New logo!

Hi y'all. I've worked in collaboration with a fantastic graphic designer to bring about a new logo to the site. The vision I had for the logo was something sleek and modern that was also simple and darker in tone. Max Julian was able to bring my vision to life and for that I thank him. Please visit him at www.maxjulian.com and follow him on twitter @discoblackout.

The more things change...

2011 had been the year of Novak Djokovic who came into Roland Garros having won 39 matches in a row including 4 finals victories over Nadal in masters 1000 tournaments, 2 on hard and 2 on clay. Federer was an afterthought; a distant third wheel to the Nadal Djokovic show. But at the end of this fortnight what we have learned is that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Once again, it was Federer and Nadal in the final and once again Nadal was the victor.

Now or Never?

To me the match of the tourney on the women's side was the Jankovic vs. Schiavone match. This match was a huge opportunity given the decimated draw. With the top 3 seeds, Wozniacki, Clijsters and Zvonareva all losing, Jankovic and Schiavone would have to be favored due to their experience on the grandest stages. Schiavone is of course the defending champ here while Jankovic is a former number one and 3 times a semi-finalist at RG and a perennial top-10'er. In fact, Jankovic is the longest residing top 10 player having been there since Jan 2007. Losing this match would end that streak however as she is defending points from a SF at RG last year. The match started very late due to a 4 and a half hour men's match. In the first set Jankovic had so many break point chances and game points on her own serve, yet found herself 5-1 down. She didn't take her chances on the big points and despite getting a break back, went down 6-3. In the second, she was cracking the backhand inside out and down the line to put Schiavone off-balance. Schiavone also started leaking errors. The JJ serve was working really well for her too. And after a 6-2 second, we headed to a deciding third. It was a see-saw affair and JJ put herself in a winning position. At 4-4, she was serving and had multiple game points. If she could just hold on, all the pressure would be on Schiavone to stay in the match having been broken so many times already. Then the wheels came off. She could not buy a first serve at all. She threw in some doubles. Her backhand wasn't stinging anymore and although JJ has never been known for her forehand, she went into a shell almost and was barely putting anything on the FH. It was honestly worse than Wozniacki's... Despite all this, JJ still had opportunities to win the game but by playing passively and pushing on every shot, this allowed Schiavone the chance to dictate play, and to her credit, she took it. It's all about who takes their chances, and just as she did last year, Schiavone knows when an opportunity presents itself. After laying an egg in last years SF against Stosur (a golden opportunity to win that maiden slam), Jankovic comes up empty again. JJ has had her chances but instead of going after it, she has let these opportunities slip. You have to wonder if JJ has it in her but after today's performance, now or never is starting to look a lot like never.

Milos please take a break!

Milos Raonic is the hottest thing on tour right now, winning matches everywhere (and I mean everywhere) and his ranking is shooting up at lightning pace. Here's my concern: after reaching the 4th round at the Australian Open, he flew to Johannesburg, South Africa and played qualies and 2 main draw matches. Then he went to San Jose, California and won the thing, and this past week he played 5, 3 set matches in reaching the Memphis final. Now he's jetting off to Acapulco, Mexico to play on clay ahead of the Canada/Mexico Davis Cup Tie to be held in Mexico. He will most certainly be playing in the big Masters 1000 events in Indian Wells and Miami so there is no break in sight. But burnout is very possible and with the two masters events, that is a worrying proposition. He should also take some time off so that he re-fuels for the rest of a very long season. That's my 2 cents anyway. Winning San Jose or Memphis might be nice but you always want to peak at the big events.

Roddick: 50 Finals, 30 Titles

Congratulations to Andy Roddick are in order for winning in Memphis over Canadian upstart, Milos Raonic. He is now the 3rd active player to have 30 titles or more joining Roger and Rafa...but that's where the good news ends. If you take a closer look at his titles, almost 2 thirds of them (19/30) are at the 250 level, the lowest on the tour. All 5 of his 500 level events are in the US, 4 of them being in Memphis which certainly has one of the weakest draws year after year. So I'm really not that impressed.

TV coverage of Tennis in Canada

So for as long as I can remember, TSN has been the major tennis carrier in Canada. I remember a time when Rogers Sportsnet was CTV Sportsnet and carried "Sanex-WTA tour" events (poorly might I add). Being a tennis fan in Canada isn't easy that's for sure. I have had a lot of gripes with TSN's coverage over the years and clearly I am still bitter about it. 1) It urks me when TSN goes to taped coverage (a slam or masters 1000) when LIVE tennis is going on. They do this to make sure their time slot they have allotted to the matches isn't extended, because God forbid That's Hockey 10 in the middle of summer or whatever has to be pushed back (yeah I know this is a hockey nation and I don't know what follows the tennis coverage, I'm sure it varies but that was just an example). 2) Slicing and Dicing of QF, SF, and F matches to fit time slots. I'm sorry but these matches are the crown jewel of any tournament, and to splice these up and cut off trophy presentations (re-air of AO men's and women's final since they were played at 330 am et) is utterly ridiculous. 3) Non-flexible coverage. The Roger's cup has been plagued with rain over the years and TSN just gives up on covering it. One instance in particular bugs me. In the 2009 Rogers  Cup for the women, the comeback mom, on the eve of her second US Open title as it were, was to take on Jelena Jankovic in the QF. It rained, but the match was eventually played around 10 pm et. It was the best match that no one saw. I mean, what gives?! You have a second channel, TSN 2, as well as online streaming capabilities. 4) Horrible commentary. Tracy Austin and Mary Carillo are world-class commentators so I give props to TSN for bringing them on for the women's event. Brian Williams and Rod Black do not do their homework at all and are absolutely abysmal. ESPECIALLY Brian Williams. Wow I mean he truly offers nothing valuable to speak of for the viewer. All he does is repeat the score a billion times and then tell us what country the player is from as if they are playing for their country. No, this is not fed cup or davis cup or the olympics, on the tour, they pretty much are playing for THEMSELVES. Ugh. Rage. Peter Burwash is alright, I mean he's got opinions, I don't necessarily always agree but I can deal with that. Robert Bettauer, I feel like he knows the game but is seriously disconnected in that he doesn't follow the tours which is kind of a problem when you're interviewing the players and analyzing their matches.

This year is the first year that the men's and women's events will be played in the same week. I think that the PR people are spinning this as "virtually combined", when in reality they would have much rather kept the events on separate weeks because they will get more TV viewership/revenue and more fan revenue because let's face it, if you're a tennis fan in Canada, you're going to both if at all possible and having both events simultaneously played out makes this a much more challenging task. Also the media hoop-la of the first week gives a fantastic lead-in to the second week and that way all of Canada knows that the Rogers cup is happening. Now it's sort of like a one-shot deal so they've got to get their promotions right with no chance for error. But this was out of Tennis Canada's hands. The tours are moving towards combined men's and women's events because that really is tennis at its finest (see the grand slams). I suppose a bunch of mini-slams is the way of the future. There is something to be said for the men's or women's only events too though. In Canada, we have two great facilities and a rotation of event's is done. I can foresee a time in the future where one year, Toronto holds the combined event and the next year, Montreal holds the combined event. Obviously both grounds will need to be expanded and you are also left with a venue that doesn't get used every other year. There was talk of sort of having this happen in a very bizarre way. I believe there were talks of having one half of the men's draw and one half of the women's draw playing in each city, then flying out the QF's from Toronto to Montreal and vice-versa. It's an interesting concept but I mean logistically it just wasn't going to happen. They would be opening themselves up to so many issues: 1) un-fair rest for one player over the next (person flying out vs. person not flying out) 2) different court conditions (speed, bounce...) 3) Weather issues 4) Inconvenience for the players 5) All-around confusion for the casual fan...so ya, just a myriad of problems, which is why this was never going to fly. The positive in this whole she-bang is that Tennis Canada got the week they wanted, which is the first week of the major US Open Series events. Most players will make the Rogers Cup their first stop on the US Open Series which means good fields, and early arrivals. Early arrivals are great for fans to come by on qualies weekend and check out their favourite players. Also, being back to back events, there have been many instances where the women's Roger's Cup has been struck by withdrawals, most recently, Maria Sharapova, who went 3 sets in the final in Cincinnati and then pulled the rip cord on the Rogers Cup. She had also played the week before in Stanford. It's tough going back to back to back, yes but I feel like the players should support the biggest events on the tour instead of playing a premier event and a premier 5 when you know you committed to the next premier 5. She should have just played both premier 5's. Just sayin'.

The post-AO lull

The post-AO lull isn't impending anymore...it's here. There has been some Fed cup action and this week smaller events scattered across the globe. The event which I want to talk about is the lowly 250 event in San Jose, for 2 reasons, 1) Del Po, 2) Milos Raonic. Del Po has been trying to find his way back into form ever since returning in the fall circuit last year and up to now, it's been "no mas". But he's finally made some headway this week. In the QF, he laid a whooping on ol' Rusty, Lleyton Hewitt and then took on Mr. Hot Sauce himself, Fernando Verdasco (yeah that's what they call him on the tennis boards b/c I guess Verdasco sounds like Tobasco, he's also known as "Fiasco", anyway...I digress).

I watched this SF match, which Verdasco won, 4 and 4 and there were moments and glimpses of the astronomical power that Del Po used to blast Nadal off the court in the 09 US Open SF and then beat Roger in the final. He can certainly make it all the way back to the top of the men's game. At the moment I think he's just missing that match toughness. He just made a few errors at critical junctures (4-4 in the second on his serve) and that loose play ultimately cost him this match. I was watching the tournament stream and the commentators were talking about his future and said that he should be a force a wimbledon and "for obvious reasons, he will never win the French", or something along those lines...uhm what?? I think someone needs to do their research. To me, Del Po is very much like a Soderling in that he hits huge off both wings and he's got a big serve. They also both have relatively big take-backs and the clay allows them the time to really load up and then blast away. Yes, their movement will be limited on the clay but if they can do enough with the ball (which they can) and stay in control of the rallies, they won't need to defend as much. Also being so tall, they can really handle the top spin of players like Nadal or Verdasco. Both of these players have two-handers which also helps them reach up and generate enough power to deal with those high looping balls to their backhands which one-handers struggle with (...see Roger vs. Rafa and the classic equation: lefty super top spin + Roger's backhand = short ball for Rafa to rip a forehand winner with). Oh yeah, did I mention that Soderling is a 2-time Roland Garros runner-up with wins over Rafa and Roger there, and that Del Po reached the SF in 2009 losing to Roger in 5 tight sets? hmm, oh and what has he done at Wimbledon you might ask? In 3 visits, he has never made it past the second round. Grass really requires you to get low and being 6"6, it ain't easy. There are also a ton of quick adjustments you need to make because of the non-homogenous bounces you're bound to get. Del Po hasn't mastered these aspects of the surface yet. His net game needs improvement, and he also needs to be quick enough to get to net to finish off points. The ball is coming at you fast and low (with skidding) and his big take backs will hurt him there. Anyway, what I am saying is that the commentator is on crack.

Wow, this post is already super long. OK, quickly to Raonic. Raonic beat one of his fellow upstarts, Ricardas (Richard) Bernankis in the QF and then got a free pass to the final when Monfils withdrew from their SF. Raonic is showing that he's not just a flash in the pan after his AO QF. His ranking is going to move towards top 50 status real fast if he continues this standard of play. I would be weary of over-playing though. Right after Melbourne, he jetted off to Johnannesburg and is now in San Jose...that's a lot of jet lag. And next week he is playing again, in Memphis. For the final I'm going with Verdasco. Raonic is in with a shot, but similar to that 4th round encounter with Ferrer, Verdasco has got all the experience here. Here's hoping for a good showing from Milos in his first ATP World Tour Final!!

On a side note...how is Memphis a 500 tournament?! It gets a weak field every year and is basically just a tournament for Roddick to get easy points.

Late final thoughts on the Aussie Open

Hey y'all, I've finally found the time to post again! I have also gotten over the truly pitiful performance that Murray had in the final. He flatout laid an egg. And this is a worrisome trend because in 3 grand slam finals, he has been comprehensively beaten by getting straight-setted in all of them. He's sort of had that deer in the headlights look in each match and relying solely on defense. This allowed Djokovic to totally take control from the baseline and just hit through Murray.

The serve which I had said was pretty even was totally in Djokovic's favor (red card for me on that one). For the past year Djokovic has been having major service issues. He developed a hitch in his service motion and started making a ton of double faults. He had more df's than aces. This all came about from working with Todd Martin where he tried to alter his motion to get more pace on the serve. Some coaching relationships don't work out and this one basically sent Djokovic into a tailspin for the better part of a year (along with a raquet change, allergies and heat-related issues). It seems though that Djokovic has worked out the kinks as evidenced by 70% first serves in, 6 aces, no doubles and winning 70% of his first serve points. Murray on the other hand barely broke 50% first serve percentage and in a grand slam final, that leads to a lot of pain.
 
After the final Murray said that he was going to take some time off the tour...then 2 weeks later he was playing in Rotterdam and he lost easily to Marcos Baghdatis. Clay has never been his surface so we'll probably see him re-surface, if he re-surfaces, on the lawns of SW19 Wimbledon. Greats such as Agassi and Clijsters have lost their first 3 finals and have gone on to grand slam glory. Can Murray do the same?

Djoko or Muzza?

Just a quick breakdown of how I see these two matching up.

Serve: The serve is pretty even. Djokovic has been getting a higher first serve percentage throughout the tournament but they both have similar first serve points won percentages.

Return: Murray is one of the best returners in the game so I'll give him the edge here.

Forehand: Big advantage to Djokovic here; he has a bigger forehand and likes to be super aggressive with it, whereas Murray has a tendency to push with his. Murray can flatten it out on the forehand side but the errors can flow off his raquet when he does so.

Backhand: Both these players have outstanding backhands so I'm going even on this one.

Defense: Again, these two guys are two of the best defenders in the game. Gotta go even again.

Intangibles: I think Murray has the edge here, and here's why
-he isn't facing Federer which should come as a relief since his other two finals against Federer left him bound and broken.
-the HEAT! It's gonna be a scorcher today; the first really hot day of the fortnight. Yes, the match is at night but if we're talking 40 deg C, this spells trouble for Djokovic who has famously struggled in the heat, including here in 2008, where he retired in the QF against Roddick.

These guys are both 23 years old, born just a week apart and this should be the start of a tremendous rivalry. I picked Murray at the start of the tournament and I can't back off it now. Murray in 5.

Women's Final

 
Coming into the tournament I had picked Kim Clijsters to win because she is the most complete player out there in the field and most importantly she was healthy. At full health only Justine or Venus could have really pushed her. In the final she came up against Li Na, who was vying to become to first asian player to win a grand slam singles title. It was an interesting match-up because just 2 weeks prior, Li had beaten Clijsters in a warm-up event in Sydney. They both have very similar styles of play. They have two of the best two-handers in the game and they love to take it down the line. Their forehands are bigger but will give you more errors. Their serves are serviceable but not great. However, Clijsters has all the experience being a 3-time slam champion and having played her first grand slam final in 2002. She is also the better defender. None of this mattered in the first set. Clijsters came out on fire winning the first 8 points and I thought she might run through Li Na as she has done to her other grand slam victory opponents, but after Li got settled she was the one dictating play. Clijsters' game plan was to fight power with power and Li was feeding off of her pace and taking it to her. So in a surprise, Li took the first 6-3. It was more of the same at the start of the second set and at 3-2, 30-all on the Cljisters serve, it seemed that Li could actually win this thing. At critical moments such as that one, champions tighten the screws but inexplicably Li started leaking errors and then was getting increasingly frustrated by crowd noise, photographers, and her own poor play. To be fair, Clijsters was causing some of these errors by changing the pace of the rallies. She started using her variety instead of going toe to toe with Li in the power department. She successfully used a combination of slices and looping top spin shots to get some more air under the ball and force Li to generate her own power and Li missed, again and again. Li's biggest detriment is her lack of gameplan options and her propensity to run hot and cold; all of which were on display in the final. At the end of the day it is Clijsters who now has won 3 of the past 5 majors after coming back from retirement. I see her as a big favorite at the French and US Open. Who would have thought that Kim might be the more successful of the "Belgian Sisters"?

End of a career for Justine Henin

Although incredibly sad, you had to see this coming. Today, Justine Henin has retired for a second time; this time it's forever. The elbow injury she sustained last year at Wimbledon has ended her career as the pain has not subsided. You wonder why she came to Australia in the first place, but as she explains in her letter,
"I have rarely been spared from the pain, those last months were very hard. Time has passed, and the doubts have grown, and only return to the courts would give me answers. Not the answer I was hoping for... unfortunately.".

Justine Henin was my favourite player to watch and I will remember Justine as a truly special player. Her all-court versatility was so refreshing and who can forget that perfect, flowing one-handed backhand. At 5"5 she was able to combat the much bigger and stronger women on the tour with a combination of pure talent, finess, and guile. I'll never forget her SF match against Capriati in the 2003 US Open. Henin was 2 points from losing the match no less than 4 times. It was a grueling affair which left Henin on IV afterwards, but somehow she came back the very next day and bested Clijsters for her first US Open title. She has won 4 French Open titles, 2 US Open titles,1 Australian Open title as well as olympic gold, but the one which eludes her, the one she came back for, will be forever missing from her CV; Wimbledon.

Merci Justine, et bonne chance.

Predictions for the AO 2011 QF's and beyond

QF Picks (Men)
Nadal def. Ferrer in 4
Murray def. Dolgopolov in 3
Djokovic def. Berdych in 4
Federer def. Wawrinka in 4

SF Picks (Men)
Murray def. Nadal
Federer def. Djokovic

F (Men)
Murray def. Federer

QF Picks (Women)

Wozniacki def. Schiavone in 2

Li def. Petkovic in 3

Clijsters def. Radwanska in 2

Zvonareva def. Kvitova in 3

SF Picks (Women)

Wozniacki def. Li
Clijsters def. Zvonareva

F (Women)
Clijsters def. Wozniacki

Maple Leaf Missile

Hey everyone, thanks for reading! Just a quick post here. I thought that the Canadian Milos Raonic (who has been dubbed the Maple Leaf Missile) did really well to take a set off of David Ferrer. Ferrer is such a strong competitor and he wore Raonic down over the course of 4 sets but it was a good effort. Ferrer is precisely the type of player an up and comer needs to beat as a sort of measuring stick and Raonic aquitted himself well. He was very aggressive in the first set, ripping the ball and coming in behind everything and pressuring Ferrer who was still getting used to Raonic's powerful game. Ferrer started getting some passes in though and I think that Raonic backed off from the net and tried to win a ground war against Ferrer which is often a losing battle. We'll see much more of Raonic that is for sure. He seems like a polite and confident kid who has the tools to go far.

Sharapova searching for answers

I was hoping to start this blog up before the Aussie Open but computer troubles have stalled me. Alright, let's get down to it-first post! Maria Sharapova!

Anyone who saw the Andrea Petkovic and Maria Sharapova match last night on Laver saw Petkovic wipe the court with Sharapova. It's now the norm for the Sharapova serve to be completely atrocious and she has never had any semblance of competence at net, however add to this that her forehand, backhand and limited movement were also off last night and you get a blowout. It seemed that even she did not believe in her trademark fist pumps and thigh slaps and was just doing them to go through the motions. At 6-2, 5-1 Sharapova saved a match point and then started connecting on a few shots breaking serve and then holding to get to 6-2, 5-3. It seemed as though maybe I had written her off too early. Would Petkovic feel the pressure mounting on the second time of asking to serve out the match? On the penultimate point, Sharapova badly missed a volley and on match point, she dumped a routine shot into the bottom of the net and that was all she wrote.

Ever since returning from shoulder surgery, Sharapova has just not been the same. I hope she does make it back to the top but it is hard for me to see that happening. She is a great fighter and talent and it is a shame that she is a shadow of her former self. Sharapova was philosophical in her post-match interview and has vowed to continue on. I have to admire her for her fight to push on. She is the highest paid female athlete in the world. She has accomplished so much in tennis winning 3 slams and being a former world no. 1. She doesn't need tennis, but there is no place she'd rather be than on the court and competing.