Honestly an almost flawless match from Zverev--and minimally flawed from Shelton! Shelton blew a serve early in the 1st, which Zverev held on to.
But then neither Zeverev nor Shelton blinked in the 2nd set. Zverev rather easily took the tie break but Shelton was still very much alive.
Zverev had one bad serve late in the 3rd set, which Shelton capitalized on.
But early in the 4th Shelton gave a break to Zverev, then flailed toward the end in a manner that seemingly caused Zverev to lose track of the score.
Not a lot to say on this match except that this shows the point-by-point nature of tennis: it looks like Zverev cruised or dominated but, not at all. Shelton was really good, he made a handful of mistakes, whereas Zverev really only had the one broken serve. Tennis is tough, man, these guys were actually super close but Zverev was nearly perfect. Zverev is really putting his stamp on the title of best of the post-Federer/Nadal/Djokovic era.
The only other US Open I caught was Tiafoe beating Medvedev. I like Tiafoe, hell of an athlete, but I always wondered if he was good at tennis, if he really had it in him to to take the next step against the top tier players. Well, from what I saw of his match against Medvedev, I believe Tiafoe can rise up. In fact, I'm surprised Shelton beat him in the semifinals.
Chwalinska was the talk of the tourney, a qualifier who managed to fustigate everyone she played all the way to the Final. Her gimmick is that she's really good at taking the speed out of the ball, controlling the pace to give herself the best opportunities to find winners. But I had a feeling this strategy wasn't gonna work against Andreeva (indeed, this is one of most predictable matches I've seen in ages). Why? Because well....(to say this about a boy is pure compliment, but about a girl, it feels kinda icky, but)...Andreeva's young and dumb. She didn't realize she was supposed to be hypnotized by Chwalinska's magic, so she just pummeled her instead. Along the way everyone was treating Chwalinksa like a puzzle to be solved, but I figured Andreeva was only going to see her as a less talented competitor (which she is) and would steamroll over her (which she pretty much did). It did take Andreeva a coupla games early on to get the feel of the match but once she found her legs, it was over, Chwalinska had no answer for Andreeva's control and power.
Worth mentioning: (1) Sabalenka is still the best...until she flames out. Here she flamed out in the quarters to (25) Shnaider, who is a nice player, but there's no reason that she should bagel Sabalenka in the 3rd set, except that Sabalenka bageled herself. Shnaider then went on to get hypnotized by Chwalinska in the semis. (*) Would Sabalenka have beaten Chwalinska and then Andreeva? Well, as long as she didn't flame out, I think she would have. Point being: only Sabalenka can beat Sabalenka right now (she dispatched (16) Osaka in the 4th round without much effort), so she's gotta be the fave for Wimbledon. But I was impressed with Andreeva and I think she went up a level, so I'll be keeping an eye on her.
(10) Cobolli 1/6/4/7/1 - 6/4/6/6/6 (2) Zverev
I thought Cobolli and Zverev were the two best players throughout the tourney, thought Zverev was the only one that could beat Cobolli after watching Cobolli destroy the American (18) Tien, who just couldn't do anything against him. To be fair, it did feel like Cobolli was playing the best tennis of his life, but he looked quite comfortable on the red clay and even got a freebie in the semis when Arnaldi retired without firing a shot. The story of the tourney besides the finalists was the wrist injury that forced Alcaraz to withdraw before the tourney began and the early upsets that knocked out (1) Sinner and (3) Djokovic, who must've thought they'd be seeing each other after Alcaraz disappeared, but neither of them made it too far.
As for the Final itself, Cobolli started slow, then recovered nicely in the 2nd set. I thought Cobolli would take the 3rd, too, but Zverev got the break and made it stick. Cobolli was up a break through most of the 4th set, but couldn't hold it, then went down early in the tiebreak, but rallied and finished it out (after a heartbreaking whiff on Set Point #1). Felt like Cobolli was on a roll, but not so much. He failed to ride the momentum and Zverev finished off the 5th set rather easily. Cobolli made a game of it and had a hell of a tourney, but Zverev's length and power were too much to overcome and it led to his first Grand Slam. Good run for Cobolli, great win for Zverev. (**)
(*) In the quarters, Chwalinska beat (22) Kalinskaya and I swear you could see the wheels turning in Kalinskaya's head: you could tell she was saying to herself 'I'm better than this chick, why can't I beat her!' Shnaider, too, in the semis was a ball of frustration. Chwalinska's mesmerism was on point but I think it was uniquely suited to Roland Garros, I don't see her being a factor in Wimbledon or the US.
(**) I believe Alcaraz has already withdrawn from Wimbledon, too, so Zverev might be coming in as the popular favorite. Curious to see if Cobolli can keep it going on grass. Keep an eye on (26) Mensik, who lost to Zverev in the semis, and (28) Fonseca, who looks ready to make a leap. And will Sinner, Shelton and Djokovic be ready after bowing out early in Roland Garros?
Sabalenka wasn't wildly better than Navarro on this night, but she was better enough. Sabalenka went up a break in the 1st and rode it to win the set. Then she went up a break in the 2nd, faltered when serving for the match (which bummed me out because I was hoping to skip off to catch the Ravens-Chiefs kickoff) and for a minute it felt like she was going to let the whole thing get away from her. But she pulled it together, got the match to a tie break and then breezed to victory (which she could've just as easily done 20 minutes earlier). As for Navarro, this was her first major semifinal and while she's a nice player, I'm not sure I really saw anything to make me think she's going to be a semifinal regular or anything. Always liked Sabalenka, on her best day she's a tough out, but she's (I'll say it) Russian and therefore an unpredictable head case and on her bad days can flame out Hindenburg-style. (The final has a real Rocky IV vibe to it, huh?)
(6) Pegula 1/6/6 - 6/4/2 Muchova
Dang, the first set was over so quick, I barely saw it. Seemed like Muchova was in the driver's seat, then all of a sudden she wasn't. Not really sure what happened, Pegula found her game and stuck to it and Muchova just couldn't hang. Nice run for Muchova but she wasn't built to win this tourney, though I was impressed how easily she dispatched Paolini in the Round of 16.
(6) Pegula 5/5 - 7/7 (2) Sabalenka
Sabalenka is the better player, bigger game, better talent but....she's dying to blow it. So the opportunity for Pegula was to just stay on track and take advantage of Sabalenka's breakdown. Well, didn't happen in the 1st set, Sabalenka went up a break, then gave it back, but turned it on late and won the set. In the 2nd, Pegula got up a break early but Sabalenka unpredictably cranked it up, got her break back and rode the momentum to take the title (which suggests that Sabalenka keeps it together better when she's coming from behind?). Pegula is a nice player but I don't see the little extras to put her over the top--but she did take out Swiatek rather easily, which is maybe the most impressive match of the whole tourney. so.... Sabalenka is one of the best in the world right now, but again, she is a moody player and totally capable of giving it away. But she didn't here, she stayed strong, made the most of her opportunities, overcame her mistakes and looked pretty damn good doing this. Curious to see if she rides this momentum into next season.
Men's
(1) Sinner 7/7/6 - 5/6/2 (25) Draper
Didn't get to see this, as my computer glitched while I was trying to catch the replay and I ended up catching the very end instead. Oh well, just two of the best, most exciting players in the world, I'm sure it was no big deal.
(12) Fritz 4/7/4/6/6 - 6/5/6/4/1 (20) Tiafoe
I like Tiafoe, hell of an athlete, but I'm not sure he's good at tennis. He makes up in power what he lacks in mobility---almost! And that's what I mean: he doesn't have the ability to recover that the tippy top players have. He's got amazing strength and has the impressive ability to pick his spots (shows a real intuitive knowledge of the game) as well as anyone I've seen in ages, but I just don't think he's got that last little skill that the greats have. If we were to put in him the top tier right now, I'd put him at the very bottom: good enough to tromp over the lower tiers, but probably not good enough to get past the giants. As for Fritz, I like his game and while he doesn't have Tiafoe's strength or showmanship, I do think he possesses the intangibles to firmly ensconce him in the upper tier. This match was glorious back and forth action for the first 4 sets, felt like the 5th was gonna be an all timer. But, then, outta nowhere, Tiafoe just...I dunno what happened to him, he just couldn't finish any more and he totally lost his serve (his one game was a break, where Fritz tripped over himself serving for the match). I don't know what happened and while I think the overall outcome was pretty much correct, a 5th set tiebreak may well have bounced in the other direction. I like Tiafoe, fun to watch, a tough out, but I think he's a quarterfinals kinda guy (we'll see). Fritz has his shot at the championship, Sinner ain't be easy.
(1) Sinner 6/6/7 - 3/4/5 (12) Fritz
Yeah, that's about right. Sinner is the best in the world right now (I suppose Alcaraz would disagree, but I stand by it) and Fritz is a nice up-and-comer, but he ain't exactly ready to win a Major just yet. Sinner took control early and breezed through the first two sets. Fritz was up a break in the 3rd and just couldn't hold it together, Sinner surged back and reminded everyone why he is the #1 seed right now. I like Fritz, I think he has room to get better and I think he'll be around for the next few years. But Sinner is full-on ready to put Djokovic out to pasture and for the foreseeable future it is up to Alcaraz to dual the top dog, with Fritz and the rest waiting for the crumbs.
Sabalenka opened the semifnal match in full fury mode to take a break right away from Gauff. My mantra: the Russians in tennis have big talent and big blowups (e: big game but big headcase) and early on Sabalenka was using her power to push Gauff out of her comfort zone. But as the 1st set wore on, it felt like Gauff was making better use of Sabalenka's fury than Sabalenka was and Gauff was able to get the break back and take it to a tiebreak. Then the surprise happened: rather than completely falling apart, Sabalenka showed great discipline through the tiebreak and took the 1st set. From there it felt over to me, it did not feel like Gauff was gonna come back and when Sabalenka went up a break in the 2nd, it didn't feel like Sabalenka was going to blow it. Sabalenka at her best is maybe the most talented in all of women's tennis right now, but she melts down, too, and Gauff is the kind of hardnosed competitor than can take advantage when Sabalenka flails. That scenario was on the table but Sabalenka played with wisdom and used her talent instead of her fury to play a successful match. I love Gauff, she moves like a cat out there, and she's got the mind of a savvy veteran (though she looks like a little kid--a very muscular little kid!), and she's still got a lot ahead of her. But Sabalenka played well here and didn't make the big mistakes and when she does that, she's probably the best in the world right now.
Yastremska 4/4 - 6/6 (12) Zheng
The Ukrainian-born Yastremska had some good moments early on, but she looked to be in over her head pretty quick. She rose up from the qualifiers, meaning she played an extra week of hard tennis and I think her body just wore out and whatever zing her game had, it just wasn't semifinal quality. Zheng just looked cooler in return and her defensive style allowed her to keep so many rallies going that Zheng played herself into having more opportunities than Yastremska could ever get for herself. Nice run for Yastremska, but Zheng was the better player. Zheng's ability to defend so well will give her a real chance against Sabalenka in the final: the key is to keep rallies going and let Sabalenka frustrate herself.
(12) Zheng 3/2 -6/6 (2) Sabalenka
Zheng has a great ability to play defense, to place her returns in a variety of places and paces. I thought if she could just fight off Sabalenka's physical strength and play some frustrating defense, then it was certainly possible that Sabalenka was lose her shit and Zheng might have a shot at an upset. But, no. Sabalenka played a very mellow brand of tennis and won convincingly and quickly. Good run for the defending champ, I really do think Sabalenka is the best in the world right now (when she keeps it together).
Men's
(1) Djokovic 1/2/7/3 - 6/6/6/6 (4) Sinner
Wow, haven't seen Djokovic get handled like this in a long long time. Sinner (and Alcaraz) can beat Djokovic, there are a few guys at the top that can hang and maybe steal a victory from Djoker, but Sinner can go toe-to-toe with Djokovic and beat him at his own game. Not to say that all is lost for Djokjovic, but this is what Djokovic did to Federer back in the day: provide him a formidable opponent, not just a guy good enough to get lucky. Sinner took Djokovic's first two service games--stunning!--and then went up early again in the 2nd set. Djokovic came to life in the 3rd set (too late) but he drove Sinner to a tiebreak and suddenly it felt like maybe a titanic Djokovic comeback was in the offing. But, no, that went away pretty quick in the 4th and Sinner cruised to victory. Good match but really only because we saw the giant get bested--again, its not over for Djokovic, he's still better than just about everyone else on earth. But he's not the only predator in the jungle anymore, he's got real competition now and we'll see how much hardware he can steal on his way out.
(3) Medvedev 5/3/7/7/6 - 7/6/6/6/3 (6) Zverev
I couldn't get through this one. I knew it was gonna be at least a 4-hour match and I just knew I wouldn't be able to sustain. Zverev took the first two sets and even though I knew there was a long way to go, I retired thinking he would be the victor. Nope. Medvedev came back from 2 sets down and now, of course, I wish I'd watched more of it. Both of these guys are nice but both are too self-destructive to be able to get it done. Does Sinner just beat Djokovic or does he beat the other guys, too? I'm betting he does, won't be easy, but I think Sinner takes Medvedev.
(4) Sinner 3/3/6/6/6- 6/6/4/4/3 (3) Medvedev
Medvedev is a defensive player, a grinder, a snake in the grass that seeks to survive and wear opponents down; but, whoa, that's not at all how he came to play in this Final. He attacked Sinner's serve early and often and two breaks in each of the first two sets. I know it was still going to be a long match (I believe Medvedev set the record for most sets in a single Major tourney), but I felt like Medvedev was still in his comfrort zone and ready to play a long game. But his return kinda disappeared and his ability to keep rallies going just didn't make for any momentum turns for him. Sinner was shellshocked early on, but he kept his head and the 3rd set he got his serve working. I feel bad for Medvedev, this was his best shot at winning another Major and though he came out with an innovative game plan that had early success, he still can't get an audience to get on his side. Tough break. But great win for Sinner, this will not be his last Major, I'm guessing.
Medvedev never seemed ready to be in this match, he dropped his first serve and that was pretty much that. He rallied to a tie-break in the 2nd set and I thought he was going to take it, then on set point it was like he was forgot he was playing tennis or something, just flaked away his last service and it was all over. Then in the 3rd he put up no effort at all. Djokoic is so effortlessly awesome that we just assume he's going to win all the time but I think Alcaraz would've pushed him (as he did at Wimbledon), whereas Medvedev already looked as if he'd lost from the jump. Kinda lame Final really, since Alcaraz was watching on TV instead of hoisting the trophy.
(1) Alcaraz 6/1/6/3 - 7/6/3/6 (3) Medvedev
Wow, I was shocked when Medvedev won that first set tie-break, it just felt like Alcaraz was going to roll up over him pronto, but Medvedev hung tight and was able to steal the tiebreak. Then Alcaraz fell asleep to start the 2nd set and Medvedev was in the driver's seat. Alcaraz is the man right now, not sure why he flamed out so badly here because he was dominating early on, faltered, gave away a set and then was too deep in the hole to rally. I think he had a good shot at hanging with Djokovic in the final, not sure what happened against Medvedev because he should've won this match.
Shelton 3/2/6 - 6/6/7 (2) Djokovic
I watched Shelton in his Round of 16 match and was impressed with his power game (BIG serve!) but in that match mostly what I noticed was how badly his opponent flailed. So when it came time for the young American upstart to go up against Djokovic, I didn't give him much of a chance. And Djokovic didn't either. He was spunky enough to get a 3rd set tie-break (nice work), but that was too little, too late. Shelton is interesting but I can't help thinking he overachieved this year and probably isn't quite ready to hit the top ten just yet.
Women's
(6) Gauff 2/6/6 - 6/3/2 (2) Sabalenka
Sabalenka doomed herself with way too many unforced errors, if she could've stopped spraying her returns and stayed within the lines, I think she would've overpowered Gauff. But Sabalenka was wild, Gauff was measured and stayed within her game plan and though I think Gauff arrived here a little early, she is now a Major champion. Good for her! She's got real star power, a total cutie, amazing athlete, slyly good serve and her lateral quickness is going to keep her deep in tournaments for years to come. I think right here, right now Sabalenka is the more talented player, but in this Final she couldn't keep her game together (Russians, man, I'm just sayin'...) and I'm curious to see if Sabalenka can get back to the top (I'd say 50/50).
(6) Gauff 6/7 - 4/5 (10) Muchova
Gauff was the better player, Muchova is a nice player but just doesn't have the quickness or staying power that Gauff possesses. Gauff was really impressive here, just sticking to her plan and getting it done.
(17) Keys 6/6/6 - 0/7/7 (2) Sabalenka
I missed the first set, Sabalenka obviously had trouble getting started. But once she got going, Keys just couldn't keep up. Keys is a nice player but I think she was over her skis in this semifinal.
I caught almost none of the French this year and that's too bad. Grand Slam tennis is always good and without a clear female fave and no Nadal on the other side meant that this year's French was wide open and worth catching. Oh well, I saw both Finals, so not a total loss.
(1) Swiatek 6/5/6 - 2/7/4 (NR) Muchova
Swiatek is a hell of a player but, you know, she doesn't have any signature moves, there's no real transcendence to her game, she's just all-round good at everything. And as for Muchova, she played steady, whereas I was expecting her to be emotional, spotty, up and down, she really wasn't any of that. She was consistent and played hard and smart all the way through and it almost worked for her. Swiatek was the better player but she had moments of doubt and she was the one who had ups and downs.
I hesitate to say Swiatek didn't play her best, I suspect this mostly good/but occasionally out of sorts is who she is. Muchova played well--really well--but just couldn't match Swiatek's best effort. Swiatek is an interesting champ because I feel like she can hang anywhere with anyone, but she can also fritter away her best chances and probably could be had by even an unranked no-name if she has an extended braindead period. That said, Swiatek is #1 for a reason and I could also see her dominating the women's game for a few more years.
(3) Djokovic 7/6/7 - 6/3/5 (4) Ruud
Early on, I thought Djokovic looked a little rusty and when Ruud went up a break early in the 1st, I really felt like Ruud would hold it and take the set. But, it didn't happen. Ruud was good but just couldn't maintain his composure, I just kept waiting for Ruud to pull it together but when he let the 1st set get to a tiebreak, I knew it was probably over for him. Then in the 2nd set, felt like Ruud was gonna go full Richie Tannenbaum melt down and he just never got his fight back in him. 3rd set, too, I was wondering if Ruud would pull it together and he didn't.
As for Djokovic, he was loose and free, playing with house money, nothing to lose, just went out there and played his game, kept the audience from cheering for the underdog and like your roommate's pet python, Djokovic slowly wrapped himself around anyone that might want some of the oxygen he was hoarding.
Another great W for the GOAT (*), though I really felt like Ruud had a chance--not a big one, but the path to steal the first set was there and he couldn't stay on it.
(*) Oh yeah, I made my peace with it a while ago, Djokovic is the all-time greatest tennis player of all-time (**).
Djokovic is still the man. Last year he was booted out of the tournament for not bowing down to Covid nonsense (hold on to your history books, kids, the greatest irrational panic of the last century or so was in full effect in the sports world back then), so this year he seemed extra incentivized to whomp the shit out of everyone and that's what he did. He only dropped 1 set in the entire tourney (a 2nd set tiebreak to a qualifier!) and even though it feels like the next crop of talent is ready to step up (hmmm., seems like Americans are playing tennis again though the future seems to be Russian (*)), Djokovic is still the best in the biz.
My favorite match that I saw was in the round of 16 where Rublev defeated Rune in 5 sets. Man, keep an eye on Rune: he's definitely not completely in control of his powers (yanked a lot of balls into the 5th row), but when he gets around on a ball--holy shit! That kid hits rockets! If you've got ESPN+ and wanna see some top quality tennis, the 5th set of this one was NCAA tournament-quality nail biting entertainment. (https://www.espn.com/espnplus/player/_/id/19fdbaf5-b5cf-4dc0-be0d-486999e0b601)
#5 Sabalenka over #22 Rybakina in 3
I only caught random Ladies' matches, but I saw Sabalenka a few times: big hitter, good game but like most Russians (**), when she gets down on herself, she gets doooooowwwwwnnnn, which is precisely what keeps her from dominating like she could. Didn't see the Final but I was impressed with Rybakina's performance over Azarenka in the semis. Nice run from Pliskova and Azarenka to remind us that they're still capable of getting big wins.
Saw a random smattering of the Aussie this year, wish I'd seen more.
(*) Or at least I think they're Russian. Now that we don't have Covid to panic about any more, we've moved to pretending like ignoring the Russian flag is how wars get won. I'd like to think that level headed objectivity will return to civilization but it might take a while.
(**) It's okay to root for Sabalenka, she at least has the good taste to pretend like she's not from Moscow, which I guess that makes her acceptable....but is she vaccinated....? Has she jumped through all possible pointless hoops for acceptance?
Fun match! I didn't see much of the Ladies' side this year but I doubt I would've paid much attention to either of these girls anyway because they were both such crazy long shots, so just as well that I missed it. Fernandez was the crowd favorite who came out of nowhere to win everyone's hearts but all I saw was the Final and I gotta say: holy balls, she looks like a little child! She looks like she should be selling candy bars so her middle school soccer team can go to the state finals. The crowd (including Steve Nash) was clearly rooting for her. She moves well, big hitter, great footwork, I think she's got a future. But I was blown away by Raducanu--she's the shit! First qualifier to ever win the US Open and I don't think she's done. I was impressed with Fernandez, but Raducanu was legit better at every phase of the game. She's top ten right now. And considering the standard bearer on the women's side is Ashleigh Barty, who probably has the most all-around talent but just does not get it done in the Finals, I think Raducanu can be the next big big big star. I would be surprised if this was her last major. Great match, a lot of fun, the crowd was totally into it, always great to see new faces and I think both Fernandez and Raducanu are gonna have staying power (which should elevate this particular Final to an all-time classic).
(2) Medvedev 6/6/6 - 4/4/4 (1) Djokovic
Yipes! I don't remember the last time I saw Djokovic just get roasted like a hog before....yeah, I've never seen that happen. Djokovic was weird all through this tournament, kept dropping sets when normally he's just a robot that crushes all comers, so I don't know what kind of funk he was in. But the fact that he was not exactly at his best in this tourney and still made the Finals (even eviscerating Zverev in the semifinal), just shows what an unholy badass he is. But, man, Medvedev came to play--and he was talking shit, whooping up the crowd, staring Djoker down--and Djokovic couldn't smooth talk his way back into this. Wow, it's amazing how far off the baseline Medvedev was hanging--holy shit, when he was in the near court, you couldn't even see him on the TV broadcast! I'm amazed that that strategy worked. You would think a craftsman like Djokovic could find the holes (he was definitely pumping drop shots whenever possible, but it wasn't enough), but Medvedev is just a such a big dude, he was tracking everything down. I like watching Medvedev, the way he unfolds as he takes his shots is funny to watch (reminds me of Utah's Joe Ingles). Is Djokovic done? Is Medvedev ready to de-throne him (seems like Zverev has shown that he is not)? We'll see, it could be Meevedev's for the foreseeable future. Good match, even Djokovic at half strength still makes for great tennis.
Weird roller coaster of a match. Krejcikova is the young upstart, Pavlyuchenkova is the wily veteran who hasn't had much success since she was the young upstart ten years ago. Krejcikova is unranked, Pavlyuchenkova was ranked #31 (and I thought the rankings only went to #30), so no one saw this coming. (1) Ashley Barty and (2) Naomi Osaka (*) both bailed, Serena looks to be finally spent, and the two finalists knocked out a number of ranked opponents along the way.
Pavlyuchenkova broke Krejcikova on the first serve, then gave it right back and then gave away her next serve and her next and the 1st set was quickly over and this felt like it might be a boat race.
But Pavlyuchenkova came out angry in the 2nd set (Russians, man), roamed the baseline like a caged animal, started hitting with ferocity and went up 5-1 and looking ahead, the 3rd set was gonna be interesting. But, wait! Pavlyuchenkova came up gimpy (grabbing her groin like Anthony Davis), faltered as she was serving for the set and then took an extended trainer time out. Suddenly the 2nd set that looked like a walkover was back in play. But Krejcikova didn't take advantage, gave up her serve and it's all down to the 3rd set.
In the 3rd set Krejcikova's strategy seemed obvious to me: run Pavlyuchenkova from side to side then sneak in drop shots for winners, repeat six times, collect trophy. I think Krejcikova had the right idea but it took her a while to execute and felt like Pavlyuchenkova was gonna wily-vet her way back into this match. But Krejcikova got her bearings and shut her down for the victory (and one of the most muted, waiting to exhale championship reactions I've ever seen). Good W for the youngster, this should vault her into the rankings and get a fresh bullseye on her back at Wimbledon, no? And does Pavlyuchenkova have another major run in her this summer? We'll see.
(5) Tsitsipas 7/6/3/2/4 - 6/2/6/6/6 (2) Djokovic
Oh, man, some brilliant five set tennis right here. I missed the 1st set, entering just as they were going to tiebreak. In tennis I root for 1) a longer match and 2) the underdog. So in the 1st set I was pleased to see Tsitsipas grab control.
In the 2nd set, Tsitsipas broke Djoker early and I gotta say: I've never Djokovic just give up on a set before. He went, 'meh, fuck it' and just dribbled out the clock because he knew it was going five sets.
In the 3rd set, Djoker put on a clinic: he knew exactly which game he wanted and he moved heaven and earth to win that break (how many deuces? 6? 7? I dunno, that game went on forever). Tsitsipas was still in it but the momentum flipped right there and he was never able to flip it back.
Djokovic rolled over him in the 4th, went up on early break in the 5th and it was over. Felt bad for Tsitsipas, he played so well early on but just could not sustain it once Djokovic got tuned in.
Mary Carillo said at one point what I had already been pondering: I guess it's time to say Djokovic is the all-time GOAT. He really is, man, he's won everywhere, he's beat everyone, and he's done it while being squeezed out by the more popular fanbases of Nadal and Federer. But beating Nadal at Roland-Garros and pulling off the five-set comeback just makes it obvious. Djokovic is better than those dudes and those dudes were the two best of all-time.
It didn't me long at all to think Federer was the GOAT, he was anointed as such fairly early in his career and I never questioned it. But with Djokovic this thought has been in the back of my head for a few years now and I cannot account for why it took me so long to get here. Factor in the insanely long and productive careers of the two dudes that he has bested and frankly it's pretty obvious: Djokovic is the all time greatest.
(*) The big splash of this year's French Open (well, at least since that match fixing scandal didn't take hold in the American media) was Naomi Osaka refusing to do press conferences citing "depression" and then withdrawing completely--though I never understood why. She agreed to pay the Roland Garros-imposed fines, so why did she have to split? Look, the ATP/WTA wants as much publicity as they can get for their events and that means trying to turn these players into int'l celebrities and that means sucking up to the media whenever possible.
Media-driven fame is pretty much an unavoidable component for something like a tennis competition and the players not trying to be famous is really not an option; players used to like being famous but I can certainly understand kids today avoiding the whole mess (says the guy who has yet to identify himself after more than 14 years of writing this blog). But what if the players don't need the media to be famous? What if the players can generate all the following and sponsorships they need from their own social media platforms without ever giving themselves over to scrutiny from out of touch old farts that still run the mainstream media?
This isn't a sign that the French Open is in danger, it is a sign that NBC Sports is in danger. Or, at least, that the paradigm of how fans and celebrities interact is evolving rapidly. Personally, I adore the French Open and I hope it continues; but between you and me, if NBC Sports dropped dead tomorrow, I doubt I'd notice or care. The medium is the message and the message is that the media is swallowing itself.
I didn't see any of the ladies' final but I did see a little of each of these players earlier in the tournament. I thought (14) Muguruza had Osaka beat in the 4th round: she was up a break in the 3rd, felt like she was cruising, but I kept thinking this Osaka girl gets to every ball--she returns everything! Sure enough, Osaka pulled some Jedi mind shit, got her break back and swept the last three games when Muguruza was serving for the match. Nice. Osaka is the shit, I was not surprised she housed Serena, nor was I shocked by the final over Brady.
I watched Brady over Pegula in the Quarters, but honestly I thought Pegula was the better player. Brady made timely plays but I felt like Pegula faltered more than Brady bested her. I will say Brady looked pretty good in the highlights I saw of the Final, she looked intense and engaged and made some plays. But Osaka is the shit right now, no shame in going down to her.
I was surprised Serena dispatched Halep so easily in the quarters and that Barty fell to Muchova. I watched Muchova beat Pliskova and I was impressed because I was expecting Pliskova (back to back Aussie semifinals) to make a run, but Muchova controlled the match, probably should've made the Final. Barty strikes me as quite capable of winning big matches, she's got a no-nonsense quality and competitive spirit that seems well built for deep runs, but she is allergic to the Aussie, I don't get it.
Dudes
(1) Djokovic 7/6/6 - 5/2/2 (4) Medvedev
The first set was fun, Djokovic went up a break early, Medvedev got it back, but then faltered late and Djoker stole it from him. Felt like it was gonna be a match, though, especially when Medvedev took a quick break in the second; then Djokovic turned it on, got his break back, then another, and it was pretty much over right there. Medvedev started looking to his wife and muttering out loud from that point on and he was out of it. (Can I say something racist? Russians, man, big talent but they go out like Richie Tanenbaum every time) Medvedev is a helluva player but Djokovic is strengthening his grip on GOAT status (yeah, I think I'm there, he's better then Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker--best I ever saw), and Medvedev's unraveling made this a relatively easy tourney for Djokovic.
I also watched Djokovic in the semis against Karatsev, fun player (qualifier got all the way to the semis), but you could see right away that he just wasn't gonna beat Djokovic. Karatsev was a qualifier that smoked his way through (8) Schwartzman, (18) Dmitrov and (20) Auger-Alisiama but you could tell right away that Djokovic was gonna stomp this guy. Going through (6) Zverev and (14) Raonic was enough to get Djoker up to speed, but avoiding (3) Thiem, (7) Rublev and (2) Nadal pretty much handed him the trophy.
I watched Medvedev over (5) Tsitsipas in the semis and I gotta say: Tsitsipas had the win of the tourney coming back from two sets to beat Nadal, but I wasn't impressed with him at all in the semis. Felt like Medvedev was in control throughout the match. I also watched Medvedev over (7) Rublev in the quarters and, uh, yeah, Rublev was even more Baumer than Medvedev was in that one.
Nice to have tennis back, I was skeptical and this tourney got off to a shaky start, but once they got going this was good fun.
This type of bratty meltdown is par for the course for Kyrgios, a massively talented player but clearly a headcase kinda guy (reminds me of Marat Safin). This may look like a 'feel-good' moment but this isn't cool. For the ref to take an interest in one of the players is not part of his mission. I would be surprised if this umpire isn't suspended for at least the rest of this tourney. As for Kyrgios, he needs to get his head together on his own, I doubt he'll find any chair umpires that take this level of interest in him ever again.
Federer and Nadal....five sets....oh man....just....jeez....wow....god damn good day to love tennis. I don't even know what to say. What a brilliant way to start the 2017 sports season.
Kerber over Pliskova. It felt early on like Kerber was gonna run Pliskova out of the stadium, then Pliskova got it together and felt like she was gonna get it done. But Kerber had a solid push at the end of the 3rd set to take the championship. Pretty good final, went back and forth. The semis were the only other women's matches I watched this year: Kerber whooping unranked Wozniacki; and Pliskova over Serena (like Duke basketball, always a pleasure to watch Serena lose). Kerber looks good but not unbeatable, it's a good time for women's tennis.
Wawrinka over Djokovic. Oh, good stuff! Wawrinka dropped his opening serve, looked real nervous early on and it felt like Djokovic was gonna steam roll him. Djokovic had two walkovers leading up to this so he was fresh while Wawrinka had gut check matches against Nishikori and Del Potro (he played hard but I reckon that's the last we'll ever see of Del Potro) in the quarters and semis. (I'd like to go back and see Djokovic's match with Monfils in the semis, apparently Monfils was fucking with him pretty hard) I guess being tested worked in his favor. Wawrinka was able to get his break back, then crumbled in the tie break. But he was able to take the 2nd and then outlasted Djok in a marathon 3rd set and I knew it was over. I missed the 4th set, Djok had a controversial medical delay but Wawrinka seemed cool with it. Good match, good win for Wawrinka.
Murray over Raonic
Gotta hand it to Raonic: he battled. He has perhaps the best serve in the game right now, unfortunately for him Murray is perhaps the best returner in the game right now. Federer gets to every ball by good defensive play, Nadal gets to every ball by hustling like a maniac, Djokovic gets to every ball because he has a Gretzky-like sense of just knowing where every ball is gonna go but Murray gets to every ball because he is a giant crazy octopus-man who is never far away from anything on the court. He had the home court advantage (no love for the plucky underdog Roanic when up against a Brit at Wimbledon, sorry dude) and came into the Final rolling. Man, once Djokovic went out it was up for grabs but I thought only Federer could beat Murray. Murray is your Wimbeldon champion and a well deserved Slam for him.
Murray over Berdych
Berdych is good but he has that malady that top ten tennis players often suffer from: he's better than 99% of the planet at tennis but not that last 1%. (I think Ferrer, Tsonga and Gasquet are in that camp, as well, which is where Andy Roddick spent the bulk of his career) Berdych is a good athlete, good serve, good return, moves well around the court but tennis is a game of big plays and I just never felt like against Murray Berdych was gonna get any of those big plays. Murray had him stifled early and that was that.
Raonic over Federer
Raonic won the 1st set, Federer won the 2nd and then the 3rd. Then an interesting thing happened in the 4th set: Federer had his break chances but just couldn't take advantage and both players seemed resigned for a tie-break, when all of the sudden, Raonic stepped up and surprised Federer on his last serve and stole the 4th set from him. You could tell Federer never quite got over that moment and he floundered badly in the 5th. Raonic broke him early in the 5th and even though it felt like Federer would have a moment or two to put it on Raonic, he never really challenged him. Federer has this thing where he is such a super genius of tennis that he can see 4 or 5 steps ahead in the future and every once in a while he looks ahead and realizes he's lost. Federer's not the fighter he once was and if he can't win by playing the cleanest, neatest tennis on the planet (the Edberg-i-est tennis), then he just doesn't even wanna win. Federer is still a step ahead of Berdych and Gasquet, et al., but he doesn't have that fire any more and falters at the oddest times. This was (perhaps) his last best chance to win another Slam.
Serena over Kerber
This was a very even match coming down to a handful of points (as is often the case in high level tennis). Serena made the plays and Kerber did not. Kind of a mirrors of Kerber's defeat of Venus in the semis: Kerber made the plays that Venus couldn't make. Serena is still the best but there's a lot more competition out there for her these days than there was in the past. Kerber is a comer and was lucky enough to be born long enough after the Williams sisters that she seems on her way to having the great tennis career that Serena has mostly kept everyone else from having.
The Australian Open is maybe my favorite tennis event of the year. Unfortunately, on the East Coast its on at 3am making it tough to watch live and tough to stay away from to watch tape delayed; fortunately, I've been putting my insomnia to good use and I got to catch the semifinal matches.
Djokovic over Federer in 4 sets
Man, Federer is only slightly worse than his decade-ago peak when he flat mooshed everyone he played (except for Nadal in Paris). Nadal stepped up his game and Federer went from penceled-in champ of every Grand Slam to quarterfinal-at-best also ran....except that he didn't. Federer is still easily a top 5 player in the world of tennis and he still mooshes most everyone he plays to breeze into the semifinals. Swept Berdych (#6), crushed Goffin (#15), dropped a single set to Dmitrov (#27), Federer is still rolling, man, still beating top ranked talent with ease. But Djokovic is a robot, gets to every ball, as smooth as Federer in his prime with the athleticism of Nadal in his prime. The first two sets went to Djokovic without much effort and it looked like the rout was on. But Federer finally snuck a break in the 3rd and the fans went nuts (tennis fans always love the guy they forgot to love at his peak). But, man, I ain't gonna lie: even when Federer got his break, I still thought Djok would break him back and take the tiebreaker. Fed held on but couldn't get it going in the 4th. Djokovic is the man right now, he doesn't dominate exactly, he wears people down with his grueling intensity. Federer is still mostly untouchable (Wawrinka and Murray can push him but no one else really) but he can't beat Djokovic, who's learned everything about being the best from Federer. Even though Federer probably won't win another major, he's still piling up impressive wins, going deeps in all four slams year after year even after Roddick, Davydenko and Nadal have long since fallen back.
Murray over Raonic in 5
Tennis is a game of inches. The match took almost 4 hours but it all comes down to 3 games: Murray dropped his 1st serve handing the 1st set to Raonic; Raonic had a brain freeze in the 2nd set, which propelled Murray back to form; Raonic lost his cool in the 4th set, which gave the momentum back to Murray. Raonic couldn't make a push in the 5th and Murray put it on him. The other 4 sets were basically a draw. Raonic impressed me but he let Murray get into his head when he challenged a call in the 2nd set, even though he won the call (seemed like he won every replay challenge in this match), Murray complained about Raonic's slow poke challenge and Raonic never quite seemed the same after that. Murray is a solid player but not vastly better than Raonic and if Raonic can keep his head together (always a tall order for tennis players), he should surge up to the top five this season.
I gotta go with Djokovic in the final. Murray's length will keep him in the match but Djok gets to every ball--EVERY ball--and I just don't think Murray has enough to knock him off. Then again, Murray only needs to capitalize on 3 or 4 chances and the Slam is his. I'll say Djokovic in 4 sets.
I was able to see: Wawrinka over Federer in 4, Djokovic over Nadal in 3, Murray over Ferrer in 4.
Odd to me that Wawrinka, the poor man's Federer, is good enough to beat the real Federer. Federer has a way of still looking like the better player even when he's losing. Wawrinka is playing well, he's got a puncher's chance.
The first set of Djokovic-Nadal was an epic battle: Djo breaks Rafa early, Rafa breaks back, Djo saves the set in a tie-break. After that Djokovic just looked better, Nadal got no luck at all. Down two sets, Nadal didn't have the energy to get it to a fifth set. Djokovic's ability to get to each ball and make at least a decent return has officially now surpassed Nadal's. Weird to see a 5-time defending champ go out so casually but Djokovic is in an Aaron Rodgers phase: his good games look like the best games in the world. He's smart, he's quicker than you think, he's got size and reach, doesn't waste energy. I reckon he's the best left, not that he's invincible but he'll be tough to beat.
Frankly I thought Ferrer was gonna pull it out but Murray made shots. Ferrer gets to every shot (every shot), that's his thing: most guys play offense, he plays defense. But by the fourth set, Ferrer was out of gas. Cilic has a similar game (or body type, at least) to Murray and Ferrer cut him out in straight sets, but Murray made more shots than Cilic did, more than even Ferrer could keep up with. Ferrer either just got Murray's best game or prepared him for his next match against Djokovic....guess we'll find out which. (If you're just a casual fan of tennis, you should check out the first two sets of this match, great stuff. Murray makes shots, Ferrer makes returns, each guy displayed the best of his game in this match. Ignore which one is American or married to a Kadashian, forget the politics and just watch the game of tennis get played at a high high level. Good stuff)
Didn't get to see the 5-set thriller between Tsonga and Nishikori, two good young players playing really well right now. Bet it was good. Tsonga goes on to meet Wawrinka in the Semis.
I'll take Djokovic over Murray in 4, Tsonga over Wawrinka in 4. And Djokovic over Tsonga in 3. The Nadal reign is officially over, how long will the Djokovic reign last?
Looking through a list of French Open winners, there are some Finals matches I'd love to nerd out and watch some day: 1999 (Agassi over Medvedev), 1995 (Muster over Chang), 1984 (Lendl over McEnroe), 1981 (Borg over Lendl) and 2005 Semi-final (Nadal over Federer).
When there is no NBA I watch other sports. I had forgotten that about myself.
French Open (Serena over Stephens). Serena did it again: threw a 1st set bone to the young American, let her get right to the edge of winning the 2nd set....then yanked the chain. Normally I would appreciate this dominance but I find her play so un-gentlemanly (and tennis is an English sport), to toy with your opponents is more palatable in a team sport (Jordan or Messi or Gretzky or Kobe to do whatever they like) but becomes cartoonish in a one-on-one sport (Floyd Mayweather, Rowdy Roddy Piper, Shooter McGavin, Ernie 'Big Ern' McCracken). I reckon Serena will take another Slam, I don't know who awaits her but I reckon Serena's better.
German Cup (Wolfsburg 3-1 Dortmund). Dortmund scored early, looked like they were gonna dominate. But it didn't happen. Wolfsburg attacked well, looked more dangerous around the goal and were able to connect on a coupla nice ones.
Spanish Cup (Barcelona 3-1 Atheltico Madrid). Barca was better, Messi is a mathematician, Ahletico had a nice charge late, warded off the clean sheet, but Barca pretty well dominated for the first 75 minutes.
Fred Hoiberg confirmed as the next Bulls coach. Good hire? I guess so. Hoiberg played in the league but he's never coached in the league. If his players love him then I guess that'll be better Thibs and I'm guessing next year they'll have a festive vibe. A fresh face may look at this squad and see a lot of good talent, rather than the last guy who watched his young team get old. The Bulls need a positive outlook and a cohesive plan (they could also use some bench depth), good morale will at least keep the gossip to a minimum. Hoiberg's results may well depend on what the Bulls can pull off this summer or next.
French Open (Federer over Monfils, Ferrer over Cilic). Federer-Monfils was suspended yesterday, so Federer only needed two sets today to finish off Monfils; the vibe between them was playful, Federer's gambits worked, not so for Monfils. Federer is still a helluva player, man, wonder if he can win. Ferrer is an attack dog and that's what Cilic got a face full of today. Ferrer is a hustler, gets to every ball, Cilic had power but didn't have the command to elude Ferrer. (Think I'd like to catch Nishikori-Tsonga tomorrow morning, two good players both playing well right now)
Good lord! I'm watching a Tigers-Angels game from a coupla days ago. I got problems, yo.
FA Cup Final (Arsenal 3-0 Aston Villa). Yeah, never felt like Aston was gonna score. Arsenal didn't exactly dominate the game but they were more dangerous team from beginning to end. (Man, that second goal, yowza!)
French Open Tennis. Azarenka (against Serena) choked away a break in the 2nd and another in the 3rd, can't say anything other than she blew it. Matches like those (when you're on the verge of winning and then Serena effortlessly surges back into the lead), must hurt worse than other losses: Azarenka not only has to live with choking away a winnable match in a Slam but the way Serena let Azarenka feel like she had a chance of winning, just to snap it back, is just cold-hearted and hurtful. Serena Williams is probably my all-time least favorite athlete: I think she's an obnoxious snob on the court and her rudeness to her opponents is all the more egregious because she's clearly better than anyone else that has played in the last 15 years! When she wants to be the best she is clearly the best and has been pretty much since day one. And for her to be such a selfish, angry, demented little brat makes her the quintessential ugly American in my book. (Very rare for me to dis an athlete, the hero/villain dynamic in our entertainment culture rather bores me, that's not what I watch sports for, so I rarely pay attention enough to really dislike anyone; AJ Pierzynski and Bill Romanowski are the only other athletes I can think of that really struck me as awful people)
Rugby 7's. I used to cover rugby back in the day, so I have actually watched and paid attention to rugby in my lifetime, though not for long and not recently. Always liked the game, bummed Americans don't dig it a little more. Dude, we have minor league indoor football, can't we just get into rugby? Its a really cool game. And the way the NCAA plays it is much more fluid than 'real' rugby, much more like backyard football. 'Real' rugby is slower, chippier, more intense, the scrums are Road Warrior-like affairs, and pro rugby players are badass dudes, they've been beat up and stuff, they are not 'studio tough'. So watching these clean cut college kids with spiffy clean jerseys was fun, a bite-sized morsel of sugary rugby rather than a hearty meal of the real thing. I really do like rugby and I'd like to see USA get more competitive in it (its a college sport here, surely we're producing plenty of rugby players) and I'd like to see Americans embrace it more fully. The Rugby 7's is not great stuff but its pretty good stuff and that ain't bad.
Alvin Gentry to the Pelicans. I think Gentry is (or was until Saturday) the best coach in the world not coaching in the NBA. Steve Nash had his best years under Gentry, I think he can be a great coach with the right talent. Personally, I thought he was the best candidate for the Cavs job (if David Blatt should happen to get shivved during the post-game shower), but I guess Gentry wanted to lock up the gig as Anthony Davis's mentor rather than wait for the courtly intrigue to play itself out. Good move for the Pelicans, I think it'll be a good move for Gentry, too. (*sigh* Now Calipari is the only guy that can replace Blatt)
NHL Western Conference Finals (Blackhawks 5-2 Ducks). The Ducks didn't have a single slice of luck in the whole match. Reminded me of watching the Clippers game 7 against the Rockets: no lucky breaks, nothing to build on, felt like they'd lost before they even walked in the arena. The Blackhawks scored early and kept it on the Ducks all the way. Very tight game, thought the Ducks goalie played about as well as he could have (he got no help from that defense in front of him). The Ducks controlled the puck well enough but they're scoring chances (til the 3rd period) were never so scary. The Blackhawks pressed their chances and were able to keep the Ducks backpedaling the whole way.
Way to go, NBC Sports! I know where to go for my Tour de France fix.
