Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Gilles Simon and Equal Tournament Play

by Savannah

Gilles Simon is now a member of the ATP player council. As a member his comments get more play than they did before.

He's set off a firestorm with his most recent comments on the equal pay situation for the WTA at majors. What did he say?
WIMBLEDON, England — Gilles Simon, a Frenchman seeded 13th and freshly elected to the ATP Player Council, told French reporters on Monday that he was opposed to women receiving equal prize money as men.

“I think that men’s tennis is really ahead of women’s tennis at this stage,” he told the radio station France Info after winning his first-round match. “Once more, the men spent surely twice as much time on court as the women at the French Open. We often talk about salary equality. I don’t think it’s something that works in sport. I think we are the only sport that has parity with the women in terms of prize money. Meanwhile, men’s tennis remains more attractive than women’s tennis at this moment.”

In 2007, Wimbledon became the last of the four Grand Slam tournaments to award equal prize money to the women. The United States Open was the first in 1973.

But the men’s and women’s tours operate independently, and there are still disparities in the prize money that women earn at their own top-tier tour events compared with the men’s top-tier events.

In an interview with the French sports newspaper L’Equipe that appeared on Monday, Simon also said that he was upset that the men’s tour had agreed to make the tournament in Rome a joint event with the women without consulting him and some other men’s players directly.




“The year before, the women, for their final, they had 20 spectators,” he said. “And so, in that case, you save them, but when you want a practice court, there aren’t any left.”

Simon, looking ahead to his term on the ATP Players Council, made other suggestions during the L’Equipe interview that had nothing to do with women’s tennis. He wants to reduce the number of Masters 1000 tournaments that the leading men are required to play from eight out of nine to six out of nine. He also wants to cut the participatory requirements for Masters 500 tournaments.

(...)

“Am I going to incur the wrath of feminist organizations? I don’t care,” said Simon, pointing to the fact that women contest matches over best-of-three sets at the Grand Slam tournaments while the men play best-of-five set matches.

SOURCE

Might this rant have to do with the ATP considering raising prize money? Does this have to do with the inferior quality of the WTA product right now? Have I not been saying for a couple of years now that the WTA went for image over substance, promoting the Blonde standard over quality play? Outside of Serena Williams and Maria Sharapova who puts butts in seats? Victoria Azarenka?

Marion Bartoli came to the defense of women's tennis saying there are only five or six big draws in men's tennis. That's at least three more than the top draws of women's tennis.

There will be a lot of weeping and gnasing of teeth but nothing, and I mean nothing, Simon said isn't true. Is he a male chauvinist? Maybe. But his job is to reflect the attitudes of his constituency, the ATP players.

As for the Master's 1000 and 500 requirements I defer to the players on that. I'm sure the TD's will oppose any change but I suspect that is an argument that will be played out over the next two years.

Monday, June 25, 2012

Is It Over?

by Savannah



I overslept and didn't see any of Venus Williams first round match against Elena Vesnina except the very last, listless ball Venus hit into the net to end it.
Vesnina celebrated but it wasn't an in your face "BOOM" kind of thing. Her record will show a victory over Venus Williams, something every woman player dreams of but she knew that the woman she beat early this morning US time was a mere shadow of the woman who has won more at Wimbledon than anyone in her generation.

As Venus walked off court and towards the locker room she was not her usual regal self. Instead she looked so worn out she was barely able to carry her racquet bag. She was stoop shouldered and walked slowly.





I've been watching Venus Williams since she played her first US Open. I've been a fan ever since. During her presser today she politely but firmly said she was up for challenges and said she will be back at SW 19 in 2013.

It will take a lot for Venus to hang up her racquets. She is a fierce competitor and hates to give in to anything or anyone. She will fight this illness to the best of her ability wanting to go out on her terms not those dictated by some auto immune problem.

When she does I know she will want to go out with her head high. Whatever she decides as her fan I will support her.

Friday, June 22, 2012

Wimbledon Gentlemen's and Ladies Draws

by Savannah

I'm sure many of you have seen these already and have formed opinions. I'm usually ranting about the inherent bias of the draws but I'm not this time.


Novak Djokovic SRB (1) vs Juan Carlos Ferrero ESP
Ryan Harrison USA vs Yen-Hsun Lu TPE
Benjamin Becker GER vs James Blake USA
Sergiy Stakhovsky UKR vs Radek Stepanek CZE (28)

Marcel Granollers ESP (24) vs Viktor Troicki SRB
Martin Klizan SVK vs Juan Ignacio Chela ARG
Jeremy Chardy FRA vs Filippo Volandri ITA
Leonardo Mayer ARG vs Juan Monaco ARG (15)

Nicolas Almagro ESP (12) vs Olivier Rochus BEL
Q Guillaume Rufin FRA vs Steve Darcis BEL
Carlos Berlocq ARG vs Q Ruben Bemelmans BEL
Tobias Kamke GER vs Richard Gasquet FRA (18)

Florian Mayer GER (31) vs Dmitry Tursunov RUS
Philipp Petzschner GER vs Blaz Kavcic SLO
Q Simone Bolelli ITA vs Q Jerzy Janowicz POL
Ernests Gulbis LAT vs Tomas Berdych CZE (6 )


Roger Federer SUI (3) vs Albert Ramos ESP
Fabio Fognini ITA vs Michael Llodra FRA
Q Adrian Menendez-MacEiras ESP vs Q Michael Russell USA
Gilles Muller LUX vs Julien Benneteau FRA (29)

Fernando Verdasco ESP (17)vs Q Jimmy Wang TPE
WC Grega Zemlja SLO vs WC Josh Goodall GBR
Xavier Malisse BEL vs Marinko Matosevic AUS
Paul-Henri Mathieu FRA vs Gilles Simon FRA (13)

John Isner USA (11) vs Alejandro Falla COL
Paolo Lorenzi ITA vs Nicolas Mahut FRA
Igor Andreev RUS vs WC Oliver Golding GBR
Denis Istomin UZB vs Andreas Seppi ITA (23)

Mikhail Youzhny RUS (26) vs Donald Young USA
Q Inigo Cervantes ESP vs Flavio Cipolla ITA
Q Ryan Sweeting USA vs Potito Starace ITA
David Nalbandian ARG vs Janko Tipsarevic SRB (8)


David Ferrer ESP (7) vs Q Dustin Brown GER
Q Kenny De Schepper FRA vs Matthias Bachinger GER
LL Wayne Odesnik USA vs Bjorn Phau GER
WC Jamie Baker GBR vs Andy Roddick USA (30)

Kei Nishikori JPN (19) vs Mikhail Kukushkin KAZ
Q Andrey Kuznetsov RUS vs Q Florent Serra FRA
Go Soeda JPN vs Igor Kunitsyn RUS
Robin Haase NED vs Juan Martin Del Potro ARG (9)

Marin Cilic CRO (16) vs Cedrik-Marcel Stebe GER
Tatsuma Ito JPN vs Lukasz Kubot POL
Vasek Pospisil CAN vs Sam Querrey USA
Santiago Giraldo COL vs Milos Raonic CAN (21)

Kevin Anderson RSA (32) vs Grigor Dimitrov BUL
Albert Montanes ESP vs Marcos Baghdatis CYP
Ivo Karlovic CRO vs Dudi Sela ISR
Nikolay Davydenko RUS vs Andy Murray GBR (4)


Jo-Wilfried Tsonga FRA (5) vs WC Lleyton Hewitt AUS
Edouard Roger-Vasselin FRA vs Guillermo Garcia-Lopez ESP
Lukas Lacko SVK vs Adrian Ungur ROU
Jurgen Melzer AUT vs Stanislas Wawrinka SUI (25)

Bernard Tomic AUS (20) vs WC David Goffin BEL
Q Jesse Levine USA vs Karol Beck SVK
WC James Ward GBR vs Pablo Andujar ESP
Ruben Ramirez Hidalgo ESP vs Mardy Fish USA (10)

Feliciano Lopez ESP (14) vs Jarkko Nieminen FIN
Q Brian Baker USA vs Rui Machado POR
Matthew Ebden AUS vs Benoit Paire FRA
Alex Bogomolov Jr. RUS vs Alexandr Dolgopolov UKR (22)

Philipp Kohlschreiber GER (27) vs WC Tommy Haas GER
Q Jurgen Zopp EST vs Malek Jaziri TUN
Lukas Rosol CZE vs Ivan Dodig CRO
Thomaz Bellucci BRA vs Rafael Nadal ESP (2)

The Powers That Be seem to have decided that it's good theatre, and policy, to create a draw that sets some interesting matches, matches that will appeal not only physically but mentally.

Maria Sharapova RUS (1) vs Anastasia Rodionova AUS
Q Vesna Dolonc SRB vs Tsvetana Pironkova BUL
Su-Wei Hsieh TPE vs WC Virginie Razzano FRA
Stephanie Foretz Gacon FRA vs Monica Niculescu ROU (29)

Petra Cetkovska CZE (23) vs Vania King USA
Sloane Stephens USA vs Q Karolina Pliskova CZE
Bojana Jovanovski SRB vs Eleni Daniilidou GRE
Petra Martic CRO vs Sabine Lisicki GER (15)

Vera Zvonareva RUS (12) vs Mona Barthel GER
Edina Gallovits-Hall ROU vs Silvia Soler-Espinosa ESP
Kai-Chen Chang TPE vs Andrea Hlavackova CZE
Kim Clijsters BEL vs Jelena Jankovic SRB (18)

Christina McHale USA (28) vs WC Johanna Konta GBR
Lesia Tsurenko UKR vs Mathilde Johansson FRA
Ekaterina Makarova RUS vs Alberta Brianti ITA
Lucie Hradecka CZE vs Angelique Kerber GER (8)

Agnieszka Radwanska POL (3] vs Magdalena Rybarikova SVK
Venus Williams USA vs Elena Vesnina RUS
Iveta Benesova CZE vs Heather Watson GBR
Jamie Lee Hampton USA vs Daniela Hantuchova SVK (27)

Nadia Petrova RUS (20) vs Q Maria Elena Camerin ITA
Timea Babos HUN vs WC Melanie Oudin USA
Tamarine Tanasugarn THA vs Anna Tatishvili GEO
Q Camila Giorgi ITA vs Flavia Pennetta ITA (16)

Na Li CHN (11) vs Ksenia Pervak KAZ
Sorana Cirstea ROU vs Pauline Parmentier FRA
WC Naomi Broady GBR vs Lourdes Dominguez Lino ESP
Alexandra Cadantu ROU vs Maria Kirilenko RUS (17)

Shuai Peng CHN (30) vs Q Sandra Zaniewska POL
Jarmila Gajdosova AUS vsAyumi Morita JPN
Arantxa Rus NED vs LL Misaki Doi JPN
Carla Suarez Navarro ESP vs Samantha Stosur AUS (5)


Serena Williams USA (6) vs Barbora Zahlavova Strycova CZE
Johanna Larsson SWE vs Q Melinda Czink HUN
Vera Dushevina RUS vs Aleksandra Wozniak CAN
Stephanie Dubois CAN vs Jie Zheng CHN (25)

Lucie Safarova CZE (19) vs Kiki Bertens NED
Chanelle Scheepers RSA vs WC Yaroslava Shvedova KAZ
Laura Pous-Tio ESP vs Anne Keothavong GBR
Q Coco Vandeweghe USA vs Sara Errani ITA (10)

Dominika Cibulkova SVK (13) vs Klara Zakopalova CZE
Olga Govortsova BLR vs Q Annika Beck GER
Polona Hercog SLO vs Q Kristyna Pliskova CZE
WC Laura Robson GBR vs Francesca Schiavone ITA (24)

Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova RUS (31) vs Sofia Arvidsson SWE
Patricia Mayr-Achleitner AUT vs Varvara Lepchenko USA
Elena Baltacha GBR vs Karin Knapp ITA
Akgul Amanmuradova UZB vs Petra Kvitova CZE (4)

Caroline Wozniacki DEN (7) vs Tamira Paszek AUT
Alize Cornet FRA vs Nina Bratchikova RUS
Greta Arn HUN vs Galina Voskoboeva KAZ
Yanina Wickmayer BEL vs Svetlana Kuznetsova RUS (32)

Roberta Vinci ITA (21) vs WC Ashleigh Barty AUS
Urszula Radwanska POL vs Marina Erakovic NZL
Q Mirjana Lucic CRO vs Alexandra Panova RUS
Casey Dellacqua AUS vs Marion Bartoli FRA (9)

Ana Ivanovic SRB (14) vs Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez ESP
Kimiko Date-Krumm JPN vs Kateryna Bondarenko UKR
Anastasiya Yakimova BLR vs Mandy Minella LUX
Shahar Peer ISR vs Julia Goerges GER (22)

Anabel Medina Garrigues ESP (26) vs Simona Halep ROU
Q Jana Cepelova SVK vs Q Kristina Mladenovic FRA
Irina-Camelia Begu ROU vs Romina Oprandi SUI
Irina Falconi USA vs Victoria Azarenka BLR (2)


I still think the Ladies tournament is wide open and that anyone can win it. Most of the top women players have had a lot of rest coming into this event so hopefully they'll be mentally and physically ready for the Fortnight.


Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Wimbledon News - And Some Views

by Savannah

Despite Middle Sunday. Despite the requirement for your kit to be mostly white. Despite strawberries and cream. Despite all of those things Wimbledon has been the most digital friendly of all the Slams. Australia runs a close second. The French tried some innovation this year but it's mobile app was roundly panned as being the worst ever. Meanwhile the AELTC's mobile app, originally released for IOS devices only with Android to follow, is really very, very good. The only fault I find with it is that it's not available for the iPad. When Apple updates it's OS systems so that Airplay is available from it's laptops I'm hoping that the US Open will take full advantage. ESPN has already taken the step to set up "Watch ESPN" for tablets so I'm guessing next year at least one Slam will be ready to have it's entire tournament streamed wirelessly. I know I'm hoping against hope about the US Open. They don't even see that moving the stadiums around - and spending millions to do so - isn't what they need to do at Flushing Meadows. I guess I'm in a hopeful mood today.

There is a reason other than general bitching and moaning for this post though. In the last three days the news out of London and relating to Wimbledon has been quite interesting.

First came a presser by ESPN about it's upcoming Wimbledon broadcast. They've been pimping the fact that they're now the home of all four Slams for some time now but fans in the United States really have something to look forward to starting June 25. ESPN is using both of it's channels, ESPN and ESPN2, both of which are on basic cable, to broadcast every day of Wimbledon live. That means live on both the East and West coasts of this country, something tennis fans living on the left coast as it's often called have been fantasizing about for years. ESPN has also taken over the sobriquet "Breakfast at Wimbledon" for it's weekend coverage. This means no more tape delays. No more two hour windows where they try to squeeze in two matches. It's all going to be live.

The presser itself was a masterpiece of snide remarks and innuendo. In other words it was right up my alley. Here's a sample of what was said.

Q. This is for whoever wants it, I guess. I don't know who would be most appropriate to field this. But how important was it for the All England Club in negotiating this deal that you guys were getting everything live considering all the tape delays that NBC had been doing for the past decade‑plus at least and not having live matches on in this growing era of social media and up‑to‑the‑second updates on everything?

JASON BERNSTEIN: For sure. During the negotiation, it was abundantly clear that being live and bringing fans live matches was of paramount importance to both the All England Club and ESPN. No doubt about it. And our ability to do so, lining up two networks, and to Jed's point four networks, given ESPN3 and 3D, merely ensured that we were serving all fans on all devices, all live, all the time, given that that's what fans have required for so many years and given the expansive nature of social media and the social currency that live sport delivers.



Q. Do you think there was a degree of frustration in the previous NBC contract for the All England Club?

JASON BERNSTEIN: Yeah, I can't speak for the Club, but I can speak for what fans have voiced over the years, and in any sport and in any walk of life, when there isn't that immediate live payoff, there have been a number of letters written, stories written by folks like you, and it was always our intent to work with the Club to ensure that fans had the opportunity to see live coverage coast to coast.

(...)


Q. This is for whoever most wants to speak to the question. There will be people who will complain that they used to be able to see at least some Wimbledon on over‑the‑air channels. Do you think that being able to see it live trumps being on free TV?

JASON BERNSTEIN: I'm happy to make a quick response, and Jamie and Jed I know have some thoughts on this, as well. In short, the schedule that we crafted with the All England Club really was designed to give fans the best of both worlds. We wanted to obviously serve the fans on a live basis, every match possible to be consumed, and then in sports windows, the traditional sports windows, if you will, of broadcast television and weekend afternoons when live play has mostly been exhausted, we're serving fans in the middle weekend with a highlight show on middle weekend when there is no play, so we're giving fans an opportunity to experience Wimbledon for the first time if they haven't witnessed it for the first week on ABC, and then encore presentations of both the ladies' and gentlemen's Finals will be seen in the late afternoon sports windows on ABC on both the Saturday and the final Sunday.



Q. So both the men's and women's Finals will be able to be watched by people who don't have cable?

JASON BERNSTEIN: Correct.



Q. And how anachronistic is it to tell people they couldn't watch live sports in this day and age? It was getting harder and harder to explain, wasn't it?

JED DRAKE: There wasn't anything left to explain. We were televising what we were televising live.

(...)

Q. On the same kind of line, whether you could ever imagine a sports network carrying something tape delayed, what kind of thoughts do you have about the way NBC still runs the Olympics and presents them?

JASON BERNSTEIN: From my perspective I'd rather not make this an NBC or an ESPN thing as much as this is a fan thing, and fans deserve live coverage, and we're obviously honored to be a part of delivering live coverage here and in a way that it hasn't been done before. And we think that whether the event is Wimbledon, the Australian Open or the Euro Championships, fans are way too smart and way too savvy to accept anything other than live.

The complete transcript can be found on one of my favorite fan sites, one that lives up to it's name Talk About Tennis

The second piece of news causes me to have to apologize for saying that Wimbledon would never, ever, move from it's current calendar location. This piece comes from the Daily Mail online

Wimbledon is set to push for a break from more than 100 years of tradition to create a three-week gap between itself and the French Open.

The All England Club’s leadership want to extend the grass court season by another week to avoid clashes with other major sports events and allow players more time to adjust from clay to grass.

Not since the late 1800s has Wimbledon ever finished later than July 9, but such a move, which would not be achievable for at least two years, would see the world’s premier tournament finish around the middle of the month.

It is a sound idea on a number of fronts, especially in an age of a massive summer football tournament every two years.

There is also a clash this year with the British Grand Prix, which will happen on the same day as the men’s singles final.

The world’s top players currently face a dash to get ready for grass due to Roland Garros and Wimbledon being crammed into a six-week period.

Crucially, All England chairman Philip Brook appears to have the backing of the Lawn Tennis Association, who own and run the grass court tournaments in Britain that lead up to the main event.

Although neither body was prepared to comment on Monday it is understood they have already taken informal soundings from representatives of the men’s and women’s tours about a shift of date.

To quote the late Sam Cook "Ain't That Good News"? Of course it would involve a lot of changes for the warm up tournaments but where there's a will there's a way isn't there?
It'll be interesting to see how this idea progresses won't it?



The last bit of news comes from a presser that featured John McEnroe, Chris Evert and Cliff Drysdale talking about not only Wimbledon but tennis, specifically grass court tennis. Here's a sample.


Q. This is for all of you or any of you, and I hope this doesn't seem too tired of a question or tedious, but I really wanted to ask about grass. Could you remind us, what are truly the skills and the smarts that are required to really excel on the grass? And is it truly gentler on the body for a player? And then finally, could you foresee a day where it's just too retro or old school to be continued? Will it live on as long as tennis lives on, or is it kind of a vestige of the past?

CLIFF DRYSDALE: Let me fire away first on this one. It's a really good question and a really interesting one, because the game is evolving. In the same way that the strings and the rackets and the tennis balls are evolving and changing, so has the grass court at Wimbledon. It's not the same as your daddy's grass court. When we played, and I think even in the early years of John's career, and I know he's going to address it, but when we played at the Australian on grass and Forest Hills, they were both terrible grass courts. The ball hardly got up at all.

Wimbledon was always the best grass courts, but they were not what they are now. They're so much more like a hard ‑‑ the surface is much harder. The ball bounces up, the bounces are good, the balls are heavier, so there's been a balance of conditions. Grass is here to stay.


I'll just say one more thing: To me, watching tennis on the grass court now is more fun than either the hard court or the clay court.

CHRIS EVERT: I feel like I was in the wrong era. I played against the serve and volleyer Martina when the grass was really fast. I think that power is very important. I think court coverage, moving is very important. But I also think for a baseliner, for a ground stroker like myself or Steffi or Monica or anybody, I think you have to adapt and you have to make adjustments in your game. No other surface do you have to except on grass. You have to shorten your swing, you have to bend your knees and get down lower for the ball. You have to make split‑second adjustments if that's what it takes. And I think, therefore, you don't see a lot of baseliners winning Wimbledon because a lot of them can't make those adjustments, can't adapt to them. But I hope it's around forever because Wimbledon is just the epitome, really, of tennis, and I hope as long as they keep the courts really well groomed, I think it's around forever.

JOHN McENROE: I think it will be. I thought it was going to be gone in the '80s because the serving just got so absurd, particularly by the time you got to Sampras and Becker. But the change has been so much the other way, it's unbelievable to watch guys in the baseline. So it's sort of thrown away the argument that there's no rallies. If anything, it's too much like the other surfaces, which is incredible. But the subtleties of the game, I still think the ball will react in a different way, it's going to go through the grass and hit a knife slice. People don't seem to get the nuances. They play a similar way almost, and to me maybe that's why Roger, if he made those subtle adjustments, could win.

In my day the reason I was taught the way I was taught was because three of the four Slams were on grass, and like Cliff said, the grasses were bad, so you had to have short back swings and take the ball in the air as much as possible. Which you don't have to do. It allows the guys, big swingers like Nadal or Sharapova, they have those lasso‑like forehands, they can get away with it. It's totally different. I guess the good news is all the guys that are good all around they can pretty much any surface now.

But it'll be interesting to see what they do in the next ten years to sort of address some of the issues now with what's going on, the changes that have taken place, if they hopefully will continue to try to work with things so they get the best out of all the players.

Q. Just a couple of quick ones if I may. Cliff, first of all, you said you were very critical of Andy's (Murray) forehand and seemed to suggest that may be a technical problem in his game, which is stopping him. Just want you to elaborate on that. And also, I think you're coming up for 50 years in terms of visiting Wimbledon. Just what changes have you seen in it over the years? You maybe touched on some of that. And for Chris, you spoke with Petra Kvitova and maybe she's feeling the pressure of being Wimbledon champion. Could you elaborate on that for us?
CLIFF DRYSDALE: I've watched very carefully, I'm very interested in the technical side of things. It's very hard to find any chinks in the armor of the top three players. With Andy on the forehand side in my opinion, he meets the ball a little bit, sort of like Stefan Edberg used to do, and he doesn't have the same margin for error of the forehand side that any of the other three have. And that to me, you need three things: You've got to have fitness, which he has absolutely, you've got to have a very strong mentality, which I think he has, but the one thing that I think is lacking and the one thing that keeps him from beating the top three or going higher than where he is now is technical on the forehand side.

As for the changes at Wimbledon, they're almost unrecognizable. The game that is played now is unrecognizable from the game that we played. We had slice forehands. The only reason to play a shot was to try to get into the net and then to finish the point off at the net. That was what it was all about on three of the four Grand Slams. As you can see now, it is a completely different game. The balls have changed, the court surface as we said earlier, that's different, the strings have changed. It's a very different game. I don't think it's any worse to watch than it was, it's just different.
CHRIS EVERT: Petra, this is a different year for her, and last year she won Wimbledon. Number one, she had nothing to do, she felt no pressure, she wasn't on the radar. And number two, I felt like she played the match of her life against Sharapova. This year she hasn't won a lot of matches coming into this. She can't be confident because in the warm‑up tournament she lost first round. It's going to be more of a struggle for her to win it this year. Does she have the game to win it? Yes, but everything is going to have to be working. Her serve, she's going to have to move as well as she did last year, and I haven't seen that since. I haven't seen her move as well since last Wimbledon. I think it's going to be a bit of a struggle for her. She wouldn't be one of my top two favorites to win the title.

Q. Chris, did you see Caroline Wozniacki against McHale yesterday? What do you think of her situation right now? And what should she, in your opinion, do to get back on track?
CHRIS EVERT: Yeah, I actually did not see her yesterday play. But I have observed her in every other tournament. Caroline, you know, I think that one big problem with Caroline is her court positioning. I've always been critical of this. I think she stands too far back. I think she waits for the ball to come to her. I think she's got that big swing, and I think she needs to really move in and take the ball on the rise a lot more, and be more aggressive with her groundstrokes. I sense that her serve she's starting to get a little more zip on her first serve, which she's going to need to compete or be back in the top four. Hopefully her new coach will be able to cite these things. But I would hope that she's working on being more aggressive and not just happy with the fact that she was ranked No. 1, and it'll happen for her and she will win a Grand Slam. She's got to make some changes. I don't know how you feel, Cliff, but that hasn't been evident to me yet.

CLIFF DRYSDALE: I agree with everything that you've said, and in a way she benefitted from a stagnant women's game to become world's No. 1. Now she has got to do technically the things that you're saying that she has to do to get back to No. 1 or just to stay alive in the top five.

CHRIS EVERT: Yeah, not only change her court positioning and move it and hit on the rise but also even speed up the racquet head. She kind of guides the ball sometimes, and that would have been good enough for ten years ago, but it's not good enough for this. The women are playing so much better now than they were this time last year.

Once again the full transcript can be found on Talk About Tennis

It's so good to hear these pro's talk about the game in a professional, informed way. I'm hoping that with all the time ESPN is allotting to Wimbledon this is the type of commentary we'll get.










Monday, June 18, 2012

Well That Was Some Weekend

by Savannah


Being American and all I suppose I'm required to start this post with a picture of Miss Melanie Oudin, a Southern girl who said that she really didn't want to come up North because, well, she's a Southern girl. It brought to mind Blanche Devereaux's comments about her going against social barriers in the south by dating a northerner and scandalizing her class.

But I digress.

What is kind of interesting is that Blanche, uh, Melanie, defeated Jelena Jankovic, a former WTA #1. Do I have to mention she was one of the Slamless number ones? I guess I should because there are some who may be new to tennis who are trying to learn as much as possible about the sport. JJ played every tournament known to God and man in order to achieve the top ranking, a path followed by several other of her peers who made it to the top without winning a Slam along the way.

Anyway I think it's time to acknowledge that JJ is in a serious decline. She's never been the same since that idjut Ricardo Sanchez had her bulk up to improve her stamina. Does JJ need to take some time off and assess where she wants to go in tennis? Then again who am I? I sit on my couch or at the dining table watching television and knowing every move a player should make on court. Still a brief vacation may do JJ some good.



Then there's Alize Cornet looking like she stepped out of a Renoir painting in her trophy picture. Alize showed great promise as a young teen and was being touted as the next best among the French women. Alize then proceeded to fall off the face of the earth tennis wise. She's been making a comeback, this is her second title in four years, and I'm glad to see her continuing to play and try to get her ranking up. I'm not sure if she's ready for the big babes of the WTA yet but she's trying to live up to her potential more or less out of the limelight.



There is this grass warm up tournament held in Germany right after the French Open in a place called Halle. The tournament pays big bucks to big names to have them show up with clay court hang over's and bring the fans out. The players do their thing and then go off for some rest and relaxation before the next big dance held in fabled London SW19.

When the dust settled this year the Halle Final was played between two men who are both in their thirties. Tommy Haas, seen above, is 34. He played this guy named Roger Federer who found himself in another final.

Federer is not used to his opponents fighting back. He loves the adulation and resignation many who take the court against him exhibit and uses it to push him towards his goal sure of a win and building up more adulation from the prostrate tennis media.

Haas had nothing to lose and played aggressive, fearless, non adulatory tennis. He treated Federer as just another guy across the net and came away with a win.

MV did send me another email by the way. Something about her Captain being locked in the man wing of the house - you didn't think a mere man cave would suffice did you - and not coming out for food or practice.

Anywho Haas earned himself a Wild Card into Wimbledon based on his play. I don't think there are too many players who want to see his name in their quarter.



Then there's Marin Cilic, the tall, dark and some would say handsome player from Croatia (Is there any other kind?). He found himself playing another man who seemed to have decided that he was sick of waiting for the indoor season to get some silverware to put in his trophy chest, David Nalbandian. It was very windy and I wondered if Mr. Indoor Tennis would have trouble against Cilic who played well this tournament. David - not Fat Dave at the moment - is Nalbandian fit. That is all I'm going to say about that.

But it wasn't stamina or the elements that cost David the trophy. David, in a fit of blind anger, kicked one of the ad boxes the lines people stand in during play and sit in during a break. I've always thought those boxes were silly since they restrict the movement of the line judges.

I'm going to take a minute and describe "blind anger" for those who seem not to understand what that term means. There are people who get so angry, with
themselves, others, or circumstance, that they are literally blind. It's why murderers sometimes say they don't remember committing the act. They're blind not only emotionally but in a way physically since they grab the first thing they can and wail away. In David's case he kicked the thing that was in front of him, the ad box. I don't think he even saw that there was someone sitting inside the box. The line judge had no way to get away.



Yes it's a cut. Cut's bleed. David did not run away, he stayed there talking to the man until the medics arrived. If you read some of the shit the "professional journalists" tweeted yesterday you'd think David picked up a piece of the splintered wood and bashed the man's head in. Not only was the physical act of kicking the ad box raised to the level of a capital crime but some of the comments revealed a deep seated animus against David Nalbandian, coming from where I don't know and don't want to speculate lest I come down to their level, a place I don't want to be.




The rule book states there are penalties that have to be assessed in a case like this and David has been penalized by the powers that be. All of which makes me wonder where these outraged "journalists" were when current favorite Grigor Dimitrov chased after an official after a match and assaulted him not only verbally but physically? What about Victoria Azarenka's outbursts a mere two or three years ago that are never discussed by the "tennis media"? And of course there's Yanina Wickmayer who threw a racquet and hit a lines woman in the head? That woman went to the hospital. I guess because none of these people follow tennis that's played away from glamourous resorts or stadium complexes think no one else does either. Then they wonder why certain of their favorites are not popular with the average tennis fanatic and think good p.r. and nice pictures will win fans over.




There were some who said Nalbandian's punishment didn't go far enough, that he should be forced to pay at least what Serena Williams was fined. Do. Not. Get.Me. Started.

There was no blood shed during that US Open incident. There was a verbal threat but no blood was spilled anywhere. The fear of the anger of an African American woman is what fueled that storm, nothing more, nothing less. Has Andy Roddick done more verbal abuse on court? Yes. Did Andre Agassi do physical damage to officials? Yes. But hey, it's just Andy in the heat of battle. And Andre is SUCH a competitor isn't he?



Nalbandian committed an infraction and he's paying for it. That is what the rule book calls for. He is not up for capital murder. Let's let this furor die.

The USTA Does Absolutely Nothing...

Except figure out how to spend a lot of money so that they can cram more people into the US Open in a couple of years. Are they putting a roof on Ashe? No. Armstrong? No.
Somewhere? No.

They're moving some of the outer courts around and taking away the best court for watching tennis, The Grandstand court. If you've been there you know that the Grandstand court is linked to Louis (pronounced Lewis as was clearly stated in Louis Armstrong's cover of "Hello Dolly") Armstrong stadium and provides fans a way to go back and forth without having to exit one to get to the other or vice versa. There was a lot of whining about the long lines that form for Grandstand entry and the logjam that sometimes follows.

It should be mentioned that admittance to Armstrong and/or The Grandstand requires the mere purchase of a Grounds Pass. There is no need to pay an exorbitant amount of money to get a decent seat in Ashe, or to pay a somewhat more reasonable amount to sit in the blue seats and watch the jumbotrons.

With this announcement the US Open will remain the only Slam without at least one of it's main venues having a roof. I've heard all about the swamp land and it's boring now. I mean they're moving the Grandstand off of the soft ground and onto a portion of the property that is not swamp. All I see them doing is shifting deck chairs. The longer they wait the more expensive it'll become. I'm just saying.











Tuesday, June 12, 2012

The 2012 French Open

by Savannah



Grand Slams are supposed to be, well, grand. Or should I say grandiose? Tennis is asking it's top players to prove to the world that they have mastered the surface the Slam is being played on. There are two hard court Slams, both taking place in their respective nations summer heat. The two natural surface Slams take place during their countries spring. Spring is, as those of us who live in temperate climates know, an iffy proposition at best. You can have searing heat, damp chilly days that may or may not come with wind, or sunny cool days that can also bring windy conditions. Each event requires a different skill set from the players no matter their ranking. The players that achieve mastery, who survive whatever it is Mother Nature throws at them get the right to hoist the winners trophy and have their name engraved on the trophy for future generations to admire and aspire to the level of play that got that player's name engraved there for posterity.



Of all the Slams the French Open stands alone. It's about patience, mental and physical stamina, shot construction and body control. You can't fake it on the terre battue - the red clay of Roland Garros. In fact you can't fake it on any red clay surface. I feel I have to be specific here because this was the year promoter Ion Tiriac decided to throw a wrench into the run up to the French by staging his tournament on what was called "blue clay". As player complaints mounted there were revelations that the surface, originally said to be no different from it's red counterpart had never been tested by a live player. It was said, or admitted, that the surface had never been tested by a living breathing player and that the assurances had come from the lab techs that created it. Those who won the event on that surface said that those complaining were "weenies" or whiners who didn't want to adjust to change. It bears mentioning that neither champion, mens or women's, figured in the outcome of the French Open. If Tiriac wants to continue using this gimmick to promote his tournament maybe it should be moved to after the spring clay court season to take place after Wimbledon and lead into the US summer hard court season. Maybe Hamburg, so rudely treated after upgrading it's stadiums, should be put back in the place it used to occupy. The heavy slow clay would make a better warm up than the blue surface that plays more like a hard court than a crushed brick one.

Yeah I know I digress but I think this needs to be said. The debacle that was the women's draw in Paris wouldn't have happened if the hype machine hadn't picked a favorite based on results on two "clay" surfaces that in reality bear no resemblance to it.



My other sore point, in fact the one that really made me angry, was the coverage viewers in the United States were subjected to. My anger has nothing to do with the fact that my cable provider refuses to settle with Tennis Channel so that I had to rely on streams when coverage moved from ESPN2. It had to do with two veteran players who at best were abysmal in their knowledge not only of the players but of what was going on on the court. I'm a fan. I can root for anyone I want from my living room sofa. If I'm getting paid to provide insightful and informative coverage of a match it's my job to put my inner fan girl away and report on tactics, technique, the effect of the weather, the surface, grips and mental processes taking place on the court. None of this was provided by Chris Evert or John McEnroe.




I know that both are busy people, that they're both running academies and make appearances in exhibitions and/or senior tour events and can't devote a lot of time to watching tennis.




BUT they know when they're going to be broadcasting and I don't know whether the blame lies with ESPN2 or the two people I named above but to have Evert live on the air saying she'd never heard of a player who every tennis head knew had had a pretty good clay season or McEnroe not knowing that Venus Williams had been diagnosed with an auto immune disease that effects her energy level and can cause lack of feeling in her hands. And that's before Evert tweeted that she felt "nauseous" about Roger Federer's play in an early round. This is why despite their fanboy tendencies at some times Rob Koenig and Jason Goodall are constantly rated as the best in the business by knowledgeable fans, fans who watch a lot of tennis, something that is apparently not required of JMac and Chrissie. In my opinion if the announcers due to outside factors come in a little hazy about what's been going on in the tennis world briefing sheets or sessions should be held. What's wrong with cheat sheets giving the won/lost records, rankings and results leading into the Slam being provided? If pertinent medical histories can be provided as well. Is that too much to ask? Apparently it is.





As for the United States our performance was once again horrid. The top rated US Junior girl Taylor Townsend snagged the number one ranking over Anna Schmiedlova who had been having a wonderful summer and came into the French on fire. This caused a lot of jaws to get tight in the junior tennis world but I figured they'd all had their haterade and that Taylor had to have improved her fitness since she was last seen on a major stage.



Unfortunately I was wrong. It's inexcusable for a young woman wanting to be considered a top contender to show up for a tournament, any tournament, in the above condition. Taylor is not alone in the lack of fitness department though. None of the American girls I saw with the possible exception of Lauren Davis, were fit. I exclude Davis because the only time I saw her she was sitting down. I'm not saying the young girls should go on a starvation diet but I mean even Christina McHale had a bit of a paunch. I'm old enough to remember Lindsay Davenport before she got fit and was the target of many snickers and asides by the American male tennis establishment, many of whom considered women players to be nothing more that pretenders because so many weren't fit.


The girl pictured above won the Junior girls championship by the way.

So what about the state of American tennis, male and female, going into Wimbledon? I think Patrick McEnroe has accepted that "winter is here" for the US and that it may be a long one. Ryan Harrison is the top hope for the US but like Victoria Azarenka will have to get himself under better control to compete with the big boys who are not impressed by histrionics and smashed racquets or as in Azarenka's case objects thrown at court officials and verbal abuse.




Andy Roddicks's mind is clearly on other things right now and he's barely been worth a footnote during the spring clay season. John Isner defeated Roger Federer during Davis Cup play but that said more about Federer than Isner whose game doesn't translate well to clay at all. The Bryan twins are aging and you have to wonder how much longer they'll be top competitors.




There is Sloan Stephens on the women's side though. Sloan has made the gutsy move to go to Barcelona to learn how to play on red clay, a sad commentary of the level of clay court instruction available in the United States. Let's not forget that Maria Sharapova's transformation into a decent if not spectacular clay court player took close to three years of work on her part. She didn't wake up one day and suddenly play better. Yet once more exhibiting ignorance of the sport he's paid to be an expert on John McEnroe asked, on the air, if Russian national Maria Sharapova was going to play the Olympics for the United States. That was the "Facepalm of the Tournament" award winner for me. Still it wasn't a surprise. I mentioned during my post on the WTA finalists that the US tennis establishment was going to try and claim Sharapova's success as it's own since she's done so much training here. That the USTA has to bask in the reflected glow of a US trained woman playing for Russia hoping that American's will forget her nationality is pretty sad. It's also pretty sad that the American's are once again "waiting for Wimbledon" where the hope of good draws and a faster surface can possibly improve our showing.



Enough of the pathetic state of American tennis. Let's look at both tours starting with the WTA. The Italian women seem to be staking a claim to the French. For the third year in a row an Italian woman made the Final. Tiny Sara Errani showed how to make her height less of a disadvantage playing bigger women by moving around the ball to get a good angle and frustrate her taller opponents. Her style could be a prototype for the smaller women trying to make it in the States but I doubt that this will happen. I thought that Nikolay Davydenko's style would be a good one for Donald Young to study but what do I know? I'm just a fan. God forbid some foreigner would be worthy of emulation.



But back to the WTA. The only woman who seemed to have an idea about how to play Sharapova on clay was defending champion Li Na but she seems to have forgotten how to play tennis longer than a set and a half. If you make Sharapova move her shots lose their effectiveness but no one seemed able to do that for more than a few games. Perhaps it's a testament to Sharapova's will that she didn't allow her opponents to be able to do that for any length of time during a match. Perhaps it's a testament to the lack of mental toughness outside of Sharapova and Serena Williams in the women's game. I was slack jawed when I read that Victoria Azarenka had added Amelie Mauresmo to her team to prepare for the French. What did Amelie do in Paris to warrant being a consultant to the then WTA #1?



That great tennis sage Marion Bartoli said that it's a big difference between being the hunter and the hunted. I think Ms Azarenka found this out. I said from the beginning of her ascension that Azarenka was not temperamentally suited to be a number one. She may redeem herself at Wimbledon and the US Open but I have a feeling two women named Williams and Sharapova will have other ideas about her reclaiming the top spot. Neither Serena nor Maria give a rats ass about being the hunted. They care about winning and don't care who they have to destroy on their way to doing that. Serena believed the hype about her being a contender for Paris and didn't play a tournament on the red dirt coming into Paris. Sharapova did. I think Serena will leave the pretty at home and come out ready to take names at Wimbledon.



So what about the ATP tour? Does it have the depth most feel is lacking in the women's tour? I think the answer is a definite maybe. One of the things I saw on a lot of fan boards during the French was that aside from the top four or five (isn't it time to include David Ferrer in the conversation?) the last few majors and Master's events have been boring. Players like Tomas Berdych, Juan Martin del Potro, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Gilles Simon have shown the skills but not the necessary will to do damage against the top three players. Milos Raonic has the weight of Canada on his shoulders every time he steps on court. I also feel his game hasn't matured the way it could have if they left him alone to develop. I don't know what to say about Fernando Verdasco. Feliciano Lopez seems to have been slowed down by age but he is better on hard courts than clay. David Nalbandian is best during the indoor season but if he pulls himself together can definitely ruin your day. I refuse to discuss Janko Tipsarevic.



Then there's this quote from Newsweek has to have jaws tight.

The storylines for global tennis only get better as Nadal and Djokovic continue their back-and-forth. Who will conquer at Wimbledon? And again at the grounds of the All England Club a month later at the London Olympics? Can supporting cast members such as Federer, Murray, and the electric Frenchman Jo-Wilfried Tsonga or the big hitters like Tomas Berdych and Juan Martin del Potro push aside the Tremendous Two for a title?

That's not from me folks. I wrote the other stuff before seeing this quote. Great minds and all that I guess.

Still notice the lack of an American even being mentioned? US commentators can continue to pretend that our players have more than a fluke chance of going deep in a Slam or a Masters 1000. They can not read up on the European's and ignore the European and to a lesser extent the South Americans - Juan Monaco until he was injured was having a very good year - but it's not going to change reality.
Winter is here, and it's going to be a very long one.

End Note

Those of you have have read this blog from the beginning know that I used to hear quite a bit from MV about her Captain Wasabi. Well as luck, or something, would have it I got an email from her the other day. She's worried about her Captain, worried enough to not be able to text as much as she would like to her friends during his matches. The day she sent me the email she said he'd locked himself in the man cave wing of the house muttering something about "two and a half". Not even the twins - yes they've had children since she last communicated with me - could lure him out. He's also been screaming about the Kid as he still calls his rival being five majors away and that sixteen was supposed to be sacred. I know MV loves her Captain and as a woman I sympathize. I'm not sure how I should answer her.
























Monday, June 11, 2012

Seven It Is

f7a6c23e

I think that Rafael Nadal's winning his seventh French Open deserves it's own post. With his win today Rafa surpasses Bjorn Borg in total number of French Open's won.

Rafa had to overcome the elements and shaky decisions about playing in inclement weather but I'll let that slide for now.

Thanks to the person who created this montage for summing it all up quite nicely.

Friday, June 8, 2012

Ladies Day June 9, 2012

by Savannah

bd458bed
No one in the American tennis media gave Sara Errani of Italy a chance. She stands a whisper above five feet tall so what chance did she have at this the most physical of all the Slams? Slim to none? Was she the player one American comm said she'd never heard of before? I'm not sure. And this column is not my review of the French Open. That will come a bit later next week.

If unlike the former American players who get paid beaucoup bucks to commentate matches and never seem to watch one between gigs you were watching tennis during the spring European clay court season you were very aware of Sara Errani. She played very very well and most European commentators stopped talking about her size and focused on her tennis. And she was playing tennis very well.

It wasn't a big surprise that she made it to the semi final match to me. Her enemy would be nerves. Instead it was Samantha Stosur who succumbed to nerves, the very Samantha Stosur whose name had already been penciled into one of the final slots by many American and Australian observers. When the final point was won it was Sara who was dropping her racquet to the ground and sobbing in joy along with her father. If some of the hired hands had bothered to pay attention earlier in the season they would've heard about the work Sara had been putting in, how she'd worked on her game and herself relentlessly so that she'd make a good showing on the terre battue of Paris. And make a good showing she did. She deserves to be in this final. And I know she will expect nothing but the best from herself.

163df8be

It's a completely different scenario for Russian Maria Sharapova. The commentary I was subjected to sang her praises from day one, especially after the women who could've presented the biggest obstacle to her lost early. "Could anyone stop her relentless march to Goddess status" was the constant refrain. "She's no longer a cow on ice" they said over and over and over.

Don't get me wrong. Sharapova has worked her ass off for the last two years to get herself ready for the European clay court season. And her results have been stunning. No one who has watched Sharapova over the years can deny her strength of will and pursuit of the Maria Slam. She didn't throw tantrums after a loss. She was upset, mostly with herself, but kept her eyes on the prize.

Americans forget that Maria is a Russian national because she has had so much training here in the United States.
Her victories are claimed as theirs. So no one will be cheering harder for the tall Russian than the American tennis establishment even if her new found maturity on clay had almost nothing to do with them.

A Brief Commentary

Bizarre is not a word usually associated with a tennis match. Tough. Draining. Exciting. Challenging. All of these words can be used to describe a match. But the mens semi final between Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic can only be described as bizarre. I didn't understand what was going on while watching and now several hours later I still don't understand.

Thanks to the work of the ITWA Roland Garros opts not to publish print versions of all player interviews, something they were doing up until a couple of years ago. I've commented on this travesty of justice several times in the past and won't go into a lot of depth now. I will say that in this Internet age trying to restrict access to information only results in it popping up somewhere else. That's what happened with Roger Federer's post match interview. Thanks to the people at Freedom Tennis you can read Federer's interview not only in English but they've translated the French part of the interview as well. I'm posting it in it's entirety below. Thanks guys.

ROGER FEDERER June 08 2012

ROGER FEDERER



Q. What went wrong during the match?

ROGER FEDERER: I don’t know. I mean, I thought he played well, you know, under tough conditions. Yeah, and I wasn’t able to sustain maybe a solid enough game today, I guess.

That’s about it.


Q. Do you think maybe the weather conditions had anything to do with today’s game turning out the way it did?

ROGER FEDERER: Maybe a little bit now, you know, after the match is over. I mean, the match itself obviously try to use the conditions to your advantage.

But I was struggling, you know, to sort of keep the ball in play, you know, probably long enough, even though I wasn’t hitting the ball poorly. It’s been a tough week for me last couple. Maybe in these conditions today didn’t help me, help the cause, let’s put it that way.

I did have enough chances, so it’s no excuse there. I tried, and it just didn’t work out today.



Q. You had many chances in the second set, 3‑Love, 4‑2, 5‑4, and the crowd was with you, also. Do you think that if you had won that set it would have been a totally different match or not?

ROGER FEDERER: Yes, I think it would have been, but it’s not. (Smiling.)



Q. You talked about struggling to find your rhythm after a few matches this week. Did you feel any better today? Did you feel you were hitting the ball any better?

ROGER FEDERER: You know, maybe it was more straightforward because obviously Novak forces the issue as well, so there’s a bit more reacting going on than actually deciding where you want to hit the ball and how many different ‑‑ you know, with how many different possibilities can you hit it in a certain corner.

That was I think a bit of my issue. Earlier on in the week, obviously against top players it’s more straightforward, you know. You’re doing a bit more reacting, as well. That was the case out here today, as well.

I thought, you know, I was playing very aggressive early on, had the break, things were going well, but obviously it was always going to be hard to keep on serving well in the wind.

Obviously when Novak picks up some good returns, you know, my first serve obviously was going to be difficult.

I was actually feeling particularly well in the second set, so that one obviously hurts the most to lose, yeah. And the first set, too.

But in the third, I mean, I wasn’t able to put a good game together anymore. And the return in particular, obviously with a two sets to love lead against Novak it’s not the same match anymore. He goes are goes for broke and there is no more fear. That’s about it.



Q. What’s your balance about your level in this tournament? In which conditions you arrive to the Wimbledon and Olympic Games?

ROGER FEDERER: Well, I mean, Olympics are still two months away; Wimbledon is still, you know, two weeks away. So we have a lot of time.

But, again, I mean, semifinals is, at the end of the day, very good result for any tennis player. For me, too. I wish I could have done a bit better today, especially with the wasted opportunities.

But that’s how it goes sometimes. I’ve got to go, you know, change things around now for grass anyway. I’m looking forward to that. It’s been a difficult clay court season. I wasn’t in the best shape physically, to be quite honest.

Maybe I also that I did feel down the stretch a little bit. Overall I did feel my very best coming into the semis today. I was where I wanted to be, but ran into an opponent who was just better today.

Still, it gives me a little bit of a lift, you know, coming ‑‑ I guess coming into the grass court season now.



Q. Just your thoughts about Sunday’s duel of Titans, Nadal/Djokovic.

ROGER FEDERER: I’m sure it’s going to be a good match. I have no idea what the conditions are going to be, if it’s going to be rainy or slow or fast. I mean, it’s never going to be fast here because this year the balls are very slow.

Yeah, my pick is not a surprising one. I obviously pick Rafa. I think he’s the overwhelming favorite. We’ll see how it goes.

THE MODERATOR: French, please.



Q. You made it to the semis. That’s a good tournament for you. I felt that you were not really at ease. You were not physically present. Is that what you said?

ROGER FEDERER: I don’t know. I wondered about many things. You know, there comes a time when you have to stop asking yourself questions and play, which is what I tried to do.

What’s certain is that given the conditions, you know, I tried to be aggressive. It’s more complicated. Even more the case on clay. That’s about it.

I had opportunities; I missed them, even though I didn’t play badly on the break points. But then it’s on my serve. When I was serving, I didn’t manage ‑‑ not to play better. I can’t say this. But it was tough.

It was difficult to attack, and being defensive, or rather, you know, I could have waited a little. But if I were to do this, I was playing for him. I was not here to play a good match but to win the match, so I had to hit the balls. It was a bit disappointing today.



Q. Would you say you were irritated given the conditions since the beginning of the tournament? Today it was quite windy.

ROGER FEDERER: I usually like when it’s windy, but maybe it was not the right moment for me when there was wind, because I was looking for my pace and rhythm since the beginning of the tournament.

Then wind or no wind, I don’t know if I’d have won otherwise today. You know, I had to play a good match, and this was a match that was correct but not good enough to beat Novak.



Q. I have the impression when I’m listening to you that you have a little cold; is that true?

ROGER FEDERER: No, no. My throat was a little sore. My nose was running a little in the past days, but it didn’t really bother me today. No, not at all. Didn’t bother me at all.



Q. I’ll ask the question that was asked in English before: What about your position concerning Novak and Rafael Nadal on Sunday? What would you say about this? Would you say that Rafael is stronger?

ROGER FEDERER: I’d say that Novak is the favorite, I should say in French, when I said the contrary in English. No, no. I said that Rafa is my favorite to win this tournament here, but it’s going to be an interesting and pleasant final.

I don’t know anything about the conditions. I think this is what I said in English.



Q. You said that your season on clay had its ups and downs due to physical injuries. Would you say that this is what you paid here at Roland Garros, all these physical difficulties?

ROGER FEDERER: No, physically I feel good. What I said before is that today was my best day physically speaking if I look at the past months.

When I practiced the week after Madrid I was okay, then I hurt myself a little, and then for three or four weeks I knew I’d feel this physically. But then the pain vanished after Rome. I was happy on this side.

I played this side as well, so mentally afterwards you don’t want to hit too strongly. Who knows? You know, I tried to find other solutions in my game, but it was a good season on clay.

I would have liked to do better here at Roland Garros. I’m supported so much, and I won in 2009, also. So I wanted to reexperience this. Unfortunately, it was not possible at all during these two weeks.



Q. On Sunday who is going to have more pressure, Djokovic aiming for the Grand Slam or Rafael Nadal who wants to beat Borg’s record or will you say that both will be totally transformed?

ROGER FEDERER: They’re going to play well, I can tell you, pressure or no pressure. They’re used to it.

Novak has more pressure because he’s never won here, I think.

I was in the same situation twice, I think, for the Grand Slam, you know, the four in a row, four Grand Slam tournaments. I can’t really remember, anyway.

But Rafa has won six times here. Of course it would be great to win for a seventh time. But, you know, for Novak, he’s never won the tournament, so who knows?

Maybe luck will be on his side again. Well, Novak therefore will have more pressure, I think, which is quite normal, even though everybody thinks that Rafa is going to win.

I think Novak has more pressure on him, you know. To be in this situation you have to win three Grand Slams in a row again, which is more difficult.



Q. Have you lost a set after breaking three times? Has it happened to you already?

ROGER FEDERER: I hope so. I hope it’s not the first time. But I don’t know. I have played so many matches.