TENNIS: Queen's - Men's championship - R2
Jun. 20th, 2025 08:07 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllWednesday: First, Jakub Mensik was facing Roberto Baptista-Agut, as one of half the seeds left in the draw. And it looked as if Mensik had more firepower on his serve and groundstrokes, breaking once to win the first set. So he’d do the same at some point in the second, right?
Well, no. He was called for a foot fault (twice) for crossing the centre line with his back foot, a rule he perhaps had never fully grasped before. James Keothavong, umpiring, had to explain this to him, and I certainly learned how they were umpiring this under the new regime – someone is watching a dedicated feed and presses the button for the automated call to blare out. Suddenly, the match turned into the Teenager vs. the Veteran, because Mensik was frustrated, taking it out on the board (the umpire pretended he didn’t see it), and after his emotions/mind had helped him lose a later point, venting again and losing control of the racquet in a way that could have hit a spectator. He got a (deserved) warning.
Meanwhile, Bautista-Agut took advantage of his opponent’s churning emotions to win the second set, protecting his service games well. Mensik was better in the third, until he played a loose game, and Bautista-Agut was serving at 5-4. Fair dos, the teenager (who has won a Masters!) went for it and broke back, but his opponent (who has played ten times the amount of grass court tennis because he’s 37, and once reached the Wimbledon semis, even if he’s not had a great season so far) continued to stay calm and beat him.
Second, home favourite Jack Draper vs. Alexei Popyrin, who is no 21 in the world right now. Draper put him in to serve, but wasn’t able to break despite pushing him in that first game. They both held their serves until towards the end of the set, when Draper played a subpar game and Popyrin took advantage.
Fair play to Draper, he’d recognised that he needed more intensity and brought it in the second set, where he broke twice. His forehand wasn’t quite what it should have been, neither, perhaps were his drop-shots. The final set was closer. Draper wasn’t able to convert two match points, and it went to a tiebreak that kept swinging backward and forwards until Popyrin faltered when it mattered, giving Draper a chance if he won his next two service points, which he did by playing big. Some of it was home advantage, some of it was the instinct that separates the top 10 players from the rest.
He’ll next face Brandon Nakashima, who beat Dan Evans in two close sets that I fast forwarded through, as the last two matches had been intense three-setters.
Following on from the story about players getting online abuse, there were developments about a known stalker having got himself into the public ballot at Wimbledon. Ugh. They have removed him, so he won’t get access, but ugh.
Thursday: I was granted the opportunity to see Gabriel Diallo play against Jiri Lehechka. Diallo is 6 foot 8 (!!!), but looks athletic, and was fresh off his first tour tournament win. But Lehechka is higher ranked, and he played well throughout, particularly on the return, given the height his opponent’s serve was coming from, but also his own serve was mighty. Diallo somewhat gave away the first game of the second set, and has areas to work on, while Lehechka impressed by winning so convincingly.
I didn’t follow Fearnely vs. Moutet as closely. The latter was probably the most chaotic player in the draw. Fearnley got a slight lead, lost it, but retrieved it. In the second set, Moutet took advantage of a string of double faults from Fearnley and dictated things – it was a match of terrible and fabulous drop shots, and no consistency from the Frenchman.
After losing the second set, Fearnley took a break during which he must have decided to play more aggressively, and he did, meaning he was dictating, now, rarely allowing Moutet to do much. The crowd got on his back for an underarm serve, but Moutet does that. I was less impressed at his taking out his frustrations on the grass, then the umpire who started warning him for his time violations. In the penultimate game, he got into back and forth with the crowd.
To his credit, Fearnley remained focused, hit some big, big shots and wasn’t too shabby when he came forward. It’s the first time he’s got through to a quarter final in an ATP tournament.
Next up, Alcaraz vs. Munar, who seems like a decent all rounder, but the younger and higher ranked Spaniard is the all rounder of all rounders at his age. Munar gave away a break with three double faults, which Alcaraz hardly needed, one thought, and so the top seed won the first set.
But Munar was striking the ball well, even though you could tell he was trying so hard to put something on his serves that it made him prone to double faults. The second set was competitive, even if Alcaraz had an easier time on his serve at first. It then became clear that his first serve percentage was not great (when he got it in he nearly always won the point.) Munar staved off break points, and, because he was serving first, got set points. Which is when Alcaraz played better, until, in the tiebreak, it became too much. Both players had issues with the umpire’s timekeeping/the 25-second rule.
As these had been long games, I had to fast forward through the third set, so I think Alcaraz had to make up ground after falling behind, but Munar kept playing at something close to his highest level. Perhaps the toll of the French Open win was telling. Still, Alcaraz’s will to win found him a way to break and win late in the third set. He’s through, but it took a lot out of him.
What has struck me is that so many of these players are in their early 20s.
Well, no. He was called for a foot fault (twice) for crossing the centre line with his back foot, a rule he perhaps had never fully grasped before. James Keothavong, umpiring, had to explain this to him, and I certainly learned how they were umpiring this under the new regime – someone is watching a dedicated feed and presses the button for the automated call to blare out. Suddenly, the match turned into the Teenager vs. the Veteran, because Mensik was frustrated, taking it out on the board (the umpire pretended he didn’t see it), and after his emotions/mind had helped him lose a later point, venting again and losing control of the racquet in a way that could have hit a spectator. He got a (deserved) warning.
Meanwhile, Bautista-Agut took advantage of his opponent’s churning emotions to win the second set, protecting his service games well. Mensik was better in the third, until he played a loose game, and Bautista-Agut was serving at 5-4. Fair dos, the teenager (who has won a Masters!) went for it and broke back, but his opponent (who has played ten times the amount of grass court tennis because he’s 37, and once reached the Wimbledon semis, even if he’s not had a great season so far) continued to stay calm and beat him.
Second, home favourite Jack Draper vs. Alexei Popyrin, who is no 21 in the world right now. Draper put him in to serve, but wasn’t able to break despite pushing him in that first game. They both held their serves until towards the end of the set, when Draper played a subpar game and Popyrin took advantage.
Fair play to Draper, he’d recognised that he needed more intensity and brought it in the second set, where he broke twice. His forehand wasn’t quite what it should have been, neither, perhaps were his drop-shots. The final set was closer. Draper wasn’t able to convert two match points, and it went to a tiebreak that kept swinging backward and forwards until Popyrin faltered when it mattered, giving Draper a chance if he won his next two service points, which he did by playing big. Some of it was home advantage, some of it was the instinct that separates the top 10 players from the rest.
He’ll next face Brandon Nakashima, who beat Dan Evans in two close sets that I fast forwarded through, as the last two matches had been intense three-setters.
Following on from the story about players getting online abuse, there were developments about a known stalker having got himself into the public ballot at Wimbledon. Ugh. They have removed him, so he won’t get access, but ugh.
Thursday: I was granted the opportunity to see Gabriel Diallo play against Jiri Lehechka. Diallo is 6 foot 8 (!!!), but looks athletic, and was fresh off his first tour tournament win. But Lehechka is higher ranked, and he played well throughout, particularly on the return, given the height his opponent’s serve was coming from, but also his own serve was mighty. Diallo somewhat gave away the first game of the second set, and has areas to work on, while Lehechka impressed by winning so convincingly.
I didn’t follow Fearnely vs. Moutet as closely. The latter was probably the most chaotic player in the draw. Fearnley got a slight lead, lost it, but retrieved it. In the second set, Moutet took advantage of a string of double faults from Fearnley and dictated things – it was a match of terrible and fabulous drop shots, and no consistency from the Frenchman.
After losing the second set, Fearnley took a break during which he must have decided to play more aggressively, and he did, meaning he was dictating, now, rarely allowing Moutet to do much. The crowd got on his back for an underarm serve, but Moutet does that. I was less impressed at his taking out his frustrations on the grass, then the umpire who started warning him for his time violations. In the penultimate game, he got into back and forth with the crowd.
To his credit, Fearnley remained focused, hit some big, big shots and wasn’t too shabby when he came forward. It’s the first time he’s got through to a quarter final in an ATP tournament.
Next up, Alcaraz vs. Munar, who seems like a decent all rounder, but the younger and higher ranked Spaniard is the all rounder of all rounders at his age. Munar gave away a break with three double faults, which Alcaraz hardly needed, one thought, and so the top seed won the first set.
But Munar was striking the ball well, even though you could tell he was trying so hard to put something on his serves that it made him prone to double faults. The second set was competitive, even if Alcaraz had an easier time on his serve at first. It then became clear that his first serve percentage was not great (when he got it in he nearly always won the point.) Munar staved off break points, and, because he was serving first, got set points. Which is when Alcaraz played better, until, in the tiebreak, it became too much. Both players had issues with the umpire’s timekeeping/the 25-second rule.
As these had been long games, I had to fast forward through the third set, so I think Alcaraz had to make up ground after falling behind, but Munar kept playing at something close to his highest level. Perhaps the toll of the French Open win was telling. Still, Alcaraz’s will to win found him a way to break and win late in the third set. He’s through, but it took a lot out of him.
What has struck me is that so many of these players are in their early 20s.
