TENNIS: Australian Open conclusion
Jan. 29th, 2018 07:39 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllSo, in the semi-finals, both their incredible journeys caught up with Edmund and Chung, and the more seasoned campaigners made their way through. Must have been disappointing for those who came to watch.
I managed to watch the highlights programme on the Beeb of both finals without knowing the outcome.
As they started with the ladies' first set tiebreaker, I deduced it would be a three-setter. Reading up for the final, I hadn’t realised Halep and Wosniacki were so close in age – Wozniacki has been around at the top for much longer. For all the talk about it being an open championship, they were the number one and two seeds. Both players also shared the weight of having been world number one without winning a grand slams, and people not truly expecting them to. But one of them would.
It was an enthralling match, and because they don’t have the big serve of a Pliskova or a Williams, it made for an intriguing rivalry, and one I wouldn’t mind seeing more of. So, Wozniacki won the first set tiebreak decisively, but a scrappy Halep, clearly feeling her longer, tougher (?) journey (it later emerged she was treated for dehydration) to this point as well as the heat and humidity, got the second. And then it seemed that neither of them could keep their serve in the third.
As an aside, I can’t believe that Halep lost a sportswear contract. She’s in the top flight of the game.
The French Open loss was clear in Halep’s attempt to be aggressive and her nerviness. But she seemed to have got the momentum back at about 4-3 or 4-4. I was supporting her. But Wozniacki’s response after her injury time-out was commendable, and she absolutely won it in the amazing penultimate rally. Congratulations to her, because I’ve spent years being snide whenever tennis commentators tried to interest me in a match featuring her with ‘the former world no. 1’ (riposting with ‘and never a grand slam champion.’)
Well, she is now.
Federer was the very strong favourite to win the men's finals, but Cilic had to make himself believe that he could make a match of it against the 36 year old. I don’t remember when I worked out from the running time that it was going to be a five-setter.
The first set was a bit Wimbledon final, but Cilic began putting games on the board, and fought back to take the second set to a tie-break, which he won.
But Federer fought back. I use the words fighting more intentionally than I normally do, because that’s what Cilic made me think of. In the second part of the fourth set, he really did wrestle the match away from Federer, pushing it to a fifth set, at the beginning of which Cilic had the momentum. Until he didn’t, and the game with two double faults has to go down as the turning point.
Federer has done something incredible…again, with those shots of his, matching and beating the younger man. I hope Cilic gets to a point where he can be proud of having pushed Federer so much. He did find a style of play where he could beat him, but not for long enough, which has been true of so many players over the years.
I managed to watch the highlights programme on the Beeb of both finals without knowing the outcome.
As they started with the ladies' first set tiebreaker, I deduced it would be a three-setter. Reading up for the final, I hadn’t realised Halep and Wosniacki were so close in age – Wozniacki has been around at the top for much longer. For all the talk about it being an open championship, they were the number one and two seeds. Both players also shared the weight of having been world number one without winning a grand slams, and people not truly expecting them to. But one of them would.
It was an enthralling match, and because they don’t have the big serve of a Pliskova or a Williams, it made for an intriguing rivalry, and one I wouldn’t mind seeing more of. So, Wozniacki won the first set tiebreak decisively, but a scrappy Halep, clearly feeling her longer, tougher (?) journey (it later emerged she was treated for dehydration) to this point as well as the heat and humidity, got the second. And then it seemed that neither of them could keep their serve in the third.
As an aside, I can’t believe that Halep lost a sportswear contract. She’s in the top flight of the game.
The French Open loss was clear in Halep’s attempt to be aggressive and her nerviness. But she seemed to have got the momentum back at about 4-3 or 4-4. I was supporting her. But Wozniacki’s response after her injury time-out was commendable, and she absolutely won it in the amazing penultimate rally. Congratulations to her, because I’ve spent years being snide whenever tennis commentators tried to interest me in a match featuring her with ‘the former world no. 1’ (riposting with ‘and never a grand slam champion.’)
Well, she is now.
Federer was the very strong favourite to win the men's finals, but Cilic had to make himself believe that he could make a match of it against the 36 year old. I don’t remember when I worked out from the running time that it was going to be a five-setter.
The first set was a bit Wimbledon final, but Cilic began putting games on the board, and fought back to take the second set to a tie-break, which he won.
But Federer fought back. I use the words fighting more intentionally than I normally do, because that’s what Cilic made me think of. In the second part of the fourth set, he really did wrestle the match away from Federer, pushing it to a fifth set, at the beginning of which Cilic had the momentum. Until he didn’t, and the game with two double faults has to go down as the turning point.
Federer has done something incredible…again, with those shots of his, matching and beating the younger man. I hope Cilic gets to a point where he can be proud of having pushed Federer so much. He did find a style of play where he could beat him, but not for long enough, which has been true of so many players over the years.
