Tag: Eugenie Bouchard

WTA Luxembourg: Julia Goerges Meets the Bar

Although I eventually decided against it, I was tempted to add “time and again” to the end of the title, to avoid any misunderstanding. So, I will clarify. It is not by winning the WTA Luxembourg Open that Julia Goerges “met the bar” this week. There is a lot more nuance to her run to the title than simply accomplishing what was expected on paper from the top-seeded player in the field. What must be emphasized here is the consistent way in which the ninth-ranked German “met the bar” every time she was challenged by her opponents and the stakes got higher.

Any coach/supporter will tell you that, while watching your player roll through matches with great overall performances may feel ecstatic, seeing him/her overcome challenging situations, making the right decisions under duress, and turning into a mental giant each time the score points to a critical stage, corresponds to a unique type of jubilation that satisfies at a far deeper level than one generated by watching him/her dominate an opponent during a routine win.

Let’s take a look at the key moments of the last three matches played this week by Goerges, her quarterfinal win over Donna Vekic, her comeback semifinal one over Eugénie Bouchard, and her victory over Belinda Bencic in the final.

Photo: Lintao Zhang – Getty Images (from the China Open)

Vekic took Goerges to a third set in the quarterfinals and pushed her hard in the final set. Down 2-3 and serving, Vekic saved three break points to hold and get back to 3-3. At the time, it felt like a significant momentum change in a match where each previous set had been decided by a single major momentum shift. When Goerges started that seventh game with a double fault, it felt like the beginning of a final shift in the match. Vekic’s chance to take command of the match had arrived.

Instead, Goerges popped a first serve to the “T,” and followed it up with a backhand down-the-line winner, classic execution of a 1-2 punch, to get to 15-15. Two points later, at 30-30, she pulled the trigger on a running forehand that forced Vekic into a defensive position. Goerges followed her shot to the net, but Vekic made a high – and impressive – retrieval that left Goerges little choice but to back up and hit a forehand swing-volley in the air from less than two meters inside the baseline. She smacked it right on the corner for a winner. She pumped her fist and let out her loudest scream of the match in relief. It was after all at 3-3, 30-30, in the third set, that she pulled those shots of her hat. Yet, that point alone was only a part of the whole.

Outside of the double fault to start that 3-3 game, Goerges committed no unforced errors from that point forward and won eight out of the last nine points to shut the curtains down on Vekic with a 6-3 3-6 6-3 victory. In that short segment, she also hit four winners and an ace.

In the semifinals, she faced qualifier Bouchard who had guaranteed her reentry to the top 100 by reaching the semifinal round and was riding a five-match winning streak, first one since her breakthrough year in 2014. Playing solid from the baseline and keeping the balls deep, Bouchard built a 7-6 5-3 lead on Goerges before the pendulum began tilting, sharply and suddenly, in the German’s favor.

Julia had her back against the wall when Bouchard served for the match at 5-4. It is true that Bouchard could not buy a first serve in that game and double-faulted at 15-15. Nevertheless, it also undeniably true that Goerges nailed three forehand winners on the most important points of the game. The first was to start it, the second at 30-30, the third to end it and earn the break. After Goerges held serve to grab the 6-5 lead, she broke the Canadian’s serve again at love, hitting two return winners in the process. In a matter of few minutes, she went from being two points away from defeat to starting a third set.

Although Goerges may have recorded a stunning +22 difference in the number of winners vs. unforced errors (48-26) for the match, the seven winners that she hit in those three games mattered the most. They came when she found herself in the do-or-die. They also bore dire consequences for her opponent Bouchard because Goerges never looked back, winning 10 out of the last 11 games to get past the Canadian 6-7 7-5 6-1 in two hours and two minutes.

In Saturday’s final, Goerges prevailed in two close sets to outlast the former top-ten player and qualifier Belinda Bencic and earn her second WTA title of the year. Bencic, the 21-year-old Swiss, is climbing back toward the top 20 after a miserable 2016 campaign that saw her suffer from a wrist injury, ultimately requiring surgery and causing her to plummet outside the top 100. She is currently ranked no.47 and poised to climb higher next week following her run this week.

On Saturday, both players had little trouble holding comfortably. For a player to take command, she either needed to pull a few magic shots on a return game, or her adversary had to gag points away on her serving game. Goerges did the former and pulled ahead. At 2-2, she exclusively went for bazooka returns on every point. She missed two out of the first three, going down 30-15. She made the next three, two of them resulting in clean winners, and the other, an almost-clean one. Four huge returns made brought Goerges the only break that she needed, to win the set.

It would not be fair though if I did not mention the 5-4 game. Goerges rode the early break until 5-4 and had the chance to serve the set out. She lost the first point when she sailed her forehand deep. She did not let the scoreboard pressure get to her. She served her first ace of the match to get to 15-15. Two points later, another big first serve brought her two set points at 40-15. She only needed the first. Another vintage 1-2 punch 3ending with a forehand winner put the first set in Julia’s pocket. It was perhaps her best serving game of the match, right when it counted the most.

In the second set, Goerges found herself serving at 4-5 to remain alive in the second set. She met the bar, yet again! Cool as a cucumber, she served four first serves to hold serve, one being an ace, the other two resulting in follow-up winners. In the next game on Bencic’s serve at 5-5, Goerges produced three more winners but also got an assist from her opponent when Bencic missed a high-forehand volley from the top of the net. That was the decisive break.

In the 6-5 game, Goerges earned her first match point at 40-0 when she served two aces and hit an unreturnable second serve. On her second match point at 40-15, Goerges pulled her umpteenth 1-2 punch winner to earn the title with a score of 6-4 7-5.

Goerges had 19 more winners than unforced errors (35-16), another spectacular spread in those numbers. She never faced a break point in the match. However, the stringing together of a few great points by Goerges at crucial junctures mentioned above played the largest role in deciding the match. Goerges seemed to find the extra gear whenever she needed it.

The above-noted segments from her last three matches are fresh in Goerges’s memory. When one uses the type of aggressive game that she plays, confidence can be the cornerstone of one’s performance. For three days and three matches, Goerges repeatedly met the bar, and that should mean something. I would not be surprised if a series of wins like these, combined with the title, propel her to a period of rapid improvement, perhaps even to the next level in her progress, whatever that may represent to her.

A baseline player who mainly operates on safe groundstrokes and consistency can maintain a certain level even during a down cycle in confidence. In the case of a striker like Goerges, down cycles can be painful and filled with an abundance of sprayed errors. At the same time, that which she can accomplish would have no limits if she can ride on a high degree of confidence and belief. If anything at all, the Luxembourg Open serves to bring Goerges closer to that ride.

Until next time…

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

MT-Desk at the Citi Open, Washington D.C.

Mertov’s Tennis Desk will be on location at the Rock Creek Park Tennis Center, in Washington D.C., throughout the Citi Open (August 1-9) !!

The men’s field is led by two top 5 players, Andy Murray (no. 3) and Kei Nishikori (no. 5). It will also feature an impressive group of players such as Marin Cilic (no. 9), Richard Gasquet (no. 13), Kevin Anderson (no. 15), Grigor Dimitrov (no. 16), Feliciano Lopez (no. 18), and the top American John Isner (no. 19).

On the women’s side, following the late withdrawal of Victoria Azarenka due to right-shoulder injury, Ekaterina Makarova is the highest-ranked participant at no. 11 and will be challenged by a strong group consisting of ex-Major winners such as Samantha Stosur (no. 21) and Svetlana Kuznetsova (no. 24), and younger stars like Belinda Bencic (no. 22) and Eugenie Bouchard (no. 26).
Update: Bouchard has withdrawn with an abdominal injury

Check here for reports throughout the tournament and stay tuned to Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter for live updates, and on-site photos…

Photo: BostonHerald.com
Photo: BostonHerald.com

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

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…

Ending Tale of Roland Garros 2014

Clay Court Sweep
Roland Garros ended with two usual characters holding the winning trophies. Ironically, it will remain as one of the most upset-filled Slams in recent memory. Through all the upsets and the unexpected twists, the men’s number one and two seeds kept coming to a collision that all tennis fans expected since the beginning of the tournament. On the women’s side, once the top 3 seeds, Williams, Li Na, and Agnieska Radwanska, lost in the early days of the tournament, Sharapova and Halep were the two names that they predicted for the finals before any other name.

No need to go into details of each match, since most tennis fans have either watched them or read about them. It is worth noting however that for the first time in many years of worth of Slams (and yes, it’s “Slams” and not “Grand Slams”, a whole write-up needed for that mistake that keeps getting repeated over and over), the final weekend of the women’s draw witnessed as much excitement as the men’s, contained more dramatic matches with extremely tight finishes. The semifinals on Thursday – Sharapova vs. Eugenie Bouchard and Halep vs. Andrea Petkovic – undoubtedly provided more thrills for the spectators than the dull Friday of the men’s semifinals in which both matches remained sub-par in quality, and above-par in disappointment in terms expectations. Ernests Gulbis and Novak Djokovic played mediocre tennis for the most part, piling up the unforced errors. Djokovic’s physical condition deteriorated as the match went on and Gulbis could not raise his level of play to take advantage of it. The second match between Nadal and Andy Murray went from start to finish at maximum warp speed as Nadal totally outclassed Murray for a one-man-show that lasted 1 hour and 38 minutes.

On Saturday, Sharapova and Halep brought their “A” games to Philippe Chatrier and provided the crowd, as well as the millions in front of their TV screens, with a spectacle to be remembered for a long time to come. It made me think back to the last three-set-final at Roland Garros, some 13 years before Saturday, when Jennifer Capriati confirmed her comeback year that started at the Australian Open with a thrilling victory, 1/6 6/4 12/10, over the young newcomer Kim Clijsters of Belgium. It was a high flying period for the WTA with the Williams sisters in the beginning of their dominance, with Capriati and Martina Hingis challenging them, the Belgian duo Clijsters and Justine Henin joining the race and Sharapova getting in the mix in the mid-2000s. That match on Chatrier between Capriati and Clijsters was the stamp on the envelope that contained the sealed confirmation that WTA was a highly popular product among tennis fans. Around late 2000s, the product got old and stale, with many of the stars who built it, retiring or losing their skills. Yet, the new crop of players never managed to take over the few remaining names that kept dominating most tournaments. Saturday’s final match was not only a thrill in terms of quality of tennis played but also the stamp that the WTA desperately needed to confirm that it is on its way back. Sharapova may have lifted the winner’s trophy but the fresh crop of players such as Halep, Bouchard, Garbine Muguruza, Ajla Tomljanovic, Sloane Stephens, Caroline Garcia, and few others are not going anywhere, and will stay around for a long time. WTA has a golden opportunity to capitalize on a new, radiant group of players, and it could not have asked for a better Slam final match to launch their product.

The men’s final lacked nothing with regards to hype. The two best players in the world met at the highest stage of clay court tennis. The first two sets matched the expectations in quality and competition. Djokovic and Nadal traded blows, with each attempting to gain control over the other’s baseline game through aggressive shots. In the first set, Djokovic managed to stay inside the court and push Nadal around. In the second set, Nadal began going for winners much more often and succeeded in taking the middle of the court away from Djokovic. With the first two sets split, everyone expected a thrill ride the rest of the way. It never happened, due to two things. First Nadal completely found his rhythm and remained on high gear for the next hour, only to come land from space down to earth for the last few games of the match. Second, Djokovic’s physical state rapidly deteriorated from about 4-3 in the second set to 2-0 in the third set, to the point where he began shaking and stretching his legs and arms between points to relax and recover, stretching for balls to avoid extra steps, and as the usual result of fatigue, increasing the number of unforced errors in abundance. It was only after the middle of the fourth set, when the clouds came and the wind picked up, that Djokovic found a way to get back into the match – and Rafa had a hand in it too, with a few unexpected unforced errors. Yet, it was too little too late, as Djokovic did not have enough reserve in the tank to match the quality of his tennis from the first set. Nadal remained the king of clay and the number one player in the world, improving on his record of French Open titles and adding a new one to his expanding resume: he is now the only player in tennis to have one at least one Slam title for ten years in a row.

That being said, the stars of the last weekend of this Slam were the women. It was the first time in many years that women’s matches outclassed the men’s matches in excitement, thrill, and in quality. Unlike in men’s matches, there were no ‘empty moments’ in the three women’s matches of the last weekend, no one-sided shows, and plenty of quality shot making. Unlike in the men’s matches, each of the three women’s matches remained hard to predict all the way to the very last few points. Roland Garros 2014 was the recipe that the WTA desperately needed, the injection that rejuvenated a stale product.

I hope you enjoyed the series of updates from Paris.
Let the grass court season begin…

Women’s Final Preview: Sharapova vs. Halep

Since the eliminations of the top 3 seeds Serena Williams, Li Na, and Agnieska Radwanska in the early days of Roland Garros, the few left who were still daring to make predictions called on two names to meet in the finals: Maria Sharapova and Simona Halep. To their relief, the two players stayed the course and reached tomorrow’s final match, although not without some difficulty in Sharapova’s case.

Logic would dictate that with all her previous Slam titles and her mental toughness, Sharapova should overcome yet another challenge by a newcomer to the elite world of “big time” in WTA in the form of Halep. She has already held off challenges by the so-called the ‘new generation’ by recording remarkable comeback wins against Garbine Muguruza and Eugenie Bouchard, and one other against a proven player in Samantha Stosur. She came back to win in three sets after losing the first against all three. Especially her win against Bouchard deserves special mention.

The 48 hours leading up to the match, a photo of Sharapova taken with an 8-year-old Bouchard circulated all over the social and main stream media, courtesy of the editor at TV Guide who initially posted it on Twitter. The effects of this picture, coupled with Bouchard’s reference to Sharapova as her idol – ‘back then’ Bouchard specified, adding that they are “not friends” now – when asked about it, transformed the match into the image of a champion who stands to cede her younger rival the status of the revered champion and let the newcomer take her place. This was reminded to her more than once in the form of direct question – how did she feel about playing someone who took her as an idol when she was young? –, and in the form of newspaper articles and TV spots, in case she followed the media. She even had to respond to the last-second question by the colorful French TV personality Nelson Monfort on screen right before she walked on the court. He asked her how she felt about being the favorite and Sharapova, probably sick of the hype, bluntly answered that there could be no favorites in a match like this, and walked out. If she lost she would drop out of top 10, and Bouchard would enter it. Thus, it was under tremendous pressure that the Russian took her first steps to the court. To exasperate things further, the Philippe Chatrier crowd overwhelmingly supported Bouchard throughout the match. In short, Sharapova played a match where all the elements worked against her and she had everything to lose, while Bouchard stepped on the court as someone who had everything to gain from a victory.

So, one can understand when Sharapova celebrated her victory as if she won the tournament after her courageous comeback from a set down again. It was not happiness or contentment that she manifested. It was relief! I am not a big Sharapova fan, but I admired her tenacity, her sheer will to find a way to win, or refusal to lose. I believe that she will enter the court much more relaxed against Halep, an recently established top 5 player. She has already passed the toughest mental tests against Muguruza and Bouchard. She will play a match in which she is not the clear-cut favorite, although she is the slightly on paper. Her main advantage is her experience and her awareness that she can accomplish what is necessary when clutch moments arrive.

In contrast, Halep has steamrolled through the tournament, just as she has steamrolled through the last 12 months. If one was to pick the best player on the WTA Tour without a Slam title in the last 12 months, it would be Halep without a doubt. Yet, she has never been to this stage in a Slam tournament. Will that be a factor? It sure did not in her first semifinal in a Slam against Andrea Petkovic. She played the best tennis of the tournament by any player in the first set of that match. Her biggest strength is her footwork. She is able to move around the ball in small steps and get in position better than anyone in the current generation and probably better than any player since Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario of Spain, the French Open winner of 1989, 1994, and 1998. Her forehand is lethal and she does not seem to have a clear weakness.

If the past was not considered and tennis history began in the last 12 months, it would be a 50-50 call. Halep has numerous titles on every surface, skyrocketed to the number 4 ranking. Sharapova recovered from an injury the latter part of 2013, and has won Stuttgart and Madrid. In Madrid and on clay, she did beat Halep in three sets. When the past and the aura are added to the equation, the balance tilts in Sharapova’s favor. She has been to this stage, and has won Slam titles. Halep will play in her first final. All indications show that it has the potential to be a final for ages. Let’s hope it turns out so.

SAM_2144a Friday evening – Trophy presentation ceremony rehearsal on Philippe Chatrier

Navigation