Tag: rafael nadal

  • US Open Day 4 Schedule of Play / Scores: Thursday, August 29

    US Open Day 4 Schedule of Play / Scores: Thursday, August 29

    [Scores added as known.]

    Arthur Ashe Stadium – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Flavia Pennetta (ITA) d. Sara Errani (ITA) (4) — 6-3, 6-1

    Not Before: 1:00 P.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Serena Williams (USA) (1) d. Galina Voskoboeva (KAZ) — 6-3, 6-0

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Roger Federer (SUI) (7) d. Carlos Berlocq (ARG) — 6-3, 6-2, 6-1

    Not Before 7:00 P.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Caroline Wozniacki (DEN) (6) d. Chanelle Scheepers (RSA) — 6-1, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Rafael Nadal (ESP) (2) d. Rogerio Dutra Silva (BRA) — 6-2, 6-1, 6-0

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Men’s matches in our discussion forum.

    Click here to discuss the Women’s matches in our discussion forum.

    [divider]

    Louis Armstrong Stadium – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Angelique Kerber (GER) (8) d. Eugenie Bouchard (CAN) — 6-4, 2-6, 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    David Ferrer (ESP) (4) d. Roberto Bautista Agut (ESP) — 6-3, 6-7(5), 6-1, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Victoria Azarenka (BLR) (2) d. Aleksandra Wozniak (CAN) — 6-3, 6-1

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Serena Williams (USA) / Venus Williams (USA) d. Silvia Soler-Espinosa (ESP) / Carla Suarez Navarro (ESP) — 6-7(5), 6-0, 6-3

    Not Before: 5:30 P.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    John Isner (USA) (13) d. Gael Monfils (FRA) — 7-5, 6-2, 4-6, 7-6(4)

    [divider]

    Grandstand — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Christina McHale (USA) d. Elina Svitolina (UKR) — 6-4, 3-6, 7-5

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Ana Ivanovic (SRB) (13) d. Alexandra Dulgheru (ROU) — 6-2, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Adrian Mannarino (FRA) d. Sam Querrey (USA) (26) — 7-6(4), 7-6(5), 6-7(5), 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Milos Raonic (CAN) (10) d. Pablo Andujar (ESP) — 6-1, 6-2, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 17 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Sabine Lisicki (GER) (16) d. Paula Ormaechea (ARG) — 6-2, 6-3

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Alize Cornet (FRA) (26) d. Ajla Tomljanovic (CRO) — 6-2, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Daniel Evans (GBR) d. Bernard Tomic (AUS) — 1-6, 6-3, 7-6(4), 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Feliciano Lopez (ESP) (23) d. Bradley Klahn (USA) — 6-4, 7-6(4), 4-6, 7-5

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Daniela Hantuchova (SVK) d. Victoria Duval (USA) — 6-2, 6-3

    [divider]

    Court 13 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Kurumi Nara (JPN) d. Sorana Cirstea (ROU) (19) — 7-5, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Richard Gasquet (FRA) (8) d. Stephane Robert (FRA) — 6-3, 7-5, 7-5

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Alison Riske (USA) d. Mona Barthel (GER) (28) — 6-4, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Philipp Kohlschreiber (GER) (22) d. Edouard Roger-Vasselin (FRA) — 6-3, 6-2, 5-7, 6-2

    [divider]

    Court 11 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Svetlana Kuznetsova (RUS) (27) d. Shuai Peng (CHN) — 6-1, 4-6, 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Jack Sock (USA) d. Maximo Gonzalez (ARG) — 7-6(3), 1-6, 7-5, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Tommy Robredo (ESP) (19) d. Frank Dancevic (CAN) — 6-4, 6-4, 6-1

    [divider]

    Court 4 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Jelena Jankovic (SRB) (9) d. Alisa Kleybanova (RUS) — 6-3, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Janko Tipsarevic (SRB) (18) d. Dudi Sela (ISR) — 6-4, 6-4, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Petra Kvitova (CZE) (7) d. Bojana Jovanovski (SRB) — 6-2, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Julia Glushko (ISR) d. Sachia Vickery (USA) — 7-5, 6-3

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Alexander Peya (AUT) (2) / Bruno Soares (BRA) (2) d. James Blake (USA) / Jack Sock (USA) — 4-6, 6-2, 6-2

    [divider]

    Court 6 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Kaia Kanepi (EST) (25) d. Anna Schmiedlova (SVK) — 6-4, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Karin Knapp (ITA) d. Elena Vesnina (RUS) (22) — 6-1, 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Mikhail Kukushkin (KAZ) d. Andreas Haider-Maurer (AUT) — 6-4, 6-4, 7-5

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Ivan Dodig (CRO) d. Nikolay Davydenko (RUS) — 6-1, 6-4, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 7 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Ekaterina Makarova (RUS) (24) d. Bethanie Mattek-Sands (USA) — 6-4, 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 2
    Dmitry Tursunov (RUS) (32) d. Guillaume Rufin (FRA) — 7-6(4), 1-1 Ret.

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Bob Bryan (USA) (1) / Mike Bryan (USA) (1) d. Federico Delbonis (ARG) / Leonardo Mayer (ARG) — 7-6(1), 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Maria Kirilenko (RUS) (14) d. Michelle Larcher De Brito (POR) — 6-3, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Camila Giorgi (ITA) d. Su-Wei Hsieh (TPE) — 6-4, 7-6(8)

    [divider]

    Court 8 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Roberta Vinci (ITA) (10) d. Lucie Safarova (CZE) — 4-6, 6-1, 6-2

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Jonathan Erlich (ISR) / Andy Ram (ISR) d. Santiago Gonzalez (MEX) (11) / Scott Lipsky (USA) (11) — 6-2, 6-3

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Simona Halep (ROU) (21) d. Donna Vekic (CRO) — 6-2, 6-1

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Alla Kudryavtseva (RUS) / Anastasia Rodionova (AUS) d. Yaroslava Shvedova (KAZ) / Shuai Zhang (CHN) — 7-5, 6-3

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Alize Cornet (FRA) / Caroline Garcia (FRA) d. Mallory Burdette (USA) / Taylor Townsend (USA) — 6-4, 1-6, 6-1

    [divider]

    Court 9 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Raquel Kops-Jones (USA) (7) / Abigail Spears (USA) (7) d. Natalie Grandin (RSA) / Darija Jurak (CRO) — 6-1, 6-3

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Sergiy Stakhovsky (UKR) / Mikhail Youzhny (RUS) d. Mariusz Fyrstenberg (POL) (8) / Marcin Matkowski (POL) (8) — 6-4, 6-4

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova (RUS) (11) / Lucie Safarova (CZE) (11) d. Dominika Cibulkova (SVK) / Monica Niculescu (ROU) — 6-2, 6-1

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Daniel Nestor (CAN) / Vasek Pospisil (CAN) d. Mahesh Bhupathi (IND) / Philipp Petzschner (GER) — 6-3, 7-6(4)

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Julia Goerges (GER) (12) / Barbora Zahlavova Strycova (CZE) (12) d. Olga Govortsova (BLR) / Mandy Minella (LUX) — 6-2, 3-6, 6-1

    [divider]

    Court 10 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 2
    Yaroslava Shvedova (KAZ) d. Patricia Mayr-Achleitner (AUT) — 6-2, 6-3

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Andre Begemann (GER) / Martin Emmrich (GER) d. Alex Kuznetsov (USA) / Bobby Reynolds (USA) — 6-4, 6-2

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Ashleigh Barty (AUS) (8) / Casey Dellacqua (AUS) (8) d. Sorana Cirstea (ROU) / Yanina Wickmayer (BEL) — 6-4, 6-1

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Brian Baker (USA) / Rajeev Ram (USA) d. Paul C. Oosterbaan (USA) / Ronnie Schneider (USA) — 6-0, 6-4

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Michael Llodra (FRA) (14) / Nicolas Mahut (FRA) (14) d. Jarmere Jenkins (USA) / Mac Styslinger (USA) — 6-3, 6-2

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Leander Paes (IND) (4) / Radek Stepanek (CZE) (4) d. Jarkko Nieminen (FIN) / Dmitry Tursunov (RUS) — 6-4, 7-6(4)

    [divider]

    Court 12 — 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Ryan Harrison (USA) / Robert Lindstedt (SWE) d. Steve Johnson (USA) / Michael Russell (USA) — 7-6(6), 7-6(8)

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Julien Benneteau (FRA) (7) / Nenad Zimonjic (SRB) (7) d. Tomasz Bednarek (POL) / Lukas Lacko (SVK) — 6-1, 7-6(4)

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Marcel Granollers (ESP) (3) / Marc Lopez (ESP) (3) d. Tobias Kamke (GER) / Florian Mayer (GER) — 5-7, 7-5, 6-1

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Anabel Medina Garrigues (ESP) (16) / Flavia Pennetta (ITA) (16) d. Alisa Kleybanova (RUS) / Christina McHale (USA) — 6-4, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 14 — 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Jamie Murray (GBR) / John Peers (AUS) d. David Marrero (ESP) (9) / Fernando Verdasco (ESP) (9) — 7-6(4), 6-4

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Timea Babos (HUN) / Francesca Schiavone (ITA) d. Oksana Kalashnikova (GEO) / Alicja Rosolska (POL) — 7-6(5), 6-2

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Varvara Lepchenko (USA) / Saisai Zheng (CHN) d. Sofia Arvidsson (SWE) / Kaia Kanepi (EST) — 6-3, 6-3

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Treat Huey (PHI) (16) / Dominic Inglot (GBR) (16) d. Julian Knowle (AUT) / Jurgen Melzer (AUT) — 6-2, 6-7(4), 7-6(5)

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Aisam-Ul-Haq Qureshi (PAK) (5) / Jean-Julien Rojer (NED) (5) d. Jerzy Janowicz (POL) / Lukasz Kubot (POL) — 2-6, 6-2, 6-3

    [divider]

    Court 15 — 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Cara Black (ZIM) (13) / Marina Erakovic (NZL) (13) d. Lourdes Dominguez Lino (ESP) / Shahar Peer (ISR) — 6-4, 7-6(4)

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Austin Krajicek (USA) / Denis Kudla (USA) d. Martin Klizan (SVK) / Michal Mertinak (SVK) — 6-3, 6-2

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Yen-Hsun Lu (TPE) / Divij Sharan (IND) d. Robin Haase (NED) / Igor Sijsling (NED) — 6-1, 7-5

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Jelena Jankovic (SRB) (15) / Mirjana Lucic-Baroni (CRO) (15) d. Irina Buryachok (UKR) / Karin Knapp (ITA) — 6-2, 6-3

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Anna-Lena Groenefeld (GER) (6) / Kveta Peschke (CZE) (6) d. Hao-Ching Chan (TPE) / Yung-Jan Chan (TPE) — 3-6, 6-2, 6-3

    [divider]

    Court 16 — 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Daniele Bracciali (ITA) / Lukas Dlouhy (CZE) d. Paolo Lorenzi (ITA) / Andreas Seppi (ITA) — 7-5, 7-5

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Sania Mirza (IND) (10) / Jie Zheng (CHN) (10) d. Annika Beck (GER) / Monica Puig (PUR) — 6-2, 6-2

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Jaroslav Levinsky (CZE) / Jiri Vesely (CZE) d. Denis Istomin (UZB) / Ken Skupski (GBR) — 6-3, 6-3

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Petra Cetkovska (CZE) / Kirsten Flipkens (BEL) d. Eugenie Bouchard (CAN) / Janette Husarova (SVK) — 6-2, 6-1

    Women’s Doubles – Round 1
    Kristina Mladenovic (FRA) (14) / Galina Voskoboeva (KAZ) (14) d. Eva Birnerova (CZE) / Stefanie Voegele (SUI) — 6-2, 7-5

    Credits: Cover Photo: jpellgen (Creative Commons License)

  • You Know You Made It When…

    You Know You Made It When…

    Hours before Andy Murray opens his 2013 US Open title defense campaign, there seems to be an unusual — but welcome — air of tranquility surrounding him, or more accurately, surrounding his critics, supporters, and tennis pundits in general. Sure, there is no escaping the clichéd narrative of “defending champion pressure,” as it seemed to become the de facto question mark once the media ran out of reasons to doubt the Brit, but that almost seems like a compliment when compared to years of harsh assessments, inaccurate labels, and false predictions of a gloomy future following every loss. In the span of twelve months, Murray went from everyone’s obligatory choice on a “best player never to win a Slam” shortlist, to the heaven-sent savior of British tennis and a multiple Grand Slam champion.

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss “You Know You Made It When …” in our discussion forum.

    [divider]

    For years, Murray was impatiently crucified for every high profile loss, every shocking defeat, and yes, even every Masters 1000 event tournament win because “if only he can do that in Majors.” At times, he was given a few deserved passes due to competing in an era where three of the greatest ever to play the game happen to dominate, but he was ultimately a victim of his own success: He had proven he could beat them on more than one occasion, but had yet to do so when it mattered most. Of course, in an ever fickle tennis world, failing to string together two consecutive wins over Nadal and Federer in your first ever Major semifinal (and final) appearance, losing to Novak Djokovic on his beloved Australian Open turf, and succumbing to the Swiss master on the Centre Court of Wimbledon dubiously brings your mental toughness into question.

    If the general consensus was to be believed, every Slam was Murray’s last chance to win a Major, and every Grand Slam final loss somehow meant his chances of finally snatching one were decreasing, despite the fact that he was continuously putting himself in a position to do so. Murray’s years of unfair media treatment were largely a result of him not winning a Slam as early as most predicted. Typically, he was quick to be put on a pedestal only to be shot down once he didn’t immediately meet the needlessly inflated expectations.

    In hindsight, Murray’s career has been far from unusual. In fact, its evolution makes sense, once one looks at the tennis aspect of his game, what he lacked, what he excelled at, and what he has managed to improve. If experts simply distanced themselves from the fanfare and unreasonable demands of immediate glory, the reasons behind Murray’s “failings” were fairly evident, especially once contrasted with his subsequent success in winning Grand Slams.

    Murray was long chastised for his inability to play aggressively in key matches or moments, but this was hardly a mental block that he was somehow unable to overcome, or an elusive strategy he had yet to comprehend. From a pure tennis perspective, Murray’s forehand was letting him down against the game’s elite. That is not to suggest that he had never approached a match the wrong way, implemented an ill-advised strategy, or remained too content to stay within his comfort zone. In fact, those factors definitely contributed to many of his defeats. Likewise, while he was never nearly as shaky between the ears as many would have you believe, the Scot didn’t always have the most exemplary attitude facing adversity (a semifinal match with Nadal at the 2011 US Open particularly stands out), and he was obviously nervous in his first ever Grand Slam final appearance against Federer.

    However, for the bulk of his career, Murray’s forehand was what was stopping him from employing the aggression many urged him to, while the improvement he later made to that very shot (helped immensely by the partnership with Ivan Lendl) turned him into the champion many predicted he would become. Heartbreaking as it must have been, Murray’s 2012 Australian Open semifinal loss to Novak Djokovic was the definite sign of things to come. Up until that point, Murray had been routinely dominated in forehand-to-forehand crosscourt exchanges by Djokovic, Federer, and even by Nadal’s crosscourt backhand. That Djokovic semi marked the first time since his brilliant 2010 Australian Open performance against Nadal that Murray used his forehand with authority against one of the game’s “Big 3” in a Major. The Lendl partnership was immediately paying off.

    Looking back at the pre-2012 US Open phase of Murray’s career, you can pinpoint four crucial matches that perfectly capture his development. Often, a player turns in an eye-opening performance (even in defeat) that earns him premature predictions of guaranteed greatness by trigger-happy fans and pundits, only to spectacularly fail to live up to the hype. Murray, on the other hand, is a rare case of a player whose defining matches were corroborated by his career trajectory.

    Murray had shown flashes of his future brilliance in a five-set loss to David Nalbandian at Wimbledon in 2005, and a straight-set upset of Roger Federer at the 2006 Cincinnati Masters. However, his real “take notice” moment, at least as far as I’m concerned, was his five-set loss to Rafael Nadal at the 2007 Australian Open. A more fit version of Murray would have more than likely emerged victorious, but the Brit looked noticeably winded in the deciding set. Nevertheless, Murray’s talent was on full display, as he handled Nadal’s spin with crosscourt backhands all day, toyed with his opponent with silky-smooth drop shots, and showed incredible hands at the net. While injury would soon derail his momentum that year, it remains the match which gave us the first glimpse of Murray against a future rival, and one of the sport’s giants on the Grand Slam level.

    Eighteen months later, Murray got his shot at redemption, this time producing what was the most sensational tennis of his career to topple Nadal in 4 sets at the 2008 US Open semifinal. Murray had just broken into the Top 10, and cemented his status as a legitimate threat at Majors by eliminating the Spaniard in the midst of the hottest run of his career. The match remains among Murray’s finest hours, as his serve, aggression, and forehand looked near unplayable. Despite a disappointing outing against Federer in the final, Murray would build off that monumental win over Nadal with an impressive fall indoor season, winning his second Masters 1000 event in Madrid (his first was at Cincinnati earlier that summer), thus officially becoming part of the sport’s “Big 4” (when the term was first coined).

    If the two Nadal matches were turning points as far as Murray cementing his status among the sport’s very best is concerned, his aforementioned semifinal with Djokovic at the 2012 Australian Open was the turning point with regards to his eventual Grand Slam triumph. The Lendl partnership was still in its early stages, but the intent was clear. Despite the loss, there was an overwhelming amount of positives for Murray to take. The match saw him combine his variety, defense, and aggression to deliver an absolute classic that would have been even more fondly remembered had it not been for a rough opening set and the subsequent Djokovic/Nadal final.

    Murray built off that match to take himself all the way to his first Wimbledon final, where he was once again toppled by his Grand Slam final tormentor, Roger Federer. However, a few weeks later, Murray would gain revenge in one of the greatest moments of his career, and his ultimate pre-Grand Slam win turning point, when he beat Federer in the final of the 2012 Olympics in London. From a tennis perspective, the performance itself may not have been as telling as Murray’s aggressive outing against Djokovic in Melbourne, but it finally gave Murray a satisfaction that rivals winning a Major, and the emotional boost he needed on his way to realizing his dream. It took him mere weeks to do so, as Murray once again used  that career exemplifying match against Federer to win the US Open crown by beating Novak Djokovic in five windy sets.

    Almost a full year later, Murray revisits the ground that provided him his first taste of Grand Slam glory, and walks in as the Wimbledon champion to boot. There are no talks of last chances,  mental obstacles, “first British man since…”, or the need to adopt a more aggressive approach. In fact, there have been no overreactions to his now-customary post-Slam final lulls when he surprisingly loses early in Masters 1000 events. There is only “Andy Murray: US Open and Wimbledon champion.”

    You know you’ve made it when the media manage to keep a level head after you lose, and still pencil you in as one of the favorites for a Major, instead of using said defeat as a sure-fire sign of a tennis apocalypse. Only a few players are offered this luxury. Andy Murray, you have officially made it.

    Credits: Cover Photo: anonlinegreenworld (Creative Commons License)

  • Luck of the Draw: US Open 2013

    Luck of the Draw: US Open 2013

    The draw for the US Open has been released in the traditional fashion, which is to write the names of every eligible player on little slips of paper, place them all in an antique cannon in the middle of Arthur Ashe Stadium, and fire them straight up. From there the strong prevailing winds take over, and a player’s placement is determined by where in the tri-state area his name flutters to rest. It is for this reason, one presumes, that the year’s final Major is always contested during hurricane season. Sadly, the USTA has announced that in 2017 there will be roofs over the main stadiums at the Billy Jean King National Tennis Center. The US Open will have to find a new way of conducting the ceremony (since it is unthinkable that something as momentous as populating a tournament draw could be achieved without due pomp). It’s always a shame when old traditions disappear.

    [divider]

    Discuss this article, the match and lots more with fellow tennis fans in the forums.

    [divider]

    Of subsidiary interest, the placement of the very highest seeds is decided by where their names fall in relation to David Ferrer’s. As it happened, Rafael Nadal was the luckiest one. We can safely ignore scurrilous rumours that the slips of paper bearing the two Spaniards’ names had been stuck together with adhesive. Meanwhile, Novak Djokovic’s name turned up in Stamford, Connecticut. It could have been worse, I suppose.

    Once again we’re invited to marvel at the vagaries of the ATP rankings, especially the situation whereby Andy Murray, reigning US Open (and Wimbledon) champion and eternal saviour of British tennis, is ranked number three in the world. This is one place lower than Nadal, who holds only a single Major (Roland Garros), lost in the first round at Wimbledon, and didn’t even play at the others. It is two places lower than Novak Djokovic, who holds only the Australian Open. As a result the Scot is seeded lower than both those men at the upcoming US Open. As far as the population of the small island positioned off the extreme western coast of the Eurasian landmass is concerned, this is nothing short of a cosmic injustice.

    Although Sky Sports have never attained the febrile derangement of their compatriots at the Daily Mail, they have nonetheless elevated cheerleading on Murray’s behalf into something of an art form, and will reliably ascend to heights of outrage when they feel he’s been hard-done-by. While raucous advocacy presumably doesn’t reflect management’s official position, it certainly isn’t discouraged, and any failure to address Britain’s top player in sufficiently rapturous terms presumably results in disciplinary action. (This policy, incidentally, isn’t limited to Sky: word is that John McEnroe received a stern talking-to from ESPN after he repeatedly excoriated American players on air during last year’s US Open. He and his brother really did go to town on Donald Young one evening. Here in Australia, failure to sing the praises of either Lleyton Hewitt or Bernard Tomic will earn the offender a baleful visit from John Newcombe.) Anyway, Peter Fleming pronounced the latest rankings to be “crazy”. Marcus Buckland suggested it “seemed unfair”. Others were less circumspect, in each case betraying a deliberate ignorance of how the rankings actually work. It is understandable that the average punter’s knowledge of the sport ends with the Majors – we shouldn’t necessarily be thrilled at this, and American coverage in particular can grow pathetically grateful at any public interest at all – but for those paid good money to follow professional tennis from week to week, the Majors should merely be the start. There is no mystery why Nadal is ranked higher than Murray: there’s more to tennis than Grand Slam events.

    Anyway, the reason why the second and third seedings matter so much at this US Open is that David Ferrer is seeded fourth. There are probably kinder ways to say it, but the reality is that even when Ferrer was in decent form he represented a more benign semifinal opponent than whomever the alternative happened to be. Right now, however, he is in execrable form, and still troubled by a lingering injury. Not only that, but these are the potential quarterfinal match-ups based on seedings:

    • Djokovic – del Potro
    • Murray – Berdych
    • Nadal – Federer
    • Ferrer – Gasquet

    Which of these is not like the others? Any one of Berdych, del Potro, or Federer could have fallen in Ferrer’s quarter, and in each case would have been favoured to reach the last weekend. Alas, it wasn’t to be. So it goes. Let’s just call Ferrer’s quarter a grand opportunity for someone. There are nine qualifiers in this quarter, and four of them are facing each other. I’m going to venture out on an especially shaky limb, and suggest that Dmitry Tursunov’s time has arrived. Seeded thirty-two, the Russian won’t encounter anyone ranked higher until the third round at the earliest. By wisely choosing to be drawn in Ferrer’s quarter, he has ensured that he won’t face anyone truly terrifying until the semifinals. So pencil him in for that. Gasquet is in there, too, of course, seeded eighth. I could pencil him in for a quarterfinal, but history suggests that would be a waste of graphite. On the small chance that Tursunov doesn’t push all the way through to Super Saturday, I suspect either Milos Raonic or Jerzy Janowicz will. Or Ernests Gulbis, who is now seeded and can thus stop thinking of himself as the world’s most dangerous floater, since it was frankly getting him nowhere. But really it’s anyone’s guess.

    Ryan Harrison’s appalling luck at Grand Slam level continues. He has once again drawn a lofty seed early on, in this case Nadal in the opening round. Last year in New York he faced Juan Martin del Potro in the second round. The upshot is that even last year’s modest points will almost certainly go undefended. It’s rotten luck, undoubtedly, though one shouldn’t pretend there aren’t other reasons why Harrison isn’t ranked high enough to elude this kind of misfortune. It’s bound to be a featured night match, and thus a test of McEnroe’s generosity. It’s hard to imagine either Nadal or Federer will suffer upsets before they meet in the quarterfinals, unlike at Wimbledon, where I totally foresaw those early losses to Steve Darcis and Sergiy Stakhovsky, but didn’t want to spoil the surprise.

    Only one first round match really stands out – setting to one side the possibility that those qualifiers will entertainingly pulverise each other in fifth set tiebreaks – which is the one between Lleyton Hewitt and Brian Baker. Joints creaking and metal pins clanking, they’ll contest the chance to play del Potro. Whoever comes out of all that, it’ll be a triumph for medical science.

    Credits: Cover Photo: Wallyg, (Creative Commons License)

  • 2013 US Open and Draw Analysis

    2013 US Open and Draw Analysis

    It is the final week in August.  Workers are eager to escape from their tedium to play in the remaining sun baked summer warmth.  Beaches and pools teem with families and friends who enjoy the last days of summer before the school year begins.  Barbecues and grills still sizzle with the aroma of an array of culinary delights, while fresh salads and sumptuous fruits lay in tempting displays on picnic tables.  For tennis fans and players alike, though, these seasonal festivities lead to a single focal point.  We and they are swooping in on the New York City borough of Queens, at Flushing Meadows, and the hard courts of the US Open, the year’s final slam event in tennis.

    [divider]

    Discuss this article, the match and lots more with fellow tennis fans in the forums.

    [divider]

    The context of this year’s US Open for the men is similar to last year.  So far the first 3 Majors have produced 3 different winners: Novak Djokovic at the Australian Open; Rafael Nadal at Roland Garros (French Open); and Andy Murray at Wimbledon. However, the most in-form and consistent player of the year is without a doubt Rafael Nadal. Since his comeback to the tour in February after a seven-month absence, he has won an astonishing 9 titles, winning all but 2 finals out of 12 tournaments played, including Roland Garros and 5 Masters 1000 tournaments – 3 of those on hard courts.

    Nadal’s results since his comeback are in the words of the struggling Mardy Fish “not normal”.  As Andre Agassi has noted, historically, players that have been off a significant amount of time usually take approximately double the time to return to previous form.  How and why Nadal has been able to get to a level that is seemingly above his peers in such a short time is a subject for another discussion.  But there it is. His form cannot be ignored.  If he can maintain his form for the duration of the US Open, while also taking into considering his draw, he has to be considered the favorite, though he would probably never admit that.

    And yet, there can always be surprises in a Major.  128 players and 7 best of 5 set rounds over two weeks can introduce roadblocks to ultimate success.  The key for every player is overcoming all of the roadblocks to gain the title.  Players can underperform and over perform; players can get hurt.  Court/ball conditions may be different from the previous year.  Weather conditions can change abruptly leading to different playing conditions each day.  There are many variables, many intangibles. One can be the favorite, but it is definitely no sure thing.

    Much the same can be said about draw predictions before a single match has been played.  We can make a good analysis made on the basis of the past, but since humans and varying conditions are involved, we can never be sure of the future.  We can make predictions based on seeding, based on past performances of individual match-ups, based on overall class, based on consistency, based on favorite players of the moment.  And it’s almost impossible to avoid one’s own biases, even though one makes an effort to be unbiased. But in the knock-out system of tennis, anyone can be eliminated and change the nature of the draw, thus invalidating one’s original prediction.  It can be said that one may have as much success of predicting the outcome simply by choosing their favorite player or players.

    But let’s pretend that on average, a reasoned analysis, even with the unknowns, can lead to better predictions than simply picking your favorite top player or players.  So here it is:

    Top Half and 1st Quarter

    1st section – Novak Djokovic should have little trouble in the first two rounds getting past Ricardas Berankis and probably Benjamin Becker.  His 3rd round opponent will likely be either Jarkko Nieminen or Grigor Dimitrov.  Nieminen has not lost to Dimitrov in their only two meetings.  Either one will probably be Novak’s earliest roadblock.  He’s had a loss to each of them, and Nieminen has played him pretty close in his losing matches.

    2nd section – #16 seed Fabio Fognini should get past Rajeev Ram and Granollers over Zopp, but then it can go either way between those two winners.  The winner will likely prevail over any of the other 4 in this section, probably Benoit Paire, but one never knows with Paire as he can play wonderfully one day and atrociously the next.

    In any case, the winner of the first section is likely to prevail against the winner of the second section in the 4th round and get through to the quarterfinal.  I’ll pick Novak Djokovic over Nieminen or Dimitrov to make it to the quarterfinals.

    3rd section – Tommy Haas plays Paul-Henri Mathieu in the first round.  Mathieu beat Haas both times they played, way back in 2005. But Tommy is having a fairly solid year, while Mathieu’s ranking has plummeted.  I’ll pick Tommy here despite the head-to-head record.  The winner will likely beat either Lu or Gimeno-Traver. The other part of this section has David Goffin vs. Alex Dolgopolov, and Nicolas Mahut vs. Mikhail Youzhny.  I see Youzhny coming out of here to play probably Haas.  Their hardcourt record against each other is 3-2 in favor of Haas, but Tommy demolished Mikhail in their only slam meeting at Roland Garros this year.  It could go either way, but I’ll pick Haas to advance in this section.

    4th section – I can’t see anyone beating a healthy Juan Martin del Potro.  He might play former #1 Lleyton Hewitt, but Hewitt would have to roll back the years to beat del Potro and I don’t see that happening.

    Del Potro has never lost to Haas in 5 meetings all on hardcourts.  He stands out to win here and make it to the quarterfinals against Novak Djokovic.

    Quarterfinal – Juan Martin del Potro vs. Novak Djokovic

    The last meeting between Djokovic and del Potro went the distance on grass at the Wimbledon semifinal, with Djokovic barely prevailing.  But del Potro took their previous meeting on hardcourt at Indian Wells.  It’s a toss up, but I think Djokovic’s confidence is a bit shaken, and as long as del Potro is healthy, he should be fresh for this battle.

    1st Quarterfinal – Juan Martin del Potro to upset Novak Djokovic

    [divider]

    Top Half and 2nd Quarter

    1st Section – Murray heads this quarter and has a fairly easy road all the way to the quarterfinals.  He should go through the first 3 rounds without too much trouble as he plays Michael Llodra in the first round, probably Hanescu in the 2nd, and a little tougher battle in the 3rd, probably against Florian Mayer, who hasn’t played badly this year.

    2nd section – The highest seed in this section, Nicolas Almagro, is not a lock to win his first round match.  He plays Dennis Istomin, who has beaten Almagro on both clay and grass in their only two meetings, both in 2010.  Still, Istomin’s record at the US Open is not as good as Almagro’s.  But no matter, whether it’s Almagro, Istomin, Malisse, or anyone else in this section, I don’t see anyone beating my projected 1st section winner, Andy Murray, who should make it to the quarterfinals.

    3rd section – #9 seed Stan Wawrinka plays nemesis Radek Stepanek, who has beaten Stan all 4 times they have played.  But the last match was in 2009, and Stepanek has fallen to world #58, while Stan is #10.  This is actually a tricky section.  James Blake plays Ivo Karlovic, who has done reasonably well after being out for a few months. Marcos Baghdatis plays Go Soeda, and Daniel Brands plays Kevin Anderson.  I’ll go with Stan to win this section, but it wouldn’t surprise me if one of the other big servers gets through.

    4th section – #5 seed Tomas Berdych tops this section, and I don’t see anyone troubling him here, with the possible exception of Julien Benneteau. That’s the likely 3rd round match, and I see Berdych winning that to advance to the 4th round, and probably play Wawrinka for the right to get into the quarterfinals.  I can’t call this battle.

    Quarterfinal – Murray vs. Berdych/Wawrinka  – This quarterfinal match is difficult to call.  Murray beat Berdych in a windy semifinal here last year, but Berdych can beat Murray when he is on as well — and just did in Cincinnati.  A similar situation exists for Wawrinka vs. Murray. Stan beat Andy in their last US Open match in a tough 4 sets, but Andy has beaten Stan more on hardcourts.  If one goes on the most recent form on hardcourts, Berdych is the man to beat even though Murray won Wimbledon. But then if Wawrinka and Berdych have a tough match, Murray might gain the advantage.

    2nd Quarterfinal – Berdych/Murray/Wawrinka – Too close to call, but the order here is just a gut feeling.  I believe Murray has more mental strength than the others, but the others can still hurt him with their game.  This is a combination I would prefer to call before the quarterfinal.

    Top Half Semifinal – Juan Martin del Potro d. Berdych/Murray/Wawrinka

    Juan Martin might be tired after the Djokovic match, but the same goes for the other possible quarterfinalists.  I think whomever wins this semifinal is likely to be quite exhausted for the final vs. the winner of the bottom half.  I’m going to flip a coin and pick Juan Martin del Potro, but anyone could win this, and I would really prefer to wait till the semifinal to pick the match.

    [divider]

    Bottom Half and 3rd Quarter

    David Ferrer heads the undoubtably weakest quarter of the lot, which has a fair chance of producing a surprise quarterfinalist.  With 8 qualifiers, a lucky loser, and 2 wild cards in this quarter, one shouldn’t wonder at the level of difficulty required to forge through.

    1st section –  I expect this to come down to Richard Gasquet and Dmitry Tursunov.  Tursunov has had Gasquet’s number over the years, and I expect the 32nd seed to upset the number 8 seed.

    2nd section – Milos Raonic  and Feliciano Lopez should meet in the 3rd round. Lopez has beaten Raonic in their only meeting on clay, and could upset Raonic.

    If Lopez beats Raonic, I believe he will beat Tursunov to advance to the quarterfinal, but in any event, I think the winner will go down to the winner from the other sections.

    3rd section – This ultimately looks like a Jerzy Janowicz vs. Janko Tipsarevic match in the 3rd round. Tipsarevic is falling, and Janowicz is rising.  Janowicz should take this section.

    4th section – David Ferrer and Ernests Gulbis would be hard pressed to lose this section before meeting in the 3rd round.  They have only played each other one time, 6 years ago when Gulbis was just under 19 and Ferrer 25.  Ferrer won handily, but I think we have to forget that.  Ferrer has been unsteady of late, and Gulbis is always unpredictable.  I can’t call the winner of this match, but I think that player will lose to Janowicz.

    Ferrer beat Janowicz in the Paris final last year, but Janowicz played his 8th match in 9 days and was clearly exhausted.  I think Jerzy can beat David if he plays near his best level.  Gulbis and Janowicz would be a very interesting match and either could win.

    Quarterfinal – Lopez vs Janowicz/Gulbis/Ferrer

    I think Lopez will lose to whomever wins the 4th round from the other side. I favor Janowicz over Ferrer, while Janowicz vs. Gulbis is a toss up. In a very open quarterfinal, I’m going to give the edge to Jerzy Janowicz who should have more confidence and less nervousness after getting to his first semifinal at Wimbledon.  If it’s not Jerzy, it will be either Gulbis or Ferrer, but in any event, I believe they will lose to the winner of the 4th quarterfinal.

    3rd Quarterfinal – Jerzy Janowicz d. Feliciano Lopez

    [divider]

    Bottom Half and 4th Quarter

    I’m not going to bother with analysis of each section in this quarter.   World #2 Rafael Nadal has a fairly easy first couple of rounds (I don’t see Harrison troubling him), but the third could be tricky depending on the health and energy of Nikolay Davydenko.  Davydenko has only lost once to Nadal on a hardcourt in 7 matches (their first meeting, in 2006), and he leads their overall head-to-head 6-5. The other 4 wins by Nadal were on clay. They last played in 2012 in Madrid on the blue clay. Their last hardcourt match was in Doha in 2011, where Nadal lost 3 and 2. But in their relative form right now, it’s still difficult to pick Davydenko.  If Nadal gets past Davydenko, he will probably face Fernando Verdasco in the 3rd round, and Verdasco can be tough on Nadal on hardcourts. If Nadal gets past Verdasco, he could have to deal with John Isner again in the 4th round, and we saw how close that was on the high bouncing courts this year in Cincinnati. The trouble for Isner is the amount of energy he will have left by the 4th round to fight Nadal in a best-of-5 match. Should Nadal get past the 3 roadblocks mentioned, Roger Federer will probably be there in the quarterfinal, as I don’t see anyone in Federer’s sections who should be beating him before then — though this year, with Federer’s inconsistent form, I guess anything is possible.

    Quarterfinal – Rafael Nadal vs. Roger Federer
    Nadal and Federer have never met at the US Open, even though Federer has 5 USO titles and a final to his credit, and Nadal 1 USO title and a final to his. It would be an interesting battle. Nadal certainly is riding high, and has definitely been the best player during 2013 so far, despite missing the AO and exiting early at Wimbledon. Their last match in Cincinnati was closer than it appeared, and the bounce was higher there this year than in the past, as many players mentioned.

    The bounce makes all the difference to me in matches between these two. Nadal wins close to 100% when the bounce is higher as Federer cannot be as aggressive, especially on the backhand side, without making lots of errors, and Federer nearly 100% when the bounce is lower. Fortunately for Nadal, the trend overall on tour in the last few years favors higher bouncing surfaces, and they have mostly met on higher bouncing surfaces, and Rafa has a 2-to-1 ratio of matches won. How will it be in New York on Arthur Ashe at night? Arthur Ashe has been slowed over the past 3 years. Weather could also play a factor. Still, they both have to make the quarterfinals for this to play out.

    As previously mentioned, Nadal is without a doubt the most in-form player on the planet right now. Will his form continue to hold?  Will he be able to get past the 4th round without injury to his knees?

    Roger Federer is very light on matches this year, between his back, racquet experimentation, and some poor matches. He has only played 43 matches up to the US Open, his lightest year since his first full-time year on the tour in 2000 where he played 41 leading to the US Open. In his winning US Open years, he played at least 64 matches prior to playing the US Open with the exception of 2007, where he only played 52. Still, his Cincinnati performance was encouraging for him, probably his best level since the Australian Open this year, or the World Tour Final in 2012. If he doesn’t have any problems with his back, then with his draw, he has a good chance. Only Nadal stands in his way.

    Based on their most recent 2 or 3 tournaments, one would probably have to favor Nadal over Federer if they met in the quarterfinal, but I would never count Federer out at the US Open, even though his recent play has not been stellar, and he hasn’t won the title since 2008. But then again, nobody has won the US Open more than once since Federer won 5 in a row.  Again, this is a match I would prefer to pick just beforehand. Conditions are such a factor in this match up. Nadal will take it if it’s high bouncing; if it’s low bouncing, Federer. Since it is a toss up to me at this point, I won’t separate them.  But regardless, I think the winner of the bottom half will win the tournament as long as the draw does not open up in the top half, which would provide an easier path for the winner of that half.

    4th Quarterfinanal – Rafael Nadal – Roger Federer – toss up

    If I were forced to pick one or the other, I would probably have to go with Rafael Nadal, considering their relative form of late and the trend toward higher bouncing surfaces at most tournaments over the last few years.

    Bottom Half Semifinal – Rafael Nadal/Roger Federer d. Jerzy Janowicz

    Note that if Nadal and Janowicz meet, it could be a very interesting semifinal.  It would not surprise me to see Janowicz  pulled off an upset.  If it’s Federer vs. Janowicz, I think Federer will take it.

    Final – Rafael Nadal/Roger Federer d. a tired Juan Martin del Potro

    That’s how I see it as of now, dear readers.  The implications are clear.  Anything other than a Djokovic, Nadal, or Murray win would mean no multiple slam winners this year.  A Nadal win would probably seal a #1 ranking for the end of the year.   A Murray or Djokovic win would help their cause.   A first time winner would be a pleasant surprise.  Anything is possible in tennis.  Let’s hope for some great tennis, and wish health and good play to all of the players.

    Credits: Cover Photo: Wallyg, (Creative Commons License)

  • US Open Day 1 Schedule of Play / Scores: Monday, August 26

    US Open Day 1 Schedule of Play / Scores: Monday, August 26

    [Scores added as known.]

    Arthur Ashe Stadium – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Agnieszka Radwanska (POL) (3) d. Silvia Soler-Espinosa (ESP) — 6-1, 6-2

    Not Before: 1:00 P.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Venus Williams (USA) d. Kirsten Flipkens (BEL) (12) — 6-1, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Rafael Nadal (ESP) (2) d. Ryan Harrison (USA) — 6-4, 6-2, 6-2

    7:00 P.M.
    US Open 2013 Opening Ceremony

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Serena Williams (USA) (1) d. Francesca Schiavone (ITA) — 6-0, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Roger Federer (SUI) (7) vs. Grega Zemlja (SLO) — Canceled

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Men’s matches in our discussion forum.

    Click here to discuss the Women’s matches in our discussion forum.

    [divider]

    Louis Armstrong Stadium – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Na Li (CHN) (5) d. Olga Govortsova (BLR) — 6-2, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Richard Gasquet (FRA) (8) d. Michael Russell (USA) — 6-3, 6-4, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Sloane Stephens (USA) (15) d. Mandy Minella (LUX) — 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(5)

    Not Before: 5:30 P.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    David Ferrer (ESP) (4) d. Nick Kyrgios (AUS) — 7-5, 6-3, 6-2

    [divider]

    Grandstand – 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Bernard Tomic (AUS) d. Albert Ramos (ESP) — 6-3, 3-6, 4-6, 7-6(1), 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Ivan Dodig (CRO) d. Fernando Verdasco (ESP) (27) — 6-3, 7-5, 1-6, 4-6, 6-3

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Jelena Jankovic (SRB) (9) d. Madison Keys (USA) — 6-3, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 17 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Laura Robson (GBR) (30) d. Lourdes Dominguez Lino (ESP) — 7-5, 6-0

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Jamie Hampton (USA) (23) d. Lara Arruabarrena (ESP) — 6-4, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Janko Tipsarevic (SRB) (18) d. Pablo Cuevas (URU) — 6-3, 6-7(5), 6-3 Ret.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Tommy Robredo (ESP) (19) d. Marinko Matosevic (AUS) — 6-3, 6-7(6), 6-3, 6-2

    [divider]

    Court 13 – 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Daniel Evans (GBR) d. Kei Nishikori (JPN) (11) — 6-4, 6-4, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Sabine Lisicki (GER) (16) d. Vera Dushevina (RUS) — 6-2, 7-6(3)

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Paula Ormaechea (ARG) d. Kimiko Date-Krumm (JPN) — 6-3, 7-6(7)

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Eugenie Bouchard (CAN) d. Karolina Pliskova (CZE) — 4-6, 6-4, 7-5

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Angelique Kerber (GER) (8) d. Lucie Hradecka (CZE) — 6-1, 6-1

    [divider]

    Court 11 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Carla Suarez Navarro (ESP) (18) d. Lauren Davis (USA) — 6-0, 6-0

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Bradley Klahn (USA) d. Kenny De Schepper (FRA) — 6-7(5), 6-2, 7-6(0), 7-6(4)

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Kristina Mladenovic (FRA) d. Anabel Medina Garrigues (ESP) — 6-1, 1-6, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Santiago Giraldo (COL) vs. Carlos Berlocq (ARG) — 3-6, 6-3, 7-6(6), 2-1 Postponed

    [divider]

    Court 4 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Kaia Kanepi (EST) (25) d. Vania King (USA) — 4-6, 7-6(4), 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Andreas Haider-Maurer (AUT) d. Ernests Gulbis (LAT) (30) — 3-6, 6-3, 1-6, 7-6(4), 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Roberto Bautista Agut (ESP) d. Thomaz Bellucci (BRA) — 6-3, 6-2, 6-2

    [divider]

    Court 6 – 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Feliciano Lopez (ESP) (23) d. Florent Serra (FRA) — 6-7(4), 6-2, 6-3, 6-3

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Sorana Cirstea (ROU) (19) d. Sharon Fichman (CAN) — 7-5, 5-7, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Dudi Sela (ISR) d. Andrey Kuznetsov (RUS) — 7-6(2), 6-3, 6-7(2), 5-7, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 7 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Coco Vandeweghe (USA) d. Aleksandra Krunic (SRB) — 6-4, 7-6(5)

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Nikolay Davydenko (RUS) d. Rhyne Williams (USA) — 6-3, 4-6, 1-6, 7-5, 6-0

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Alisa Kleybanova (RUS) d. Monica Puig (PUR) — 6-4, 3-6, 7-5

    [divider]

    Court 8 – 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Dmitry Tursunov (RUS) (32) d. Aljaz Bedene (SLO) — 7-5, 4-6, 6-3, 6-0

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Anna Schmiedlova (SVK) d. Stefanie Voegele (SUI) — 6-1, 5-7, 7-6(4)

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Kurumi Nara (JPN) d. Alexandra Cadantu (ROU) — 6-2, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Bethanie Mattek-Sands (USA) d. Mathilde Johansson (FRA) — 6-3, 6-1

    [divider]

    Court 9 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Patricia Mayr-Achleitner (AUT) d. Magdalena Rybarikova (SVK) (29) — 7-6(2), 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Stephane Robert (FRA) d. Albano Olivetti (FRA) — 6-3, 6-3, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Urszula Radwanska (POL) d. Irina-Camelia Begu (ROU) — 6-1, 6-3

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Ekaterina Makarova (RUS) (24) d. Polona Hercog (SLO) — 6-2, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 10 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Maria-Teresa Torro-Flor (ESP) d. Marina Erakovic (NZL) — 6-0, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Caroline Garcia (FRA) d. Shelby Rogers (USA) — 6-3, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova (RUS) (32) d. Virginie Razzano (FRA) — 7-5, 6-0

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Frank Dancevic (CAN) d. Robin Haase (NED) — 7-6(5), 3-6, 7-5, 7-6(3)

    [divider]

    Court 14 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Sofia Arvidsson (SWE) d. Petra Cetkovska (CZE) — 1-6, 6-4, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Mikhail Kukushkin (KAZ) d. Andrej Martin (SVK) — 6-4, 7-6(2), 7-5

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Jie Zheng (CHN) d. Kiki Bertens (NED) — 6-1, 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Rogerio Dutra Silva (BRA) vs. Vasek Pospisil (CAN) — 4-6, 3-6, 7-6(9), 4-0 Postponed

    [divider]

    Court 15 – 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Guillaume Rufin (FRA) d. Jan-Lennard Struff (GER) — 7-6(4), 6-3, 2-6, 2-6, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Yaroslava Shvedova (KAZ) d. Olga Puchkova (RUS) — 6-1, 6-0

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Ashleigh Barty (AUS) d. Estrella Cabeza Candela (ESP) — 6-1, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Galina Voskoboeva (KAZ) d. Monica Niculescu (ROU) — 6-4, 6-3

    Credits: Cover Photo: Luca Nonato, (Creative Commons License)

  • US Open – Men’s Draw

    US Open – Men’s Draw

    Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray set to meet in the semifinal in the top half; Rafael Nadal and David Ferrer in the bottom half; Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal will face off in the quarterfinals.

    Click here to discuss the US Open Men’s Draw in our discussion forum.

    First Quarter

    Novak Djokovic (SRB) (1)
    Ricardas Berankis (LTU)

    Benjamin Becker (GER)
    Lukas Rosol (CZE)

    Lukasz Kubot (POL)
    Jarkko Nieminen (FIN)

    Joao Sousa (POR)
    Grigor Dimitrov (BUL) (25)

    Benoit Paire (FRA) (24)
    Alex Bogomolov Jr. (RUS)

    Tim Smyczek (USA)
    James Duckworth (AUS)

    Jurgen Zopp (EST)
    Marcel Granollers (ESP)

    Rajeev Ram (USA)
    Fabio Fognini (ITA) (16)

    Tommy Haas (GER) (12)
    Paul-Henri Mathieu (FRA)

    Yen-Hsun Lu (TPE)
    Daniel Gimeno-Traver (ESP)

    David Goffin (BEL)
    Alexandr Dolgopolov (UKR)

    Nicolas Mahut (FRA)
    Mikhail Youzhny (RUS) (21)

    Jurgen Melzer (AUT) (29)
    Evgeny Donskoy (RUS)

    Igor Sijsling (NED)
    Qualifier

    Lleyton Hewitt (AUS)
    Brian Baker (USA)

    Guillermo Garcia-Lopez (ESP)
    Juan Martin Del Potro (ARG) (6)

    [divider]

    Second Quarter

    Andy Murray (GBR) (3)
    Michael Llodra (FRA)

    Victor Hanescu (ROU)
    Leonardo Mayer (ARG)

    Qualifier
    Martin Klizan (SVK)

    Florian Mayer (GER)
    Juan Monaco (ARG) (28)

    Andreas Seppi (ITA) (20)
    Xavier Malisse (BEL)

    Lukas Lacko (SVK)
    Qualifier

    Tobias Kamke (GER)
    Steve Johnson (USA)

    Denis Istomin (UZB)
    Nicolas Almagro (ESP) (15)

    Stanislas Wawrinka (SUI) (9)
    Radek Stepanek (CZE)

    James Blake (USA)
    Qualifier

    Marcos Baghdatis (CYP)
    Qualifier

    Daniel Brands (GER)
    Kevin Anderson (RSA) (17)

    Julien Benneteau (FRA) (31)
    Michal Przysiezny (POL)

    Sergiy Stakhovsky (UKR)
    Jeremy Chardy (FRA)

    Jiri Vesely (CZE)
    Denis Kudla (USA)

    Paolo Lorenzi (ITA)
    Tomas Berdych (CZE) (5)

    [divider]

    Third Quarter

    Richard Gasquet (FRA) (8)
    Michael Russell (USA)

    Qualifier
    Qualifier

    Jan-Lennard Struff (GER)
    Guillaume Rufin (FRA)

    Aljaz Bedene (SLO)
    Dmitry Tursunov (RUS) (32)

    Feliciano Lopez (ESP) (23)
    Qualifier

    Kenny De Schepper (FRA)
    Bradley Klahn (USA)

    Pablo Andujar (ESP)
    Thiemo de Bakker (NED)

    Qualifier
    Milos Raonic (CAN) (10)

    Jerzy Janowicz (POL) (14)
    Qualifier

    Jack Sock (USA)
    Qualifier

    Andrey Kuznetsov (RUS)
    Dudi Sela (ISR)

    Pablo Cuevas (URU)
    Janko Tipsarevic (SRB) (18)

    Ernests Gulbis (LAT) (30)
    Andreas Haider-Maurer (AUT)

    Qualifier
    Qualifier

    Roberto Bautista Agut (ESP)
    Thomaz Bellucci (BRA)

    Qualifier
    David Ferrer (ESP) (4)

    [divider]

    Fourth Quarter

    Roger Federer (SUI) (7)
    Grega Zemlja (SLO)

    Santiago Giraldo (COL)
    Carlos Berlocq (ARG)

    Horacio Zeballos (ARG)
    Adrian Mannarino (FRA)

    Guido Pella (ARG)
    Sam Querrey (USA) (26)

    Tommy Robredo (ESP) (19)
    Marinko Matosevic (AUS)

    Robin Haase (NED)
    Qualifier

    Albert Ramos (ESP)
    Bernard Tomic (AUS)

    Qualifier
    Kei Nishikori (JPN) (11)

    John Isner (USA) (13)
    Filippo Volandri (ITA)

    Adrian Ungur (ROU)
    Gael Monfils (FRA)

    Albert Montanes (ESP)
    Edouard Roger-Vasselin (FRA)

    Collin Altamirano (USA)
    Philipp Kohlschreiber (GER) (22)

    Fernando Verdasco (ESP) (27)
    Ivan Dodig (CRO)

    Rhyne Williams (USA)
    Nikolay Davydenko (RUS)

    Qualifier
    Vasek Pospisil (CAN)

    Ryan Harrison (USA)
    Rafael Nadal (ESP) (2)

     

    Credits: Cover Photo:  Adam Isserlis (Creative Commons License)

  • One More Time, With Feeling

    One More Time, With Feeling

    The Western & Southern Open ATP Final, 2013

    Rafael Nadal [3] def. John Isner 7-6 (8), 7-6(3)

    Three tournaments, three crowns: With his 7-6, 7-6 win over John Isner in the final of the Western & Southern Open in Cincinnati, Rafael Nadal remains unbeaten on North American hard tennis courts in 2013. The Spaniard also reclaims the No. 2 world-ranking; earns his 26th career Masters title, the second in as many weeks; and gets to take home a floral-themed vessel adorned with an earthier-than-ever-before glaze palette of burgundy and green. (I am not making that last bit up.) Indeed, there is talk of crowning him King of Concrete, or, at the very least, considering him as a favorite to win the US Open.

    Last week, in the Montreal final, Nadal demolished his 6’ 5” Canadian opponent, Milos Raonic, 6-2, 6-2. Raonic’s performance was decidedly muted, and Nadal calibrated his victory celebration accordingly. (It involved little more than warm, heartfelt smiles and a a few thankyouverymucheverybodys.) Today, at the Lindner Family Tennis Center in Mason, Ohio, Rafael Nadal again faced a native son. But unlike Raonic in Canada, the 6’ 10” American played a fantastic final.

    Although, from my perspective, today’s two tiebreak-sets still weren’t as thrilling as the first two sets of Nadal’s quarterfinal victory over Roger Federer on Friday evening. (Read about it here.) Gargantuan serves like Isner’s are more fun for me to see in person than on TV. (In fact, they are almost impossible to see on TV, because although they are beastly in size, they are also avoidant creatures, and tend to scurry off the television frame before you can get a good look at them.) Nadal earned exactly zero break points in twelve Isner service games. John managed to get three break points of his own, but converted none. Isner’s forehand was tremendous, which was both enjoyable and visible, but his return let him down at crucial moments, most notably at 3-5 in the second set tiebreaker.

    It’s possible Nadal was every bit as good in the Cincinnati final as he was against Federer in the quarters, but with Isner on the other side of the net, the conversation wasn’t half as eloquent. Which isn’t to say it wasn’t deep and meaningful—Isner’s presence in the final means Americans who have heard of tennis can tell foreigners that we once again have a top twenty player in the ATP computer rankings. It will be good for our collective sense of numerical self-worth. It should also be good for John Isner’s sense of his tennis self as he prepares to enter the US Open with the weight of American expectations on his broad shoulders.

    Speaking of American pride, the U.S. crowd was with Isner from first point to last. Yet Nadal had a fair measure of support from the stands, and no small amount of their admiration. After all, he has put together a highly entertaining two weeks of tennis. And, like any great big-stage performer, when it came time—on his first of three available match points— for Rafa to bury his final forehand winner of the tournament down the line, he sensed the moment had arrived to let loose his inner celebratory animal.

    After collapsing flat onto his back (with impressive alacrity), the Spaniard screamed, tensing all his muscles, thereby paradoxically releasing all the tension accumulated during two taut hours of competition. Then, beaming like a ray of tennis-ball-colored sunshine, Nadal jogged to the net, shook the American’s proffered hand (resting his head briefly on Isner’s vast midsection) before going on delightedly screaming and jumping around the court. Oh, and he also wagged his No. 1 finger at the sky—just as he did after defeating Novak Djokovic in the Montreal semifinals.

    Given that finger-wagging was officially trademarked by RF, Inc. during the spring of 2011, Nadal’s infringement on copyright has not gone unnoticed—or unanalyzed. For my part, it was the finger-wag more than the third straight hardcourt title that reminded me of Mark Antony’s famous lines in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar: “I thrice presented him a kingly crown, Which he did thrice refuse. Was this ambition?”

    Antony goes on to say that Brutus, an honorable man, did indeed think Caesar was a hair ambitious and ought therefore to be stabbed to death by a group of his buddies, making a mess of at least a dozen nice togas in the process. (I believe similar suggestions for summary execution have been put forth many-a-time on twitter in regards to Nadal, Federer, and also Gilles Simon.) But the reason Caesar had to be got rid of wasn’t because of his ambition; it was to do with how he applied it. Caesar sought to raise himself above the rules of the game, and to do so secretly— indirectly. Romans did not want to be ruled by a king (not when they could be gently guided by the classic democratic principles of bribery and corruption!). But tennis? Tennis craves kings. Every year—every week, even— tennis chooses the guy with the No. 1 finger.

    So, the thing I enjoyed most about this tournament—besides watching James Blake catch fire in his second round match against Jerzy Janowicz, of course—was seeing Rafael Nadal execute his tennis game with such clarity. He almost looked, well, entitled, out there. If I had a quarter for every time I saw Nadal move inside the baseline to hit groundstrokes, and go for winners, I could park my car at a meter in Oakland for long enough to do my grocery shopping and get a coffee. (For instance, during his semifinal match against Berdych, Nadal hit 19 forehand winners, 38 overall. That’s $9.50 for me, which roughly comes out to 11 minutes and 28 seconds of metered parking. See? Perfect.)

    One of the points from the final that sticks with me now was, I believe, the very first point of the second set tiebreaker. Nadal not only hit a winning forehand down the line, he managed to bend it so the ball struck the line as if it were an inside-out forehand hit from his backhand corner. Jim Courier, who was in the CBS booth, exclaimed, “Explain to me, how do you create an angle when you hit down-the-line?!” Then he told Mary Carillo how to do it. But even if Mary knows how to do it, that doesn’t mean she could. Which is why it is such a pleasure to watch a player capable of so much play so near that capacity.

    Without losing contact with his defensive skills, Nadal has spent the last two weeks executing the aggressive aspects of his game with remarkable openness. It’s refreshing; and it’s time.

    Not to play favorites for the Open, but if this is ambition—I like it.

    [divider]

    Discuss this article and the match on our tennis forums.

  • We Might Run Out Of Words

    We Might Run Out Of Words

    Cincinnati Masters, Final

    (4) Nadal d. Isner, 7-6(8), 7-6(3)

    Rafael Nadal has won the Cincinnati Masters, defeating John Isner to claim his second Masters event in two weeks, and his third hardcourt Masters of the year. Prolonged domination by a single player presents a writer with peculiar difficulties, assuming the writer is at all disinclined to repeat themself. This was a real problem in 2011, when Novak Djokovic refused to stop winning. I was not writing about tennis at the time, but I assume it must have been an issue in 2005 and 2006, when Roger Federer was nearly unbeatable, and very nearly unbeaten. Wimbledon aside, so it is proving this season with Nadal. I’d suggest there’s no higher compliment than to concede that if he keeps going on like this, we might run out of words.

    For example, there was little that could usefully be said after Nadal’s Rome triumph that hadn’t been said following the Madrid final a week earlier. His new Swiss opponent had greater pedigree, but won even fewer games. Similarly, today’s victory over a towering North American with a frightening serve and maneuverability on par with the Exxon Valdez more or less reprised last week’s. Last week it was local favourite Milos Raonic, whose trip to the Montreal final propelled him into the top ten. This week it was local favourite John Isner, whose passage to the final was if anything more impressive, and had the laudable effect of ensuring the United States has a man inside the top twenty for their home Grand Slam. Both giants progressed to the final after defeating Juan Martin del Potro in memorable fashion. Raonic, you will recall, generating fleeting controversy by delivering a series of roundhouse kicks to the net while cackling that he was “above the law.” Meanwhile Isner, more conventionally, saved a match point in a marathon. Isner also beat Raonic this week. The similarities mount, but ultimately amount to little. What really matters is that Nadal beat everyone. Again.

    Today’s final wasn’t the most memorable example we’ve witnessed this year, or even today, given that it was entirely upstaged by the women’s final that followed. Had it been a quarterfinal it would have already faded into the sepia backdrop of general forgetting: yet another example of a monstrous serve guaranteeing tiebreakers, which were then decided by the better player’s superior fortitude and technique. But it was a final, and so gains some luster by default, and thus bears recounting.

    If for no other reason, it was an interesting study in how two sets can be numerically similar yet end up feeling totally different. The first set was quite exciting, featuring multiple set points for both men, mostly in the fraught tiebreaker. Isner saved those he faced with typically muscular points on serve, but failed utterly to impose himself on return. Mark Petchey was correct in commentary when he remarked on the strange contrast that Isner presents us with. On serve he has an “all-American attacking game,” yet on return is “negative and pushy.” He did get an impressive number of Nadal’s serves back, yet they never had much on them, and thereafter he won very few points. It didn’t help that he facing one of the most punishing baseliners ever to heft a racquet. Nadal finally got a set point on his own serve, and duly took it.

    The second set, on the other hand, was frankly dull. If the first set demonstrated that tiebreakers are considerably more interesting when their arrival isn’t necessarily inevitable, the second set proved the corollary. Both men continued to serve magnificently, and return ineffectively. Nadal was more or less guaranteed a point whenever he switched up his serve wide to the deuce court, since the undeniable lethality of the American’s forehand requires that his feet are set. Nadal lifted and played a smart tiebreaker, and never looked in trouble. After victory he collapsed onto his back, and generally made it apparent just what winning Cincinnati means to him. It seems this tournament had featured on more bucket-lists than Serena Williams’s. The strange vase that Cincinnati passes off as a trophy proved every bit as awkward to bite as Montreal’s silverware had been.

    This was, of course, Nadal’s first strange vase. One can essay complicated reasons why he has never won this title before, including surface speed and bounce, opponents, balls, proximity to the US Open, and the misfortune a couple of years ago to combine with Fernando Verdasco to thrash out one of the worst tennis matches in living memory. All of these factors have merit, and combined meant that no one was surprised at his lack of success here (as opposed to Federer’s oddly dismal record at Bercy until 2011). Nadal characteristically offered the simpler explanation that he’d simply never played well in Cincinnati, and that this week he did. It was a salutary reminder that complicated rationales aren’t necessarily wrong so much as unnecessary, and that elite athletes generally operate with a savant-like eschewal of nuance. This is how Roger Rasheed can function effectively as a coach while employing the discursive range of an inspirational fridge magnet. The manner of Nadal’s progress this week certainly bore his contention out. There was no match in which he wasn’t the clear favourite – including the quarterfinal against the defending champion Federer – in which playing to his strengths would more than likely ensure victory. He just had to play well.

    This isn’t to suggest he didn’t have his difficulties. Federer came within a couple of games of winning, and Grigor Dimitrov boldly grabbed a set when Nadal allowed his focus to waver. However, this meant that in addition to savouring their hero’s triumph, the more martially-inclined portions of Nadal’s fan base could indulge themselves in their most cherished conceit, which is that of the Spaniard as el guerrero imparable. After what amounted to a fairly unremarkable defeat of Dimitrov there was no shortage of chest-beating proclamations that Nadal had not been at his best, yet had “found a way to win.” Insofar as the “way” consisted of “being better than his opponent at nearly every aspect of tennis,” I suppose it’s not inaccurate. What’s false is the emphasis. He didn’t win because of his warrior spirit, but because he’s a very good tennis player.

    Indeed, anyone still insisting Nadal isn’t the very best tennis player in the world right now sounds increasingly deluded. He will arrive in New York determined to become the first man to sweep the US summer since Andy Roddick ten years ago, and only the third man to do so ever (Pat Rafter also managed it in 1998, to Pete Sampras’s unstinting disgust). He will return to the number two ranking tomorrow, and could well return to number one if he sustains his current form for a few weeks in New York. Although the bookmakers in their wisdom have retained Djokovic and Andy Murray as US Open favourites ahead of the Spaniard, it will take a reckless punter to bet against him.

    But that’s all in the future. For now, Nadal has won twenty-six Masters 1000 titles, including a record-equalling five this season. It’s an accomplishment that is only enhanced by recalling that none of the five were Monte Carlo, which otherwise exists only that he might augment his tally by one each year. Aside from that, the only other Masters event Nadal hasn’t won this year was Miami, which he didn’t play. In order to break the record, which was only set two years ago by Djokovic, Nadal will have to win either Shanghai or Paris. History suggests that he is unlikely to do so. Then again, the Spaniard has already spent the season showing history just where it can shove its suggestions.

    [divider]

    Discuss this article, the match and lots more with fellow tennis fans in the forums.

  • Nadal Wins Cincinnati Masters

    Nadal Wins Cincinnati Masters

    The Spaniard Rafael Nadal beat the American John Isner 7-6(8), 7-6(3) in the final of the Western & Southern Open in Cincinnati.

    It was Nadal’s 26th Masters Series win, breaking his own record.

    The first set was a standard Isner affair: both players holding serve, before going to a tiebreak. It almost wasn’t so. Serving at 5-6, 15-40, Nadal saved two set points. But that only held off the inevitable. They exchanged mini-breaks late in the tiebreak, and each saved a couple of sets points, until Isner missed a volley setting up Nadal’s third set point. After Isner netted the ball, the Spaniard won the first set 7-6(8).

    The second set followed the same narrative. Other than Nadal having to save a break point when serving at 3-3, they held serve, taking the second set to a tiebreak. After Isner committed a few errors, they exchanged sides of the net with Nadal up 5-1. Isner tried to hold off the Spaniard, but when serving down 3-6, Nadal hit a forehand winner, converting on his first championship point, getting the set 7-6(3).

    It was Nadal’s first final in Cincinnati, the only Masters Series final he had never been in before. With today’s win, he enters into a three-way tie with Roger Federer and Andre Agassi for having won 7 out of the 9 different Masters Series. (Novak Djokovic has won 8 of 9. Ironically, the only one missing from his collection is Cincinnati.)

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Nadal/Isner final in our discussion forum.

  • Cincinnati Western & Southern ATP/WTA Finals

    Cincinnati Western & Southern ATP/WTA Finals

    [Scores added as known.]

    Center Court – Start 12:30 P.M.

    (4) Rafael Nadal (ESP) d John Isner (USA) — 7-6(8), 7-6(3)

    Not Before 4:00 P.M.

    (2) Victoria Azarenka (BLR) d (1) Serena Williams (USA) — 2-6, 6-2, 7-6(6)

    [divider]

    GRANDSTAND — Start 2:00 P.M.

    (3) Su-Wei Hsieh (TPE) / Shuai Peng (CHN) d (6) Anna-Lena Groenefeld (GER) / Kveta Peschke (CZE) — 2-6, 6-3, 12-10

    Not Before 3:00 P.M.

    (1) Bob Bryan (USA) / Mike Bryan (USA) d (2) Marcel Granollers (ESP) / Marc Lopez (ESP) — 6-4, 4-6, 10-4

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Nadal/Isner final in our discussion forum.

    Click here to discuss the Serena Williams/Azarenka final in our discussion forum.