The Wuhan Open, through the round of 16, was marked by upsets. None of the top 15 players made it to the quarterfinals. My piece focuses on the quarterfinals, semifinals, and final.
This was a tough match-up for the 27th-ranked Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova from the moment she walked on the court 3, Roland Garros, to face the 15th-ranked and 2009 French Open winner Svetlana Kuznetsova. The two Russians had previously played five times, all on hard courts. Pavlyuchenkova had only won once, and the four wins by her opponent were all comfortable, straight-set wins, except the match in Canada in 2010 (7-5 4-6 6-1). To make matters worse for Pavlyuchenkova, they were this time playing in Kuznetsova’s favorite Major, on her favorite surface.
Pavlyuchenkova is, for the most part, a hard, flat hitter. She seldom uses a backhand slice, and occasionally hit effective drops shots. She usually tends to put pressure on her opponents by taking the ball on the rise, stepping inside the baseline, and using her powerful forehand to either hit winners, or force her opponent into errors. Unfortunately for her, it all plays into Kuznetsova’s game plan. Sveta has a wide arsenal of shots at her disposal and thrives on scrambling in the back of the court, and getting as many balls back as possible. She can, when the opportunity arises, counterpunch and turn the rally in her favor. She can also hit flat or high topspin on both sides and change the pace efficiently with her backhand slice to take the pace off the ball. With a flick of her wrist she can hit angles at the most unexpected moments, or accelerate the ball and approach the net on whim. She has sound technique on her volleys and serve. I could comfortably say that her game is well-crafted to succeed on clay courts. Sveta usually performs well against (mostly) one-dimensional players, taking them out of their rhythm by giving them several different looks during rallies. Last but not the least, Kuznetsova is one of the smartest players on the WTA tour.
All of the above, as one would expect, worked in Kuznetsova’s favor as she put on a display of high-quality tennis that left the spectators in awe, at least until her lead at 6-1 3-1. If anyone wanted to make a case about why it is important for promising juniors to develop all facets of their game early in their tennis career, this would be the emblematic match to show them.
Pavlyuchenkova did not particularly play badly during that stretch. She stuck to her guns, applying pressure whenever she could, and hitting returns early (photo below) to take charge from the beginning of the point in her return games, which is what she does best.
The problem was that Kuznetsova would not allow her to settle into that routine. Not only would she get those balls back, but she would dazzle the crowd, with how many weapons she possesses in her game. She finished the first game on an ace, the second game on a “sneak-in” swing volley winner when Pavlyuchenkova did not expect it, and the third game on a passing shot on the run, when Pavlyuchekova decided to attack because, up to that point, nothing else worked.
One particular point in the late stages of the first set summarized what was happening (see the sequence below). In that point, Kuznetsova remained on defense during the first part of the rally, starting with the return, then retrieving a couple of balls from deep behind the baseline. On one shot later in the rally, she found enough time to run around her backhand to hit a high, aggressive, inside-out forehand to pull Pavlyuchenkova wide on the ad side. Pavlyuchenkova, who found herself on defense for the first time in the rally (not part of her plan A), returned the ball a bit short on the court. It was the first short ball that Kuznetsova got in the rally, and unlike her opponent, it was all that she needed to put the ball away with a hard forehand to the open deuce corner.
Sveta would later say to me that she was playing “smart tennis” at that point. “I knew what I had to do and I completed it well.”
Then she let her guard down. She squandered a 30-0 lead in the 3-1 game, and a 40-0 lead in the next one. Pavlycuhenkova, with renewed confidence, played a great seventh game and took the lead 4-3 for the first time in the set. Unexpectedly losing those two consecutive games with 30-0 and 40-0 leads did not help Sveta who registered a string of errors for the first time in the match. Kuznetsova admitted later that she “got tense and started to do weird things.” She said the ease with which she got the 6-1 3-1 lead played a role in her let-down: “Really? I’m winning that good? And I just get a little bit nervous, I don’t know, I just got a little bit confused and I started playing short points, and it’s not really what I had to do against Anastasia, and then I started to get back to what I was doing [at 3-4 down]. But it was tricky you know, I had to make my plan to get back in the match, and it was a more difficult task to win then, instead of winning when I was 3-1 [up].” She added that she needed to “shut it down” in her memory when she was down 3-4 and say to herself “Look, you got to start over.” She finished her point saying “I’m better on clay and I have to focus on that.” She did just that, winning the next three games and the set 6-4.
Pavlyuchenkova did have success when she attacked the net (8/10), but the problem is that she did not get to do that much as Kuznetsova kept her guessing and out of balance. One stat jumps out: as aggressive as Pavlyuchenkova plays, going often for winners, Sveta ended up hitting a dozen more winners than her (27 to 15). That is because when Sveta gets a chance to finish the point, she has already worked her opponent and set up the opening for a high-probability winner (remember the sequence above). It is an essential part of her game, to cleverly construct the point. However, not many players can do that unless they possess a variety of shot making skills. That is what sets Kuznetsova apart from most players. It is also the reason for which Sveta remains a daunting opponent on clay, especially at the French Open where she had the most of her success in Majors.
Her next opponent is the fourth seed Garbine Muguruza who also happens to base her game on powerful ground strokes. I cannot wait to see what Kuznetsova will have in store for that match.
First of all, I apologize to the readers who may have come to expect more frequent blog updates when I am present at a tournament. It has been hectic to say the least, with writing obligations outside of MT-Desk mounting up this week. Nonetheless, I woke up this morning, determined to post a write-up at the end of today, so here it is.
The 2014 US Open final between Kei Nishikori and Marin Cilic was lackluster to say the least. It was hard to decide if the match was so one-sided because Cilic played spatial tennis, outclassing Nishikori, or because Nishikori simply performed far below his standard, especially after having beaten the top-seeded Novak Djokovic in the semis. But in terms of score, and tennis quality, it was the least thrilling men’s final match at the Majors last year. So I expected better this afternoon. Cilic was gradually finding his form and Nishikori has looked sharp throughout the week.
Instead, it was another flop, not so much in the score line as in the level of play by both players. Cilic broke immediately to start the match and Nishikori wasted a whole set before starting to do the right thing. He only had a chance to break back at 1-3 down, and instead of keeping the balls deep and looking to out-rally Cilic, he would get impatient and go for broke in the 5th or 6th shot of the rally, mostly from behind the baseline, and make the error. Cilic only had to keep holding the lead with some solid first serves, and he did just that.
It seemed that Kei woke up immediately as the second set began. For those who can go back and watch the match, for example, in the third point of the set (15-15), the Japanese star did something that he neglected (or failed, depending on the perspective) to do since the beginning of the match. He kept the balls deep, did not go for unnecessary, low-percentage winners, and eventually earned the point on a Cilic error. From then on, he cut the unforced errors down largely because he followed that same pattern. Again at 1-0 up, and a break point in his favor, Nishikori once again got the return in, settled for deep shots, kept Cilic on the move, finally collected a backhand in the net by the Croat. Next game at 15-15, Cilic hung in there during a long rally, but having to cover too much ground, the big guy ended the rally by slapping a on-the-run forehand in the net when he was strecthed. Same scenario again occured at the game point to go up 3-0. Funny how the tide can turn when you tweak and adjust small, yet basic, patterns during the points. Nishikori cruised the rest of the set and Cilic, not finding a solution (which was provided for him by Nishikori in the first set), faded away quickly to lose the second set 6-1.
After having the early games decide the outcomes of both first and second sets, it came as no surprise that the same thing happened in the third set. Much less confident now, Cilic double-faulted and missed an easy backhand volley in the net to fall behind in the very first game of the third set, and eventually got broken. Figuring out only at 2-4 down that rallying from the baseline was no longer working with a less generous Nishikori across the net, Cilic got more aggressive and forced the issue. At 3-4 down and Nishikori serving, Cilic took risks on the returns and ventured to the net. At 0-15, he finished the point with a volley winner. At 15-30 he whipped a forehand that left Nishikori at a distance, staring at the winner. He remained aggressive on the return and missed one, on the first break point at 15-40. But Nishikori was feeling the heat, and missed a risky second serve for a double fault on the second break point at 30-40, in an effort to avoid Cilic taking charge on the return. Marin’s body language was extremely positive at that point, pumping his fist regularly.
Then out of nowhere, he makes couple of bad decisions (one, not to attack when he had the chance) and Nishikori gets the important break again to go up 5-4. It seemed that neither player could get in the groove for an extended period of time and both had to battle hard just to keep balls in play and deep. The last game characterized the whole match: 5 total errors by both players, 4 of them complete give-aways. Nishikori held and earned his spot in the finals.
Next on Center Court was the women’s semifinal between Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova and the Ekaterina Makarova. Or so everyone thought! On their way out to the court, both women were told that their match was moved to the Grandstand court. A men’s doubles match, featuring the Bryan brothers, was deemed more worthy of the Center Court. Makarova, the top-seeded player, not only did not play her first two matches on either the Center Court or the Grandstand (played the third on Grandstand), but was probably going to go down in the history of professional tennis as the only top-seeded player in history at a WTA event to never get to play on Center Court before the finals. As it turns out, she retired in the beginning of the third set and did not get that accolade! But if there was ever a slap on a top seed’s face, today was it.
The explanation was that the ATP and the WTA tournaments were two separate events, with the WTA one being a lower-tier tournament forking out less prize money than the men’s, which made it so that the women could be moved to the Grandstand. Let’s be honest, that attitude was obvious anyway from the beginning of the tournament. Prior to Saturday, only 4 women’s matches have been scheduled on the Center Court (all four as the first match of the day, when there is the least amount of crowd on the grounds) whereas men’s matches that were featured there amounted to four times that number.
However, today was unacceptable. You don’t tell the players right before the match that they got demoted to a lesser court, and you certainly don’t do it when it involves the top seed and the no. 12 player in the world Makarova, who had yet to set foot on the Center Court, and Pavlyuchenkova who has been ranked as high as no. 13 in the world (now ranked 40), holder of 7 WTA titles in her career. As far as the “explanation” goes, if the issue is that these are two separate events and not one combined event, then the same committee should not make decisions for both. Nor should you charge one ticket price for both (as @TheBoiledEgg astutely pointed out on Twitter). If the WTA event is the “lesser” event and the spectators come to watch two “separate” events in which one event is taking place on the “lesser” courts, then you designate two separate prices and charge less for those who come to watch the “lesser” event. Sounds ridiculous right? Almost as ridiculous as the “explanation.” Lastly, would the same thing have happened if the match were between Venus Williams (ranked 15) and Svetlana Kuznetsova (ranked 28)? Or if it were between Jelena Jankovic (23) and the American Sloane Stephens (35)? Or better yet, would the reverse have happened if it were a higher tier women’s event and a lower men’s event? To that end, would all the men’s quarterfinals have taken place at the Grandstand on Friday while the women played on the Center Court, as was the case (in reverse) yesterday? I think everyone can guess the answers to these questions.
In the evening session, contrary to most people’s expectations, the second semifinal between John Isner and Steve Johnson greatly exceeded the first semifinal in terms of both quality and suspense. Steve Johnson, having a golden tournament, had two match points at 6-4 up in the thrilling third set tiebreaker. The first one was something to behold. Johnson served and a long rally ensued which meant, as was the case for the most part up to that point, that Johnson would end up winning the point. Instead, Isner played good a baseline rally as you will ever see him do, and outlasted Johnson, finally forcing him into an error. Then, he served an ace to equalize at 6-6. Each player had one more match point, and finally, Isner prevailed 11-9 to deny Johnson his first career final. The big guy served four aces after saving that first match point in spectacular fashion.
Last but not the least, Sloane Stephens, looking for her own first final at a WTA event (amazing, considering how many semifinal appearances she has had, including in some big events) came out to face the in-form Samantha Stosur. From the beginning the scenario was clear. Stephens was stroking her groundstrokes well, and Stosur needed to take risks and cut the points short to win. Sam played the right game for most of the first set, stepping inside the baseline on returns, and going for big shots, especially on her down-the-line backhands. However, Stephens would win the majority of points whenever they got engaged in extended baseline rallies. The first set went to a tiebreaker. Stosur went up 4-2 on a forehand volley error by Stephens and seemed to have the upper hand as they changed sides. Then, a total collapse by Stosur followed. Stephens remained steady as Stosur made mistake after mistake losing the next five points in succession, and the tiebreaker. The worst was yet to come.
In the second set, Stephens, now exuding confidence, efficiently kept the balls deep, pinned Stosur to the baseline, and controlled the rallies. It did not help that Stosur framed more shots than I have ever seen anyone else in a singles match. I wondered if such stats were kept, would Stosur have broken the record. She regularly mishit one or two shots, or more, each game, as the collapse of her game continued. Stephens ended up winning 7-6 6-0, and signed autographs and took selfies with anyone and everyone who came to the court side after the match.
Tomorrow’s singles finals will feature John Isner vs. Kei Nishikori, scheduled to start at 3:00 PM, followed by the women’s finals between Sloane Stephens and Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova. And yes, they will all take place in the Center Court! At least, that is what the schedule says, with no caveats this time.
Pavlyuchenkova served this ace on set point to take it to a final set, and it turned out to be her last shot as Makarova retired with a leg injury few moments later
I drive into the grounds around 10:30 AM. The first match is not scheduled to start until 1:50 PM. Nonetheless, I come early, because I have a few things to do on my computer, and more importantly, I love watching the players practice. There is hardly anyone around, and they are busy tweaking bits and pieces of their game, or working on a strategy for their upcoming match later in the day. Parking is problematic to say the least at the Citi Open. First, there are not enough spaces. Second, if you arrive later in the day or in the evening, from first-person experiences of a few people that I have talked to, it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to park and get in the grounds. They are directed to another site to park from where they have to take the shuttle, etc. To make matters worse, not all parking attendants are apparently on the same page, and they get conflicting information on how to do what.
For my part, I run into a lady who made the person before me park very close to the car next to hers. I see that and I have no intention of doing the same, so I park about a foot further than she indicates. She gets mad and tells me that I need to “follow instructions.” I tell her I want to be able to get out, and she keeps ranting. I get out of my car anyway and see the lady who parked before me giving me thumbs up and shaking her head to the attendant. She is barely able to squeeze out of her car. I make a note to myself that if I run into the same problem, that parking attendant will hear a few words back from me such as “I follow instructions if they appeal to my common sense, sorry that you have none!” By the way, did I mention that parking costs $15 per day? If you are there every day, that is over a $100 dollars that you plan to spend. For some weekly ticket holders, it’s included in the cost.
I walk around the courts. Andy Murray is hitting with Richard Gasquet who gets a ton of instructions from his coach (and former two-time French Open champion) Sergi Bruguera during the breaks. It is already hot and Gasquet is wearing a black t-shirt (unlike Murray who has a white one) that says “Paris” on it.
They are both concentrated on the task in hand; this is not what one would call a “fun” practice.
A shirtless John Isner is on the next court. The tall guy is fairly slim and in good shape, not too muscular. He is hitting with a youngster and Justin Gimelstob is on the side of the youngster, yelling across the net to Isner for instructions.
The first match begins promptly at 1:50 PM on Center Court between two Americans, Coco Vandeweghe and Christina McHale. I am more interested in the one that starts in 20 minutes on Grandstand between Kristina Mladenovic and Samantha Stosur. Therefore, I only stay for a few points on Center Court, but I am rather astonished by the fact that the stands are virtually empty. As I walk away I see Wayne Bryan (Mike and Bob’s father) running a tennis clinic for adults, and I wonder if the head count is higher in that clinic than in the Center Court!
The Mldenovic vs Stosur match disappoints largely because nothing seems to work for Kiki. She makes routine errors, and as the match progresses, her body language gets more and more negative. Her mother Dzenita, former professional volleyball player and an ex-member of the national team of the former Yugoslavia, walks out to the court as Kiki’s coach once in each set to turn the tide (pictured below is the first one). Alas, the slide never ends and Stosur walks out with a comfortable 6-2 6-2 score to record her 500th career win.
Little did Dzenita know that her “real” coaching/mothering would come after the match. Kiki sits by the wall outside the players’ area, cries, sobs, and rants to herself for at least 30 minutes. Dzenita stands by her side through all of it, attempting to lift her daughter’s spirits up. I feel bad for Mladenovic because any of us who played high-level competitive tennis (and if it sounds patronizing, sorry, but only people who experienced individual competition under great pressure would understand the gravity of these moments) have gone through these types of agonizing emotions following certain losses, and I can only imagine how painful it must be for her at that moment. Although it is the first round of a WTA Event and it is obviously not her first career loss, there could be many reasons behind it, or a culmination of things. In any case, tennis players know and understand that this happens (or will happen) to every one of them, probably more than once. Each may have a different way of manifesting it. I remember going to my dad’s car and staring at the side mirror for 15 minutes, wondering why I am playing tennis if I can’t win a match like this, following an excruciating loss in the semifinals of a national tournament that played a role in the selection of the country’s national team back then. There are highs and lows, this happens to be one of the “lowly lows.” I am hoping she will get through it.
Next, I see Sam Groth who is getting last-minute instructions from his coach. He is totally relaxed, cracking jokes, and laughing. Not all players have the need to get that tunnel-vision “boxing” face prior to a match. He plays a tricky opponent in Thomaz Bellucci. Groth wins the first set in a tiebreaker, and breaks in the second to go up 4-2. Then, a rare occurrence: Groth loses his serve twice in a row, allowing Bellucci to carry the match to a third set. Sam imposes his game again in the third, and this time, does not squander the lead. While his serve never ceases to amaze, I am more struck by how quick he gets from the baseline to the service line after the serve.
His second step is almost midway between the two lines. You may say that in today’s tennis, in order to be a successful serve-and-volley player, you must do nothing less than that, but we are talking about a pretty big, muscular guy here (6’4 and 216), and his forward explosion after the serve is remarkable.
I quickly go to the next court to watch the third set tiebreaker between Jarmila Gajdosova and the qualifier Naomi Broady. Gajdosova can’t capitalize on a match-point opportunity at 6-5 in the tiebreaker. She is fuming. Broady wins the next two points and closes it 8-6. Someone in the stands (British accent) cheers Broady on along with other spectators clapping. On her way to the net to shake hands, Gajodosova yells and scolds that fan. Broady is not happy and says a few words to Gajdosova who looks shocked for a few seconds and stares at her after the handshake. Then, another exchange between the two players ensues before Jarmila packs up her bags and leaves the court.
As that same fan walks out, he passes by Heather Watson who was there to support Broady. He gives her a few words of encouragement. Watson, always friendly, says “no it was terrible yesterday” and laughs (she lost 6-3 6-0 to Louisa Chirico).
I begin to watch the match between Ivan Dodig, a “Lucky Loser” who only found out that he is in the tournament earlier in the day due to Marcos Baghdatis’ retirement, and the qualifier Guido Pella. I am determined to stick through this match, because I admire the tenacity and the desire that these types of players, ones to whom a first-round win in an ATP 500 level event means as much as that first balloon that your parents get you when you are a kid. Pella ranked 100, Dodig at 104, both players were in the qualifying draw and a second round appearance in the main draw would tremendously boost their confidence. They don’t disappoint. They fight for every point, run down every ball within their reach.
Pella wins the first set 6-3, and can’t close the match out in the tiebreaker of the second set, despite earning a match point. Dodig takes a quick bathroom break before the third set, and I see Pella sitting in his chair, shirtless and dejected. I am wondering if he is replaying the match point wasted in his head.
When he loses his serve routinely in the first game of the third set, I begin to think that Dodig may run away with this match. However, out of nowhere, Dodig tries two ill-advised drop shots that he misses in the net, gags an easy put away, and lets Pella back in the match. At 2-1, the rain arrives, which results in a fairly lengthy delay. When the match resumes around 9:30 PM, both players begin to comfortable hold serves until 6-5 where Dodig once again plays a bad game in which he makes two unforced forehand errors to quickly go down 0-40. Pella capitalizes on his second match point and you can see the “relief” (as he called it after the match when I talked to him) on his face. His celebration is subdued, but his face tells it all.
When the clock strikes midnight, there are still 4 matches on the courts, one that is about to begin, and another still waiting for the prior match to end. I watch the Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova vs Magdalena Rybarikova match on Grandstand 2.
It cannot be an easy task to play a match that starts after midnight, and both players spray balls all over the place. Pavlyuchenkova proves to be the one to make fewer mistakes and hit more winners in tiebreakers, so she wins 7-6 7-6. At one point during the second set, 4th seed Svetlana Kuznetsova casually enters the court around 1:30 AM and joins the other 20 spectators left in the stands.
Before I leave little before 2 AM, I watch a couple of games and the first set tiebreaker between Marin Cilic and Hyeon Chung. There are between 50 and 100 people in the stands to watch the defending US Open champion.
I am not that surprised. It has been a long day and the rain delay in the evening did not help. I leave after the first set and see that the car that parked after me is extremely close to my car and I remember the parking attendant from the morning…