No he’s not - he’s Scottish.
Henin tore a ligament in her elbow when she fell during her match with Clijsters. She’s out for two months and will miss the U.S. Open. That sucks.
Speaking of losing confidence, I’m really surprised to see Djokovic in the semis. He had such a promising start, with many pundits predicting he’d win majors because he had an all-around game…and then something happened. As McEnroe said, I believe he’s lost his love of the game. He used to be goofy and smile all the time…now he looks like tennis is a chore to him. It’s a real shame because he seems like a genuinely nice, albeit a bit of a smart alec, kid. So good luck to him…
Although it would be nice to see Thomas Berdych win, too. He’s been around so long and it’s refreshing to see one of the dark horses rise to the occasion and play up to his potential…
Of course, it would be nice to see Murray win a major, too, especially on his home turf…
And then we have Rafa, who puts in the work and still seems grounded…
In short, I’d be glad to see any of them win! It’s a real shame that I have to work today and can’t watch the matches live.
As far as the women go, I have to root for Zvonareva. It’s always nice to see an underdog win. Serena is an awesome player, but she needs some humility.
Bummer.
He did win one. I think part of what happened is that the public turned on him and he didn’t know what to do with that. He started making a name for himself at the U.S. Open in 2007 when he did those impressions of Nadal and Sharapova and people liked him. (I don’t think the players appreciated it, which is too bad.) Then he won in Australia in 2008 and things changed. I don’t he did anything, but his family started getting more attention and some of the stuff they did - like saying he’d surpassed Federer as the top player, and wearing matching jumpsuits that spelled out his name - irritated people. They were seen as arrogant.
Then there was the withdrawal issue: he retired during the Australian Open semis in 2009. He was the defending champion and he quit in the fourth set. (Years earlier he’d pulled out of French Open and Wimbledon matches). Reaction to that was very negative. I understand he was in a tough situation - I think he won a very late night match and then had to come back the next day - but people started to think he’s a quitter. By that point he’d failed to overtake Federer and Nadal and Murray was on his heels, and nobody thought he could do anything right. His performance at the U.S. Open last year might help, and he’s been playing better since late last year. He still does have more shots that anyone not named Federer, in my opinion.
I don’t know why I typed Scouser there. I meant Scottish. 
Berdych needed a lot of chances, but he won the second set in a tiebreak and is now up two sets to none. He served for the set at 6-5, and in the tiebreak he lost about four set points before he finally sealed the deal. Here’s a statement on how powerful Berdych is: he’s making barely half his first serves. Djokovic is at 78%, which is a huge difference, but Berdych is doing better in terms of winning points on both his first and second serves. And he’s hitting more winners, too. He’s at +9 right now with Djokovic breaking even (17 winners, 17 errors).
And Berdych gets through Djokovic in three sets, affirming he’s emerging as a top player the way Del Potro, Soderling, and Cilic have over the last year. It looks like Berdych won on sheer power. Even though Djokovic had a high first serve percentage, he hit eight double faults in three sets. Berdych ended the match with 34 winners (+17) to 25 for Djokovic (+3). The serving stats got a little closer from my last post, with Berdych’s percentage going up a bit and Djokovic going down a few points. But when Berdych got his first serve in he won the point more than 80% of the time - and even on second serve he was above 60%. Djokovic was at about 40% on his second serve. Looks like he didn’t have enough firepower out there today.
I think Nadal will beat Murray. If had to play it safe I’d say he’ll win in four sets, but I think there’s a chance he’ll do it without a whole lot of trouble. Murray is very good but I don’t know if he can knock Nadal off his game, and Nadal just keeps coming and coming. Murray may get frustrated by that and go a fade. The question then becomes, can Nadal do what Haase and Petzschner almost did to Nadal during this tournament and what Soderling did last year - kill the ball at every opportunity and keep him from getting any rhythm. It’s Berdych’s first major final but I think he might be able to do that.
I’m not sure that he needs to knock Nadal off his game. Nadal has been the most successful clay-court specialist at Wimbledon in the modern game, but he’s still just that - a clay court specialist.
On paper, Murray should win, IMHO.
I have to disagree there. Nadal outgrew the specialist tag the first time he made a Wimbledon final, and then he made a second, and eventually won the thing. And he also won in Australia. He’s definitely best on clay but he’s figured out what to do on other surfaces, like hitting the ball through the court more. And I don’t think grass suits Murray’s game that well either. He doesn’t play that much offense. Sometimes I think clay would be the best for him instead of hardcourt, but I don’t see him beating Nadal on clay too many times. But we’ll find out soon.
And by the way, Zvonareva is now in the doubles final as well as singles. That’s usually Williams (or Navratilova) territory.
He’s had success at Wimbledon in spite of his style, though - it’s just sheer talent and athleticism.
I don’t see anyone beating Nadal on clay. I agree that Murray’s game is better suited to hard courts, but a hard court game works better on grass than a clay court one - and Murray is significantly better at net.
Stupid NBC delays Nadal-Murray so they can start it at Noon instead of live.
I agree that the talent and athleticism are big factors, and his game is always going to be best suited for clay. I do think Nadal has done a good job of adapting to other surfaces. He doesn’t play so far behind the baseline on grass, he uses less topspin, and his serve is better than it used to be.
Right now they’re tied 4-4 in the first set.
Spoilered for Mahaloth or anyone being victimized by NBC:
Nadal toughs out a win in three sets. It doesn’t look like he had it easy, but he played bigger on the big points: he broke Murray at 4-4 and quickly served out the first set, and won a tiebreak in the second set. He double-faulted at 5 points all, which was uncharacteristic, but then won the last three points. Murray immediately broke Nadal’s serve in the third, but Nadal ripped off the last four games of the set. Final score: Nadal, 6-3, 7-6 (6), 6-4.
I didn’t get up in time for the start of this match, but I did see the last half hour of Serena killing Zvonareva. Serena dominated this one, and Zvonareva didn’t hit a winner until the fifth game of the second set. Serena closed it out with an overhead smash and won her second Wimbledon in a row. She didn’t lose a set the whole tournament, and now has 13 major championships.
I’m not sure I see the distinction between being an all-around great tennis player and one who has a distinct style of play but can change it up based on the surface he’s playing on.
I think anyone who watched the Murray/Nadal match would say that they saw two very talented tennis players duking it out in an incredibly high-level match. Never did I think that Nadal was handicapped by the fact that he excels on clay.
I just hope the Berdych/Nadal final will be as good as the Murray/Nadal semi-final. I didn’t know who to even root for, they both played so well.
Oh, and the women’s final was a real snoozer. Shame that.
Well, another lackluster finale. Congrats to Rafa on a great tournament. Berdych really raised his game these last two tournaments, final here excepted, and I wish him the best of luck breaking through that final barrier.
The Borg/McEnroe classic was good but I wish that Borg wasn’t as reticent. McEnroe did 95% of the talking. Still, is it ever not amusing to see the hair and short shorts of that decade.
Speaking of which, though I don’t want to see shorts go back to that length, I wouldn’t mind if the shorts went to mid-thigh so that I can see the quadricep. Soccer and tennis – it’s a toss up which sport produces the best thighs. 
I have series tickets to the Cincinnati Tennis Masters series event and was relieved to hear Rafa say that he’d hoped to do well in Toronto and Cincinnati. It isn’t the same without Rafa.
In the case of grass, carpet and hard courts, it’s a distinction without a difference. However, in the case of clay, it’s a distinction with a significant difference.
Yeah, I wish Bjorg had more to say during the tie break.
He just doesn’t seem to want to say much whenever he is asked about his playing days.
Well, now the grass courts don’t differ from the synthetic ones purely because there’s few dedicated serve-and-volleyers out there anymore. Note that Borg was in on every single 1st serve-and Mac was in even on his second; the last guy who did that was Patrick Rafter I think. They also noted the drastic difference in wear patterns between then and now-in 1979 the service line was worn all to heck, but now it’s only slightly brown. If Mac tried to do that today, he’d have tons of passing shots whistling past his ass which even his legendary agility and anticipation skills would be unable to cope with. Damned shame that the dedicated serve-and-volleyers have more or less gone extinct, all because TPTB don’t sack it up and try to rein in the equipment (c.f. see golf as well)-the game is more exciting when there’s a big difference in strategy and style, which is why the Agassi/Sampras matches were always interesting.