TENNIS: French Open semi finals.
Jun. 4th, 2011 08:41 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllI only saw one whole match, so this won't be long. Not all the results I was expecting, but Li Na and Francesca Schiavonne seemed to have found their form on the clay. I will not predict anything, except that I daresay I will tear up - I have started doing that with recent women's grand slam finals.
I was glad not to be able to watch most of Murray/Nadal, even though I like both players and think they can being out the most tremendous tennis from each other. Nadal found a way to block Murray. He must be playing his way towards a better standard than the one I saw against Lubjicic. It is his clay, after all. It was dispiriting that Murray couldn't convert those break points (or that Nadal was too good to let him). There has been a feeling of reality setting in and showing Murray not being in the class of the top three, because even if his game can reach those pinnacles at times, slams test your consistency. I know that this is his best French Open result and a promising development on the clay, but Del Potro is only going to improve and regain his position somewhere in the upper echelons.
Ahem.
I saw most of the last set of the first semi and then...the first and fourth set of the second semi-final was stupendous. Tremendous hitting - the commentators wondered if the power was coming through the TV screens, well, yes, it was. But I was really rather jealous of the people who were there, and a bit miffed at the empty seats and, frankly, the cute children who were more interested in colouring in. Federer came out fierce, but, as can be the case in tennis, won it by a slight margin (although Djokovic had two set points that Federer blocked). He maintained that just enough in the second set, whereas Djokovic got a bit lost and looked like old Djokovic, who old Federer generally beat at this point in a slam. But then he gritted out the third set (and I found that, although Federer lays the most sublime shots and his determination to won was impressive, I wanted Djokovic to keep his run going, to pass the test to be number one in the world. I certainly wanted a fifth set.) And it looked like he could pinch the fourth. Except he couldn't and the standard of both men at that point was fantabulous.
But Federer won, made a point about all the people who have written him off, and nobody should have been in such a hurry to put away the old script for the new guard (Djokovic and Murray replaying the Aussie Open final was not such a stretch this time yesterday). Federer and Nadal have that same magnetic pull for each other in a final, or it should be Nadal and Federer based on the rankings and the location. Having said that, Federer has made his way more smoothly through the tournament. If he plays like he did in the semis, Nadal will have to find his best to best him. The prospect is mouth-watering.
I was glad not to be able to watch most of Murray/Nadal, even though I like both players and think they can being out the most tremendous tennis from each other. Nadal found a way to block Murray. He must be playing his way towards a better standard than the one I saw against Lubjicic. It is his clay, after all. It was dispiriting that Murray couldn't convert those break points (or that Nadal was too good to let him). There has been a feeling of reality setting in and showing Murray not being in the class of the top three, because even if his game can reach those pinnacles at times, slams test your consistency. I know that this is his best French Open result and a promising development on the clay, but Del Potro is only going to improve and regain his position somewhere in the upper echelons.
Ahem.
I saw most of the last set of the first semi and then...the first and fourth set of the second semi-final was stupendous. Tremendous hitting - the commentators wondered if the power was coming through the TV screens, well, yes, it was. But I was really rather jealous of the people who were there, and a bit miffed at the empty seats and, frankly, the cute children who were more interested in colouring in. Federer came out fierce, but, as can be the case in tennis, won it by a slight margin (although Djokovic had two set points that Federer blocked). He maintained that just enough in the second set, whereas Djokovic got a bit lost and looked like old Djokovic, who old Federer generally beat at this point in a slam. But then he gritted out the third set (and I found that, although Federer lays the most sublime shots and his determination to won was impressive, I wanted Djokovic to keep his run going, to pass the test to be number one in the world. I certainly wanted a fifth set.) And it looked like he could pinch the fourth. Except he couldn't and the standard of both men at that point was fantabulous.
But Federer won, made a point about all the people who have written him off, and nobody should have been in such a hurry to put away the old script for the new guard (Djokovic and Murray replaying the Aussie Open final was not such a stretch this time yesterday). Federer and Nadal have that same magnetic pull for each other in a final, or it should be Nadal and Federer based on the rankings and the location. Having said that, Federer has made his way more smoothly through the tournament. If he plays like he did in the semis, Nadal will have to find his best to best him. The prospect is mouth-watering.
