TENNIS: Toronto and Montreal 2023
Aug. 14th, 2023 12:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllTo the Canada Open, where the ATP Masters 1000 is being held in Toronto, where all the top players (apart from Djokovic) were playing. I chose to watch the second round encounter between Berrettini and Sinner, apparently the first time they’ve played at tour level. There was no commentary, and I didn’t like the beige shoulders of Berrettini’s t-shirt.
Berrettini seemed to be keeping his serve more easily, but the 2-2 game was pivotal. He had five break points and wasn’t allowed or able to take any of them. It went on serve until the last two points of the set, where Berrettini played two careless points, gifting Sinner a set point with a double fault and then losing with a careless error. Looking over the set statistics, Berrettini’s errors were way too numerous, and this continued in the start of the second set. He’d been leading his first service game 40-0, but lost it, mainly because of his errors. He tidied things up on his service games, but Sinner had the lead throughout the set and was strikingly willing to come in. You can’t hand a player of Sinner’s calibre so many errors, and until Berrettini sorts that out, he’s not going to return to being a seed himself.
The WTA’s Masters 1000 was in Montreal (I think the tours switch location every year) and again, top players were present and competing, and there were several intriguing match-ups.
I started watching Swiatek against Muchova, a rematch of the French Open final (with Sam Smith and Anne Keothavong commentating.) This was a third round match and Swiatek, of course, started blazingly (apparently Muchova is renowned for having to come back from deficits.) The world no. 1 won the first set quite handily, but Muchova improved her level in the second set, and Swiatek got very frazzled, which helped her opponent. At two sets all, Swiatek went off for a toilet break, and then it started to rain, so play was suspended and I went off and did something else.
I saw that Swiatek must have won because she was playing in an upcoming match. But I watched Vondrousova vs Gauff (no commentary and we couldn’t really hear the umpire call out the score). A bit of a tussle over keeping serve at the start of the first set, but based on how they played, if you’d been asked which was the Grand Slam champion, if you didn’t know you’d have picked the wrong one. Although a lot of games went to deuce, Gauff won them over and over by the second set (and by that time, my attention was wavering.)
I sat down to watch a replay of the Carlos Alcaraz v. Tommy Paul quarter final, without having realised how tight Alcaraz’s victory over Hurcacz to get there had been. (Two commentators of whom Greg Rusedski was the most knowledgeable, and it sounded as though they were commentating from the UK.) With two double faults, it felt as though Alcaraz handed his first service game to his opponent, but it soon became clear that Paul was playing near his best, and Alcaraz really wasn’t. His serve wasn’t doing much damage and he was making unforced errors on his forehand. He lost three of his service games and was a set down and very frustrated. The racquet got thumped, he had a bit of a rant at his box (unusual) and I got to see what he plays like when he’s in a temper. He kept his serve more easily is how. A moment of magic (a tweener winner) won him a service game to love and got the crowd (who’d clearly come for him) involved, and Paul just handed him the next game, probably shaken by that point more than it helped Alcaraz. One set all.
But Alcaraz still couldn’t find the consistency (he probably would have done better to play more like a normal Spaniard, with percentage tennis, more margins and to cut out the drop shots because Paul had the movement on this surface to more than cope with them.) Paul, again playing better (his level dropped in the second set) broke, and although Alcaraz forced him to serve it out and deal with the nerves of beating the world no. 1 and get through to his first Masters semi AND get his highest ever tanking, he couldn’t put enough pressure on Paul who won his second match point. (Unexpected men going through to the end of this tournament.)
But three of the top four seeds had it made it through to the semis in Montreal. I watched the replay of the Swiatek vs Pegula match in several sittings (you couldn’t really tell how it would go.) It started off with an inordinate number of breaks, so I assumed whoever would keep their serve would win the first set, and it was Pegula, who kept her composure, while Swiatek lost hers (and her serve. The latter repeatedly.)
A different Swiatek came back from her obligatory toilet break and kept her serve and broke Pegula’s to love. But Pegula kept her serve the next time, and Swiatek never quite kept her good spells going, until the end of the second, when she would not let Pegula get a sniff in the ‘serving for the match’ game, taking it to a tiebreak, which she played better.
One set all, but by this time I was wary, if Swiatek was getting a little run, it meant nothing if she couldn’t consolidate it, and the commentators pointed out that maybe Swiatek’s level hasn’t been quite so much above the rest this year in the way it was last year, and that Pegula’s defensive skills have improved, so that she makes you play one more shot. Swiatek got flat, and lost the match with two errors, which she’ll no doubt hate.
I was confused as to why the next semi-final wasn’t available the next morning, but realised it had been postponed to the Sunday, because of the weather, meaning the winner would have to play two matches on the same day. Not ideal, and surely favouring Pegula.
Rybakina vs. Samsonova, and I was supporting the first. Even if I wasn’t going to get a Swiatek vs Rybakina rematch, the world no 3 vs world no 4 would be interesting. Rybakina seemed more dialled in than Samsonova, playing at this level for the first time. The Kazakh’s serve seemed on song, and Samsonova was making too many errors, especially the ‘plus one’ shot, partly because Rybakina’s returns were deep. This had taken under half an hour, and I started thinking that if the second set was as easy, it might work as a practice session and give Rybakina a better chance in the final.
(Silly me. This is women’s tennis, after all.)
Rybakina’s first service game of the second set was a horror story. An unheard-of three double faults handed it to her opponent, and she struggled with serve for the rest of the set (Rybakina! Struggling with her serve!!) giving Samsonova a reprieve and a chance to get into the match, with the second set scoreline the reverse of the third.
Could Rybakina, who had played an epic against Kasatkina until three local time the night before last and hung around the next day waiting, regain her form? Not enough, and so Samsonova (who’d had to play Sabalenka and Bencic on the same day) was through to the final.
I watched Rybakina’s press conference on YouTube and she didn’t give a clear answer as to why the serve had gone – the wind – but she did seem to be unhappy with the scheduling, and worried about how it and the injuries she’s now carrying would affect her in the crucial build-up to the US Open. YouTube highlight videos also confirmed that Pegula had beaten Samsonova easily, which I expected, and, after a more competitive first set, Sinner had beaten de Minaur in Toronto, also expected given his weight of shot, never mind that the Australian had an excellent tournament (beating Medvedev.) The tours roll on to Cincinnati. [Edited for typos 10/1/26.]
Berrettini seemed to be keeping his serve more easily, but the 2-2 game was pivotal. He had five break points and wasn’t allowed or able to take any of them. It went on serve until the last two points of the set, where Berrettini played two careless points, gifting Sinner a set point with a double fault and then losing with a careless error. Looking over the set statistics, Berrettini’s errors were way too numerous, and this continued in the start of the second set. He’d been leading his first service game 40-0, but lost it, mainly because of his errors. He tidied things up on his service games, but Sinner had the lead throughout the set and was strikingly willing to come in. You can’t hand a player of Sinner’s calibre so many errors, and until Berrettini sorts that out, he’s not going to return to being a seed himself.
The WTA’s Masters 1000 was in Montreal (I think the tours switch location every year) and again, top players were present and competing, and there were several intriguing match-ups.
I started watching Swiatek against Muchova, a rematch of the French Open final (with Sam Smith and Anne Keothavong commentating.) This was a third round match and Swiatek, of course, started blazingly (apparently Muchova is renowned for having to come back from deficits.) The world no. 1 won the first set quite handily, but Muchova improved her level in the second set, and Swiatek got very frazzled, which helped her opponent. At two sets all, Swiatek went off for a toilet break, and then it started to rain, so play was suspended and I went off and did something else.
I saw that Swiatek must have won because she was playing in an upcoming match. But I watched Vondrousova vs Gauff (no commentary and we couldn’t really hear the umpire call out the score). A bit of a tussle over keeping serve at the start of the first set, but based on how they played, if you’d been asked which was the Grand Slam champion, if you didn’t know you’d have picked the wrong one. Although a lot of games went to deuce, Gauff won them over and over by the second set (and by that time, my attention was wavering.)
I sat down to watch a replay of the Carlos Alcaraz v. Tommy Paul quarter final, without having realised how tight Alcaraz’s victory over Hurcacz to get there had been. (Two commentators of whom Greg Rusedski was the most knowledgeable, and it sounded as though they were commentating from the UK.) With two double faults, it felt as though Alcaraz handed his first service game to his opponent, but it soon became clear that Paul was playing near his best, and Alcaraz really wasn’t. His serve wasn’t doing much damage and he was making unforced errors on his forehand. He lost three of his service games and was a set down and very frustrated. The racquet got thumped, he had a bit of a rant at his box (unusual) and I got to see what he plays like when he’s in a temper. He kept his serve more easily is how. A moment of magic (a tweener winner) won him a service game to love and got the crowd (who’d clearly come for him) involved, and Paul just handed him the next game, probably shaken by that point more than it helped Alcaraz. One set all.
But Alcaraz still couldn’t find the consistency (he probably would have done better to play more like a normal Spaniard, with percentage tennis, more margins and to cut out the drop shots because Paul had the movement on this surface to more than cope with them.) Paul, again playing better (his level dropped in the second set) broke, and although Alcaraz forced him to serve it out and deal with the nerves of beating the world no. 1 and get through to his first Masters semi AND get his highest ever tanking, he couldn’t put enough pressure on Paul who won his second match point. (Unexpected men going through to the end of this tournament.)
But three of the top four seeds had it made it through to the semis in Montreal. I watched the replay of the Swiatek vs Pegula match in several sittings (you couldn’t really tell how it would go.) It started off with an inordinate number of breaks, so I assumed whoever would keep their serve would win the first set, and it was Pegula, who kept her composure, while Swiatek lost hers (and her serve. The latter repeatedly.)
A different Swiatek came back from her obligatory toilet break and kept her serve and broke Pegula’s to love. But Pegula kept her serve the next time, and Swiatek never quite kept her good spells going, until the end of the second, when she would not let Pegula get a sniff in the ‘serving for the match’ game, taking it to a tiebreak, which she played better.
One set all, but by this time I was wary, if Swiatek was getting a little run, it meant nothing if she couldn’t consolidate it, and the commentators pointed out that maybe Swiatek’s level hasn’t been quite so much above the rest this year in the way it was last year, and that Pegula’s defensive skills have improved, so that she makes you play one more shot. Swiatek got flat, and lost the match with two errors, which she’ll no doubt hate.
I was confused as to why the next semi-final wasn’t available the next morning, but realised it had been postponed to the Sunday, because of the weather, meaning the winner would have to play two matches on the same day. Not ideal, and surely favouring Pegula.
Rybakina vs. Samsonova, and I was supporting the first. Even if I wasn’t going to get a Swiatek vs Rybakina rematch, the world no 3 vs world no 4 would be interesting. Rybakina seemed more dialled in than Samsonova, playing at this level for the first time. The Kazakh’s serve seemed on song, and Samsonova was making too many errors, especially the ‘plus one’ shot, partly because Rybakina’s returns were deep. This had taken under half an hour, and I started thinking that if the second set was as easy, it might work as a practice session and give Rybakina a better chance in the final.
(Silly me. This is women’s tennis, after all.)
Rybakina’s first service game of the second set was a horror story. An unheard-of three double faults handed it to her opponent, and she struggled with serve for the rest of the set (Rybakina! Struggling with her serve!!) giving Samsonova a reprieve and a chance to get into the match, with the second set scoreline the reverse of the third.
Could Rybakina, who had played an epic against Kasatkina until three local time the night before last and hung around the next day waiting, regain her form? Not enough, and so Samsonova (who’d had to play Sabalenka and Bencic on the same day) was through to the final.
I watched Rybakina’s press conference on YouTube and she didn’t give a clear answer as to why the serve had gone – the wind – but she did seem to be unhappy with the scheduling, and worried about how it and the injuries she’s now carrying would affect her in the crucial build-up to the US Open. YouTube highlight videos also confirmed that Pegula had beaten Samsonova easily, which I expected, and, after a more competitive first set, Sinner had beaten de Minaur in Toronto, also expected given his weight of shot, never mind that the Australian had an excellent tournament (beating Medvedev.) The tours roll on to Cincinnati. [Edited for typos 10/1/26.]
