SPORTS: More tennis
Jun. 11th, 2022 12:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllObviously, I should have posted this before now.
French Open: Men’s semi finals
I started listening in during the third game, and it was a quite extraordinary first semi, as far as I could tell, although not for the quality of the tennis. Zverev started off hot, but then got nervous and Nadal was never consistently good, though he was better on the biggest points. In fact, there was no consistency all round. Nadal had set points on Zverev’s serve, then Zverev had set points in the tie break, neither could take them. Guttingly for Zverev, Nadal won with a couple of those forehand winners that had been so scarce all set.
It seemed as if Nadal would now put his foot on the pedal, breaking a despondent opponent, but…I don’t know if he gave up the breakback or if it was Zverev, but they were back on equal terms. The first set had gone over well past an hour, making everyone wonder why the tournament had started the men’s semi finals at three local time as the second set ground on.
There was a 44-point rally, not of brilliant tennis, that was won by exhaustion. There were numerous bad double faults from Zvervev, who was in the weird position of competing with Medvedev for the world no. 1 due to the timing and the lack of points at Wimbledon, but also under a suspended sentence for any on court abuse, so when he received a warning for swearing, which he seemed to sincerely deny, it meant more that he didn’t let that bother him too much, as it was the kind of thing the authorities could listen back to and rescind if he was convinced of his innocence. Still, his tennis didn’t really improve – the set was characterised by breaks and then, all of a sudden he was crying out in pain, having rolled his ankle badly.
Zverev had to retire, and one set up, Nadal went through to the final in a way he could hardly have wanted, but the match had been a total slog, with Rafa nowhere near his best, although possibly more consistent that Zverev. The latter’s play was making the commentators question whether he would indeed be the multiple Slam winner Nadal said he would in the awkward post-match interview. He’s got the game, but it’s what’s going on inside his head that seem to be blocking him – the nerves were the cause of the double faults, and he just couldn’t seem to impose his will on what was going on. He really ought to have won that first set, but he couldn’t seem to hack being in the lead. Well, you can’t do that; you’ve got to make the most of a subpar (tired?) Nadal at his tournament, instead of being respectful. Obviously, recovering from the injury will be Zverev’s priority, but he’s got to work on the mental aspect or hungrier opportunists will be winning slams, not him. (Although from what I understood of the behaviour that got him the suspension, and the domestic abuse allegations, maybe he’s got bigger issues.)
After that flattening ending, the second semi started at six our time, although I only started listening during the second game. I was supporting Cilic for old time’s sake – I don’t really know Ruud, although it sounds as if he is a seriously promising clay courter, younger than Zverev, but out of his teens. Cilic was playing the game that had got him so far, unexpectedly, in this tournament, and Ruud (and his backhand) didn’t have a response. But the calm young Norwegian slowly, slowly pulled it together and won the second set and was on the way to winning the third when there was a court invasion by a young woman. It was a bit disturbing even on the radio as the commentators tried to work out what was happening, for it didn’t seem like the security guards had stopped her and if her intent had been more violent rather than some kind of protest, well, that was bad.
The feed cut off a few games later, but it seemed as if Ruud’s youth and fitness would win versus Cilic’s frustration and the effort required to win the last two sets. On Saturday, I confirmed as much.
French Open: Women’s finals
I skipped the build-up, and if I’m honest, I was irritated by the constant interruptions to inform us of the goings-on at other sports. Gauff chose to serve first, and maybe rued it as Swiatek went ahead 4-0. The commentators focused on what Gauff could do to make a match of it – she wasn’t as frozen as Pliskova had been at Wimbledon last year or anything, Swiatek was just playing at her best or towards her best, and ruthlessly exploited Gauff’s weaknesses on the forehand, which were legion, something about the way she hit it. Swiatek won the first set easily and Gauff understandably went off court.
She came back more focused, and served better, had more purpose and actually had a brief lead, until Swiatek came back at her and Gauff seemed unable to continue doing the smart things she’d been doing. Swiatek kept showing up Gauff’s forehand. Gauff did manage to make the Pole serve it out, but one or two shots aside, she didn’t show many nerves and won.
And I’m glad, I know everyone wanted a competitive match, and women’s tennis is craving a rivalry (I’ll believe it when I see it at this point,) but Swiatek confirmed why she’s world no. 1, and comprehensively so, apparently she’s got about double the points that the no. 2, (who to my surprise is Kontaveit,) has, all the finals she’s won this year and now the 35-match-winning streak, which matches the one enjoyed by Venus Williams before Switek was even born.
There was much talk of Gauff’s youth (and there are loads of positives for her, at 19, she’s got through to her first Grand Slam final, where she was shown what she needs to do to win, and she should only improve. Nonetheless, Swiatek has only just turned 21, and won her first slam as a teenager. This victory must have been so much sweeter, to shoulder the burden of pressure, to play in front of a capacity crowd, with possibly as many Poles there as had been there in total when she first won. She’s now a multiple grand slam winner, deserved no. 1, and if she maintains this standard and stays healthy…
Well, we’ll see, women’s tennis is women’s tennis. Winning Wimbledon after the French is a tough, tough challenge. There are many former Wimbledon champions who could hav another good fortnight, it depends how Swiatek adjusts to the grass.
Surbiton
I was then able to switch to watch Murray at Surbiton, thanks to iPlayer. It felt a bit indecent to be watching grass-court tennis while the French was still on! He was up 4-1 in the first when I started watching, and maybe it was me but more likely Kudla (of whom I had heard, unlike anyone else other than Murray who’s been playing at Surbiton) improved. He clearly knew his way around a grass court, and had raced to level terms by the end of the first set, until Murray imposed a break on him.
Murray’s serve seemed good, as did his movement, and there were moments where he pulled off some spectacular shots that only he could, and he deployed his slice well, but Kudla wasn’t afraid of the net and won the second…and the third, which will give Murray plenty to think about.
As for the switching tennis radio tennis commentary to TV, there was only the one commentator. That meant there was a lot more silence, leaving me to wonder whether the birdsong I was hearing was coming from the TV set or outside, and as the match progressed I could hear the gusts of wind there.
French Open - Men’s final
The roof was open, making it less humid and conditions more Nadal friendly. He started off blisteringly, but let Ruud break, really, with two double faults and a forehand error, but Nadal returned to attacking Ruud’s backhand, as his forehand is so strong, and although Ruud settled, Nadal was a little smarter and better. And all the statistics showed the scale of the task.
But Ruud had a little reset in the second set, a lead after a break that was more his doing than Nadal’s, but that roused Nadal to break back, and by the end of the second set, Nadal kicked up a notch, and got greedy for game after game after game. The first break in the third set was clearly demoralising for the young Norwegian, and Nadal just wasn’t in the mood to yield points. He turned into the steamroller he can be on the Phillippe Chatrier. Ruud wanted a game for pride, wanted to test if Nadal had nerves (after winning every final he’d played in there?) But of course he didn’t. Small consolation, but Nadal has also bagelled Federer and Djokovic in the French Open final.
But still, wow. 14 (and the comparison to Real Madrid isn’t much when you think that Nadal has done it all by himself in so much less time.) He’s truly been dominant, and that’s 22 grand slams, beating Djokovic along the way.
He’s got to see ow it goes, how his foot and the rest of his body hold up, but...the calendar slam is on (although Djokovic will surely be desperate for Wimbledon.)
On the morning after, the scale of the Majorcan’s achievements became even clearer, and learning he’d been anaesthetising his bad foot, which came with a greater risk of an accident like Zverev’s, was sobering.
Of course the other sporty thing that happened that day was that the Welsh men’s football team beat Ukraine (yes, it was awkward, but although I felt bad, I still really wanted us to win, and I have only begun to understand that soccer is more than men running up and down a pitch, sometimes with a ball, and collapsing in fake agony for no good reason since 2016.) And we did. So, we’re in the World Cup. And we sang about it. There’s more to be said about all that, even from my removed perspective, but it’s a lot to unpick.
I saw a little of Nottingham on iPlayer: some Evans, some Sakkari. It’s no Queens or Eastbourne, and they’re no Wimbledon. And then came the news that this will be Sue Barker’s last Wimbledon. It seems like it is by choice and for entirely understandable reasons. I presume they’ll hand it over to Claire Balding, who I like more as a presenter of other sports, but on the plus side, that means she won’t be doing Today at Wimbledon, and they’re unlikely to give that back to Inverdale (although I wish they’d stop letting him ‘commentate’.) Is it too much to ask that they get someone who gets tennis and likes it?
[Edited for typos 24/2/25.]
French Open: Men’s semi finals
I started listening in during the third game, and it was a quite extraordinary first semi, as far as I could tell, although not for the quality of the tennis. Zverev started off hot, but then got nervous and Nadal was never consistently good, though he was better on the biggest points. In fact, there was no consistency all round. Nadal had set points on Zverev’s serve, then Zverev had set points in the tie break, neither could take them. Guttingly for Zverev, Nadal won with a couple of those forehand winners that had been so scarce all set.
It seemed as if Nadal would now put his foot on the pedal, breaking a despondent opponent, but…I don’t know if he gave up the breakback or if it was Zverev, but they were back on equal terms. The first set had gone over well past an hour, making everyone wonder why the tournament had started the men’s semi finals at three local time as the second set ground on.
There was a 44-point rally, not of brilliant tennis, that was won by exhaustion. There were numerous bad double faults from Zvervev, who was in the weird position of competing with Medvedev for the world no. 1 due to the timing and the lack of points at Wimbledon, but also under a suspended sentence for any on court abuse, so when he received a warning for swearing, which he seemed to sincerely deny, it meant more that he didn’t let that bother him too much, as it was the kind of thing the authorities could listen back to and rescind if he was convinced of his innocence. Still, his tennis didn’t really improve – the set was characterised by breaks and then, all of a sudden he was crying out in pain, having rolled his ankle badly.
Zverev had to retire, and one set up, Nadal went through to the final in a way he could hardly have wanted, but the match had been a total slog, with Rafa nowhere near his best, although possibly more consistent that Zverev. The latter’s play was making the commentators question whether he would indeed be the multiple Slam winner Nadal said he would in the awkward post-match interview. He’s got the game, but it’s what’s going on inside his head that seem to be blocking him – the nerves were the cause of the double faults, and he just couldn’t seem to impose his will on what was going on. He really ought to have won that first set, but he couldn’t seem to hack being in the lead. Well, you can’t do that; you’ve got to make the most of a subpar (tired?) Nadal at his tournament, instead of being respectful. Obviously, recovering from the injury will be Zverev’s priority, but he’s got to work on the mental aspect or hungrier opportunists will be winning slams, not him. (Although from what I understood of the behaviour that got him the suspension, and the domestic abuse allegations, maybe he’s got bigger issues.)
After that flattening ending, the second semi started at six our time, although I only started listening during the second game. I was supporting Cilic for old time’s sake – I don’t really know Ruud, although it sounds as if he is a seriously promising clay courter, younger than Zverev, but out of his teens. Cilic was playing the game that had got him so far, unexpectedly, in this tournament, and Ruud (and his backhand) didn’t have a response. But the calm young Norwegian slowly, slowly pulled it together and won the second set and was on the way to winning the third when there was a court invasion by a young woman. It was a bit disturbing even on the radio as the commentators tried to work out what was happening, for it didn’t seem like the security guards had stopped her and if her intent had been more violent rather than some kind of protest, well, that was bad.
The feed cut off a few games later, but it seemed as if Ruud’s youth and fitness would win versus Cilic’s frustration and the effort required to win the last two sets. On Saturday, I confirmed as much.
French Open: Women’s finals
I skipped the build-up, and if I’m honest, I was irritated by the constant interruptions to inform us of the goings-on at other sports. Gauff chose to serve first, and maybe rued it as Swiatek went ahead 4-0. The commentators focused on what Gauff could do to make a match of it – she wasn’t as frozen as Pliskova had been at Wimbledon last year or anything, Swiatek was just playing at her best or towards her best, and ruthlessly exploited Gauff’s weaknesses on the forehand, which were legion, something about the way she hit it. Swiatek won the first set easily and Gauff understandably went off court.
She came back more focused, and served better, had more purpose and actually had a brief lead, until Swiatek came back at her and Gauff seemed unable to continue doing the smart things she’d been doing. Swiatek kept showing up Gauff’s forehand. Gauff did manage to make the Pole serve it out, but one or two shots aside, she didn’t show many nerves and won.
And I’m glad, I know everyone wanted a competitive match, and women’s tennis is craving a rivalry (I’ll believe it when I see it at this point,) but Swiatek confirmed why she’s world no. 1, and comprehensively so, apparently she’s got about double the points that the no. 2, (who to my surprise is Kontaveit,) has, all the finals she’s won this year and now the 35-match-winning streak, which matches the one enjoyed by Venus Williams before Switek was even born.
There was much talk of Gauff’s youth (and there are loads of positives for her, at 19, she’s got through to her first Grand Slam final, where she was shown what she needs to do to win, and she should only improve. Nonetheless, Swiatek has only just turned 21, and won her first slam as a teenager. This victory must have been so much sweeter, to shoulder the burden of pressure, to play in front of a capacity crowd, with possibly as many Poles there as had been there in total when she first won. She’s now a multiple grand slam winner, deserved no. 1, and if she maintains this standard and stays healthy…
Well, we’ll see, women’s tennis is women’s tennis. Winning Wimbledon after the French is a tough, tough challenge. There are many former Wimbledon champions who could hav another good fortnight, it depends how Swiatek adjusts to the grass.
Surbiton
I was then able to switch to watch Murray at Surbiton, thanks to iPlayer. It felt a bit indecent to be watching grass-court tennis while the French was still on! He was up 4-1 in the first when I started watching, and maybe it was me but more likely Kudla (of whom I had heard, unlike anyone else other than Murray who’s been playing at Surbiton) improved. He clearly knew his way around a grass court, and had raced to level terms by the end of the first set, until Murray imposed a break on him.
Murray’s serve seemed good, as did his movement, and there were moments where he pulled off some spectacular shots that only he could, and he deployed his slice well, but Kudla wasn’t afraid of the net and won the second…and the third, which will give Murray plenty to think about.
As for the switching tennis radio tennis commentary to TV, there was only the one commentator. That meant there was a lot more silence, leaving me to wonder whether the birdsong I was hearing was coming from the TV set or outside, and as the match progressed I could hear the gusts of wind there.
French Open - Men’s final
The roof was open, making it less humid and conditions more Nadal friendly. He started off blisteringly, but let Ruud break, really, with two double faults and a forehand error, but Nadal returned to attacking Ruud’s backhand, as his forehand is so strong, and although Ruud settled, Nadal was a little smarter and better. And all the statistics showed the scale of the task.
But Ruud had a little reset in the second set, a lead after a break that was more his doing than Nadal’s, but that roused Nadal to break back, and by the end of the second set, Nadal kicked up a notch, and got greedy for game after game after game. The first break in the third set was clearly demoralising for the young Norwegian, and Nadal just wasn’t in the mood to yield points. He turned into the steamroller he can be on the Phillippe Chatrier. Ruud wanted a game for pride, wanted to test if Nadal had nerves (after winning every final he’d played in there?) But of course he didn’t. Small consolation, but Nadal has also bagelled Federer and Djokovic in the French Open final.
But still, wow. 14 (and the comparison to Real Madrid isn’t much when you think that Nadal has done it all by himself in so much less time.) He’s truly been dominant, and that’s 22 grand slams, beating Djokovic along the way.
He’s got to see ow it goes, how his foot and the rest of his body hold up, but...the calendar slam is on (although Djokovic will surely be desperate for Wimbledon.)
On the morning after, the scale of the Majorcan’s achievements became even clearer, and learning he’d been anaesthetising his bad foot, which came with a greater risk of an accident like Zverev’s, was sobering.
Of course the other sporty thing that happened that day was that the Welsh men’s football team beat Ukraine (yes, it was awkward, but although I felt bad, I still really wanted us to win, and I have only begun to understand that soccer is more than men running up and down a pitch, sometimes with a ball, and collapsing in fake agony for no good reason since 2016.) And we did. So, we’re in the World Cup. And we sang about it. There’s more to be said about all that, even from my removed perspective, but it’s a lot to unpick.
I saw a little of Nottingham on iPlayer: some Evans, some Sakkari. It’s no Queens or Eastbourne, and they’re no Wimbledon. And then came the news that this will be Sue Barker’s last Wimbledon. It seems like it is by choice and for entirely understandable reasons. I presume they’ll hand it over to Claire Balding, who I like more as a presenter of other sports, but on the plus side, that means she won’t be doing Today at Wimbledon, and they’re unlikely to give that back to Inverdale (although I wish they’d stop letting him ‘commentate’.) Is it too much to ask that they get someone who gets tennis and likes it?
[Edited for typos 24/2/25.]
