Let me begin by saying that the question I was asked most frequently when I returned from London had nothing to do with Wimbledon, or tennis, or England, or Michael Jackson. It was: “How was your flight? I hope it was better than the one you had going over there.” The return trip was much smoother, just so you know, though I was surrounded by a class of high school students, mostly girls, from Dayton, Ohio, who I can only assume hadn’t descended through many bumpy banks of clouds before. Each time the plane lost altitude and began to float downward during our landing, they shrieked, hugged each other, and then broke apart in spastic giggles—“Dude, we're going to die!” the girl next to me happily squealed to her friend. It was better than Space Mountain.

Seeing Wimbledon on TV after a week of seeing it with my own eyes, I had the same thought that I’d had when I came home last year: It might be better in HD than it is live. You get the same sunlight, but it’s concentrated and made more comprehensible—meaningful—inside the TV’s rectangle, and you get closer to the players. One close-up this morning showed the texture of Serena Williams’ hair in more detail than I’ve ever seen it in person. It seemed to be within touching distance.

Live or on TV, Wimbledon received its best match of 2009 from Lleyton Hewitt and Andy Roddick today. They rallied and rallied and rallied some more, but the quality was high enough and the score close enough to keep it from ever sinking into the mundane, even over five long sets and numerous multi-deuce games. Hewitt, after playing his finest tournament in years, dug himself too deep a hole when he suffered a brief brain camp in the third-set tiebreaker. It was one of the few bad patches of play all afternoon, but it was enough.

With that, the semifinals of Wimbledon are set. What do they hold in store for us?

Elena Dementieva vs. Serena Williams

I know what you’re thinking: Is Elena Dementieve really still in this tournament? I don’t think I’ve seen one point of hers so far, but give her credit: She took an easy draw and didn’t blow it.

If you think Dementieva’s cause is hopeless against Serena Williams, who played a very determined, quality match to beat Victoria Azarenka in the quarterfinals, you’re probably right. Serena beat her in a routine straight-setter the last time they met in a Slam semi, in Melbourne in January, and the American appears to want another crack at her sister in a Wimbledon final as much as she’s wanted anything on a tennis court in recent years.

Before Australia, however, Dementieva had won three straight over Serena, including a big one at the Olympics in Beijing. The Russian thrives on pace, and Serena certainly brings that. Still, I liked Williams’ form, and focus, in the quarters. She doesn’t often lose that once she’s got it at a major.

Winner: S. Williams

Dinara Safina vs. Venus Williams

Serena’s big sister follows her onto the court for the second match, having looked almost as sharp as her sibling this week—neither sister has dropped a set at Wimbledon so far. Her opponent, Safina, has dropped plenty, having struggled her way back from one-set deficits against Amelie Mauresmo and Sabine Lisicki.

Williams and Safina have only played three times over the years—how is that possible?—with the American winning twice. The Russian snuck out a three-setter the last time they played, but that was on clay, Safina’s best surface. This is, as we all know, Venus’ best surface. Like her sister, she gets better as the matches get bigger. How can Safina spoil the seemingly inevitable Williams final feud? I would say that she should try to give Venus no rhythm by mixing up spins and paces, but that really isn’t her specialty. So Safina is going to have to bomb away heavy and deep from the baseline, take charge of points with her return when possible, and not hurt herself with her serve. What are the chances that it will be enough?

Winner: V. Williams

Roger Federer vs. Tommy Haas

There’s always been a little resentment from Tommy Haas over Roger Federer’s outrageous success. The German beat him in two of their first three matches, including a five-setter in Melbourne way back in 2002. For years, Haas must have thought of Federer as another guy of similar talents, not someone who was going to win 14 Grand Slams, while he never even reached a major final. The upshot is that Haas has never bowed to Federer, never put him on a pedestal, never considered him unbeatable. As we all remember, he was just a point away from serving for a straight-set win over him in Paris last month.

Haas is playing even better now. He showed off some frankly beautiful all-court tennis today in beating Novak Djokovic, and proved that a competent transition game and vintage volley technique can still make the difference on grass. Haas, naturally, tried his best to lose his concentration and fold when he served for a two-set lead, but he uncharacteristically gathered himself a few minutes later and saved three set points in the ensuing tiebreaker. He sealed the set with a fabulous approach and stretch volley winner of a sharp Djokovic pass.

You might say Haas has nothing to lose against Federer, but that’s only true until he gets a lead. It isn’t that he can’t close the deal against his old rival; it’s that Federer has looked just as bulletproof at Wimbledon as he did at the French. Soderling threw the kitchen sink at him in the fourth round, and he came up with all the right responses when he needed them. I’m looking forward to seeing Haas do the same, by coming to the net at every plausible opportunity. And I’m betting that Federer, while surrendering a set, finds a way—with stab returns at his opponent’s feet, with clutch serves during tiebreakers, with a killer forehand pass on his only break point of the set—to end the 31-year-old Haas’ Indian Spring.

Winner: Federer

Andy Roddick vs. Andy Murray

From the start, even when Murray was a scraggly whippersnapper, his crafty game gave Roddick fits. The Scot beat him in their first two meetings, in 2006, the second of which happened at Wimbledon. And he’s beaten in their last three meetings, including a straight-setter early this year in Doha.

Does Roddick have a chance against the hometown favorite? He is a steadier and more patient player than he has been in the past, but he also did a lot more work in his quarterfinal, taking five sets to oust Hewitt while Murray terminated JC Ferrero in straights. Murray has borne the pressure well; only in his match against Wawrinka did he appear to be pressing, particularly on his forehand. Roddick will be the guy with nothing to lose, and his serve has been more effective than ever over this fortnight—why is he suddenly acing people left and right? For his part, Murray will have to banish all thoughts of the final, of the Queen in the royal box, of a chance at immortality. That will have to affect his psyche, won't it? Just a little? Maybe?

Steadier or not, 30 aces or not, Roddick has fewer ways to win points than the Man Who Might Be King. The Yank has to serve lights out—which won’t be easy against Murray, who puts a racquet on more serves than just about anyone else—and take his chances in tiebreakers. I'll bet he almost pulls it off.

Winner: Murray