Australian Open 2008 (tennis)

[PunditLisa]

I don't see a thread about the '08 Aussie Open, so I'll start one:

Women's side

1) Serena Williams is looking very good.
2) Venus is a little shaky, but both have proven that they can come back strong.
3) Justine, Justine, Justine...why don't you wear a sleeveless shirt every now and then? Those cap sleeves and confining sports bra do nothing for your figure.
4) Sharapova's serve is looking very sharp. I'm looking forward to her playing one of the Williams sisters.

Men's side

1) Federer is looking rock solid. That one point (if you saw it, you know what I mean) between him and Fabrice Santoro was magnificent. I was rooting for Fabrice.
2) How can I possibly choose between Safin, the sexy headcase, and Baghdatis, the charismatic whippersnapper?
3) Nadal needs to quit beating the hell out of his body.
4) Gooooooooooooo Spadea!

Overall

Pepperspraying a rowdy crowd? Bad form, Aussies.
What's up with the ESPN/TTC coverage? Can't we just pick one and stick with it???
I love Martina Navratilova's commentary. She's so brutally yet innocently honest with the players. ("Venus, what are you going to do about that crappy serve?") :D

[Marley23]

I wish I didn't have to work so early and could watch more, but this weekend figures to be a tennisgasm for me.

Federer, from the little I saw, looks great, and certainly not like a guy who just got over a case of food poisoning. He crushed Santoro, and that's a pretty tough guy to draw in the second round.

I particularly wish I'd seen more than a few minutes of Baghdatis-Safin. I would really like to see Baghdatis return to form, and his next match (Hewitt) should also be very interesting, and the winner should get Djokovic. Ouch.

If Sharapova is serving well, her psyche should hold up and she would be hard to beat. I look forward to examining that.

Nadal... yeah. It's hard to imagine him staying healthy and having a long career. He plays such a hard style and even his early round matches seems to last a long time. He's always tired out by the end of the season.

[PunditLisa]

Just saw the replay of the Baghdatis/Safin match. Holy crap. Safin is such a head case. He beat himself.

It's so nice to see large crowds even past midnight.

[Wee Bairn]

I think it blows that Federer probably will have to play Djokovic before the final- I don't care what the rankings are, there's no way Nadal should be a second seed on a non clay surface.

[Ellis Dee]

I would really like to see Baghdatis return to formSo would I. Was it two years ago that he made a name for himself in Australia? I was drawn in by his smokin' hot girlfriend at the time, but he subsequently won me over.

I'm having a lot of trouble getting into tennis so far this tournament; I'm usually watching hours a day like a mental patient. And there's a writer's strike! I think the reason is because my beloved Giants are still in action, which is depressingly rare this time of year.

So far I caught about three games worth of the Sharapova/Davenport match, and one set worth of the Baghdatis/Safin match. Didn't see any of the Federer match, but that particular highlight was in heavy rotation on ESPN. Very impressive.

[Marley23]

So would I. Was it two years ago that he made a name for himself in Australia? I was drawn in by his smokin' hot girlfriend at the time, but he subsequently won me over.
Yeah, amazingly that was two years ago. He has a really fun style of play and a lot of charm, but he's done little to follow up on that run, so now he's got this draw of death. I guess he's unlikely to make it past Djokovic. If he does that well, maybe he can start putting things together and carry it into other tournaments. New York really wants to get behind that guy. If he ever plays well at the Open he'll get a lot of love.

[PunditLisa]

My husband lamented all night that Baghdatis' smoking hot girlfriend was MIA. Did they break up?

[Wee Bairn]

Its now official- Andy Roddick can no longer be considered an elite player, if he ever was.

[Marley23]

Its now official- Andy Roddick can no longer be considered an elite player, if he ever was.
Wow. That's a stunning loss - not as bad as Gilles Muller, but very surprising - but I don't agree with your assessment. Despite his shortcomings he's been about the third best player in the world over the last four years. I'd say that qualifies as elite.

[Ellis Dee]

My husband lamented all night that Baghdatis' smoking hot girlfriend was MIA. Did they break up?I have to assume so. One thing I'd love to see is the reality show that the two of them did back in 2005.

As for Roddick, guess he still hasn't found his mojo.

[Wee Bairn]

Wow. That's a stunning loss - not as bad as Gilles Muller, but very surprising - but I don't agree with your assessment. Despite his shortcomings he's been about the third best player in the world over the last four years. I'd say that qualifies as elite.

I don't know- he's had a grand total of three ATP singles titles since October 2005.

[Marley23]

I don't know- he's had a grand total of three ATP singles titles since October 2005.
Depends on your definition of elite. He was never going to be an all-time great, but after Federer and Nadal, he's been the consitent #3 player. Djokovic looks better now, for sure, but we'll see how well he holds onto that spot. Is Roddick not elite at #6?
He's been to three major finals, although his performance at the slams has gotten inconsistent; his ranking has slipped a little and he's running into stronger competition at earlier rounds. He did just lead the U.S. team to that Davis Cup win. It sounds like didn't play poorly at all and lost a great match today - not the kind of choke that got him ridiculed at the U.S. Open in 2005. Kohlschreiber isn't a nobody.

[Ellis Dee]

Kohlschreiber isn't a nobody.Who is he? I only watch the slams, but I watch a ton of matches during all four of them each year, and I never heard of him before.

Roddick being his best slam win, what's his second best slam win ever?

[drm]

Did anybody watch the Haase/Grosjean match a few days ago? That Haase kid's got game. I really enjoyed that match.

As for Roddick, I've always looked at him as a decent to good tennis player with an other-worldly serve.

[Marley23]

Roddick being his best slam win, what's his second best slam win ever?
Hmmm... well, he beat Youzhny at the U.S. Open last year, that's probably the biggest one. Youzhny isn't a big name either, but he made the semifinals at the U.S. Open the previous year.
But I've been seeing his name in the slam draws for years, so he's not an upstart nobody, and he did manage to grab the #29 seed. I see that he came into the Australian off a tournament win, too. It looks like Kohlschreiber is peaking right now, since he's at his best-ever ranking.

The funny thing about Roddick is that his game has improved a lot, but he's got nothing in particular to show for it. He used to just be a forehand and a serve. Now his backhand has improved a lot, and he plays much better at net. His accuracy on serve is still excellent, it's not just his power. But the competition is getting better and some of them are more complete players, nevermind whatever mental issues Roddick might have.

[PunditLisa]

I think Roddick's problem is that he's simply not a strategic player. He's developed an incredible serve and is working very hard at developing the other parts of his game. But he just doesn't have that innate ability on the court that the great players have. He doesn't know how to change up HIS game to react to his opponent's game. He can just hit the ball really well. And that'll get you far, but not to the very top. Not with Federer sitting there.

John Isner is falling into the same trap, which is over-relying on his serve and not developing his overall game. That explains why he just got his butt handed to him by Santoro. On paper, Isner should have creamed Santoro -- he's far younger, more fit, and has incredible shots. But Santoro is waay smarter. His instincts on the court are incredible. Roddick simply falls apart when faced against someone who's smarter, but not necessarily as powerful as him, on the court. At its best, tennis is a cat and mouse game. Roddick is a big saber toothed tiger who can't figure out what to do with anything other than another saber toothed tiger.

[Ellis Dee]

Hmmm... well, he beat Youzhny at the U.S. Open last year, that's probably the biggest one. Youzhny isn't a big name either, but he made the semifinals at the U.S. Open the previous year.
But I've been seeing his name in the slam draws for years, so he's not an upstart nobody, and he did manage to grab the #29 seed. I see that he came into the Australian off a tournament win, too. It looks like Kohlschreiber is peaking right now, since he's at his best-ever ranking.Okay, thanks. Youzhny sounds vaguely familiar.

Agreed on the sad irony of Roddick's successes decreasing as his skillset improves. That has to be frustrating. And Lisa, good analysis of Roddick's issues. I'd buy that for a dollar.

[Marley23]

That's a very good analysis of Roddick indeed. I was able to watch a little of the match this afternoon on ESPN2, and it's not like Kohlschreiber was beating Roddick on strategy. He was just playing better, and in particular he was using the angles. Other than mental toughness issues (but those are mostly against Federer), Roddick's big problem actually seemed to be a lack of offense. I've heard commentators say that his forehand doesn't zing quite the way it used to, and where he was hitting solid groundstrokes, Kohlschreiber would just go for more and blast winners. His backhand was excellent, and everything else was working. He played a great match from the baseline, and he was effective at net when he had to be. Roddick still plays too defensively sometimes, standing behind the baseline and not opening up the court. He does a lot of things better these days, but against the best players, he doesn't seem to know when augment sound play with aggressive offense.

[PunditLisa]

Let's see.... the Williams sisters are out, Roddick is out, Blake is out. So no Americans left in the Open.

All my favorites are gone except Djokovic. Rafa was handily whipped by Tsonga, who is en fuego! Marat Safin, the sexy head case, went out at the hands of another favorite, Marcos Baghdatis.

My husband wants to know who the blonde was that was cheering Hewitt on. His wife has gone brunette.

Blake played as well as he could vs. the Federer machine. I hope Tsonga can keep the level of his game up. I'd love to see Federer outplayed for once.

Sharapova is looking as sharp and focused as I've ever seen her. I still don't like her but I don't think she can be beaten when she's playing at the top of her game. She had Henin running all over the place.

Jankovic needs to give her body a break and come back another day.

On to important matters:

I can appreciate Venus trying to create a reasonably priced tennis line, but I can't stand the cap sleeves on her shirts. And her shorts are waaaay too short for the average bear.

Not into Roger's all black look. Black socks and black shoes....? Blech.

I don't understand why Sharapova's visors has little gold stars on just the one side.

Not a fan of Ivanovic's outfit, which has a weird seam which encircles her boobs. It's not attractive.

The Spot Shot seems off for this tourney. Sometimes the balls look within centimeters of the line and Spot Shot shows it being several inches out.

[Marley23]

Djokovic looked really terrific against Ferrer the other night. Tonight's match with Federer should be very good - whoever wins is going to be a heavy favorite in the final. It's amazing how fast Tsonga has found his form; he showed some promise last year, but this is pretty remarkable. We'll see if he can sustain this, or if he follows in the footsteps of Baghdatis and Gonzalez.

[Wee Bairn]

The real final is Federer-Djokovic. No way Nadal should be seeded above Djokovic in any other major but the French until he proves he can win one. Unless seeding is mandated by ranking, I really question what they were doing seeding Nadal second- they could have had an awesome final but now probably won't.

[Marley23]

Unless seeding is mandated by ranking
It is. The exception is Wimbledon, where they take past results (and maybe other grass court results) into account and make their own seedings.

[abbeytxs]

The blond cheering on Hewitt was his sister. She is a professional body builder.

My two cents, I think that Fed is not looking quite as sharp as usual because the surface is a slightly slower surface. Fed just doesn't do as well on the slower surfaces (French anyone?)

I think the men's side has been really fun to watch this year. Lots of close five set matches! The women's not so much. Sharapova is definitely on, much to my dismay as I loathe her. The shrieking, the one dimensional game, the lunatic dad - no thanks.

I knew Blake was going to lose to Federer, but he held up much better than in the past. I think in a year or two he will finally be able to see Fed as human and actually beat him.

I loved watching Tsonga beat Nadal using Nadal's style. Those two were just knocking the ever living crap out of the ball! I hope he doesn't go the way of Baghdatis.

[drm]

I knew Blake was going to lose to Federer, but he held up much better than in the past. I think in a year or two he will finally be able to see Fed as human and actually beat him.

In 2 years Blake is 30 and he's older than Fed. I doubt there will ever be a period where Blake will be beating Fed consistently. The guy to do that will be Djokovic.

Tsonga looked good yesterday.

[Wee Bairn]

In 2 years Blake is 30 and he's older than Fed. I doubt there will ever be a period where Blake will be beating Fed consistently. The guy to do that will be Djokovic.



What I was going to say- Blake will decline with age before Roger will, and if he can't beat him now...

[abbeytxs]

I don't think Blake will ever be able to beat Fed conistently. I do think he stands a chance of beating him at least once. Blake just doesn't believe he can beat Fed yet. It's a head thing.

[PunditLisa]

The only way that Blake will ever consistently beat Fed is if Fed, I dunno, breaks an ankle. He gave Federer all he had, but it simply wasn't enough.

[Ellis Dee]

I don't understand why Sharapova's visors has little gold stars on just the one side.

Not a fan of Ivanovic's outfit, which has a weird seam which encircles her boobs. It's not attractive.Same here and same here. Particularly Ivanovic, whose outfit looks like huge sweat-stains. Especially near here lower back, where the border between the darker blue and lighter blue looks ragged and random, exactly like a sweat stain.

I know some of it is sweat stains and some of it is design, but it looks very much like it's all sweat. Of course, I don't really have a problem with it since that's the look I'd like to bring her to, but still, it's odd looking.

[PunditLisa]

Same here and same here. Particularly Ivanovic, whose outfit looks like huge sweat-stains. Especially near here lower back, where the border between the darker blue and lighter blue looks ragged and random, exactly like a sweat stain.

It WAS sweat that made it darker. When she started the match it was all a solid blue. But as she sweated, the material around her boobs and stomach darkened, while the rest did not. The result was rather bizarre and not appealing, IMO. (However, it looked lovely on her when it was dry.)

I wondered if the designer did that on purpose or it was an unfortunate mistake (a la Gwyneth Paltrow's see through dress).

[ColonelDax]

The guy to do that will be Djokovic.

Nice call - Federer just lost the semi to Djokovic in straight sets. It's the first defeat in 35 semis for the Fed, according to Bloomberg. No web link available yet.

[Wee Bairn]

Nice call - Federer just lost the semi to Djokovic in straight sets. It's the first defeat in 35 semis for the Fed, according to Bloomberg. No web link available yet.

Djokovic could have beaten Roger if he had won an early tiebreaker at the US Open- perhaps there's a new best player in mens tennis?

[hawthorne]

Maybe. Federer looked listless - as he has throughout the tournament. He showed signs of life in the third, but he just wasn't himself.

[Marley23]

Djokovic is excellent and has become a top player very fast, and should stay there for a long time. But it's too soon to say he's better than Federer in my opinion.

[Wee Bairn]

I'm a huge Roger fan but am now very concerned. I think he'll still be able to do like Sampras and have a good chance at winning at Wimbledon for years to come, though. And its not like everyone's caught up to him, just Djokovic, and Nadal on clay.

[Windwalker]

I'm a huge Roger fan but am now very concerned. I think he'll still be able to do like Sampras and have a good chance at winning at Wimbledon for years to come, though. And its not like everyone's caught up to him, just Djokovic, and Nadal on clay.

Perhaps Roger is losing his motivation to go all out and seize the championship. Which is understandable, if you've so dominated the sport in the last few years; there's nothing left to prove. I suspect he'll win a few more Grand Slams (taking the all-time record in the process), but his reign of absolute terror outside of clay may be over.

I hope Tsonga stays healthy and keeps fit; if he does, I can see him becoming the next Pete Sampras, but more fun to watch. The guy certainly has all the tools to do it.

[PunditLisa]

You heard it here first: Someone drugged the Williams sisters and Roger Federer. I've never seen Serena look so listless in a game. Evah.

Don't laugh. There was a father who was convicted of murder after one of his daughter's opponents fell asleep at the wheel after a tennis tourney. Turned out he'd been putting something (sedative?) in her opponent's water bottles.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/03/02/wfauv02.xml

Besides, if the Russian mafia is threatening Davedenko's family (as McEnroe has hinted) in order to get him to throw a game, I wouldn't past them to drug the players. There's a lot of money to be had when a non-favorite wins.

(I'm turning into one of those mumbling conspiracy theorists.)

[Marley23]

Besides, if the Russian mafia is threatening Davedenko's family (as McEnroe has hinted) in order to get him to throw a game, I wouldn't past them to drug the players. There's a lot of money to be had when a non-favorite wins.
I didn't hear McEnroe say that, but I'd love to know his basis for the idea. My read on the Davydenko thing was that somebody who treated him for the ankle problem gave that information to gamblers.

[PunditLisa]

I didn't hear McEnroe say that, but I'd love to know his basis for the idea. My read on the Davydenko thing was that somebody who treated him for the ankle problem gave that information to gamblers.

I may have read it in "Tennis" magazine.

[Wee Bairn]

I didn't hear McEnroe say that, but I'd love to know his basis for the idea. My read on the Davydenko thing was that somebody who treated him for the ankle problem gave that information to gamblers.

The odd thing though is from what I read the bets came in after Davydenko had won the first set 6-2. A trainer could have called the Russians during the match of course.

[Mahaloth]

Does the Men's Final air on ESPN2 any other time than live? I don't see it listed on tennis.com or in zap2it.

I see it airs 3:30 am to 6:30 am on Sunday, but never again on ESPN2?

I really want to see it, but I can't stay awake to see it live.

[Marley23]

The odd thing though is from what I read the bets came in after Davydenko had won the first set 6-2. A trainer could have called the Russians during the match of course.
He'd been injured earlier in the tournament, so if he was treated before the match and made some noises about not being sure he could play, for example - or if he took an injury timeout during the match he lost... who knows. The investigation doesn't seem to have turned up anything so far in terms of what actually happened.

[PunditLisa]

Here's an article about it.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/155304.html

[Windwalker]

Is it just me, or does the women's game seem significantly more lackluster than the men's game these days? Even in the latest rounds, unforced errors/winners ratio in the women's game seems significantly higher than in the men's game, and the rallies don't seem as exciting (probably because they seem to end with unforced errors more often than not!). To top it all off, I don't think we've had an exciting women's grand slam final in quite some time, while the men's side has (even straight set victories have usually been decent contests).

Am I crazy here? Or chauvinist? I do recall that the era when the Williams sisters were ranked 1 & 2 seemed a lot more thrilling than now (with the paradoxical exception of when they actually played against each other). Am I imagining things?

[PunditLisa]

Earlier in the Open, the Aussie papers were opining that the men's tennis matches were so boring (nobody was going past 3 sets) that they should offer the women a larger share of the prize money vs. the men. Then came Week 2.

I know I was sorely disappointed with the marquis matches namely Sharapova v. Henin and Williams v. Jankovic. But normally I'd prefer to watch women's tennis vs. watching the "sluggers" like Roddick turn the game into a serving duel.

Personally, I think it may be time to make women play best of 5. A lot of players take a bit of time to get warmed up. Once they hit their stride and the match picks up, the match is over.

[Marley23]

Personally, I think it may be time to make women play best of 5. A lot of players take a bit of time to get warmed up. Once they hit their stride and the match picks up, the match is over.
There's not a player on the tour who'd want to do it. The last match of the year-end championships used to be five sets - I saw that one year. Graf beat Hingis 6-0 in the fifth set, Hingis was clearly dead on her feet.

I do get bored by the women's matches sometimes. Even for the good players, the errors seem to get out of control. I like the Williamses and Henin, but I find Sharapova exceptionally dull.

[Wee Bairn]

Womens matches to me are definitely less exciting- espcially early rounds where matches under an hour aren't uncommon. The best about the womens game is though is that you have no idea who is going to win a given tournament- any of the seeds usually have a chance.

[Ellis Dee]

Personally, I watch the men's tour for tennis and the women's game to gawk at hot chicks. The women's game looks like it's in slow motion compared to the men. And I agree the women's game is rife with unforced errors; the ratio of winners:unforced is way higher on the men's tour.

As for the men's tour being an ace-fest, the big servers usually get knocked off in the first round like Roddick, so that's hardly a fair criticism. I'd go so far as to say that in this decade, more women champions won from aces than men. (The Williams sisters serve up more aces than Federer.)

[Windwalker]

Personally, I watch the men's tour for tennis and the women's game to gawk at hot chicks. The women's game looks like it's in slow motion compared to the men. And I agree the women's game is rife with unforced errors; the ratio of winners:unforced is way higher on the men's tour.

As for the men's tour being an ace-fest, the big servers usually get knocked off in the first round like Roddick, so that's hardly a fair criticism. I'd go so far as to say that in this decade, more women champions won from aces than men. (The Williams sisters serve up more aces than Federer.)

Yeah, one thing going for the this women's final is that both finalists are smokin' fine; Ivanovic is probably the most beautiful woman I've seen in the top 10. About the men's game, I'm glad that Federer's not an ace-man like Sampras; I used to always root against Pete, Phillopoussis, and those guys because they were so boring to watch. It's much better now; Fed is usually incredibly graceful, and Nadal's fiery game reminds me of Agassi. I also hope we see more of this Tsonga kid in the future. I like baseline rallies as much as the next guy, but that threat of a drop volley just makes the game so much more fun to watch.

[Cunctator]

An entertaining men's final. And a deserved winner.

[DSYoungEsq]

Womens matches to me are definitely less exciting- espcially early rounds where matches under an hour aren't uncommon. The best about the womens game is though is that you have no idea who is going to win a given tournament- any of the seeds usually have a chance.
Unlike the men's side in Australia this year, where the #3 was facing an unseeded? :D

[Windwalker]

An entertaining men's final. And a deserved winner.

Yep. They both had the jitters early, but Tsonga recovered enough to take the first set. For some reason, he just seemed to get really wild during the 2nd and 3rd sets, missing a bunch of short forehand balls with plenty of time to set up. And I think he only hit one or two drop volleys of the many that he tried- a total reversal of his match against Nadal.

Djokovic, on the other hand, really impressed me with his hustle and reflexes; he got to smashed balls that most players would just let go and flung it back to an oft-erring Tsonga. The 4th set was great, and despite being somewhat plagued by errors, it was also filled with genius.

I still think that Tsonga choked a little, but Djokovic was mostly responsible for seizing the victory. The unseeded one will be back at the tail end of future majors, I'm pretty sure.