2019 French Open: Where The 'Fedal' Twain Shall Meet Again - UBITENNIS
Connect with us

Editorial

2019 French Open: Where The ‘Fedal’ Twain Shall Meet Again

The re-igniting of the Fedal rivalry at the French Open has renewed implications, going beyond the event itself

Published

on

Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, French Open 2005
Photo Credit: Live Tennis

For a while now, make that years’ worth, we have been waiting for a Roger Federer-Rafael Nadal clash at the US Open. The draws have been made, either they have been grouped in the same half – and one has fallen short – or they have happened to be in different halves entirely, and have never met.

 

One reason for the higher-than-usual (in the last couple of years) pangs to see Fedal square-off in New York is because of how each of their meetings in the three other Majors has been. We have seen Nadal end Federer’s reign as the favourite at Wimbledon, and the Australian Open. The first result coming about after multiple attempts while achieving the second, in a far easier manner.

But it is what we have had the opportunity to see in Roland Garros that has kept this rivalry distinct and blazing, impervious to time passing by. Twelve of their previous 38 matches have come at the three Majors. Five of these 12 meetings have come by in Paris, four in finals and once in that fated semi-final in 2005, which in the truest of terms was the origin of this rivalrous duopoly. And, it had to happen the way it did for audiences to understand the significance of what this rivalry was and would continue to be.

Though, for a moment, let us imagine an alternate reality. A reality in which the Swiss, instead of the Spaniard, won their first meeting and the ones to follow thereafter. Let us think of an alt-verse where results at the 2008 French Open and Wimbledon did not turn out the way they did. And it was the Mallorcan in place of the Basel-born who needed a coincidental intervention to halt the latter in his tracks in Paris, the following year.

If all of these had transpired, would we have felt the same way about the two being the nemesis of each other? What hold would each player have had in our lives? Would we be thinking of them as a duology, where each player is one half of a pair that has added to men’s tennis’ qualitative appeal?

Indeed, they would have been rivals still but we would not have seen them as equals – as the greatest of the game – despite the clear unevenness in their head-to-head, albeit in Federer’s favour. Most of all, if they had been slated to play in the semi-final of the French Open nearly a decade-and-a-half removed since their first meeting there under such envisioned reality, perhaps, we would not have been this excited about the prospective match-up.

The reality as we know it is so much better. In its moments of exultation and in times of despair – for the players, their fans and even for the supposedly unbiased viewers – reality has presented the players as humans. Each match between Federer and Nadal has seen both players put forth this quality – humanness – at the forefront while vying for wins. Regardless of how easy or hard the results have come by for either player.

When Federer and Nadal step onto the court for their 39th meeting, they will try to do the same all over again, impassive to time’s turning. As Federer said, “Like against any player, there is always a chance. Otherwise, nobody will be in the stadium to watch because everybody already knows the result in advance…For me to get to Rafa is not simple. It took five matches here for me to win to get there. That’s why I’m very happy to play Rafa, because if you want to do or achieve something on the clay, inevitably, at some stage, you will go through Rafa, because he’s that strong and he will be there.

In a way, this match is also about getting closure, specifically in the French capital.

Where Wimbledon and the Australian Open have given us relative cessation, the French Open has remained in limbo in its one-sidedness. This contest, coming at a time when both have different highs at their backs, promises to be an interesting pivot for them to revisit their rivalry and their legacy at the Majors.

Even as it rekindles exigency for more of their matches at the Majors. Not only in Flushing Meadows later in the year, but perhaps in the soon-to-follow Wimbledon championships, too, in a unique kind of second wind.

Comments

At Curtains For 2019 French Open, It Was All About Women Proffering Intrepidity

Ashleigh Barty’s maiden Major title win over Marketa Vondrousova culminated an eventful fortnight from the women, who held themselves distinct vis-à-vis the men at Roland Garros.

Published

on

(photo by Gianni Ciaccia)

What will we remember about the 2019 French Open? The return of Roger Federer, or the restarting of his 15-year-old rivalry at the tournament with Rafael Nadal, or Nadal’s bid for an umpteenth title, or Dominic Thiem’s thwarting of Novak Djokovic’s second Roland Garros – and non-calendar Slam – title. Or, will we think of how botched up French Tennis Federation’s (FFT) organisational and scheduling skills were, in which the male players looked to have preferential footing over the women. The controversy involving Thiem’s and Serena Williams’ press conferences, notwithstanding?

 

We will remember all of these. Even so, thinking about how one press conference was shunted aside to accommodate the other, ostensibly that of a man, will be a reminder of how women snatched the narrative of the event for themselves, from start to finish.

When the women’s singles draw was released, the usual bunch of names remained in the spotlight. Naomi Osaka, Petra Kvitova, (then) defending champion Simona Halep, Karolina Pliskova, Garbine Muguruza, Sloane Stephens, Elina Svitolina, and even Serena Williams dominated the discussion even as the other seeded and non-seeded players remained in contention. As is wont in tennis – especially in women’s tennis – predictions about potential upsets also took an important place of their own, though no one really expected a wild ride this time around.

At least, that was the consensus with expectations overflowing that one among these women would fulfil the coffers of consistency. However, as results flew about in a non-linear manner, rather than heighten frustrations about the women’s tour’s unpredictability, exuberance reigned high about the currently-prevailing depth in the women’s side of the game.

Case in point: Johanna Konta reaching the semi-final in Paris in spite of possessing a poor record previously in the tournament. Or, the manner in which youngsters such as Sofia Kenin, Amanda Anisimova, and Marketa Vondrousova rose collectively in a show-of-arms about them being the sport’s future, extending the subject from where Osaka had left it off at the Australian Open. Even 23-year-old Ashleigh Barty’s winning her first Major against the 19-year-old Vondrousova, for that matter, can be considered a continuation of the aspect of the younger lot shining.

The NextGen Dilemma

And one cannot help but think if the lack of hyping about Next Generation” players among the women has contributed to younger non-favourites finding it easy to establish themselves in the mainstay of the WTA tour.

It would be wrong to compare the men’s half of tennis with that of the women. Nonetheless, there is no denying that the likes of Alexander Zverev, Denis Shapovalov, Felix Auger-Aliassime, Borna Coric and Stefanos Tsitsipas gained somewhat premature prominence. In that, the roadmap about their probable path to glory was set even before they could find – and make – their place in the frenetic tour. To be honest, except for Zverev, and Tsitsipas this year, the others are still struggling to push themselves to where they are capable of belonging.

Not that all younger players in the women’s tour have found their groove. For many, it is still work-in-progress. Having said that though, it is unquestionable that the WTA’s pace is way ahead of that of the ATP in being able to bring its future to the forefront parallelly alongside its present.

That the organisers of the 2019 French Open were oblivious to this unique selling proposition (USP) of the women’s game as it went about prioritising the other gender, then, ought to be remembered the most about the Major. So that by the time the next Slam – and even other events – come about, apathy and indifference do not tar the women’s draw, reducing it to some kind of unavoidable-yet-unimportant sideshow.

Continue Reading

Comments

Stefanos Tsitsipas’ French Open loss to Stan Wawrinka brings perspectives with life lessons

It was the longest match of the tournament, at the end of which the Greek left the court a student instead of a victor.

Published

on

Stefanos Tsitsipas, Philippe Montigny/ FFT

After his five-set, five-hour-nine-minute loss to Stan Wawrinka in the fourth round of the 2019 French Open on Sunday, 2nd June, Stefanos Tsitsipas wrote a post on Instagram.

 

He said he had felt the “real definition of the word, competition,” and added the result made him appreciate the sport he had chosen as his career. Finally, concluding his post, Tsitsipas noted, “Today I learned something that no school, no classroom, no teacher would be able to teach. It’s called, living life!”

View this post on Instagram

Today I felt something that I can’t really explain. Today was the first time in my entire life, in my twenty years of existence that I felt that “aura”, the real definition of the word, competition. Not any kind of competition though, it felt different than any other time, any other battle, any other moment on the tennis court. There is something about today that I won’t be able to explain. It’s a feeling that makes me appreciate the sport that I chose to pursue in my life as a career. The bitter taste of that loss is something unexplainable. @stanwawrinka85 makes our sport real and pragmatic. It’s something that’s rare to find in the world that we are at. It’s something unique. There is loads of charm and charisma to it. We both struggled, we both went beyond our limits, we both experienced luck and our destiny was drawn on that Parisian court after five hours of physical and mental suffering. I really don’t know if what I feel right now is positive or negative. There is no bipolar effect to it. Today I learned something that no school, no classroom, no teacher would be able to teach. It’s called, living life!

A post shared by Stefanos Tsitsipas (@stefanostsitsipas98) on

Tsitsipas’ words, touching as they were powerful, helped him to establish a deeper connect with tennis audiences across the world. Even with those for whom his game did not hold that big an appeal.

They also presented another side to the player whose ascension to the higher levels of the sport has been a revelation in itself. Tsitsipas showed he was not content to shrug aside this loss as being par for the process of learning. Expectations drove the match, and that it would be played at the full quota of best-of-five was the least these. Along with the external (that of the audiences) build-up of expectations, once the match began, it became clear that each player vying for victory had made his own reckoning about the proceedings. And, going in with the belief that he would win, Tsitsipas perhaps did not factor in that Wawrinka, too, would have similar ideas regarding their on-court meeting.

In this regard, Tsitsipas’ comments about getting real-time knowledge of competition are understandable. Although he has won two titles this year and upset Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal this year – at the Australian Open fourth round and Madrid Open semi-final – this was the first time he was tested.

The match was physically gruelling, mentally frustrating and emotionally draining. In the end, it was the 20-year-old’s lack of expertise in the latter two areas that let him down even though his older-by-14-years rival looked physically spent after having to save numerous break points throughout the match, and especially in the fifth set.

“Living life”, is what Tsitsipas called the result in his Instagram post. Beyond the poignancy, then, there is also a connotation of caution to it. That if his past successes had helped him gain elevation in the rankings, lessons from losses like these would be the first step to seeing him cement his place as a potential champion in the years to come.

There are, of course, other aspects to be learnt, too. Like, how not to indulge in unfiltered gamesmanship. By tapping the racquet mid-rally, or for opting for a change of racquet just as his opponent is about to serve. The latter was an occurrence that happened twice in the course of his fourth round against Wawrinka, lowering the qualitative intensity of the clash.

Learning about sportsmanship is something Tsitsipas can do from Wawrinka – the man who has been on either side of a result but who has always left the court with his head held high. In yet another social media engagement, Tsitsipas borrowed Wawrinka’s tattoo, “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better,” posted it as a tweet and said, it was inspired by the three-time Major champion.

Maybe, Wawrinka’s influence as an inspiration will extend to Tsitsipas’ on-court competitive comportment beyond his results as well.

Continue Reading

Comments

Is It Time To Ignore Nick Kyrgios’ On-And-Off Court Vagaries?

From criticising the French Open to making a dig at Novak Djokovic, Kyrgios’ outspoken comments have not gone down too well with many.

Published

on

Nick Kyrgios (photo by Nick Kyrgios Giuliano Dalla Vecchia)

It has been a few days but Nick Kyrgios’ statements about the French Open “sucking” and clay’s supposed lack of value-addition to the Tour swirl about predominantly. That the Australian did not even play a match in Roland Garros but withdrew with an illness – a reason which fooled no one – should have been good enough reason for all discussions about him to be shut out. But since it is Kyrgios, the chatter has carried forth on and on as though dissecting it could bring about better clarity to his words.

 

What did Kyrgios say?

In an Instagram video shot at the All England Club in Wimbledon, the 24-year-old said, “The fact that I’m here right now and then I have to go to Paris in a couple of days is like… the French Open just sucks compared to this place. It sucks. It absolutely sucks.Then, making an unnecessary comparison between the grass courts in Wimbledon and the clay courts in general, he added, “I think this is the best tournament in the world. Look at this perfect green surface. Get rid of the clay, man. Who likes the clay(?) It is so bad.”

Kyrgios’ monologue was sarcastically reiterated by his compatriot – and fellow troublemaker – Bernard Tomic after his first-round loss to American Taylor Fritz on 28th May, Tuesday. In response to a question by a reporter during his post-match press conference, Tomic said, “I agree with him (Kyrgios), with everything. The tournament is not for me.”

Tomic’s comments seemed to give validation of Kyrgios’ sentiments. However, for Kyrgios and by extension for Tomic, irony has had the last laugh as their words came to be set against the swiftly-altering backdrop of qualitative action in Paris in the first week of the tournament. This scenario – where other players have brought the best of the French Open – should be the cue to take up vis-à-vis Kyrgios once the tour moves onward.

Given that Kyrgios’ verbosity speaks louder than his game sometimes, it is about time one stopped paying attention to his verbal inputs – however controversial they may be. Moreover, almost every time that he has let himself loose verbally, he has failed to impress on the court. As he did after his disrespectful comments about Novak Djokovic – and his on-court, post-win celebration – in his appearance in the No Challenges Remaining (NCR) podcast at the Italian Open, in Rome.

Soon after the release of the podcast, Kyrgios had a temper tantrum in his second-round match against Casper Ruud. It resulted in him getting disqualified from the match. His disqualification also lent to suggestions about him receiving punitive action – from suspension to lifetime ban – away from the sport.

However, for someone who perhaps likes to spend his time away from the court for whatever reason possible – even with dubious illnesses before the start of events that suck – the best way to punish him would be to not pay him any attention. Not only when he makes ridiculous comments and follows them up with ludicrous on-court exploits. But also, when he is at the top of the game, building up expectations that he invariably ends up smashing not long thereafter.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending