Category: ATP & WTA

How to Play Piss-Poor and Still Reach the Third Round at a Major 101- Course taught by Feliciano Lopez

We have reached the third round stage at the Australian Open, and although the surge in the number of surprise winners in the first days of competition emerged as a major topic of conversation, the title contenders on both women’s and men’s draws have moved forward. Only two of those players, Maria Sharapova and Rafael Nadal, have been in legitimate danger of being ousted by their “lesser” opponents, but both showed why they belong to the elite group of genii in our sport who rise above challenges in ways that others can only imagine. Down a match point twice, Sharapova hit two forehands winners that most other players would only dare to attempt if they were up 5-0 30-0. Nadal overcame violent stomach pains, vomiting on the court, and still found an extra supply of his interminable fighting spirit somewhere deep within him to come back from two-sets-to-one down to win in a battle that lasted over four hours.

This is how these genii operate and that is why they are likely to be there when late next week arrives instead of the emerging group of great players such as Madison Keys, Zarina Diyas, and Caroline Garcia on the women’s side, and Grigor Dimitrov, Milos Raonic, and Nick Kyrgios on the men’s.

The gap between these players and the elite has narrowed, but is still far from disappearing. Even for Eugenie Bouchard and Kei Nishikori, both reaching the finals of one Major each in 2014, the road still seems long before they can step on the same pedestal as the elite few. But this article belongs to one player on the men’s draw who is neither a genius, nor a great up-and-comer. It is about Feliciano Lopez, the veteran who has been around the top 20 for a long time while remaining a nightmare for most top players, and why he is the most unlikely player to still be in the tournament.

First of all, let’s make it very clear: it is not just the four match points saved by Lopez in his first two rounds combined against Denis Kudla and Adrian Mannarino that make his presence in the third round spectacular. It is rather how poorly he has played in those matches and still managed to turn them into victories.

Against Kudla, his first serve, which is usually the driving force for the rest of his game, hovered around the 55% mark throughout the match. It was also only in the mid-portion of the fifth set that (10-8) that the numbers of his winners surpassed that of his unforced errors; and even then, he still had to save three match points in the final stages of the match to survive. He was constantly having to catch up with Kudla’s rhythm, getting outplayed from the baseline, and having to chase the American’s balls down and committing silly errors in his attempts to dig out of that pattern and take charge during the points. Nevertheless, he survived and it could not get any worse for Lopez right? Wrong!

The level of his play dropped even lower against Mannarino. His first serve percentage was this time well below 50% (46% and 43% in the first two sets, respectively) for most of the match. Despite an opponent who kept throwing in double faults at the most inopportune moments, and who did nothing more than return low and bunt the ball back in play, Lopez made mistake after mistake and constantly complained to his corner, in search of answers for the shockingly low quality of shots coming out of his racket. Yes, Lopez did save a match point at 4-6 4-6 4-5, but alone, that does not reflect how lop-sided the match was at times in Mannarino’s favor. The Frenchman was actually up 4-0 in that third set and serving, then 5-3 and 30-0, and finally 3-0 up in the tiebreaker before losing seven points successively to lose the third set, and melting away in the fourth due to illness (he retired down 0-4 in the fourth set, unable to move the last few games).

So how did Lopez do it? Blaming Mannarino’s illness for the Frenchman’s exit from the tournament would be nothing more than telling a tall tale, because he did everything possible in the third set when he had the match in his hands, short of rolling the red carpet for Lopez and inviting him back in the match, to not cross the finish line.

At 4-0 down in the third, Lopez looked like he was ready to get in the locker room and playing terrible, except that Mannarino served a succession of double faults and committed a number of errors on shots that challenged him no more than the five-minute warm-up balls coming from the opponent. To be clear, it is not as if Mannarino led Lopez 6-4 6-4 4-0 because he was outplaying his opponent. He was up because he could not lower the quality of his game as much as Lopez did during that period. This match did not feature a world-class level of tennis, both players serving so poorly that there were a number of consecutive breaks in three and a half sets of play. Although the first sentence of the paragraph asked for an explanation of how Lopez “did it,” the more appropriate question for this particular match would have been “how did Mannarino do it?”

Yet, there must be a reason why, in Majors, Lopez has a 16-8 record in five-setters (win against Mannarino does not count because technically, Lopez did not win in five sets) and has won his last seven five-setters, dating back to Wimbledon 2009.

The Spaniard never loses hope no matter the score, and he does not link the level of his play to his will to win. In Lopez’s world, “playing bad” or “sucking” does not equal a loss. A very common phrase in tennis players’ language, “I can’t win playing like this,” does not exist for Lopez. As far as Lopez is concerned, he can play “like this,” and still win playing “like this.” In this edition of the Australian Open, he is easily the worst performer to reach the third round.

Lopez will face Jerzy Janowicz next round. In order to win, Lopez will desperately need to raise the level of his play against an opponent who has more power and shot-making capability than him. But wait! That is probably not how Lopez thinks. He probably thinks “I can win, but what can I do anyway in order to raise the level of my play?”

Note: Follow MT-Desk on Tweeter throughout the Australian Open: @MertovsTDesk

Fans’ Choice on Friday Evening: ATP over WTA

One often hears the likes of Billie Jean King, and other proponents of equal pay, make the argument that the product that the WTA puts out is just as interesting as that of the ATP, or that fans are just as interested in seeing the women play as they are in seeing the men. The evidence however, as the below example will show, points yet again to the contrary. While the argument of equal pay has its merits and is beyond the scope of this article’s main point, it is time for those making the argument to use accurate statements when presenting their case, instead of throwing faulty assumptions and relying on platitudes. Once again, during Friday evening in the Western & Southern Open in Cincinnati, there was visual proof that the ATP product clearly fills more seats than that of the WTA. The tournament had two elite matches scheduled at the same time. Roger Federer squared off against Andy Murray on Center Court at 7:00 PM at the same time as Maria Sharapova took on Simona Halep on the Grandstand Court.

The comparison is fair: Federer and Murray are the two faces of the “Big Four,” two of the most recognizable faces in men’s tennis. Sharapova and Halep are equally recognizable in women’s tennis, especially since their fantastic and recent French Open final. Federer is ranked number 3 and Murray is ranked number 9 in the ATP; Halep is ranked 2 and Sharapova is ranked number 6 in the WTA. Federer and Sharapova are two of the most famous athletes in sports, certainly the most marketable ones in men’s and women’s tennis – and that is a fact; Forbes lists the two celebrities as the highest paid tennis players thanks to endorsements.

The following two pictures were taken about 10 minutes apart. In order to make it fair, they were both taken at the same score line. Here is the Center Court (max. capacity 11,425) at the beginning of the second set after Federer won the first set 6-3:
Center

Now here is the Grandstand Court (max. capacity 5,000) at the beginning of the second set, after Halep won the first set 6-3:
Grandstand

Keep in mind that the Center Court has more than twice the capacity of the Grandstand (11,425 to 5,000). There is no doubt that tennis fans preferred to watch the men rather than the women in this case. This is not to say that women’s tennis does not generate interest. In fact, as soon as the Federer vs. Murray match was over, those fans on Center Court migrated quickly over to the Grandstand, packing the seats to watch Sharapova beat Halep in a thrilling three-set victory. Yet, when given similar choices, they prefer to watch men’s tennis over women’s tennis at the elite level.

Western & Southern Open – Day 1 Notes

In the morning, as I walked in the facility, Eugénie Bouchard was practicing on court 15 and Andy Murray was hitting with Alexander Zverev, the young German sensation of the post-Wimbledon clay-court season, on court 16. The two courts are located next to each other. There were as many spectators watching Bouchard as there were watching Murray. It’s one of those moments where a player’s stardom is confirmed. If as many tennis fans are interested in seeing Bouchard practice as Murray, Bouchard has indeed reached the “hot shot” status that her t-shirt displayed:
Bouchard

However that was nothing compared to Djokovic and Murray’s practice session yesterday on that same court, while the second-round qualifying matches were in action. There were clearly more people watching them practice than any other match that was taking place the grounds. Notice the fans on the top row of the Grandstand court, looking over to watch the two stars (and Boris Becker, standing on the left of the picture, next to Djokovic):
Djokovic Wawrinka Practice

Next to Djokovic accompanied by Becker + 1, Wawrinka looked a little lonely:
Sad Wawrinka

Yet and still, Federer proved once again that even in practice he remains the biggest draw at the age of 33. The crowd filled the side of the Court 15, and the top row of the Grandstand, similar to the Djokovic-Wawrinka practice the day before, except much more packed and “squeezed.” On top of everything else, Federer was not even practicing with another top 10 player, but with the ex-touring pro Vince Spadea:
Federer practice

Speaking of attendance and spectators… Considering how many empty stands we see in the beginning of the first day session of any tournament, the attendance at the Center Court for the first match of the day session between Tommy Robredo and Jack Sock exceeded my expectations:
attendance

Heather Watson of England accumulated some valuable points in Montreal, coming from the qualifying and reaching third round in the main draw. She did qualify again for the main draw here over the weekend, but suffered a heart-breaking loss this afternoon against Shuai Zhang of China – 6/3 4/6 7/5. Watson (below) saved two match points at 5-4 in the third set and managed to break Zhang’s serve, only to get her serve broken again and lose.
Watson

Following Watson and Zhang, Nicolas Mahut (FR) and Marinko Matosevic (AUS) squared off on Court 3. Matosevic broke Mahut on the first game of the match, and that would be the only break of the match as Matosevic won 6/4 7/6. Both players showed some terrific shot-making skills (photo below – Mahut making an athletic backhand volley winner) and there was plenty of fireworks and entertainment.
Mahut

Matosevic complained about line calls (in most cases, he was right), Mahut complained about Matosevic taking too much time between points while the latter was complaining and talking to his corner (in this case, Mahut was right), yet the referee gave the first time violation warning to Mahut which aggravated the tension further. In fact, the referee seemed to lose control of the match at different times, at one point calling the score not realizing that the line judge called it out, then trying to convince Matosevic that he heard the call and overruled it. Naturally, that argument went nowhere with Matosevic who frequently asked to his corner “Why is every call against me?” and to the referee or to the sky “What is going on?”
Matosevic

The worst moment came when Matosevic served an ace on match point, at 6-4 in the tiebreaker, had his arms in the air, only to hear the referee call the ball out. Matosevic said “Come on” loudly to the referee once and looked for help to Mahut who wanted no part of this discussion. At the end, Matosevic went back and served a second serve and Mahut missed the return which gave the Australian the match. As soon as the ball sailed out, Matosevic yelled, as loud as he can, a couple of expletives that start with the letter “f” toward the referee, walked to the net, shook Mahut’s hand, and left the court without shaking the referee’s hand. It should be interesting to see if Matosevic gets a fine or not.

WTA All-Access promotion took place today with seven of the top 8 seeds in the tournament coming and talking to the media and being around the fans by one of the entries to the stadium court. Agnieska Radwanska could not be there since she is on her way from Montréal to Cincinnati today. But the other seven players interacted with fans and had a great time. Here is a photo from Jelena Jankovic’s session:
IMG_20140811_132404

Then came rain, for about an hour. It stopped around 6:45 PM and the “rain recovery crew” went to work:
SAM_2671

Once matches restarted, I figured that since I started the day by watching the 32-year-old and in-great-shape Tommy Robredo earn his first round victory, I should finish it by watching another 32-year-old and in-great-shape, Flavia Pennetta, earn her victory.
Pennetta

Until next update…

Roland Garros and Wimbledon Reprise: The Fans (Part B)

Last Saturday in ‘Part A’, the focus was on how the French approach Roland Garros. Interviews with the fans in Paris mainly underlined their sentimental attachment to the nostalgia surrounding Roland Garros and the importance they place on their own countrymen and women competing in the tournament. This second installment will put into perspective how the English approach Wimbledon. In contrast to Roland Garros fans, Wimbledon fans are less emotional and more serious, and their attachments to tradition and to the sport outweigh all others. Watching great tennis supersedes the outcome of the matches. For example, Mark and Claire, a tennis-loving couple traveling from Yorkshire to London every summer for three decades to watch some Wimbledon, have a rather rational disposition when it comes to their expectations of Wimbledon. I found these two lovely characters at the Champagne Bar at Wimbledon, celebrating their arrival to the grounds with a rather large champagne bottle and anticipating a full day of tennis (pictured below).Resim2 - Mark and Claire

When I asked the same question to them that I asked the Roland Garros fans – if they had the power to change one thing with regards to their Slam tournament with the snap of a finger, what would it be? –, Mark quickly brought up the presence of a number of fans, who come to Wimbledon not because they understand tennis or love the game, but simply to make an appearance and “be trendy.” Mark did remain a gentleman about it – “not really a major complaint,” he added – nevertheless suggesting a rather abrupt solution: “The LTA should probably prioritize members of tennis clubs and players who really support the sport and not just make it a complete free for all for those that just want to be seen!!!! A bit harsh maybe… but sadly true.” Both Mark and Claire mentioned the high prices on the grounds but seemed to accept it as a fact of Wimbledon: “Be prepared to be parted from your dearly beloved cash, very swiftly” Mark added while Claire pointed to the bottle on their table and said tongue-in-cheek: “I’m not sure there is anything I would change other than maybe the price of the champagne.”

When it came to tradition, Mark started out mild-mannered at first, and then finished fairly firm: “I personally think that if the changes are better for the sport and improve the general game then we should be open-minded. Having said this and from the stand point of what is a traditional British competition, we should not be in a hurry to lose its heritage and appeal. I love the etiquette that remains staunch and changing (for example) the ‘all white’ would be a travesty. Embrace the modern game but don’t forget the tradition!” Claire’s disposition could not be any clearer either: “I think we should stick with tradition as much as possible. The British are so good at it. I would hate the all-white rule to be lifted. The smartest person I have ever seen on court was when Roger Federer walked out in traditional whites a few years ago. How lovely!”

Perhaps the most striking contrast with the French fans at Roland Garros appeared when I asked Mark and Claire how they approached their countrymen and women and if it mattered to their routine of watching tennis at Wimbledon. Unlike their neighbors from France (see Part A), if forced to decide between a potentially high-quality tennis match vs. a match involving their compatriot, they would choose to watch the match that promises the best tennis, even if it did not involve a British player – and not simply go to the court to cheer their compatriot: “I think it important to remember that this competition is not a national championship” Mark added, “these players are there for themselves first and foremost and so it’s not like supporting a team at the Olympic Games. Everyone has their own favorite and it nice to have your own opinion rather than just following your own nation’s players.” Claire’s reply was less analytical but just as clear: “Always for the love of tennis!”

Danielle, a nurse in a London hospital and fresh out of university, had the same type of reactions to my questions as Mark and Claire did above. One notable difference in her responses was the emphasis on weather. Her Wimbledon program essentially gravitated around the weather conditions. She insisted that she never bought tickets in advance, and thanked Wimbledon for keeping the tradition of selling tickets as late as the day of competition, understanding that there was no guarantee that she could get them. Danielle said that she has been coming to the grounds since she was 12 years old and praised Wimbledon for thinking of its “faithful fans.” As far as she is concerned, the weather was too “upsy-downy” to make plans in advance. She preferred waiting until the morning of the day in question, watch closely the weather forecast, and then make the decision to purchase tickets or not. She accepted that she may get left out in the race to buy the tickets online once they go on sale, but added quickly that she has “become an expert on the particular art.” Apparently, she has succeeded to buy tickets on the same day for the last 6 years in a row, and even got to see the 2012 men’s semi-finals through that procedure.

This article would not be complete without mentioning Maurice, a wonderful man and the most authentic Wimbledon follower that I have ever seen. He was on the grounds with his lovely grand-daughter Sylvia to enjoy a full day of early-round matches (pictured below).Maurice
He was sporting a classy looking summer suit and carrying around an extremely vintage racket that, according to him, belonged to William Renshaw, the 7-time Wimbledon champion in the 1880s. I happened to sit next to Maurice and Sylvia by chance on court 12. Maurice’s outfit and the racket piqued my interest for obvious reasons but it was rather his knowledge of the game and its history through his comments while watching the men’s singles first-round match on the court that drove me to talk to him further. He has been coming to Wimbledon for 65 years! He was a true gentleman, engaging me in small dialogues here and there about the history of Wimbledon. He had excellent comments about both players on the court and their tactics (it was the Marcos Baghdatis vs. Dustin Brown match) and it was truly remarkable to listen to him compare the players and their strokes to those from years or decades back. By the time he gave me his card and informed me that he was a tennis writer and a coach for many years, I felt more than lucky to have spent a whole match sitting next to him and listened to countless past anecdotes, the kind you don’t necessarily find in historical data sheets. If Wimbledon valued tradition, Maurice represented it by his mere disposition.

In conclusion, it would be unfair to set the parameters of the comparison between the French Open and Wimbledon on reductive dichotomies such as “emotional vs. rational,” “nostalgia vs. tradition,” or “complainer vs. solution-seeker.” That being said, distinctions in the ways that fans approach both tournaments foreground certain inclinations: the fans of one Slam tournament do not resemble the fans of another, and by extension, there is hardly anything similar about two Slams other than the fact that they are two of the four Majors in the ATP calendar, thus shell out the largest money prizes in the professional tennis circuit. Just as the surfaces differ from Paris to London, the expectations of the fans also vary largely from those of Roland Garros to those of Wimbledon.
SAM_2362

Roland Garros and Wimbledon Reprise: The Fans (Part A)

The densest portion of the professional tennis season has come to an end last week on the grass courts of Wimbledon. The European clay and grass court season, featuring two Majors and a plethora of Masters 1000 and Premier tour events in men and women, can overwhelm even the most insatiable tennis fan. This article takes a closer look at the contrast between the fans of the two Majors, Roland Garros and Wimbledon, through a few in-person dialogues that I had with some fans in both locations. It was interesting to notice certain traits that were unique to each Major with regards to their fans. Especially, the striking attachment to nostalgia and ambience manifested by Roland Garros fans, and the remarkable appreciation of tradition and the sport itself among Wimbledon fans impressed me tremendously.

For French fans, Roland Garros is not just about watching quality tennis. They live and breathe all that comprises the makeup of the grounds and the atmosphere of the tournament. They also show no reluctance in saying that the results of the French tennis players matter, a lot! Although I talked a large number of fans here and there, I selected a few that may describe the best the approach of the fans. Catherine (pictured below), who is married and a mother of a wonderful boy named Clément, immediately noted that the pleasure of attending Roland Garros was something that she tasted for the first time as a youngster in the 1970s, one that she never get tired of experiencing again and again since then.
catherine

Christian, a mild-mannered man in his 50s, sporting a hat and a backpack, has been coming to Roland Garros every year for a decade. This year, his daugther Aurélie, a university student, decided to join him for the first time. They were accompanied by Alain who is a “Roland Garros nut” in the true sense of the expression (see picture below).
RESIM1 - Christian-Aurelie-Alain

Both Christian and Alain expressed how addictive it was to come to Roland Garros every year and watch world-class tennis. Aurélie let it be known that, despite her first time, she felt the ‘virus’ of Roland Garros invade her as well. Then, there was also Ombeline, a high-school teacher in Paris, who confessed that she could not think of life without attending Roland Garros every year!

Most French fans take their countrymen and women seriously and will support them before any other player. It was no exception with this group of fans. I still wanted to put them on the spot and hear them admit it! So I first asked straight forward if they are coming to Roland Garros to watch their compatriots play or simply to watch some good tennis. While Alain and Ombeline flat out said that they would first like to see the French win, the other four said they wanted to see good tennis without neglecting to add that they are also there to support their compatriots. As I suspected, the question did not put them enough on the spot, so I decided to push further with more specific questions: if two top 10 players took the court at the same time as a match between Gasquet, Tsonga, or Simon and a player ranked around no. 100 in the world, which would they watch? Alain and Ombeline once again preferred to watch the French player over a top-ten match-up. Catherine said if one of the top 10 players were Federer or Nadal, she would prefer to see them, but if it was Djokovic playing she would rather see the French player’s match. I did not feel the need to ask her feelings about the current number 1 player in the world from Serbia! The father-duo combo of Christian and Aurélie said the top 10 match-up without hesitation.

My next question was even more precise. I talked to these people in the middle of the first week, so there was still a chance to have a Djokovic vs. Federer semi-final on one side of the men’s draw, and a Nadal vs. Gasquet (or Monfils) semi-final in the other. Given that they could only attend one of the matches, which one would they prefer? Surprisingly, Ombeline and Alain, who have been choosing the French players so far, went with the Federer-Djokovic match, while Christian, Aurélie and Catherine all took the Nadal-Gasquet match. I could not make sense of that deviation from the norm in the answers to that specific question, but then again, when talking to fans, must we look for logic in every answer? I think not! In the case of a choice of a ticket between the women’s final involving a French player vs. Maria Sharapova and the men’s final between Djokovic and Nadal (nos 1 and 2 in the world), Aurélie proved to be the only one who said she would “naturally” watch the ladies’ final with a side-eyed look at her dad and Alain who did not hesitate a second in choosing the Djokovic vs. Nadal final. In this case, Ombeline and Catherine also chose the men’s final over Sharapova and the French player. Alain did however add a caveat: if I gave her the choice of a women’s final between Gabriela Sabatini and Anna Kournikova, his answer would have been completely different!!

Nostalgia took over when I began asking questions about what they like about Roland Garros, and what they could change if they had the power to do it with the snap of a finger. With the exception of Alain, the difficulty of circulating around the grounds and the lack of space came up in all conversations (see picture below for an idea of how stifling the crowds can get). Aurélie, a fairly tall girl, complained that the seats at Suzanne Lenglen had no leg room and that her legs were aching after watching Jo-Wilfried Tsonga defeat Jerzy Janowicz in straight sets. Catherine was adamant about the negative effects of over-crowding: she said that she brought her son for the first time to Roland Garros, and that he was so disappointed by the stifling lack of space that they were going to have to leave early because he lost his enthusiasm to watch matches.
Resim 4

Alain’s expression turned pensive, and he said that he is not a good person to answer a question about ‘changes’, because he always loved Roland Garros with all its pluses and minuses. He even began talking about how it was “at that spot, right there” (fixing his eyes and pointing to a location close to the player’s tunnel on the way to Suzanne Lenglen court) that his son saw Steffi Graf in the 80s and got her autograph on a picture. Apparently, they framed that autographed picture and it still sits in a prime spot in their home. He also affirmed that the demolition of Court 1 in the upcoming years as part of the renovation plans makes him sad because of the endless great moments that were staged on that court: “history will be demolished, not just a tennis court” he said. Christian added that the round stands – thus called ‘the bull ring’ by the Anglophone media – made it unique in that there were no bad seats in the stadium. The two ladies, Catherine and Ombeline, both took a serious tone about the issue of high prices at Roland Garros. Catherine kept rolling her eyes, citing the prices of some items. Ombeline took it a step further: “A shirt for 55 euros? An umbrella for 65 euros? A towel for 75? Allez! I don’t want to hear anyone complain in this country about not having any money if these items are selling left and right in Roland Garros, or else the managers of these boutiques live in a dream world!” Ombeline went on and on, stretching her comments all the way to the President François Hollande, without much regard to the type of vocabulary used, mind you!

Stay tuned for Part B of this article for a comparison of the above, with how English tennis fans react to similar questions about their beloved Wimbledon. Coming soon!

Navigation