TENNIS: Australian Open 2014
Jan. 26th, 2014 07:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllI haven’t posted anything about the Australian Open this year, because for most of the tournament, I merely followed the headlines – great heat, seeds ‘toppling’. But I did sit down to see the women’s final yesterday morning, and for all the shock of Serena’s exit, Li Na, as we were reminded, has been a finalist in Melbourne quite a lot recently. Cibulkova (or Cibulkova the Giant Slayer as I believe it’s obligatory to refer to her) was more of a shock, but both women had won six matches, some of them impressively.
Going in, I was neutral – I was only vaguely aware of Cibulkova, I have to own, but like Li I’d seen of her. I did think that Li’s experience at this level would probably be to her advantage. Both come off as more outgoing than most players, and during the match, I supported Cibulkova, perhaps because she was the underdog, but I also liked her attitude.
It wasn’t great tennis. If the second set had been anything like the third, I thought they’d both be exhausted because they seemed to be spending so much nervous energy battling themselves or circumstances. But then it was a women's tennis grand slam final. (Look to the semis or the quarters for the better matches.)
It did become apparent that Li was the one who could win or lose it. Her backhand was brilliant, but little else was. I did wish the commentators praised Cibulkova’s returning game (they’d praise individual returns, but didn’t acknowledge it as a weapon.) The very few points that were of a high quality – some long rallies where one player gained control, others where the serve came off and led to a second, decisive punch – made one long for more.
But Li Na played the better tie-breaker at the end of the first set and then started dominating, showing why she’s the higher ranked player.
I didn’t watch the men’s final. Indeed, I only just discovered the results. I had been expecting Nadal to win, frankly, after he had Federer’s number in the semis, just as he beat Ferrer in the French, even though I’ve always admired Wawrinka’s backhand, was aware he’d been fully deserving of his place in the world tour finals and hey, beat Djokovic in this tournament. But no! I’ve only seen the highlights and, clearly, Nadal’s injury was a factor, but you still have to win against an injured player (in your first grand slam final!) and Wawrinka seemed to have pulled off some scintillating play. He did, after all, beat the top two players in the world and, in a way, Federer. Well, well.
Going in, I was neutral – I was only vaguely aware of Cibulkova, I have to own, but like Li I’d seen of her. I did think that Li’s experience at this level would probably be to her advantage. Both come off as more outgoing than most players, and during the match, I supported Cibulkova, perhaps because she was the underdog, but I also liked her attitude.
It wasn’t great tennis. If the second set had been anything like the third, I thought they’d both be exhausted because they seemed to be spending so much nervous energy battling themselves or circumstances. But then it was a women's tennis grand slam final. (Look to the semis or the quarters for the better matches.)
It did become apparent that Li was the one who could win or lose it. Her backhand was brilliant, but little else was. I did wish the commentators praised Cibulkova’s returning game (they’d praise individual returns, but didn’t acknowledge it as a weapon.) The very few points that were of a high quality – some long rallies where one player gained control, others where the serve came off and led to a second, decisive punch – made one long for more.
But Li Na played the better tie-breaker at the end of the first set and then started dominating, showing why she’s the higher ranked player.
I didn’t watch the men’s final. Indeed, I only just discovered the results. I had been expecting Nadal to win, frankly, after he had Federer’s number in the semis, just as he beat Ferrer in the French, even though I’ve always admired Wawrinka’s backhand, was aware he’d been fully deserving of his place in the world tour finals and hey, beat Djokovic in this tournament. But no! I’ve only seen the highlights and, clearly, Nadal’s injury was a factor, but you still have to win against an injured player (in your first grand slam final!) and Wawrinka seemed to have pulled off some scintillating play. He did, after all, beat the top two players in the world and, in a way, Federer. Well, well.
