SPORTS: Tennis
Jun. 3rd, 2022 09:54 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllIt’s high time I posted about tennis before the men’s semi finals at the French Open later today.
First of all, I can see both sides of the argument on the LTA’s decision not to allow Russian and Belarussian players to compete in the upcoming grass season in England. I can see why the players pushed back and asked for them not to count as ranking tournaments, which will then have all sorts of ramifications, including some players not turning up even to Wimbledon, which isn’t going to help them develop their grass game. Yes, Osaka, I’m thinking of you. And players who are better on grass are understandably miffed.
I don’t know how individual Russian and Belarussian players feel or have said; they’re exposed to non-Russian news, they presumably play and interact with Ukrainians, and may have complicated ties to Ukraine or have members of the Russian armed forces in their family. But then you’ve got to think of what Ukrainian players must be going through. Ugh, that man and his wretched war that’s ruining so many lives in so many ways!
But to turn to the French Open, I followed the first week or so via headlines, which doesn’t give you the full picture. Norrie was seeded no 10! Since Monday, I have dipped into the Five Live sports extra coverage, but radio coverage is not the same as TV coverage for tennis, and it’s a job to finding things to do when I’m listening to it so that don’t absorb me too much. But the commentators can get sidetracked by discussions, mainly about the new night slot and how it was geared towards men, and unfortunate comments about that. I’d just point out that with male singles players, you’re guaranteed three sets, whereas women’s singles can be two sets that are done and dusted in about an hour. I’ve always thought that equality would be making women play five sets at slams – and if it causes blockages in the scheduling, let the male players playing three-set tennis for the first week. Ahem.
Anyway, as they discuss that topic and others, you then find you have no idea what the score is.
I’ve heard bits of matches. Predictably, the women’s side was more unpredictable than the men’s. Swiatek was the last top 10er standing at a ridiculously/typically early point. Fernandez of US Open fame did quite well. I was pleased for Kasakina, a lovely player when she’s on song, and that Gauff was finally making the breakthrough we’d been waiting for.
I’ve been supporting Swiatek, it would be a very nice validation of her increasingly impressive thirtysomething winning streak that has kept her at world no. 1 after being handed it by Barty’s retirement if she were to win Roland Garros again. Especially because Polish supporters can now watch her in force.
I was narked yesterday that, because of the cricket I had to access the commentary via the BBC sport website, and especially miffed because my computer froze after three games. The scoreline sounded like a demolition job. (And I presume they wouldn’t have played the Russian national anthem if a Russian player had won the whole thing, but that question is moot now.)
I heard most of the Gauff vs Trevisan match. It sounded as if Trevisan was just making too many errors, either because of nerves, physical deterioration after three weeks of play or Gauff’s pressure (she’d won a tournament just before). Gauff’s main strength, I still think, is her mental composure. She got control of her own nerves and steadily improved to deliver a convincing win. I think that the tennis world will be pleased rather than not that this is the women’s final given that the public have heard of both of them and there’s a story to tell about both.
On the men’s side, well, there have been surprises, Tsitsipas out after playing flat to a teenager not named Alcaraz; Medvedev out to a reinvigorated Cilic; Nadal doing the wonderful impossible again, beating Djokovic in another epic at his favourite tournament; Zverev (accused of domestic violence) quietly building, including winning against rising star Alcaraz who has been blazing a trail only comparable to Nadal’s as a teenager over the past few months. As Nadal (and Djokovic) defy time, there’s been an intriguing battle between the next much touted next genners and the ones after! I suppose Ruud falls in between both groups. Obviously, I’m pro Rafa and would love to see (or rather hear) Cilic face him, though I respect the other two’s tennis achievements.
[Edited for typos 24/2/25.]
First of all, I can see both sides of the argument on the LTA’s decision not to allow Russian and Belarussian players to compete in the upcoming grass season in England. I can see why the players pushed back and asked for them not to count as ranking tournaments, which will then have all sorts of ramifications, including some players not turning up even to Wimbledon, which isn’t going to help them develop their grass game. Yes, Osaka, I’m thinking of you. And players who are better on grass are understandably miffed.
I don’t know how individual Russian and Belarussian players feel or have said; they’re exposed to non-Russian news, they presumably play and interact with Ukrainians, and may have complicated ties to Ukraine or have members of the Russian armed forces in their family. But then you’ve got to think of what Ukrainian players must be going through. Ugh, that man and his wretched war that’s ruining so many lives in so many ways!
But to turn to the French Open, I followed the first week or so via headlines, which doesn’t give you the full picture. Norrie was seeded no 10! Since Monday, I have dipped into the Five Live sports extra coverage, but radio coverage is not the same as TV coverage for tennis, and it’s a job to finding things to do when I’m listening to it so that don’t absorb me too much. But the commentators can get sidetracked by discussions, mainly about the new night slot and how it was geared towards men, and unfortunate comments about that. I’d just point out that with male singles players, you’re guaranteed three sets, whereas women’s singles can be two sets that are done and dusted in about an hour. I’ve always thought that equality would be making women play five sets at slams – and if it causes blockages in the scheduling, let the male players playing three-set tennis for the first week. Ahem.
Anyway, as they discuss that topic and others, you then find you have no idea what the score is.
I’ve heard bits of matches. Predictably, the women’s side was more unpredictable than the men’s. Swiatek was the last top 10er standing at a ridiculously/typically early point. Fernandez of US Open fame did quite well. I was pleased for Kasakina, a lovely player when she’s on song, and that Gauff was finally making the breakthrough we’d been waiting for.
I’ve been supporting Swiatek, it would be a very nice validation of her increasingly impressive thirtysomething winning streak that has kept her at world no. 1 after being handed it by Barty’s retirement if she were to win Roland Garros again. Especially because Polish supporters can now watch her in force.
I was narked yesterday that, because of the cricket I had to access the commentary via the BBC sport website, and especially miffed because my computer froze after three games. The scoreline sounded like a demolition job. (And I presume they wouldn’t have played the Russian national anthem if a Russian player had won the whole thing, but that question is moot now.)
I heard most of the Gauff vs Trevisan match. It sounded as if Trevisan was just making too many errors, either because of nerves, physical deterioration after three weeks of play or Gauff’s pressure (she’d won a tournament just before). Gauff’s main strength, I still think, is her mental composure. She got control of her own nerves and steadily improved to deliver a convincing win. I think that the tennis world will be pleased rather than not that this is the women’s final given that the public have heard of both of them and there’s a story to tell about both.
On the men’s side, well, there have been surprises, Tsitsipas out after playing flat to a teenager not named Alcaraz; Medvedev out to a reinvigorated Cilic; Nadal doing the wonderful impossible again, beating Djokovic in another epic at his favourite tournament; Zverev (accused of domestic violence) quietly building, including winning against rising star Alcaraz who has been blazing a trail only comparable to Nadal’s as a teenager over the past few months. As Nadal (and Djokovic) defy time, there’s been an intriguing battle between the next much touted next genners and the ones after! I suppose Ruud falls in between both groups. Obviously, I’m pro Rafa and would love to see (or rather hear) Cilic face him, though I respect the other two’s tennis achievements.
[Edited for typos 24/2/25.]
