratoglou opined, “It was horrible for us. It was horrible for Serena. It’s fantastic for tennis. It was unbelievable, that was the best moment in tennis of the past 10 years. Tennis was everywhere. You don’t have any drama in tennis. We have drama in all the other sports, but not tennis. People should be allowed to be herself and show emotion. You want passion, that’s why people watch sport. They want things to happen. They want to feel emotion, they want to root for someone, they want to be shocked, they want to be happy, they want to be sad. That’s what they want and everybody felt something that day.”

Indeed, the match prompted reactions from everybody who watched it. Nonetheless, its proceedings overshadowed the game of tennis so much so that the bigger picture was not that of the sport but that of egoism.

Continue Reading

ATP

Intriguing Team-Ups Lure Eyes Doubles’ Way. Will They Stay For The Problems, Too?

Will the recent surge in high-profile double partnerships have any impact on the long term future of the discipline?

Published

on

Cincinnati Open, Western and Southern Open, Andy Murray, Feliciano Lopez
Photo Credit: ATP Tour Twitter

In one of his press conferences at the Western and Southern Open in Cincinnati, Andy Murray said he would not be playing the US Open. His announcement came a day or so after his initial declaration that he would be playing only the two doubles events in the final Major of the season. A few things came out of Murray’s remarks. The first and the obvious was that the former world no. 1 was ready to give it his all (yet again) to play singles. The second, the understated aspect, was that doubles while seeming easy vis-à-vis singles required just as much focus, if not more. Then, there was a third.

 

In tennis’ continuity though, the relevance of the doubles game is not a recent epiphany. However, the last few tournaments of the 2019 season that featured some eclectic partnerships – Stefanos Tsitispas and Nick Kyrgios, Andy Murray and Feliciano Lopez, the Pliskova twins, Andy and Jamie Murray, and so on – has made doubles slightly more prominent than singles.

Singles has become monotonous with the same set of players making it to the final rounds. On the other hand, doubles has brought in more verve to the existing status quo of the Tour, with each player’s individuality adding to the dynamics of the team. After his first outing as Kyrgios’ doubles partner at the Citi Open in Washington in July, Tsitsipas pointed this out.

“It’s the joy of being with a person who thinks differently and reacts differently. I would characterise him (Kyrgios) as someone who likes to amuse. I’m very serious and concentrated when I play, but he just has the style of speaking all the time. It’s good sometimes to have a change,” the Greek had said.

These changes – as seen with Murray’s recent decision – may not extend for a longer period. The culmination of these short-term team-ups does – and should – not mean the end of the road of doubles piquing attention, per se. At the same time, these transitory partnerships also reroute the discussion back to the financial side of the doubles game.

In a recent interview with Forbes, Jamie Murray – a doubles specialist – shared how conducive it had become for players to take up doubles as the sole means of a tennis career these days, as compared to in the past.

“Because the money is always increasing in tennis, it is a much more viable option to go down the doubles route a lot earlier than previous generations. Before, people would play singles and then when their ranking dropped, they played an extra few years of doubles. Now it is a genuine option to start off much younger and have a career in doubles,” the 33-year-old said.

Despite Murray’s upbeat attitude, these increases have not exactly trickled towards doubles, especially at the Slams including the upcoming edition of the US Open. For 2019, the USTA showed-off yet another hike in the prize-money coffer. The men’s and women’s singles champions will be awarded $3.8 million. In comparison, the men’s and women’s doubles teams winning the respective title will get $740,000. This sum gets further diluted for the mixed-doubles’ titlists who will get $160,000 as a team.

This is the third and final takeaway that emerged from Murray’s US Open call. For several of these singles players, intermittent doubles play is an option. For those who play only doubles, that is the only option they have. The doubles game requires similar effort – travel, expenses and fitness – the costs continue to outweigh the benefits. These momentary team formations are a gauge revealing the disparity of tennis’ two sides, visible yet obliviated beyond tokenism.

Continue Reading

ATP

Andy Murray, Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic’s Big Four reunion in Cincy

Published

on

ATP Cincinnati, Andy Murray, Western and Southern Open
Photo Credit: Western and Southern Open Twitter

A few years before, there existed a quartet called Big Four in men’s tennis. At certain points in their time-line of dominance, injuries plagued each member of this four-member group. However, the severity of their affliction in one player, Andy Murray, saw his name erased from this elite pocket. Thus, the Big Four was reduced to the Big Three with Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer making up the troika.

 

At the 2019 Western and Southern Open in Cincinnati, three of the erstwhile Big Four troupe reunited as they re-entered the circuit’s circus. And each player had a different path leading up to the event, too, underlining how divergent their careers had become despite overlapping scheduling.

The 2016 season was the common catalyst leading to this divergence. From Federer’s injury to him pausing his season to focus on rehab after Wimbledon, to Djokovic pushing his boundary as a marauder and completing the non-calendar Slam, and to Murray ending the season as the world no. 1. The year in consideration also threw up other names – Nadal’s season ended in an agony of injury, while Stan Wawrinka won his third Major at the US Open. In its bounty of giving and taking, 2016 changed how we looked at these players – especially the first four – and the irrevocability of assumption that these guys could get past any hurdles stopping their way.

Juxtaposing with Cincinnati, in the three years since 2016, Federer and Djokovic have vaulted past their share of physical problems. Yet, in the Ohioan city, they have different motivations guiding them. This is the first time that Djokovic has entered the Cincinnati draw as the defending champion. Meanwhile, after having been drawn in the same half as the Serbian, Federer has the proverbial score to settle against him. “I can’t wait for my next rematch with Novak or my next time I can step on a match court and show what I can do,” the 20-time Slam champion said in one of his pre-tournament media interactions in Cincinnati.

There are a few opponents to get past before their slated semi-final meeting occurs. Nonetheless, their sustained competitiveness adds its fervour to the already-hefty top-half of the men’s draw. In the midst of their respectively successful opening rounds, Murray’s first-round defeat to Richard Gasquet in straight sets became a contextual misnomer for comebacks.

Yet, Murray’s was the most stirring return. This was not because of the emotional crossroads that had sprung up at the 2019 Australian Open regarding his retirement. But on account of how farther Murray had leapt to put his physical frailties behind and re-join the singles Tour. And, the Briton’s determination to do so is reminiscent of 2016, all over again. It’s the completion of the circle of how Murray had pushed hard to become the world’s best player and now, he is trying just as much to regain his footing back.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending