Ted Robinson’s Matchpoints

Forty-eight hours later and I’m still in awe over Sunday. A 10-hour plane flight, with time to absorb nearly a dozen London newspapers along with nearly a hundred messages, many from those who would be classified as “casual” fans, has lent to the aura of this match as “the best ever.”

Now I hear today that SI will feature the match on its cover. When Pete Sampras won his record 13th Slam and 7th Wimbledon, we came home to see a muscled and tattooed Jason Giambi on the SI cover. Sampras was appalled. And now we know that tennis fell victim to the BALCO scam.

This was pure.

This was cojones grande, the only way to describe Rafa doing what he could not 12 months earlier, find a way to win the third set from Federer.

This was a champion falling in “brutal gladiatorial combat…but tumbling with valour” in the stirring words of London Daily Mail writer Paul Hayward. And how fine is that description.

In 24 hours back home, there is a talk-show buzz and coffee shop chat about this match that I have not witnessed in many years.

These two made tennis relevant. Now can it sustain what these two have created?

More from the Wimbledon cache:

* The disappointment over early exits by Andy Roddick and James Blake certainly went away. Stories always emerge; be it Andy Murray’s next step towards the top echelon, Marat Safin (up 35 places to 40), Rainer Schuettler (up 55 to 39) and Arnaud Clement (up 73 to 72) all made themselves relevant again, the two-week siege and double wins for the Sisters, Britain’s obsession over 14-year-old junior champ Laura Robson and her marvelously refreshing attitude over new fame, and the continuing presence of so many former champions at the AELTC.

* The roof can’t arrive fast enough. Sunday’s final ended about 10 minutes before a nightmare encounter would have occurred. The Club, understandably, wanted play to continue until 9:30-9:45 p.m.. They, like everyone, wanted a result. The money and disruption for Monday play, perhaps as little as two games, would have been wasteful. Yet, there was a point at which the players would have said, understandably, that a Championship, particularly from a match so superior, couldn’t be decided in darkness. Thankfully, we were spared the moment. A match for the ages had a proper ending in the dusk of Centre Court.

And traditionalists need not weep. Centre Court will still be open. Remember that grass needs light. The roof will only close once it rains, a 12-minute process. Thus, the courts will be still be covered for a short period. The benefit of the roof will be to guarantee play after a short stoppage and thus never again the drama of Sunday night.

* Major consensus in London was that the Williams Sisters success was due in part to the weakness of the WTA Tour. This is a debate for another time but the perception must be countered by the Tour.

* Start perhaps with Aggie Radwanska, the most impressive of the game’s young women. She has a Martina Hingis-like presence on the court that adds conviction to less-than-punishing shots. She simply doesn’t beat herself. Her lack of serve may hinder the hopes of a Wimbledon title, but the women’s game needs a player like Aggie to rise.

After all, this week’s rankings still feature Patty Schnyder, a career fourth-round player with one Slam semi to her credit, at 13 in the world. Lindsay Davenport won one round at Wimbledon and rose to 23. Tough to explain that to the sporting public.

* While we’re on that point, Serena passed Venus on the computer (reason 5,742 why I hate the concept). But my colleague, SI’s Jon Wertheim, poses a terrific question: has Venus’ career eclipsed Serena’s?

* Now we move to the hard courts and wonder whether Donald Young, John Isner (both of whom fell and are close to being out of the top 100) and Sam Querrey can make a move. Can Bethanie Mattek continue her momentum from the spring/summer and make a Robby Ginepri-like charge through the summer?

And can Rafa play well in the States, particularly the Open? Will his knees, the ones that Uncle Toni admits are so tender that the family wants Rafa to play LESS on the hard stuff, allow him to show New York his greatness?

And does Roger, whose performance at Wimbledon showed he is certainly not done, feel a little pressure to win Slams sooner rather than later?

Leaving Centre Court 15 minutes after Serena completed the Sisters destiny, a Saturday Wimbledon final, and there was a throng gathered at the base of the staircase outside our NBC broadcast location.

I have never seen that kind of gathering so I paused to assess.

It was Richard Williams holding court.

My views on the man are clear: he is reprehensible in his words (racist) and deeds (the abandonment of his first family including three kids, see VENUS ENVY by Jon Wertheim for more details.)

My views on the father are also clear: he and Oracene Price raised two intelligent, talented and increasingly classy women.

He has said he is leaving Wimbledon, that he can’t watch the Sisters face each other. It doesn’t matter that he won’t be here. He has already won.

Women’s tennis is in a precarious state. Globalization doesn’t sell in America, the best emerging American player in recent years won’t acknowledge the U.S. (Maria Sharapova), the tour is losing its title sponsor and the world’s best player abruptly quit.

So enter the women who propelled the tour to new heights in the early part of this decade. They have been part-time players since with part-time success. But now, with a vacuum at the top of the sport, temporarily occupied by Ana Ivanovic while Sharapova flounders through the summer, Venus and Serena have made women’s tennis relevant again.

When they play Saturday, for the third time in a Wimbledon final at a Club they have owned (only one women’s final this decade has been without a Williams), America will watch. And that matters in tennis. The world will also watch, if nothing else but to see how time has treated the Sisters.

They will see a mature Venus who carries herself with grace and has superior grass court movement. They will see a pleasantly maturing Serena, who has finally tempered the loose tongue that has often dismissed and disrespected opponents.

Venus is never more confident than on Centre Court. It is her Magic Kingdom. Serena is healthy, playing in her eighth consecutive Slam, a personal record.

They were both pressed in the second sets of their semis, but neither was threatened with defeat. They simply serve too well.

But they have faced overmatched competition to this point, particularly Venus. No one else can challenge them thus the challenge must come from each other.

Rarely in their previous Slam finals did that happen. Five years of wisdom and maturity could well lead to a better match. As unpleasant as the assignment may be, I think the Sisters will put their lives on hold for two hours and give us a worthy final Saturday.

PIck up a Sunday paper in London and the first 7 pages of every sports section are Andy Murray. There is a dissection of his entourage, a team of 7 that replaced the solo coaching of Brad Gilbert. There are columns from his mum and big brother, a doubles player of moderate success.

Being a prominent sporting figure in these parts is lucrative. After all, there is little competition in that arena.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Winning Wimbledon, though, would make Andy Murray a sporting hero.

And what’s funny is that his game might allow him, and a nation, to dream.

Murray has always had the talent, now he has some sound grass -court experience, and finally, he seems to have grown into his body and out of his immaturity. His Saturday win over Tommy Haas featured high level play on grass, including the short variety that endears Murray to all who truly love the game.
 
What struck me was his body language- it was less mopy, less Gumby-shouldered, less negative. A wise person recently commented that the difference with John McEnroe was that John used anger as fuel. It was often a positive for John while Murray seemed to drag himself down through his behavior.

Now, Murray looks and acts like a man who believes he can someday become a British hero. Perhaps not now, with Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal in their prime, but someday soon.
 
Nadal followed form with a decisive win over Nicolas Kiefer – after a first set in which the over-30 Kiefer turned bacvk the clock. He struck serves in the mid-130’s, moved adeptly and struck the ball with significant pace. Pushed to a tiebreak, Rafa delivered the goods, then broke Kiefer’s spirit in the next two sets. A potential Nadal-Murray quarter is still a delicious thought
 
I lamented here how frustrating it is to pull for James Blake. Perhaps Richard Gasquet is that man for the French. He bails on Davis Cup, wanting no part of an indoor match with Andy Roddick. He bails on Roland Garros, the tournament where he clearly cannot handle the pressure. But at Wimbledon, he is a different player, again in the round of 16 and a legit threat to disrupt the Nadal-Murray match. Wimbledon is to Gasquet what the US Open is to Blake, their one major to shine.
 
Jelena Jankovic wanders through the first week in anonymity, although her third-round win owned a share of drama. A hyper-extended knee hampered, followed by a tape job that hampered Jankovic enough to cause her to remove it in the third set. She is always injured, always bandaged and always calling trainers on-court. Yet she is still No. 2 in the world and still a darkhorse threat in Week 2.
 
Monday is Williams day. But I hope that Bethanie Mattek seizes the moment to make people talk about her tennis rather than her wardrobe.

Thursday was my arrival to the AELTC. Walking the grounds during the early afternoon, I was repeatedly struck by why Wimbledon matters. “The Queue”, yes it has it’s own official name, stretched through a neighboring golf course for nearly a mile, composed of tennis fans willing to wait hours for a grounds pass, simply a means to enter the gates.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Does it work? As I walked to “Henman Hill”, a grassy slope thta fronts a huge TV screen named for the throngs that gathered to watch Tim Henman’s annual Wimbledon saga, I saw queue tickets laying on the ground. They were winners — people who were rewarded for their wait, likely an overnight stay, with early passes on to the grounds.

There is a new Court 2, the concrete shell complete awaiting the finishing touches for Wimbledon 2009. From its looks, it will rival the Roland Garros “Bullring” as a favorite for those who like intimate settings.

After an hour of cruising courts, watching doubles and amazed by the focus of players who serve and play while spectators chat and stroll just a few feet away, I happened upon Court 3 where James Blake was playing Rainer Schuettler.

Blake was in a struggle, facing a set point to go down 2 sets. He saved the set point, survived the tiebreak and went on to win the third. I left feeling Blake had secured the match.

And that’s when the day took a dark turn.

Within hours, Blake had blown the match, another inexplicable and disheartening for a player so liked and respected yet unable to deliver the goods in the big ones.

Schuettler has been on the fringes of the sport for years. How can a journeyman rally to knock out a top-10 player? Perhaps the answer came from a knowledgeable tennis man, whose identity must be protected, that said to me as we stood together watching Blake, “He has overachieved. He’s just not THAT good.”
 
Within moments came the stunning word of Maria Sharapova’s loss. The British papers, when not obsessing over Andy Murray, drool over Maria thus they are deprived of major strorylines. And the truth is that Sharapova has not seriously threatened to win here since her stunning 2004 title.
 
The coup de grace was Roddick falling to Janko Tipsarevic. The Serb is a fine player, witness his 5-set classic with Federer at Australia in January. But the nagging question for me is why Andy could not break the Serb’s serve in four sets. How can anyone expect Roddick to claim another major or even threaten the Big 3 if he can’t make a dent on another man’s serve?
 
Lots of questions I admit. More answers after I sense the aftermath of Thursday’s wipeout on the grounds Friday.

The stat came in the third set of Rafa Nadal’s first-round win over Andreas Beck. After nine service games, Nadal had lost a total of 8 points.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

It reminded me of last year’s Wimbledon final – through four-and-a-half sets, Nadal’s serve had been broken once. By the best player on the planet. On grass. With one ace.

There is the essence of Nadal. He doesn’t blast serves. He doesn’t win a free set with aces as Roger Federer did in last year’s classic five-setter.

Nadal just holds serve.

How? I keep recalling Johnny Mac’s statement last July that Nadal was the modern-day Bjorn Borg, the player who won matches through physical play — the player that John remembered as being “impossible to get a ball past.”

And there is an apt description of Nadal, even on grass where he hugs the baseline.

* * *

Our wait for an American to make a 2008 push continues. Sam Querrey, John Isner and Donald Young (to fellow American Jesse Levine) all lost in the first round. Young has lost first round in both Paris and Wimbledon — same with Querrey, although he drew Federer in Paris.

Isner had a tough draw at Wimby with Ernests Gulbis, but as some point one of the young Americans needs to win some tough matches.

Like Wayne Odesnik taking out Guillermo Canas in Paris or Bobby Reynolds winning first round at Wimbledon.

* * *

Well done by Lindsey Davenport in overcoming a significant leg injury that required sophisticated taping. Davenport was pushed to the third set by an anonymous European but managed to call on her classic ball striking to survive. Her third round, against Elena Dementieva, could be tough.

* * *

Great Britain’s hope is that Andy Murray can reach his first slam quarter where he would likely meet Nadal. Murray comes across in interviews as calmer than the player derailed by “court rage” in the past. Can he handle, as Tim Henman did so well, the heat of a country’s intense focus?

It was a final of two eminently likable women. Both Ana Ivanovic and Dinara Safina had reached the moment honestly, the product of hard work, seizing opportunity, growth of mind and rejection of fame over results.

Either women winning the crown was a win and there aren’t many championship matches to which one takes that feeling.

What most wanted to see was a good fight. The recent history of women’s finals at RG is miserable — seven years since a 3-setter, six since a remotely competitive final. Just give us two people playing through their nerves was a commonly held if not voiced thought.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

And the pair delivered. Ivanovic was frozen in the moment last year but he began this match striking her forehand boldly. Unlike last year and despite a healthy wind on this day, she had no issues with her toss.

Safina was the rookie but handled her first Slam final with few nerves. There some misses that hurt and a second serve problem, but overall she fought with the resolve that brought her to this day.

It was never more evident than the seventh game of the second set, a must hold for Safina. She battled through 7 deuces and multiple forehand winners from Ivanovic to hold.

That game was her last gasp — Ivanovic took 8 of the next 9 points to calmly win the title. But Safina was able to stand tall at the end, although she snuck in a reference to the “annoying” support of the Ivanovic group. Ana acknowledged so much in her speech, which makes me wonder if the tennis world will have to get used to the Serbs or will the newcomers adapt to the mores of tennis?

Justine Henin was in the first row to watch and then awarded the trophy she had won 4 times. It caused me to wonder: when JH and Kim Clijsters played for the 2003 title here, could anyone have imagined that 5 years later both Belgians would be retired while the Sisters would still be active? Not me.

It’s folly to think this will be the lone title for Ivanovic. She is too strong of forehand and serve and now owns the improved fitness that enabled her to claim this crown. What we will watch is how she handles her newfound dual status: #1 and Slam champion.

CORRECTION: Courtesy of tennis maven Leo Levin: Stefan Edberg and Boris Becker played in 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals (1988-90) so Fed and Nadal will be the second pair to achieve this in the Open Era.

Five thoughts from QF Wednesday in Paris:

* Watching the arrival of young players, especially those who have been expected, is enjoyable. Dinara Safina has carried the burden of her brother’s legacy: million dollar talent, 10-cent head. Nothing much has happened to dispute the notion until this week. She has saved match points in consecutive rounds, including a memorable two-hand backhand winner against Maria Sharapova that could be a career-changing shot. Now she has a tough but winnable semi against Svetlana Kuznetsova. Who is stronger of nerve in the moment will play Saturday.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

* Gael Monfils is the French Open answer to Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, a wildly talented player prone to injury who is arriving in a major. For the final 45 minutes of his QF win over David Ferrer, Monfils looked unbeatable. Sculpted physique, intense emotion and immense athletic ability all combined at the right moment, rendering Ferrer helpless. If Monfils can repeat any of this play, Friday’s semi with Federer will be interesting.

* How can Nadal-Djokovic, featuring the 3-time defending champ playing against his rival trying to overtake him for the #2 world rank, be a warm up match? The French will most certainly schedule Monfils-Federer as the second match, affording Monfils the prime-time slot for spectators and TV. It’s fair from a competitive standpoint as Rafa and Novak are playing with 2 days of rest, but unusual for a player who has never lost at Roland Garros.

* Doubles note: what the heck is going on in the men’s world? I haven’t heard of 3 of the 4 teams in the semis. This is worse than a bad soap opera: Dlouhy/Vizner reach the finals of 2 slams in 2007 but split because Dlouhy wants to focus on singles (Dlouhy is still playing doubles with Leander Paes, they lost in the third round while Vizner teams with Martin Damm and lost first round), Mark Knowles was dumped by Daniel Nestor despite team success and Nestor is in the semis with Zimonjic, the powerful Bjorkman-Mirnyi team split and neither man has succeeded with new partners, while the Bryans stand alone as a united team but were stunned in the quarters. None of this touches the bizarre Paes-Mahesh Bhupathi saga. Successful partners for years, after a lengthy split, Paes has sought a peace treaty so the pair can play in the Olympics, but Bhupathi has thus far been unresponsive.

* Interesting opinions from Mats Wilander: he likes Jankovic over Ivanovic Thursday. To Mats, Jelena’s defense tips the scale, Valid thought but Ivanovic has played so authoritatively and Jankovic appears to be held together by adhesive tape. It is the women’s match of this RG.

A little tennis and a little culture from Roland Garros:

Not a great day for tennis - Serbia was the winner as the three standouts advanced to the semis. Ana Ivanovic and Jelena Jankovic won easily while talented Ernests Gulbis tested Novak Djokovic. Clearly seen, though, was that Gulbis must overcome a lack of training in Latvia. A hurry-up dose of experience and wisdom will give him the chance to be a Top 10 player.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Big loser was Nicolas Almagro. Strong clay court results in the anonymity of lower tier tournaments do not translate into success at a Slam. Hate to be this strong but Almagro’s effort was pitiful. Court Chatrier is the biggest clay court stage in the world and he simply did not compete at anything approaching an acceptable level. Too often did Almagro stand still and watch Rafa Nadal winners fly by.

Can Nadal be better on clay? In the last four rounds, he has lost 17 games in 12 sets.

Junior focus: Ryan Harrison, 16, lost in 3 sets but in a Tennis Channel interview sounded amazingly poised. And he voiced the truth that must change for the US to ever truly hope of succeeding at Roland Garros — the clay here is not at all like the clay Harrison had played on at home. We must offer our best players the chance to train on red clay.

Pat McEnroe offered an interesting take on Melanie Oudin, the No. 1 seed in RG’s junior girls competition. Pat raved about her fight. It’s necessary for Oudin, from the Atlanta area, stands just 5-4. Unless she finds a height burst, it will be exceedingly difficult to project Oudin as a champion, but a good pro career is within reach due to her powerful ball striking and exceptional competitiveness.

Wednesday:
Women’s quarters find Svetlana Kuznetova facing first-timer Kaia Kanepi. Kuznetsova has the experience and the ability to withstand Kanepi’s power. Dinara Safina tries to reach her first Slam semi as she faces Elena Dementieva. But Elena has experience on her side in this matchup and has reduced her double fault problems. Is Dementieva ever favored in a big match?

Roger Federer is placed on the second court for his quarter with Fernando Gonzalez. Gonzo is playing more wisely on clay, an endorsement of coach Larry Stefanki, but history (10-1 Fed) and weather (heavy and damp) favors Federer.

Can Gael Monfils handle the moment? He’ll have a huge vibe in his favor but a tireless opponent across the net in David Ferrer. Ferrer should be too consistent for the erratic Monfils.

Culture notes:
My hotel TV carries a dozen Arabic channels, including Al Jazeera TV. The English-speaking channel has a US studio, incredibly clear pictures and the startling sights to an American viewer of women anchors in Muslim head wear.

BBC News, also available here, covers the US elections as if it were theirs. Interesting to frame the coverage here with Bill Clinton’s eternal popularity on this continent.

The lamentable state of our news coverage is evident at all times here. Multiple networks available here, including CNN International, cover Zimbabwe, the Pakistani suicide bombing and the aftermath of the China earthquake far more comprehensively than anything most of us see at home.

Headlines emphasize Maria Sharapova’s loss in Paris. But Monday wasn’t about Sharapova losing; it was about the arrival of Dinara Safina.

The Golden Girl is an uncomfortable clay courter, lacking the graceful movement so necessary and trying to win with fight and grit.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS FeedIn the first set, when Sharapova saved 6 break points and then 2 set points in a tiebreak, it looked to be another match that Maria would win on effort over excellence.

But, then Safina lifted her play for the first time in a Slam moment. This player of immense skill and equal measure self-doubt began to turn things her way when she appeared down and out.

The single moment that may elevate Safina to a top 10 player and legit Slam contender came on Sharapova’s match point. Safina unloaded a fierce two-hand backhand up the line to stay alive. And eventually Safina leveled the match with a tiebreak win.

Third set belonged to Safina in its entirety. No longer could Sharapova bull her way into a win, for on the other side stood a player who had erased her doubts. Safina closed out the match 6-2 to reach her third Slam quarter.

But this time no one (and Mats Wilander publicly proclaimed this) would be shocked if Safina could join her brother as a champ. The field is that open, although Sveta Kuznetsova has a Slam on her resume and Ana Ivanovic is playing like one as well.

David Ferrer is the intriguing man of the day. He rallied from 2-1 down to KO Radek Stepanek in 5 sets. One of the most unassuming top 5 players to ever play, Ferrer has placed himself into the realm of players who could challenge the big boys on clay. A Spaniard who openly admits he patterned himself after Lleyton Hewitt (who he beat in the third round), Ferrer is fit (consecutive 5-set wins), gives away nothing and changes direction on the ball better than anyone on tour.

Sounds a lot like the Jose Higueras formula for victory on clay? If Ferrer can outlast the wildly talented and erratic Gael Monfils in the quarters, a Fed-Ferrer semi could be an interesting warmup for Nadal-Djokovic.

Sunday reaffirmed greatness in men’s tennis. There are three above the rest, far beyond the field and two of them, Rafa Nadal and Novak Djokovic, emphasized that gap in consecutive matches at Roland Garros.

Djokovic methodically dismantled top Frenchman Paul Henri Mathieu. There was terrific crowd support and huge momentum for Mathieu. But after one set, it was clear that he had no weapon with which to hurt Djokovic. Equally, Djokovic has no weakness for a foe to attack.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Thus, the result was inevitable. And it is just as apparent that Djokovic will be better prepared to fight Nadal if they arrive at their anticipated semi.

Djokovic moves beautifully and is not fazed by clay. As intimidating as Rafa’s RG record can be, Djokovic has an enhanced court presence after joining the ranks of Champions in Australia.

Rafa had a bizarre match with Fernando Verdasco, dominating for a set before rain stopped play in the second game of the second set. After 45 minutes, and 10 minutes after play resumed on the other show court, Nadal sat on his chair, munching bananas and calling for the trainer. Word from courtside was that Nadal felt the footing was not suitable and was simply stalling to give the clay more time to dry.

When play finally resumed, Verdasco barely moved, bothered by a right leg injury. Verdasco’s lack of effort created a phenomenon never before seen at RG — Nadal playing before a crowd no more than 4,000.

This was Rafa, the marquee star of Paris. The undefeated champion of RG who is always scheduled in “prime time,” late afternoon into early evening, was now playing in a quiet arena against a hobbled foe.

The deathly silence carried into the third set, when Verdasco received treatment that allowed him to play with some verve.

The point is that Nadal never wavered in play despite the rain, the court, a hobbled opponent and no energy in the crowd. The man is simply a rock at Roland Garros, winning 25 straight matches losing only 7 sets. In this week’s 4 matches, his foes are holding 30 percent of their service games. That absurd number can’t continue but reflects Nadal’s utter dominance as he enters the final three matches.

What I didn’t know is that the U.S .has the No. 1 seed in the junior girls play, Melanie Oudin. More on her later in the week.

And the Bryans defeated fellow Americans John Isner and Sam Querrey to advance in the men’s doubles.