35 posts categorized "July 2011"
Howdy. It's a cool, clear, mountain morning here in game-rich Andes. The valleys (they're called "hollows" or "cloves") up in these parts are stuffed with fog as thick and dazzling as pure whipped cream. I think that happens when the water temperature in the creeks and rivers is warmer than the air temperature. I've been tractor hunting this weekend, as the Orange Blossom (may 1951 Allis-Chalmers WD-45) has earned her retirement. And as I approach mine, I believe I deserve power steering, and a little more time on the deck instead of under machinery.
Not sure you could cook up a more intriguing line-up of finals than we have today - Fish vs. Gulbis, Serena Williams vs. Bartoli, Cilic vs. Dologolopov, and a resurgent Verdasco vs. Granollers in Gstaad. The best way to put this line-up into perspective may bet to attempt to predict the winners. I'd really be curious to see who might pick all four finals correctly. And just so you won't be bashful, I'll go with Fish, Serena, the Dog and - as a recent comment poster so aptly described him - the "little tugboat of the Armada," Marcel Granollers. Hey, let it roll, right?
Enjoy the rest of your weekend, folks.
-- Pete
by Jackie Roe, TW Social Director
How’s it going, TWibe? Funny story from last night . . . I’m lounging at home and I get this message from one of my co-workers (who knows nothing about tennis): “OMG, watching True Hollywood Story on Anna Kournikova. Your man Pete is on it!” I’m not sure which part of the story I like best—that Pete’s ubiquitous!, that my co-worker recognized him from the tiny headshot here on the blog (which she only frequents to check out my posts), or that he’s apparently “my man.” :)
So, remember how last week I was so gung-ho about heading to Cincinnati? Now a number of conflicts have cropped up and I'm torn between staying or going. Anyone want to flip a coin for me and help me decide?
On to more important matters, like our All About Me TWiber profiles. Another great one this week, and it comes with a photo, too! (My queue is emptying quickly, so I’m putting out a call for more volunteers to take the quiz! E-mail me here if you’re interested.)
 Who am I?
Zodiac sign: Sagittarius
Hair color: Blond
Crushes: As a teenager and young adult, I was crazy about Steve McQueen, Bjorn Borg and Paul Newman
Favorite films: Dr. Zhivago, Shawshank Redemption, Jaws, The Godfather, Silence of the Lambs, Blood Diamond, Ordinary People, Best in Show, Tootsie
Favorite book: Shogun, The Thorn Birds, Seabiscuit
Currently reading: Water for Elephants, Unbroken
Favorite TV shows (current & reruns): The Office, Seinfeld, Survivor, 24
Favorite musicians: The Beatles, Frank Sinatra, Elton John, Paul Simon, Allison Kraus & Union Station, The Eagles, Andrea Bocelli, Ray Charles
Favorite food: Italian
Pets: I have a beautiful, thoroughly entertaining and dysfunctional peach-faced lovebird.
Favorite sport: Duh!
Favorite vacation spot: North Shore Lake Tahoe
Best feeling in the world: Feeling safe enough to trust
Worst feeling in the world: Paranoid anxiety
Love at first sight: Oh, yeah!
Where do you want to live?: Big Sur
Worst fears: Ebola virus, nerve gas, killer bees
Do you believe in heaven and hell?: I choose to believe that I will meet my loved ones in some kind of afterlife. I do not believe in Hell.
Do you believe in aliens?: Sure
Most embarrassing thing you’ve ever done: At a fancy New Years Eve party in 1979, I held up my glass and proposed this drunken toast: “Here’s to the ‘eff-ing’ seventies!” Then I proceeded to fall on my face.
What do you do that makes your friends mad?: I have a sarcastic sense of humor which sometimes crosses the line.
Bad habits: Pistachio nuts and Starbuck’s Caramel Frappuccinos
Hard liquor or beer?: Neither. I had to quit due to bad karaoke singing.
Love or lust?: Both, but love endures.
Favorite love song: “Unchained Melody” –Righteous Brothers, “The First Time Ever I Saw Your Face”—Roberta Flack
Favorite break-up song: “Sixty Ways to Leave Your Lover”—Paul Simon
Favorite kinds of clothes: Winter jammies
Have you ever cried in public?: Yes (in Hallmark stores)
What do you hate: Cruel, small-minded people
What makes you angry: Rudeness
Who would you want to meet?: Winston Churchill, Mark Twain, Helen Keller, Teddy Roosevelt
Most memorable experiences: Concerts: (1) The Beatles at the Hollywood Bowl, L.A., 1965; (2) Neil Diamond, Greek Theatre, L.A., 1972; (3) Elton John at Dodger Stadium, L.A., 1975
Most prized possession: My imagination
Something you want to do before you die: Attend an Olympic Games Opening Ceremony
Personal quote: “The secret to having everything is believing you already have it.”
If you could change one thing that happened in your life, what would it be?: I would have worn sunscreen and learned to speak another language fluently.
First time posting on TW: Late 2005 or early 2006
Favorite TW poster: ptenisnet (I miss him.) [JR: Don’t we all!]
Favorite TW moment: (1) Holiday Party 2008; (2) being here for the creation of the word “Wilanders”; (3) Pete’s genuine expression of delight when my 2007 Hamburg Masters poem was posted on the ESPN main page.
Most defining tennis watching moment: 2008 Wimbledon final (Nadal/Federer); 2009 Australian Open semifinal (Nadal/Verdasco)
Guess away, guys!
Feel free to call tonight's matches here . . . we've got some fun ones on the docket. Enjoy, and have a wonderful weekend.
by Pete Bodo
And you thought the headline was about tonight's Maria Sharapova vs. Serena Williams match. . .
While we're all sitting around waiting for that one, let's celebrate the Blockbuster season (aka "summer") and see what's in store for us down at the 18-screen Cineplex at the mall, in the local revival house, or the art joint, you know, the one with the espresso bar, stale scones, and really cute, tattooed barista manning the steam pipe. Anyway, here are the Top 10 summer hits I'm recommending.
Jaws — The peace and idyllic summer activities of a quaint fishing village full of white clapboard houses, soccer moms, and tow-headed children is interrupted when the mayor decides to host the kind of sporting event that appeals in towns full of white clapboard houses — a tennis tournament! Things turn scary, though, when the ESPN crew arrives and unleashes Brad Gilbert.
Transformers — Serena Williams prepped for a long time, doing painfully awkward cameos and such before she finally got a shot at a lead role in a major Hollywood motion picture. In Transformers, she plays a down-at-the-heels aspiring actress who morphs overnight into the world's greatest female tennis player. The very ground trembles and building collapse with every step she takes. A panicked U.S. President comes out from under his desk long enough to send a worthwhile rival (played by Maria Sharapova) to battle Williams in an epic match at the climax of this white-knuckle action/adventure flick. Look for a superb supporting cast led by Venus Williams. Cameo by Common. Produced by Brett Ratner.
The Way We Were — Set in London, circa 1992, this is the heartbreaking, sentimental tale of an aging singer/actress (Barbra Streisand) and a highly-evolved, Zen master-like tennis player (Andre Agassi). They have an unconventional "affair of the heart" during the Wimbledon tennis tournament. The support and encouragement provided by the old cow — er, chanteuse — inspires the gentle-spirited, wild-maned young player to come to a startling realization. He tells himself, To hail with all that one-hand clapping baloney — I'm going out to kick me some booty! He ends up winning the tournament.
300 — The year is 2010. Serbo-Irish Davis Cup team captain Bogdan Obradovic (Brad Pitt) and Novak Djokovic (Novak Djokovic) lead a tiny contingent of tennis pros (Janko Tipsarevic, Viktor Troicki, Nenad Zimonjic) and all-in, volunteer patriot/fans in a desperate, bloody, courageous attempt to stave off the vastly superior, combined forces of the USA, Croatia, the Czech Republic and France at a narrow strait, with the Davis Cup at stake. Don't get caught buying popcorn during the best scene in the movie, in which Djokovic pounds his chest with his fist and the 300 follow suit, bellowing, "Serbia!"
Master and Commander — During the Napoleonic war, a young captain (Rafael Nadal) pushes himself and his crew (including first-mate Albert Costa, confidant/physician Carlos Moya, and colorful, potty-mouthed cook, Toni Nadal) to the limits of human endurance and suffering as he chases a formidable Swiss vessel under the command of captain Jean LaRue (Roger Federer). Surprisingly, though, the climax battle takes place not at sea but on grass.
Day for Night — A surprisingly absorbing and fast-moving documentary about the late former USTA President Slew Hester (John Goodman) and his determination in 1977 to make the new National Tennis Center in Flushing, Queens, the first Grand Slam venue to feature night tennis outdoors under lights. A sequel, about the drive to put a roof over Arthur Ashe stadium, is in the works (Lucy Garvin is said to have signed onto the project).
The Lost Boys — Donald Young delivers an Oscar-worthy performance (as the lead in an ensemble cast) in this supernatural tale of a generation of tennis players who seemed destined for stardom but never quite make it into the world top 50. Set mostly at the IMG Nick Bollettieri Tennis Academy, this harrowing tale also features Philip Bester, Kristian Pless, Daniel Elsner, Al Parker, Nicolas Pereira.
 Psycho — This thriller begins when Jeremy Bates, the former British Davis Cup and world No. 54 player, retires from tennis and opens a motel. When a young embezzler (Caroline Wozniacki) who's stolen a Grand Slam title) checks into the Bates motel, things begin to get interesting because it turns out the motel has a secret of its own. Movie trivia buffs will recognize the Stella McCartney-designed shower curtain in the most famous scene in this classic.
A Room With A View — Very slow moving but exquisitely filmed, this brooding, moody reflection on the challenges faced by a veteran pro Mike Qually (Vince Spadea) trying to keep his ranking high enough for direct entry into Grand Slam events was a Cannes Film Festival Medal d'Merde nomination. The action is set mostly in Spadea's room at a Motel Six in Cupertino, Ca., to which he repairs after his matches to play video games, rap into a tape recorder, order pizza and make random crank calls to names he picks out of the phone book.
Back to the Future — This Sci-fi comedy begins with an unusual premis. The year is 2012, but the Wimbledon draw contains some unusual names: Roy Emerson, Tony Roche, Pancho Gonzalez, John McEnroe and Pete Sampras. Mayhem is sure to ensue when play begins and the likes of Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, David Ferrer and Andy Murray attempt to handle the rocket serves and crunching volleys of the serve-and-volley specialists who have returned from the past. Cameo appearances by Bjorn Borg and Vitas Gerulaitis in the now legendary disco "flashback" scene, for which Studio 54 was meticulously and realistically re-created on the back lot at MGM studios.
There's my list — feel free to add your own favorites in the Comments.
by Pete Bodo
Mornin'. I guess people are so hungry for a Serena Williams vs. Maria Sharapova match that even the news stories are geared toward how this or that result might advance or damage the chances that we'll see that quarterfinal battle at Stanford between the two stars. In fact, since I included a news item in last week's ATW on Maria's declaration that she was eager to face Serena again, stories on the same subject popped up like so many mushrooms after a hard rain. So let's pick that story up where we left off:
Be Careful What You Wish For
Don't get me wrong, I'm not taking credit for inspiring this rush of copy - just making note of it. And it is funny how a story that started out as a testament to Sharapova's game spirit and competitive gusto suddenly morphed into one that focused on the implied challenge. By the beginning of this week, the story was not, Maria eager to play Serena. It was Maria calls out Serena! That's okay. I think everyone, including the two women, knows how all this works and milks it for all it's worth.
One proof of this theory is that Maria and Serena seem to have become frenemies. After Sharapova won her first-round match at Stanford, she returned to the subject of Serena. “You can never rest against Serena. She hasn’t played in quite a while but she’s still a great competitor. At the end of the day she has 13 Grand Slam titles and I have three. That says a lot. . ."
What kind of trash talk is that? One thing we can assume it says to Maria is, "I'd better watch my mouth here."
The two were also photographed together at the ESPY awards not long ago. Asked about Sharapova's comments a few days ago, Serena told reporters she admired Maria, and how she's. . . "Always just walking around and having so much aplomb, it’s good. I always admired that, it's really cool."
Did she forget to add . . Even though she won only three majors and has a stinky serve?
Also, note that in her first match at Stanford, Williams recorded her fourth career double-bagel, an oh-and-oh pasting of Anastasia Rodionovia - while Sharapova lost seven games in a row in the middle of her match with Daniela Hantuchova before she pulled it out, 6-4 in the third.
No matter how you cut it, it seems that the women have done their best to hype their quarterfinal meeting - unless Maria Kirilenko kills the buzz by beating Serena today. They last met in the third round at Wimbledon, where Kirilenko got just five games in two sets. Speaking of. . .
Headlines We love
Kirilenko Misses Bouquet at Dementieva wedding. . It appears that the fix was in, because Kirilenko told Tennis.com that Dementieva signaled that Kirilenko should move to a certain spot on the floor when it came time for Elena to toss the bouquet. But, according to Kirilenko, ". . .suddenly from somewhere Vera Dushevina came and sprinted and stole it from me."
Dementieva married hockey star Maxim Afingenov almost two weeks ago, with many tennis players in attendance. Among them, Igor Andreev, KIrilenko's long-time boyfriend. If it were me writing the headline, I would have been tempted to go with: Andreev Breathes Giant Sign of Relief at Dementieva Wedding.
Conversion Inversion
In an interview with Inside Tennis, Michael Chang recently expressed his disappointment with the way he was characterized in Andre Agassi's runaway best-selling autobiography, Open (the complaint line forms on the left, Mike; don't forget to stay hydrated). "Andre was very harsh on me for my Christian faith, but at the same time, I believe he understands where I am as far as my faith." Chang told interviewer Richard Obsorn. "We actually used to have Bible studies together early on in our careers."
Chang's comments are accurate, insofar as Andre was once one of a number of self-professed Christians who gravitated to the ministry of Fritz Glaus. But Andre is a lot like music icon Bob Dylan that way; his embrace of faith just seemed, or seems, too out-of-character - and too out of sync with how smart, un-religious people want to see stars and their heroes. Andre skirted the issue of his faith, or the evolution of his spiritual longings, in his autobiography and I've wondered why. Sheer indifference, these days, or because of some other, inhibiting conviction or belief?
 As a Matter of Fact, It Is All About Me
Taking a cue for fellow Grand Slam champs Petra Kvitova and Kim Clijsters, Svetlana Kuznetsova withdrew from San Diego the other day, leaving the event to scramble for replacements with star power via wild cards. Mario Bartoli said she was offered one, but turned it down. Sheesh.
What is it with San Diego? It's a great seaside town, with a huge fan base for both the WTA and ATP. If you had to invent a place where tennis might go over big, it would be San Diego. Granted, tennis isn't exactly a beachfront activity, but southern California has always had a very powerful tennis tradition to go along with it surfing culture. San Diego has the Balboa Tennis Club in the park of the same name. it's one of the nation's great tennis facilities since 1922. Among the players who swung a racket there: Michael Chang and Maureen "Little Mo" Connolly, the first woman to complete a Grand Slam, who grew up in nearby North Park.
The main problem appears to be the calendar. Bartoli, for example, turned down the WC because she wants to limit her play to ensure she's fresh and prepared to make a deep run at the U.S. Open. Kuznetsova's decision is a little more difficult to understand - and, IMO, to justify on any grounds other than "I just don't feel like doing this and I don't need the money."
I know that by the time Wimbledon ends, the players are tired and all. But Kuznetsova hasn't been past the quarterfinals since way before the French Open (semis at Marbella), and hasn't played an event since the beginning of this month. I have a sneaky feeling that she hasn't spent these past four weeks doing two-a-day practices when she's not in the gym, either, but I could be wrong about that. Bartoli (who beat Kuznetsova in Paris) at least is playing this week at Stanford. Taking a week off before the two big events at Toronto and Cincinnati makes a certain amount of sense in her case. And keep in mind that those two big summer events offer roughly three times the prize money as San Diego/Carlsbad. Could that have had something to do with Sveta's decision to pull out?
The most discouraging thing, though, is that Kuznetsova is the defending champ at San Diego. Doesn't her decision to forgo the event this late in the process smack just a little bit of ingratitude?
 Just Chillicing
Marin Cilic is playing at home in Croatia this week, so maybe he'll be inspired to make a little noise and improve that no. 31 ranking. Remember when Cilic was seen in some quarters (Including here) as a potential rival to Juan Martin del Potro, Robin Soderling, and Tomas Berdych in some Big Man Aramageddon?
So far this year, Cilic has been beyond the quarterfinals just once, at the ATP 250 in Marseilles. He made the fourth-round at the Australia Open via a fifth-set tiebreaker win over John Isner, but he's been a huge disappointment at the other two majors. At Roland Garros, he was beaten in straight sets in the first round by no. 100 Ruben Ramirez Hidalgo and at Wimbledon he lost at the same stage to fellow Croat Ivan Ljubicic. Granted, the winner was ranked a respectable no. 33 at the time, but Ljubicic has a terrible record in majors (by my count, he's failed to get out of the second round in well over half of the majors he's played).
I have all the respect in the world for Bob Brett, one of the least heralded of the great coaches out there (he's guided the careers of Andres Gomez, Boris Becker and Goran Ivanisevic, among others). And Bob always touted Cilic very highly. I have to wonder, what went wrong? Or perhaps it's more like, what does this guy lack that those other big men have - and have been able to keep?
The Last Word
After beating Rebecca Marino in Stanford, Marion Bartoli said: “I lost to Rebecca last year in Quebec, so it was good for me to take revenge." Revenge? For a loss in Quebec a year ago? Man, this girl has a long memory. Is there a more earthy, viscerally driven player on the tour than Bartoli?
That's it for this week, everyone. See y'all tomorrow.
by Pete Bodo
Alisa Kleybanova turned 22 on Friday, July 15th, and her birthday "celebration" included a less than festive communication with her fellow players, fans, and tour officials. She posted a message on the WTA website explaining her absence from Roland Garros and Wimbledon. In a telephone interview that aired on Tennis Channel that same day, she explained that she was off the tour and sequestered in Perugia, Italy, receiving treatment for a form of cancer, Hodgkin's Lymphoma. It was time to go public because, as she said, "I was getting a lot of questions and emails, asking me what happen because I never miss a Grand Slam before. It was a big surprise for everybody."
Those messages and questions must have been encouraging; they probably helped Kleybanova remain positive and perhaps they gave even more impetus to her determination to be cured. As she wrote, "I'm sure I'll be able to overcome this — it's just a matter of patience and time and I believe I have enough!"
Kleybanova, who has ranked as high as No. 20 in the world, will need all that help and support — and more — because tennis is a sport that treats those who fall by the wayside with extreme indifference, a kind of institutionalized cruelty that's inextricably bound up with a great source of the game's appeal, the individual resourcefulness it demands on an ever-changing basis.
Tennis, more than any other sport, is a game of motion, in motion. Tennis is a river. The sport is forever moving on. You win, you move on, and have to face losing again, usually within 24 hours. You lose, you move on — on to the next tournament, the next town, or perhaps on to home. Each week, the tour moves on. Whether you're Novak Djokovic or Joe Novak, qualifier, you have to chase the game, week-after-week, city-after-city, continent-after-continent. Thus, tennis is also about forgetting. Moving on, yes, but also leaving behind.
This situation presents some terrible challenges to those like Kleybanova, who have to leave the tour because of serious injury or illness. Greater challenges, perhaps, than almost any other athlete might face and greater certainly than those of us who live more rooted lives are likely to come up against. Nobody likes to be left behind, least of all when he or she is hurting. And that's just Kleybanova must face. The game has moved on; who really misses you, who really remembers, or cares?
One woman who knows just what Kleybanova will be going through is Tennis Channel commentator, author and former player (Wimbledon doubles champion, in fact), Corina Morariu. Back in 2001 Morariu was diagnosed with leukemia. She was treated with chemotherapy, which ultimately left her a clogged lung and a month-long battle on the razor's edge between life and death. Morariu won her battle, and ultimately returned to compete on the tour again until she retired in 2007.
Morariu has exchanged emails with Kleybanova, and says the young Russian player sounds "positive and upbeat, like the great fighter she is."
But Morariu also knows that you always start out like that. Fueled by the support of loved ones, supported by family, appreciating the novelty (if that's the right word) of a respite from the endless grind of the tour — the ceaseless moving on — you know you've got the strength, you know you can lick this thing. And while you're in the midst of treatment, you have a regimen — a specific schedule that gives you some comfort and sense of security and progress, just as your daily routine in tennis once provided those things.
"In typical athlete fashion, when I was diagnosed I soon had a game plan, a team in place, and I knew my opponent," Morariu told me the other day in a telephone conversation. "That first month, with the chemo treatments and all that, I also had a huge outpouring of support. That really helped, too. It distracted me. I felt I was still part of the tour — maybe even more than ever, because this sense of support and friendship was strong, far stronger than anything I ever felt when I was playing, for the obvious reasons."
And then there was, for lack of a better term, the utter strangeness of it all. Here you are, a paragon of health, suddenly confronted with your mortality, like some worn-out, self-abusing adult, or senior citizen. "It's such a shock," Corina said, "that initially it's almost like you're in denial. And being an athlete, you're used to working in spurts, with periods of rest. So you're used to taking some time away from that environment. With Alisa, I don't even know if it's really hit her yet. Nothing you do in your life as a player prepares you for this kind of thing."
 Morariu discovered that while the treatments and subsequent weakness were taxing and dispiriting, the toughest part was right after the treatments ended, and she returned home. As she said, "They just release you into the world."
That was the point at which Morariu, already in a drastically weakened state, realized how lonely life could be, especially for someone used to moving on for a living. That's when the silence grew loud, and she realized how far she was from what had once been her life.
And all that support, all that love? Over time, it diminished and petered out except when it came to closest friends and family. Morariu isn't bitter about that; in fact, she can laugh about it. People move on, especially in tennis. You can't keep up with them, you can't be face-to-face with them, when you're at a fixed point and not only not going anywhere, but battling enemies like depression (What happened to my career?), anger (Why me?), and apathy (Why should I lift a finger, I'm a cancer survivor).
For Morariu the struggle to get strong and healthy again began with the struggle to want to get strong and healthy again. "The malaise was all-encompassing," Corina said. "It was a very difficult decision to want to get better."
I wondered, which protested more loudly against the decision to get healthy again, the mind or the body? Corina said, "I was getting stronger when I started playing again. No. . . I made up my mind first. I will play again, I decided. Then I started to do the physical work, on a treadmill. I remember the first time I walked half-a-mile — I felt like I'd just finished the New York Marathon."
It was, of course, a turning point — one that everyone hopes Kleybanova will arrive at one day, too. But meanwhile, she'll have to process a lot of information, juggle and manage a host of feelings and physical symptoms as her battle progresses and changes on a variety of fronts.
"I felt very alone," Morariu remembered. "I had lots of support, coming from a family of doctors. But I also felt like I had no one to talk to, and I laugh about that now — with my family of professionals, I had all the physical stuff covered, everything in doctoring is very black-and-white. But there was that other part, the emotional part. It was a huge conflict. I was so happy to be alive, at the same time I had to really struggle with being. . .ungrateful. Why did this happen to me? I kept that inside, but it was there — all the time."
"I am a strong person," Kleybanova wrote in her message. "I've shown it before. Obviously this is different than anything I've ever experienced, but after this is over I'm sure my life will be even better than ever before."
Those words echo the sentiments that Morariu decided to stress in her communication with Kleybanova — Morariu's conviction that while she lost ground she could never make up in her career, while her emotions were buffeted and her body severely punished, all of it somehow helped her get a better perspective on life, made her a better and stronger person. "It was the best thing, long term," Morariu said. "It took me out of the bubble of that sheltered, privileged life. I think someone like Kim (Clijsters) went through something similar when she left the game and she had a child. It changed the way she sees things. With a serious illness, the change might be even more profound."
The prognosis for Kleybanova is good; it's likely that she can survive this attack on her youth and health. But the enemy she faces fights on many fronts, and she needs to be ready to push back on each one. And if she needs some advice or counsel, I can think of at least one person she can call on.
 by Pete Bodo
I don't think I'll ever hear the words, "double bagel" (a euphemism for a 6-0, 6-0 blowout) without thinking of Bud Collins. Coming up with the term may not be Bud's biggest contribution to tennis lore and legend and, let's face it, popularizing that expression may not be right up there with the discovery of penicillin. But the expression has become part of the tennis fan's lexicon, unlike many other Collins-isms ("Fingers Fortiscue," anyone? Sheesh!), and I'll never hear of it without thinking of old Bud.
Actually, I might just as soon think of the American former top 10 pro, Harold Solomon. For it was Solomon, a former French Open finalist who once ranked as high as no. 5 in the world, who came up with the term. Being a feisty Jewish lad (he was often called "the human backboard") who was born in Washington D.C. but lived most his adult life in Florida, Harold knew from bagels. After he casually described a 6-0 set as a "bagel" in a conversation with Collins, TennisWorld was never the same. I doubt that Bud ever called a six-game whitewash anything but a bagel, or double bagel, and over time the descriptive term caught on.
I got to thinking about this the other day, after Galina Voskoboeva hammered her first round opponent in the Baku Cup tournament, 6-0, 6-0. Winning a match without the loss of a game is still considered so noteworthy an achievement that it merits a news story. Google "double bagel" and third entry from the top is our Tennis.com item on Voskoboeva's feat; punch it into the Yahoo Search bar and a similar story comes up fifth. Unlike the "golden set" (winning an entire set without the loss of a point, a feat that was a periodically attained goal for one of Solomon's junior tennis rivals, prodigy Dick Stockton) the double bagel is a feat within reach for most good players, including the pros. A double bagel happens just often enough to merit special mention, but not so rarely that it's considered extraordinary.
I decided to poke around and pay tribute to some of the more noteworthy double bagels we've witnessed over the years. Here are a few:
Amelia Island, 1981: Chris Evert d. Martina Navratilova - Evert was in the sweet spot of her career in 1981; she already had 11 Grand Slam singles titles. Navratilova, however, was just beginning to tap into the vast potential suggested by the two titles she'd already won at Wimbledon. Amelia Island was home to Evert and her husband of the time, British player John Lloyd. And the courts at the tournament site were the same green, Har-Tru clay on which Evert had been raised in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.
Given Evert's clay-court prowess (her 125-match clay-court winning streak may be the most secure record in tennis. Even more impressive, Evert lost just seven sets during that run) and Navratilova's mercurial nature and somewhat fragile mentality, the double bagel is less than shocking. Still, I'm not sure that any pair of comparably successful players ever had so lopsided a match.
And lest you think Navratilova had not a prayer against Evert under those conditions, at that time, consider this: the very next year Navartilova got her revenge. She fell just two games short of feeding Evert a double-bagel at the same stage (6-2, 6-0) at the same event.
To this day, Evert cites that second meeting at Amelia as her worst match. And the first as one of her best.
Roland Garros, 1988: Steffi Graf d. Natasha Zvereva -Graf was in the middle of her "golden slam" year when up-and-coming baseliner Zvereva slashed her way to what many felt might be just the first of her many Grand Slam finals. After all, she was just 17 and had been to the fourth-round of Wimbledon one year earlier, in her first-ever appearance there. The Russian's steady baseline game and impressive mobility made her a great threat on clay, but Graf didn't get the memo. She won the match in an astonishing 32 minutes.
That win by Graf remains the only double bagel served up in a Grand Slam final in the Open era, and just the second going all the way back to the turn of the century. And it wasn't like Zvereva had many chances to get a game, either. She won a grand total of 13 points.
Surprisingly, Zvereva never made a Grand Slam final again, and just one semi (at Wimbledon in 1998, a full decade later). She had a great doubles career, but was inconsistent and emotionally unreliable as a singles competitor. You have to wonder, did that devastating loss to Graf in Paris in 1988 contribute to her puzzling singles record?
 Shanghai, 2005: Roger Federer d. Gaston Gaudio - It's harder to record a double bagel in men's tennis, partly because the serve of most men is strong enough to win the at least a few games per set on the strength of aces, unreturnables and effective serves that put the returner at a huge disadvantage.That helps explain why The Mighty Fed, as dazzling a ball striker as has ever played the game, had never turned in a double-bagel up to that point.
And it's truly uncommon to see a double bagel at a Grand Slam or Masters-grade type event. In fact, Federer's pasting of Gaudio remains the only oh-and-oh served up by anyone in the history of the year-end ATP championships.
In some ways, the match was an omen for Gaudio. He had won the French Open in 2004, in one of the most sensational upsets of the Open era (d. Guillermo Coria). Although we tend to think of Gaudio flaming out shortly thereafter, he continued to play top 10 - and better - tennis throughout 2005. But by the end of the following year, he was in a free fall (he finished 2006 at no. 20) that landed him at no. 187 by the end of 2007.
Federer's double bagel is that much more impressive because he laid it on while Gaudio, no slouch himself in the talent and creativity departments, was still near the peak of his game.
Madrid, 2007, Justin Henin d. Marion Bartoli - Double bagels have been as absent from the WTA year-end championships as from the men's version of the tour finale, and this one seems to have been motivated partly by revenge. Earlier in the year, Bartoli had halted the woman who was fast-becoming a WTA juggernaut at Wimbledon in a three-set semifinal upset. Henin had been hoping to win her first Wimbledon title and thus become one of the very few women to complete a Channel Slam with back-to-back victories in Paris (where Henin defeated Ana Ivanovic for the title) and Wimbledon.
The double bagel was posted in the third of the round-robin matches for both women; Henin had already qualified for the knock-out semifinals thanks to a pair of straight set wins in her first two matches. She was free to swing from the heels with nothing more - or less - satisfying than payback on her mind. The rout is also memorable because Bartoli was fast on her way to becoming one of the most determined and pugnacious of competitors.That Henin (wo)manhandled her with such ease was a testament to her shotmaking ability.
Roland Garros, 1993, Sergi Bruguera d. Thierry Champion - This is one of the only five triple bagels ever posted at a Grand Slam event, and it's worth acknowledging here because it underscores just how formidable a player Bruguera was on that red dirt. One of the great tennis surprises in my life was hearing Pete Sampras heap praise on this two-time (1993-94) French Open. He called him "fast as a deer" and named him one of the best athletes he'd ever seen - Sampras's own aversion to clay nonwithstanding.
In some ways, Burguera was a prototype for Rafael Nadal, although Bruguera was much leaner and taller. Bruguera's technique, also heavily reliant on topspin, was just as eccentric-looking as Nadals's when he first came on the scene. Much like Nadal, Bruguera was often accused of having an "ugly" game, and unlike Nadal he was unable to transcend that rap - partly because he failed to find success on other surfaces. The Nadal model was greatly improved because the current no. 2 plays far less defensively, and from much closer to the baseline.
Bruguera ultimately had no chance of succeeding on faster surfaces than clay and perhaps even, after some time, on French clay because he played from so far back. It also hurt him that he was nowhere near as charismatic as Nadal (It's worth contemplating the extent to which Nadal has won people over on the sheer strength of his personality and looks). The Frenchman Thierry Champion was no slouch on clay, and after the triple bagel Bruguera went on to win a tough five-setter (d. Courier) in the final.
Double and triple bagels are like hailstorms in more ways than one. It takes a number of special circumstances to make them happen, on both sides of the net. We'll see when the conditions conspire to bring us another one.
by Pete Bodo
Watching the Atlanta Tennis Championships final yesterday, a borderline surreal stat caught me eye. It seemed a poignant and somehow fitting comment on the present state of the U.S. game. Mardy Fish and John Isner, the finalists and two of the three best American players at the moment, were a combined 1-9 in ATP tournament finals. . . against other American players.
If ever you were entitled to wonder. .. Hey, how did they do that?
Alright, there's probably a big Roddick/Blake factor in there, made especially poignant by the fact that those two men presently are both suffering. There's probably a vestigal Sampras/Agassi element as well, at least in the case of Fish, who turns 30 at the end of this year. It hardly matters, at this stage. And the silver lining is that the Atlanta final ensured that one of those guys (Fish was 1-4 in finals vs. his countrymen, Isner 0-4) was going to improve his record, as well as that bizarre combined stat. Yeee-ow!
But why complain or get all stressed out about this situation? The U.S. is sure to rebound (although our British friends may snicker and wag their heads knowingly upon hearing something so seemingly smug), although it's unlikely that four or six American will ever rank in the top 10 in the same year. There's just too much world out there now, and not all of it is red-white-and-blue.
The theory-de-jour regarding the demise of U.S. tennis is that American kids as a group are too "entitled," but I'm not a big fan of that reasoning. Certainly some kids, especially among those coming through the conventional pipeline, are spoiled. But that doesn't matter because, as was demonstrated by players as seemingly different as Maria Sharapova, Venus and Serena Williams, and Andre Agassi, outliers may have an enormous advantage over establishment prospects in tennis. They always have had it, too. This is an issue I wish Malcolm Gadwell would explore.
Anyway - I wish I'd been in Atlanta this week, because that tournament is a kind of a festival of American tennis, and who cares if there wasn't a well-groomed Swede or air-punching Spaniard in sight? I'm a big believer in making your own party and letting the rest take care of itself. Besides, the stakes and attention at the U.S. Open are just too high for the tournament to serve as our national festival, although it's certainly our national advertisement.
If you're conversant with tennis history, you'll remember that "closed" tournaments once flourished. That is, tournaments to which entry was restricted to amateurs, invited players, or some group with a commonality, like citizenship. Let's remember, before 1925, the French Open didn't even allow "foreigners" to enter the tournament, on the perfectly reasonable theory that the French national championships ought to be for. . . Frenchmen. What was the point of having a "national" championships if some South African dude was going to cart off the trophy? It would be sort of like Michael Phelps swimming in the Olympic games for Iceland.
At one time, the various challenges posed by going abroad to play pretty much guaranteed that the biggest tournament in any nation was contested overwhelmingly by citizens from the host country. But the cat got out of that bag pretty quickly, and what we now have is elite nations taking turns hosting international championships that have the clout - and offer rewards large enough - to attract all the great players. So it's not just a cute joke to call Atlanta the closest thing we have to a true national championships (unless the new Winston-Salem event ends up giving Atlanta a run for its money). It can make that claim because it happens at the right time of year (mid-summer), on an appropriately "American" surface, and it it attracts almost all the U.S. players, three of whom made the semifinals. Only Andy Roddick and Robert Kendrick were missing from among the American pros whose names pop into my mind.
Given all that, and the imminence of the U.S. Open, let's take a look at how all those American guys did at the "Atlanta Nationals," and what it forecast for their respective summers. We'll take them from the top of the draw down, in order, with their ATP ranking numbers:
Mardy Fish (No. 9) - Top-seeded, Fish pulled off an impressive double last week. He successfully defended his title (in a game where there's so much talk about "pressure," the kind on the shoulders of a title defender is under-publicized) and fulfilled his seeding. Fish didn't lose a set until the final, but in that ultimate match he had to overcome two match points in a second-set tiebreaker with John Isner, ensuring that his first title of 2011 was well earned.
You have to hand it to Fish; he's really embraced the discipline of that diet and fitness regimen he adopted early last year. Those things can come and go, as we all know. Although Fish had a fairly easy time getting to the final, his visible comfort and indifference to the heat that appeared to be killing Isner in the final were encouraging signs for the rest of the summer. Fish must know the the woes of U.S. tennis also present him with a great opportunity to enhance his profile, and make no mistake - almost every tennis player is also a ham and fame-seeker at heart.
Ryan Sweeting (No. 65) - Lost to no. 8 seed Somdev Devvarman in the first round, 6-4 in the third. Sweeting ran into a guy who plays a similar game and has been on the upswing even though he's ranked one spot below Sweeting. Early this year, Sweeting qualified at Australian Open and Indian Wells, going two rounds in the main-draw each event. He also won Houston (clay), and made the semis on clay again at Sarasota Challenger (l. to James Blake). Sweeting seems to play well in the U.S. and on hard courts; he missed a big opportunity to bank some ranking points in Atlanta but it's a long summer.
Ryan Harrison (No. 94) - The 19-year old continues to make excellent progress; he lost in the semis to Fish. The highlight of his tournament was the second-round three-set upset of No. 4 seeded Xavier Malisse, after which he survived another brutally long match, besting Rajeev Ram 7-6 (5) in the third. That may help explain why Harrison got only six games off Fish in the next round.
Harrison has been a break-out waiting to happen. It almost came to pass at the U.S. Open last year, and at Wimbledon this year, where he qualified and lost a very tight five-setter to No. 6 David Ferrer in the second round. Don't be surprised if, this summer, he finds the right words for that big statement he's been trying to make.
Phillip Simmons (No. 400) - Lost to Lleyton Hewitt in the first round. You know what? When you're ranked this low, qualifying for an ATP event is a huge achievement. Phil is 25, so it's unlikely that this has been a career-transforming moment for him, but he still deserves a shout-out for getting into the big ball and we hope he can do it a few more times this year. In the end, how many of us will be able to tell our grandkids that we played a former world No. 1 and Wimbledon and U.S. Open champ - and made money off it?
Rajeev Ram (No. 231) - This guy had an excellent tournament, the quality of which was obscured only by the fact that he lost in the quarters to his countryman Harrison (albeit in a third-set tiebreaker). Ram upset No. 5 seed Grigor Dimitrov, than took out Lleyton Hewitt before Harrison halted his run. Ram is 27, and he could have a career summer if he sustains the momentum he built here.
James Blake (No. 90) - Talk about hard luck - Blake drew mercurial Ernests Gulbis in the first round, the prize for the winner was a match with the tournament No. 3 seed, John Isner. Blake outlasted Gulbis, and forced Isner to 7-5 in the third before he yielded. The 31-year old veteran, once ranked as high as No. 4 and the winner of more than $7 million in prize money, may have one good summer left in that racket. He's got the experience and game to make a great run at a big tournament this summer, and veterans of his class often make a parting statement. If he gets on a bit of a roll and starts slapping around that forehand again, who knows?
John Isner (No. 33) - Isner came within a swing of the racket of the title twice in that second-set tiebreaker, but he let Fish off the hook and paid a heavy price as fatigue caught up with him in the third set. It was a good tournament for Isner, but at this point I have to believe (I should say, "I kind of hope") he's expecting a little bit more from himself. The key number here is 26 - Isner's age. Because he came on the tour so late and has such a baby face, we tend to think of him as a youngster. But he's at that age when he really needs to make a move to establish a career-high ranking - and try to sustain it for at least a year or two.
Alex Bogomolov Jr. (No. 64) - "Bogie" lost to Gilles Muller in straight sets in the first round, so this was a missed opportunity for him at a time when he's playing well and within one ranking spot of his career-high. But he's got that big serve and a solid hard-court game. At 28, he's another of those guys who's well-positioned to strike a career blow, and may have to come to grips with the fact that it's all passing him by if he doesn't do it this summer.
 Robbie Ginepri (No. 370) - The win over Tommy Haas in Atlanta was encouraging, although Ginepri ran out of steam in his next match, against Muller. Coming back from a broken elbow, Ginepri needs to get a lot of high-quality match play if he's hoping to duplicate his run to the semifinals of the U.S. Open (back in 2005). Right now, it seems like an impossibly tall mountain for a 28-year old to climb, but Ginepri had acquitted himself pretty well in Grand Slam events, so you never know. . .
Donald Young (No. 127) - He had the bad luck to draw fellow American and grizzled veteran Michael Russell in the first round, who spanked him, 6-0, 6-3. I say "bad luck" because had he at least gotten blown out by a Malisse or Dimitrov, he might have claimed bad luck. I don't know what to say about this 22-year old anymore, except that maybe getting that ranking down into double-digits would represent long-term success. And why not? Being inside the top 100 is a great accomplishment.
Michael Russell (No. 110) - You've got to love a 33-year old who can give up just three games to a talented if flawed player like Donald Young; it's a pity that Russell was drawn to play no. 2 seed Kevin Anderson in the second round. This is a guy who, in 2001, became the first player in ATP history to qualify for four Grand Slam events in a row. At one of them, the French Open, he made it all the way to the fourth round before bowing to three-time Roland Garros champ Gustavo Kuerten. Let me repeat - that was a decade ago.
And that's just the trouble. There's a lot more past than future to celebrate in the careers of many American players these days; regrettably, it's also true of the American game in general.
Howdy, everyone. Later today, Long John Isner tries to duplicate the feat Mardy Fish accomplished last year at this time, winning back-to-back titles at Newport and Atlanta. Judging from the way Fish dominated and pushed around young Ryan Harrison in the other semi, I'd say that Isner has his work cut out. Then again, as Isner remarked yesterday, he's making the right decisions on court, and that's helping him overcome his relative lack of mobility. The most encouraging aspect of Isner's semifinal win over Gilles Muller? That 6-1 third set. John Isner breaking serve twice on a set is about as encouraging for him as hitting 10 aces in a set might be for David Ferrer.
Over in Hamburg, the other Gilles, Simon, also finished off his opponent 6-1 in the third, taking down Mikhail Youzhny. Simon will face Nicolas Almagro in the final. Almagro manhandled Fernando Verdasco, 6-4, 6-1, and will be gunning for his fourth title of the year. The curious thing about the Simon-Youzhny match is that Simon was 0-7 against the Russian player, which is a formidable disincentive. But he's now won two in a row. Has Simon "figured out" Youzhny in some tactical or strategic way, or is it just that Youzhny's been struggling and Simon's star is once again rising?
Anyway, Simon and Almagro are 1-1, with Almagro winning their only previous meeting on clay. This could be a vastly entertaining final, and certainly a longer one than we have on tap in Atlanta . . .
- Pete
by Jackie Roe, TW Social Director
Evening, TWibe. Quick question: Who’s headed to Cincinnati next month? I hadn’t planned on going this year . . . then just a few days ago I realized I couldn’t not go to my favorite tournament (live, anyway) so I’m making arrangements to attend. If you’ll be in Cincy and are interested in meeting up, leave me a note in the comments and I’ll set up a gathering. Hope to see some of you there!
Now . . . another All About Me TWiber profile!
Who am I?
Name: I’m not telling, but it’s a palindrome
Gender: Female
Age: 28
Birthday: March 24
Zodiac sign: Aries
Hair color: Blondeish
Eye color: Blue
Shoe size: 7
Occupation: Wannabe journalist, freelance proofreader and copy-editor, general literary dogsbody
Siblings: Older brother, older sister
Last album you listened to: The Les Miserables soundtrack
Last film you saw: Hanna, Joe Wright’s latest, with Saoirse Ronan, Eric Banana and Cate Blanchett
Do you have a significant other?: Not unless you count the bodies in my freezer
Crushes: Nathan Fillion, David Mitchell, Sirius Black, Donald Glover a.k.a Childish Gambino
Favorite musician(s): Elliott Smith, Joni Mitchell, Childish Gambino, Will Sheff, John Darnielle
Favorite actress: Ruth Wilson
Favorite actor: Cary Grant
Favorite film: Couldn’t say, but a shortlist would have to include All About My Mother, His Girl Friday, Mulholland Drive, All About Eve, His Girl Friday, Some Like It Hot, Lord of the Rings, Hitchcock’s Rebecca and Aliens
Favorite TV show: Again, couldn’t say. All-time favorites include Buffy and Firefly, The West Wing, Futurama, Spaced, Doctor Who and Community
What you like to do on the weekend: Sleep in, watch films, talk to my friends over a bottle of wine or seven
Favorite food: Anything involving the combination of carbohydrates and melted cheese
Favorite sport: Tennis!
Most memorable experience: Finding a dead body on a bus
Pets: My cat, Scully
Favorite number: The fine structure constant (1/137)
Worst fear: Falling through a crack in reality, serial killers, sharks, spiders, death, madness
Best feeling in the world: That moment after you’ve finished a great book or seen a great film or play or piece of art (or tennis match), and you walk out into the world feeling all shaky and newborn and changed.
Worst feeling in the world: Waking up from a dream.
Love at first sight: No. Love at first conversation? Absolutely.
Death: Comes in all forms. We’re all dying, every day.
School: Yes, I went to one
Long distance relationships: Brilliant, they’re never around long enough to start to annoy you
Where do you want to live?: Rivendell
Allergies: Nuts, penicillin
Do you believe in heaven and hell?: The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a hell of heaven, a heaven of hell. Or, as both Faustus and Buffy have noted: living in this world is hell.
Do you believe in aliens?: I might be one
What do you do that makes your friends mad?: Disappear
Who is the closest person to you?: My three best friends
Bad habits: Smoking, drinking too much, naps, filler words in conversation (“Um, you know, er, well …”), attempting to compensate for shyness and social awkwardness with defensiveness and stand-offishness
Talents: I can touch my nose with my tongue and have never lost at Lord of the Rings Trivial Pursuit
Most prized possession: My signed copies of Life After God and Good Omens
Most embarrassing thing you’ve ever done: Everything I’ve ever done has been humiliating on some level
Hard liquor or beer?: Both. With some wine.
Chicken or turkey?: Chicken
Love or lust?: Both make you feel alive, neither last. Love is to some extent in your own hands, so I’d go for love.
Favorite love song: “A Miracle” by the Hidden Cameras
Favorite break-up song: “Metal Heart” by Cat Power
What are you thinking at this very moment?: How much I want a cigarette
Have you ever cried in public?: Not unless you count taxi drivers
Something you want to do before you die: Publish a novel
What do you hate: Bigotry, bananas, the use of “action” as a verb in business circles
What makes you angry: Most things
Who would you want to meet?: Amelie Mauresmo, Paul Auster, Terry Pratchett
The last person to make you smile: It’s a safe bet it was Grant
The last dream you remember: Trying to escape a zombie apocalypse on a bus with a drunk Delpo
Personal quote: Tough one. I’ve always liked Vonnegut on reading: “Many people need desperately to receive this message: ‘I feel and think much as you do, care about many of the things you care about, although most people do not care about them. You are not alone.’” Or alternatively, from Battlestar Galactica’s Lieutenant Kara Thrace: “So life’s a bitch. What are you going to do, cry about it?”
What is the meaning of life?: “The world is an enigma, a harmless enigma made terrible by our attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.” – Umberto Eco. Or, if you like: “To love another person is to see the face of God.” – Les Mis
If you could change one thing that happened in your life, what would it be?: Ha. Being born? Reading the Twilight saga in an attempt to discover what the fuss was about?
First time posting on TW: It was during the summer hard-court season in 2008, and I was dead nervous, that’s all I remember. I know one of my very first posts was a jinx-moment with Rachael when Murray was playing Karlovic, and had to do with the magnificent Jason and Robbie.
OK, TWibe, who do you think this is? (And can I say that these profiles never get old. Love learning about our posters. Remember, if you’d like to take the All About Me plunge, e-mail me here.)
Feel free to continue match calls here. Have a great weekend, and enjoy the tennis!
by Pete Bodo
Howdy. Yesterday, we looked at the mid-season stats pertaining to service game leaders; today we'll take a survey of the return game leaders and numbers. We've seen how in almost any department that involves percentages, large numbers of players are bunched together within a few points of each other—stats that underscore not just the high level of performance in the ATP these days, but also the fact that best players are the ones who win the important or big points, even though there's no statistical category for that most important of elements. That tendency breaks down a bit in the return stats, as we'll see.
I was talking about this issue with the ATP's Greg Sharko in Miami this year, and he asked what stat, if any, I'd like to see measured. While I'm not a stats freak, I suggested that it might be useful to measure success on "critical points." I'd probably designate those points as the ones played at 30-all or later in any given match. Of course, this would fail to track how often a guy wins or loses a game from 40-love up, or down, and various other scenarios. If there's a statistical category you'd like to see, post it in the comments below, or send it to me via the "Contact" tab up above.
So let's get into serve return stats.
Points Won Returning First Serve: As soon as you look at the return game leaders stats, the name jumps right out at you: Andy Murray. It's a name that was almost entirely absent from our service game stats and speculations, which tells you something. Murray is No. 4 in the world, and he wins with his defense. His return game. He's among the top 5 in three of the four categories that make up the stats (and No. 7 in the fourth).
In this category, the rankings ought to be kept in perspective because of the bunching element. For example, the top 7 men here are within two percentage points of Murray's tour-leading 37 percent. Still, would you have guessed that Juan Ignacio Chela and Juan Monaco are at Nos. 2 and 3 respectively? Or that Rafael Nadal would be ranked slightly higher than Novak Djokovic in this department (he's No. 4, Djokovic is No. 5)?
Another pair of unusual suspects occupy the Nos. 6 and 7 slots: Viktor Troicki and—get this—Fabio Fognini.
Andy Roddick is ranked No. 58 in this category (at 28%), and the two men at the bottom of the list are very familiar ones at or near the top of most serving categories—John Isner (24%) and Ivo Karlovic (20%).
What I love about this stat is that even though the numbers are significantly smaller than in the First Serve Points Won category, the spread is comparable. The 66 ranked men in FSPW are within 16 percentage points of each other, between 64 and 80 percent. In this first-serve returns won category, the ranked men range between 20 and 37 percent—a 17-point spread. So it gives us a nice sense of how bunched together the leading men are in either a high-conversion stat (first serves won) or a low-conversion department.
Biggest Surprise: It's got to be Fognini.
***
 Points Won Returning Second Serve: This is the first category that finds Nadal on top, and it's a testament to his ability to take advantage of his opportunities. One of the big differences between this and the former return category is that when a big server (or even a decent one) is on his game, there's very little anyone, including Fabio Fognini, can do about it.
But generally, a receiver gets a look at second serves, and therefore his winning percentage on this balls is a good indication of the quality of his return. For if you're going to win a high percentage of your opponent's second-serve points, you can't just return—you have to return well to start the point on even footing or with an advantage.
Novak Djokovic is No. 2 in this category, and Roger Federer is sitting tight at no. . . 18. That's no typo, and what makes it worse is that the swing here pretty big. Nadal's success rate is 58 percent, Federer's is 51. Federer was No. 9 and very close percentage points-wise in the first-serve return stats, which makes this relatively low success rate in second-serve return an even more significant statistic.
Now consider this: Fognini is pretty much in the same boat as Federer. Fognini is among the top returners of first serves, bur he's way down at No. 27 on this second-serve return list. This suggests two things—that Fognini (and/or Federer) have amazing reaction returns, but get themselves sideways when they're looking at make-able second-serve returns. The failure to return second serves, especially important ones, is usually a sign of nerves. Draw your own conclusions.
Biggest Surprise: Tomas Bredych has the fifth-best number in this category, even though he's just No. 16 in first-serve return percentage. Reaction time, anyone?
***
Break Points Converted: It's only fitting that the leader in this category is one of those go-for-broke kind of guys. Xavier Malisse leads the tour with a 50 percent break-point conversion rate. I'm surprised that he's got a better record than Djokovic, but one thing about statistics is that they don't lie. Djokovic is in at 48 percent.
Nadal follows Djokovic closely, but it's telling that Robin Soderling sits firmly in fourth place, with a 46 percent conversion rate. Incidentally, four players from the USA are bunched in the bottom 10: Andy Roddick (No. 54/37%), Mardy Fish (59/34%), Sam Querrey (64.31%) and John Isner (65.30%). The only man ranked lower than Isner is Daniel Gimeno-Traver.
One thing I like about this statistic is that it's a real area of strength—or vulnerability. There's a huge difference between the worst percentage (Gimeno-Traver) and best (Malisse, 30-50%).
Biggest Surprise: Andy Murray, No. 4 in the world, No. 1 in first-serve return percentage, is down at No. 7 in break point conversion. Again, the mental game seems to come into play.
***
Return Games Won: Djokovic and Nadal lead the parade, but Federer, the No. 3 man in any stat that would seem extra significant because it mirrors the rankings (as it did in yesterday's Second Serve Points Won category), is conspicuously absent. He is way down at no. 15, suggesting that, at least these days, breaking serve is his area of greatest weakness. In fact, Federer is in the top 10 in only the first category discussed above, and barely, hanging in at No. 9.
Murray's No. 4 position in this category undercuts to some degree his relatively low break-point conversion numbers. Can it be that Murray simply sees that many more break points? I'd rather have a poor conversion percentage (say, 4 of 11 in a five-set match ) than a high rate based on a low number of opportunities (say, 2 of 3 in the same five-setter).
And there's our friend, Fabio Fognini, sitting pretty at No. 6, ahead of such big names as Federer, Soderling and Juan Martin del Potro.
Biggest Surprise: Juan Ignacio Chela is in there at No. 5, which means he's No. 8 or better (and as high as No. 1) in all return categories. I know he's got a big rep as a defensive, return-game player, but the fact that he's just No. 21 in the world despite this defensive prowess tells me that his hold game must be truly woeful.
***
All in, the most striking thing about the return leaders is how different so many of the names are when compared to the service stats. Nadal and Djokovic are solid to great in both areas, but return games have become a real weakness for Federer. Examining these serve and return stats seems to give a really accurate portrait of where his game is, and it certainly helps explain his performance in 2011.
Bottom line, after two days of stat crunching? Individual categories are most meaningful when paired with other categories, and in all cases they suggest rather than prove, and don't always suggest in the most meaningful way. Still, it would be perverse not to keep these statistics, and their dubious or conditional relevance is a testament to the mental—unquantifiable—nature of the game.
|
