Posts Tagged ‘Wimbledon’
- I’ve been waiting since early ’12 for Petra to step up and show the type of dominance that she showed this past fortnight in winning her second Wimbledon title. It was vintage Petra (strong serves, sharp angles, and blistering pace) without the also-vintage walkabouts that have accompanied her play the past couple of years. I’ll only mention her former boyfriend, Radek Stepanek, for the purpose of showing that, since their breakup, she’s regained focus, improved her fitness, and looks to be back on track for a well-deserved shot at the top of the WTA food chain. Petra Kvitova –
- Novak Djokovic – Even though I’d picked Novak to win the title in my pre-tournament preview, I had no idea his journey would be so fraught with angst and peril. Usually one of the cleanest players in the game, Novak struggled badly at times in the later rounds. If not for a missed overhead and a few ill-timed double faults from Roger, this could have been one more dispiriting Slam final. To his credit, he hung in there after Roger saved Championship point in the fourth set, and eventually came away with the title in five. And if you couldn’t tell by his tears, this one meant a lot to him. I’m still not sure Boris Becker had that much to do with it, but it makes great grist for the commentator mill.
- Genie Bouchard – A semifinalist in Melbourne and Paris, and a finalist in London, Genie Bouchard continued her meteoric rise up the rankings after yet another astounding run at Wimbledon. Her confidence could easily border on arrogance if it weren’t so well backed-up by gutsy and aggressive play. She’s all business on and off the court, looking only for the “W” in her quest to be the best. This attitude makes her a legitimate future No. 1, but also could be problematic. It was troubling to hear Genie say, “I’m not sure I deserved all the love you gave me today” on court after the match. Hopefully her coach, Nick Saviano, can help her be mindful next time that you shouldn’t discount the love of fans that are proud of you no matter the result. Be gracious, keep your head down, and get ready for the next opportunity; because I have no doubt that it WILL come.
- Roger Federer – I hate to say that the old guy’s still got it, but the old guy’s still got it! With his back troubles from last year in the rear view mirror, Roger played, more or less, like the Roger of old against an opponent who was slightly better on the day (186 total points for Novak versus 180 points for Roger). Even in defeat, I’d say this was sweet revenge for a guy who everyone was pushing out the door at the end of 2013. When healthy and comfortable with his equipment, Roger can still play like the Roger we remember. A lot still need to go right for him at the Slams in order to have a legit shot at the title, but it feels like a lot less than last year.
- Vasek Pospisil and Jack Sock – PopSock, as the newly-crowned Wimbledon doubles champions have become known, bested the great Bryan brothers in a hard-fought 5-set battle to win the Gentlemen’s doubles in their first tournament together. Given the rigors of the ATP tour, this probably won’t become a weekly occurrence. But after years of lamenting the lack of younger singles players in doubles, how great was it to witness their shotmaking, energy and enthusiasm? My only hope is that someone on either of their team’s has copyrighted that great name.
- Bob and Mike Bryan – In one of the few successful “passing of the torch” moments at this year’s Wimbledon, the Bryans battled hard but often looked their age against a pair of guys who could almost be their sons. The Bryans are one of the greatest doubles teams ever, if not ‘the’ greatest, and have done an immense amount to legitimize doubles at the top of the tennis food chain. Unfortunately, I can’t imagine it’s gonna be easy for them to keep working this hard to overcome Father Time, injuries, family demands, and younger, stronger opponents like PopSock.
- Roberta Vinci and Sara Errani – On the heels of a disappointing final loss at the French Open, Vinci and Errani won the Ladies doubles title over Timea Babos and Kristina Mladenovic, giving them a career Grand Slam in doubles. It’s well-deserved, and hopefully makes up for a disappointing singles showing.
- Nenad Zimonjic and Sam Stosur – With her miserable record on grass, any title on the green stuff is a good thing for Sam!
- Simona Halep – Simona may have lost the Wimbledon semifinal battle of emergent WTA stars in straight sets to Genie Bouchard, but I’m sure there are great things for her on the US Open horizon.
- I was critical of Serena at the time because I felt she should have foregone the drama and not played, especially when the tournament doctor says, “If you can’t see the ball then you shouldn’t play. But I’ve had a hard time listening to all of the ridiculous theories on the incident. One person I know even went so far as to say that he’s convinced she has a pill addiction because of her past medical issues. Come on people: STOP THE NONSENSE! Serena Williams – I had a feeling this would be a tough Wimbledon for Serena, but I don’t think any of us knew just how tough it would be. It started with her loss to Alize Cornet. Two days later, Serena appeared on court for a brief but notable bit of drama on Court 1 with her sister Venus before their first-round doubles. (They ultimately retired down 0-3 in the first set after 4 Serena double faults.)
- Venus Williams – Venus played a tough 3-set match against Petra Kvitova that was worthy of a final. It was a pleasure to see from a player we love who’s struggled mightily with fitness in the wake of her Sjogrens diagnosis. On a per match basis, she can still play phenomenal tennis. But that was only a third round match. Her ranking is such that she will likely have to play at least 3 or 4 of these types of matches if she ever hopes to reach a Slam final again. Though that’s probably never going to happen, we can (and should) still appreciate her best level at those few and far between moments when she’s able to bring it.
- Li Na – I just don’t know where to begin with Li Na. There are many who dismiss her disappointing results at the French and Wimbledon by saying that she’s best on the hard courts. To those apologists, I’d like to point out her loss to Serena in Miami and remind them that those results were NOT an aberration.
- Maria Sharapova – She may have come up high and dry again at SW19, but that’s okay. She’s got Grigor AND a French Open title to keep her company.
- Rafa Nadal – Rafa avoided another Lukas Rosol upset, but still lost in four sets to young Nick Kyrgios of Australia. I’m not necessarily surprised that Rafa was knocked out of the tournament. I am, however, surprised that Rafa lost in the middle rounds, not the early or later rounds. I hope he takes enough time off before the summer hard court season so that he can come back relatively fresh, physically and mentally.
- Andy Murray – Andy, please don’t blame your horrific play on Amelie Mauresmo’s coaching, or Ivan Lendl’s spring departure. This dispiriting loss to Grigor Dimitrov was all on you. It’s your duty as an elite player to surround figure out what you need to help propel yourself forward, not back.
- Milos Raonic – It’s been impressive to watch Milos work hard with his team to overcome his physical and technical deficits on court. It was also fairly sobering to watch how surgically he was cut down by Roger in a straight-sets semifinal loss. I hope that he was able to enjoy his first solid showing on a surface that’s so well-suited for his big serve game. Okay coach (Ivan) Ljubičić, help him figure out those next steps!
- Grigor Dimitrov – For years, Grigor has been burdened with expectations of greatness. From his Federer-esque single-handed backhand game (earning him the nickname “Baby Fed”) to his scampering defense, Dimitrov, along with Raonic, has been touted as one of the next wave of ‘Young Guns’. The big problem for Grigor was that his fitness, and shot selection, was never sufficient enough to withstand the grind of tough matches against the top guys… until now. Off-court conditioning has rendered his all-too-frequent bouts of cramping almost non-existent. On top of that, he’s a more mature player now and has a better handle on shot selection with all of his tools. Next time (because there will be a next time), I hope the nerves of the moment won’t be quite so cruel to his serving arm (double-faultitis).
- Marin Cilic and Barbora Zahlavova Strycova both lost in the quarterfinals to the eventual champions after some very fine play. I’ve always rooted for both but was disheartened to see people respond to positive tweets by bringing up their past drug suspensions. If someone has served their suspension, and fought their way back to a respectable ranking in order to have a chance at Slam success, give them their due. We all make mistakes, and all deserve to be forgiven if put in the work for redemption.
- Nick Kyrgios – This kid has a ton of talent and the physical stature/attitude to go with it. He came into Wimbledon with 3 Challenger titles under his belt and now a Slam quarterfinal for good measure. Though his mid-match exuberance can come across as brash he’s exciting and LOVES the competitive fight. I wonder if there’s a way that the USTA can lure him away from Australia without starting a war?
- Noah Rubin and Stefan Kozlov – Noah and Stefan, the all-American duo that contested the Wimbledon boy’s final, should help dispel rumors that all isn’t completely lost for American tennis…at least for a few more weeks.
- I have a few broadcast notes. The first is that the popularity of tennis, and potential ad revenues, will continue to be hurt if the average Joe can’t get adequate match coverage without special cable sports packages. And even if you have a few of those packages, it doesn’t guarantee that you’ll see all available matches. Take it from me, a Sonic.Net ISP user and DirecTV viewer: not everyone has access to ESPN3!
- My second broadcast note harkens back to this piece on Sloane and Paul Annacone. I don’t want to single them out, however, because the conflicts of interest abounding in the commentary booth are almost too numerous to count at this point. I can accept conflicts of interests, but you’ve got to be more upfront about it to your viewers. Who’s getting paid by who makes all the difference in the world when you’re listening to “expert commentary”.
- Raise your hand if you’d like to see if Andy Roddick in the Centre Court commentary booth is better than Andy Roddick on Twitter!
- Raise your hand if you’re tired of hearing commentators saying “How bitterly disappointed Player X will be” after missing a shot!
- Wimbledon schedulers – Was it really necessary to leave several notable matches on court so late that fireflies started to come out?
That’s all for now. Until next year
For much of this year, I’ve been tempted to write a piece titled, “The Big Four No More”. To be clear, this isn’t that piece. But if there’s anything that we’ve learned from the past couple of days at Wimbledon, it’s that the Big Four is in a weakened state from which it might not recover.
Let’s start with Rafa Nadal’s loss to Nick Kyrgios in the round of 16. Actually, let’s go back even further to Paris, and Rafa’s 9th French Open title. It was a great victory over a man, Novak Djokovic, who’d bested him in the last 4 finals they’d contested.
It was also troubling given the continuing back issues that have plagued Rafa since Australia. It affected his serve throughout the tournament, but flared badly late in the fourth set of that final. If not for Novak’s own weakened condition, he might possibly have fought back, forced, then won a deciding set with Rafa powerless to stop him.
I have a strong feeling that this might have been the last time that Rafa bites that trophy. Between his troublesome knees, now-troublesome back, and the ever-present fatigued look of concern, the wear and tear of his grinding style can no longer be denied. Rafa’s body is giving out.
Fast-forward to London, and the workman-like manner in which Rafa was forced to eke out wins in his early round matches. Now that book is out, so to speak, on how to beat Rafa (for those who can successfully execute the game plan), he has to work harder than ever to make it to the later rounds.
By the time he got to Kyrgios, there was no higher gear left in his game. What was on display was all that he had to give. We were all left waiting for a gear shift that Rafa was unable to muster. But let’s be honest: he’s been missing that gear for most of the season. After all, how can you find another gear when you’re maxed out?
Body issues aside, the more troubling aspect of this loss was the stubborn manner in which he refused to change his tactics against Kyrgios. The majority of my tweets from that match were pleas for Rafa to stop hitting to the Kyrgios’ backhand. But they were pleas that fell on deaf ears. With Federer-like resistance, Rafa kept hoping to break down a shot that burned him time and again.
Maybe it’s his age, his body, the fatigue, or maybe the cumulative effect of all with the additional pressure of the top ranking, but I get a sense that it’s hard for him, physically and mentally, to keep tweaking his game for improvements. Unfortunately, if he can’t keep changing to stay ahead of talented young guys like Kyrgios, his time at the top will end; sooner rather than later.
Andy Murray’s descent from the Big Four began long before his sad exit from Wimbledon after a quarterfinal loss to Grigor Dimitrov. (Sad is actually an understatement for a match that was so spectacularly awful from a 2-time Slam winner, defending Gentlemen’s champion, and Olympic gold medalist.)
Andy’s AELTC triumph last year was one of the greatest things to happen to him, but also one of the worst. The great part was immediately obvious. The worst began to manifest almost as soon as he hit the US hard court swing with early losses in Montreal and Cincinnati. It peaked at the US Open with early round struggles leading to a straight sets quarterfinal loss to Stan Wawrinka.
His play throughout was spotty at best, and lacking focus. Though there was an understandable period of transition after winning his Wimbledon dream title, his level of play afterward, and equally poor attitude, were disappointing.
Exploratory surgery and time off for healing in the fall may have helped with back issues, but certainly didn’t with his game and attitude. His game continued to flounder in the early part of the ’14 season, and losses in winnable matches started to mount.
Losses are one thing, but regression to his pre-Champion days was another. Andy behaved poorly whenever his then-coach Ivan Lendl wasn’t around. He’d swear, bark at his box and, once again, endlessly reach for phantom injuries on his leg or back when matches got tight.
Each of the Big Four has played matches without their coach, and none have regressed to earlier stages in their career while doing so.
After his split with Lendl and a disappointing clay season, Andy looked ready for a credible defense of his Wimbledon title with confident victories in his first four matches. Moreover, he finally looked like he remembered what it meant to be a champion. Unfortunately, it didn’t last long.
He was simply awful in his quarterfinal against Grigor. His reliable groundstrokes, both forehand and backhand, often ended halfway up the net. His incredible defense was “hit or miss”, mostly “miss”. His overheads and volleys were terrible. His focus was lacking, and his overall demeanor was defeatist, at best.
These disappointing displays from Andy are unacceptable. Membership in the “Big Four” requires better than these types of efforts from a player who shouldn’t need to be reminded of his championship credentials. Even Rafa, stubborn as he was in his loss to Kyrgios, remembered to show his championship mettle in defeat. He always does. The same is true of Roger, and generally of Novak as well. Andy needs to do the same.
Some might want to blame Andy’s early-season woes on Lendl’s departure, or his Wimbledon loss on Amelie Mauresmo’s failings as his new coach. Both would be wrong. Ivan surely didn’t give Andy any special tips to win those Slams, nor did Amelie advise him to play as horribly as he did against Grigor. Good coaching is necessary to any player’s success, but a champion’s will to succeed must come from within.
Andy has lost that will, and in so doing has lost his late-entry membership in the Big Four. Can that change for him? Depends on how much he wants to step up and act the part.
For now, Novak and Roger are safe. In spite of recent match focus struggles, Novak is still well in his prime. And as long as Roger’s body cooperates, he’s mentally ready to step up and compete with anyone.
How about Rafa? I’m worried about his body. Then again, I was worried about his body last summer after Cincinnati and he went on to win the US Open. So you never know. As far as Andy is concerned, it’s hard to know. That depends upon Andy, and if he can ever act like the champion that he is. To be honest though, I’m not hopeful.
I got 1 out of 2 correct with the women. Here’s hoping for a 2 out of 2 result with the men.
Novak Djokovic (SRB)  v Grigor Dimitrov (BUL) 
H2H: Novak Djokovic leads 3-1
Novak has played surprisingly spotty tennis over the past week. While it’s true that his opponents played well to test his resolve, Novak hasn’t played the clean, focused tennis that one would expect. His level has been up and down, from brilliant to passable. The same could be said of his movement: from brilliant, to barely passable with a large smattering of grass stains and pain.
That said, I think Novak’s still got too much game to lose in this semifinal to Grigor. I applaud the immense work that the Bulgarian has put in to up his fitness levels in order to compete well at the Slams, as well as the mental work he’s done to organize his game into a unified weapon (as opposed to a collection of great tools). Unfortunately, that won’t be enough to get by Novak.
The problem with this match-up is that there’s no one part of Grigor’s game, outside of his serve, that can hurt Novak. His backhand is a thing of beauty, but he lacks the ability to strong arm it down the line like Wawrinka. And he can’t knife his slice enough, like Roger, to bother Novak “enough”.
Andy Murray, his quarterfinal victim, is every bit as good of a returner as Novak. So if he can serve as brilliantly as he did against Murray, it might be enough to get a toehold into Novak’s head and cause a Novak walkabout. However, that will only delay the inevitable Djokovic victory. Great tournament, Grigor, but it ends here.
Novak Djokovic in four sets
Roger Federer (SUI)  v Milos Raonic (CAN) 
H2H: Roger Federer leads 4-0
This is a tricky match to call. With his trusty new RF Pro Staff 16×19 by his side, Roger has played terrific tennis over the past two weeks. He’s serving well, hitting his forehand with authority, and working his usual repertoire of slices on the backhand side. He withstood a first set barrage from Stan to win in four sets, and is as close as he’s been to a Slam title since his last one in 2012. I’m just not sure that he’ll be able to do much against the Milos serve.
Milos Raonic is a more well-rounded version of players like John Isner, meaning that he can serve bombs to all corners of the box but also back it up with decent movement to his second shot…if one is needed. His return game is still not quite as strong as it could be, but that’s okay. His faith in his serve is unshakeable, and that’s all that matters.
Now that Milos is moving better on grass, he will be less susceptible to having his footwork exploited as Roger has done in the past. And if he can handle Roger’s “work” on the ball, he could very well put himself in a position to take the match outcome out of Roger’s hands.
Even so, I just don’t know if it’s smart to bet against a guy with 7 previous titles, and the immense heart one would expect from the GOAT. My gut says Roger, but my head says Milos. Which wins out?
In a nod to powerful steely youth over experience, Canadian momentum (congratulations Genie), and a backdrop of upsets, I’ll go with Milos for the win. For now I’ll say four sets but it could easily go five.
Milos Raonic in four sets
Never one to shy away from the possibility of errant predictions, here are my picks for the Wimbledon Ladies Semifinals…
Lucie Safarova (CZE)  v Petra Kvitova (CZE) 
H2H: Petra Kvitova leads 5-0
Don’t let the H2H fool you. In spite of the lopsided victory count, this is not necessarily a one-sided rivalry. These two friends have played 3 times this season, and two of those have gone the distance. Their last match, on grass in Eastbourne, was won 7-4 by Petra in a third-set tiebreaker.
Familiarity with your opponent’s game can either be a great thing or a bad thing. For Lucie, it’s a comfort that allows her to play Petra better than perhaps other less threatening players. Whether this comfort will be enough to help her overcome Petra’s level of play on the big stage of Wimbledon’s Centre Court remains to be seen; but is likely doubtful.
Petra Kvitova in three sets
Eugenie Bouchard (CAN)  v Simona Halep (ROU) 
H2H: Simona Halep leads 1-0
The only meeting between these women was a three-setter earlier this year at Indian Wells. Simona won 6-2 1-6 6-4 in a match decided by who best defended their second serve (Halep).
A quick glance at the match stats for second serve percentages shows that Simona was overwhelmingly better at defending her second serve than either her quarterfinal opponent, Sabine Lisicki, or her R16 opponent, Zarina Diyas. By contrast, Genie had a significantly lower percentage of second serve points won than her previous opponents, Angelique Kerber and Alize Cornet.
Obviously, Genie won those matches because of the other aspects of her game. But all things being equal with Simona, she will go down to defeat again in three sets if she can’t better defend her second serve.
Simona Halep in three sets
Genie Bouchard (CAN)  v Angelique Kerber (GER) 
Original Picks: Williams, Sharapova
H2H: Series is tied at 1-1
Far from disappointed at my failure to correctly pick this section’s quarterfinalists, it’s fantastic to see young Canadian Genie Bouchard set to battle against the crafty lefty, Angelique Kerber.
Genie is looking to make her third Slam semifinal of the season after strong showings in both Melbourne and Paris. (Compare that to Sloane Stephens who made the semifinals in Melbourne and pretty much hasn’t been heard from since.) She’s aggressive in her play, a gritty competitor, and wants to be at the top of the game.
I know I’ve said this before, but not many up-and-comers are truly “the real deal”. Genie is, indeed, the real deal! Even if Serena hadn’t lost to Cornet, I’m certain that Genie would have taken her out. Serena is the face of a veteran champion. Genie is the fresh face of the new guard that has little deference for the past.
She’ll need all of that moxie to get by Angelique, a solid player who seems to have found a new life this year on grass. At her best, Angie has tremendous defense, and a down-the-line backhand that she can hit from the most improbable of positions. Just ask Maria Sharapova.
Both Genie and Angie come into Wimbledon with winning momentum. Genie has the confidence from a semifinal run at the French, and Angie a finalist showing in Eastbourne. This could go either way on paper. Once again, however, my gut tells me to go with the plucky, opportunistic Canadian gal who’s starring in her own WTA version of ‘All About Eve’.
Genie Bouchard in three sets
Simona Halep (ROU)  v Sabine Lisicki (GER) 
Original Picks: Halep, Keys
H2H: Simona Halep leads 2-1
Simona leads the H2H, but Sabine’s history of winning Wimbledon results can’t be denied!
No matter how lackluster the rest of her season has been or will be, she hits the Wimbledon grass and becomes a different player, a much happier and more confident player.
Her forehand, always a potential weapon, is more lethal and penetrating. And her serve, another big weapon, can cause damage in much the same way as Serena’s. Add confidence to those two weapons, and you have a legitimate threat to go deep on the lawns.
This will be a big test for Simona, who hasn’t faced a heavy hitter like Sabine in her previous matches. Her all-court game and solid defense are generally good enough to help her on most court surfaces. Grass is different. The quick(er) courts/low bounces favor someone with weapons like Sabine. Simona, who lacks similar weaponry, will be at a distinct disadvantage.
More importantly, how can anyone go against Sabine and her history of improbable runs? Not me. Simona will fight hard but I’m looking at Sabine to take this one for a spot against Genie in the semifinals.
Sabine Lisicki in three sets
Stan Wawrinka (SUI)  v Roger Federer (SUI) 
Original Picks: Wawrinka, Federer
H2H: Roger Federer leads 13-2
In spite of their lopsided match history, Stan did get the better of Roger earlier this year in Monte Carlo. However, that match was on clay. This match will be played on grass, a surface they’ve never contested, at a venue where Roger has had his most prolific Slam success. Just that fact alone leads me to favor Roger in this match, but that’s not the only indicator.
Roger is serving very well this fortnight. While he may not be the tournament aces leader, he also hasn’t been broken, and hasn’t dropped a set. Stan’s serving well too, but has faced more break points overall, and was broken 4 times in his 4-set match against Yen-Hsun Lu.
Familiarity might also play a huge part in this match. Stan’s familiarity with Roger’s game might help win a set, but not more than Roger’s familiarity with Stan’s game, and especially on this familiar court.
Wimbledon history also comes into play when you look at each player’s history at the Championships. Stan has never progressed past the fourth round. And aside from the occasional upset, Roger has won this title 7 times, been the finalist on one occasion, and a quarterfinalist on 3 other occasions.
It’d be foolhardy to ignore the cumulative effect of their lopsided match history, their current level of play, and Roger’s overwhelmingly winning record at SW19. Sorry Stan.
Roger Federer in four sets
Milos Raonic (CAN)  v Nick Kyrgios (AUS)
Original Picks: Nishikori, Nadal
H2H: Milos Raonic leads 1-0
I love it when a player proves me wrong, and such is the case with Milos Raonic in his first appearance in a Wimbledon quarterfinal. For too many years we suffered the hype of this “young gun” only to see him exit early. But with the help of his coaching team and a ton of hard work, Milos has considerably improved his movement; which was his Achilles heel on grass (and clay). With better movement and improved shot selection, he’s been able to make inroads that once seemed improbable.
The best part of all is that the improvement in his overall level of performance has allowed him to relax and focus on what he does best: serve opponents off the court. Finally, he’s become the threat everyone thought he could be on this surface.
He’ll be facing Nick Kyrgios, an even younger gun who played the match of his fledgling career in taking out World No. 1, Rafa Nadal. However, Nick’s win was no fluke. He came out with confidence, served well, and smacked backhand winners at will.
More impressively, he played a tactically brilliant match by making Rafa play at his quicker pace. It takes a special kind of young player to have that kind of higher level tennis wherewithal, and Nick’s got it.
Experience counts for something though, and Milos has the greater experience at this level. This might be his first Wimbledon quarter, but he’s about as prepared to step into the limelight as I’ve ever seen. He knows exactly what his tools are, and how to use them when the stakes are high.
Nick will have to regroup after a big win, and come out playing perhaps a better match than he did against Rafa because of Milos’ serve. Playing Milos will be tough enough without the emotional letdown that happens after a big win. And though Nick is an impressive talent, I don’t think it’s gonna happen.
Look for Milos to face off against Roger in the semifinals.
Milos Raonic in four sets
There were some shocking scenes on the courts today at Wimbledon…well, mainly on one court. SW19’s famed Centre Court became the graveyard of both reigning French Open champions today. Sharapova was knocked out by Kerber, and Nadal was sent packing by Kyrgios. Not content to play second fiddle, Serena was involved in her own drama on Court 1. Here’s a quick R16 “Check-In” Shock or Not before I throw myself into my second set of quarterfinal previews.
Angelique Kerber defeats Maria Sharapova: Shock or Not? Big Shock.
In spite of the fact that Maria won her first Slam at Wimbledon, grass hasn’t historically been a great surface for her. She reached the semifinals in the two years following that win, but didn’t make another deep run until her loss to Kvitova in the 2011 final. Still, she’s a multi-Slam winner and great competitor. Her chances looked very good to face Bouchard in the quarterfinals.
Conversely, Angelique Kerber came into this match with a losing record against Maria. On top of that, she’d also had limited success at Wimbledon; usually exiting well before R16 matches like today. She did, however, reach the semifinals in 2012. I guess that taste of success was that she needed to upend the script in this match, and knock Maria out of contention for the rare French-Wimbledon double.
Maria’s 49 unforced errors probably didn’t help either…
Nick Kyrgios defeats Rafa Nadal: Shock or Not? Even Bigger Shock.
I had a strong suspicion that Rafa wouldn’t make it out of this quarter after looking at the draw. However, there was nothing that indicated young Nick Kyrgios would be the one to knock him out of contention. Sure, Kyrgios is a talented up-and-comer, but beating the World No. 1, a 14-time Slam champion, on Centre Court? No way, right? Unfortunately for Rafa, yes!
Nick came out on court acting like he belonged, and that he had just as much of a chance for victory as Rafa. He then proceeded to serve huge, and smack backhand winners from everywhere on the court. His forehand wasn’t quite as lethal, but Rafa nullified that aspect of the Aussie’s game by continuing to play his backhand no matter how many times he got burned.
There is a distinct brashness to Nick that could be off-putting to some: like the manner in which he jumps around on the court (like a victory dance) after big points, or the loud manner in which he excoriates himself after bad misses. Moreover though, he’s a breath of fresh air in a sport that hasn’t really experienced one since the appearance of Novak on the Slam stage. And that’s definitely a good thing.
Rafa was fairly gracious in defeat, but one could sense a smidgen of sour grapes when asked about his young opponent.
“Everything is easier when you are arriving. Everything is new, nothing to lose, everything is good, everything is positive. You can do whatever and everybody see just the good things on you.”
“We’ll see if he’s able to improve and to play at very high levels for a long period of time.”
However, Rafa did end on a laugh by saying “For me… beach!”
Nick was hoping to crack the 25k level of Twitter followers during Wimbledon. I’m sure he’ll have no trouble now. I’ll help him out by ending with his first tweet after the big win:
Erm, ok then………..
— Nicholas Kyrgios (@NickKyrgios) July 1, 2014
Serena Williams makes dramatic exit from Wimbledon Doubles: Shock or Not? Not.
Serena came out for doubles with her sister Venus, and it was quickly obvious that something was wrong with her. After a lengthy visit from the trainer and doctor after warm-up, the sisters decided to forge on with the match. It unraveled quickly, however, with a retirement from the match while trailing 0-3.
The initial word is that Serena was suffering from a viral illness. Given her previous medical episodes, I hope that it’s nothing serious. But honestly, if she was feeling as poorly as it appeared earlier, why not just stop. Did we really need to suffer through such an odd and sad scene? No.
In this current iteration, Serena is (in most ways) an excellent example of a champion. This was not the case earlier in her career when she was, admittedly, much more prone to drama queen theatrics. I’m not questioning the legitimacy of her illness, just the lack of judgment from both her and Venus in such a late decision to throw in the towel.
When the doctor tells you, “If you can’t see the ball, you shouldn’t play”, maybe you should listen.