Australian Open 2012 - Day 4 Blog

It’s only the second round of the Australian Open, but somehow the halving of the draw seems to feel like a huge difference in terms of what match options I have to start the day. Today is ANZ Day, where ANZ give out more goodies to their customers, and I was kind of pissed off lining up to see that they were handing out free ground passes to any customers, considering that I had bought mine.

The line appeared to be relatively long, but they do quick bag inspections here at the Australian Open. I’m not even sure that they even check them properly, but who cares, I can get into the tennis quickly. Margaret Court Arena was packed today with Aussie tennis players in the line-up. No chance of getting into those matches. For me, it feels absolutely silly to be queuing up to watch players that I’m not really a huge fan of – Nishikori, Monfils? No, thanks. I would have really liked to experience the atmosphere in Margaret Court Arena for following an Australian player for once, but it was not to be.

Instead it was a day out in the smaller courts for the most part, cheering on, or watching more low profile players. I went out to see Philipp Petzschner, who was playing against Milos Raonic, one of those frequently hyped players. Petzschner’s probably the only player on tour to wear the long socks. I think he must have only recently started doing it this year, or either I can’t remember (a bit of Google research indicates he only started doing so in 2012). Both players approached this match in a very aggressive manner, ensuring that above all, they wouldn’t engage in any overly long rallies. I liked that Petzschner came into the net quite frequently, serving and volleying, and finishing many points up there.

Despite all the hype about Raonic, I’ve decided yet again that I’m really not at all interested in him. The way he approaches his game seems very 90s-esque, with the short rallies, big game, big forehand and risk taker attitude, not only for the sake of creating opportunities but to save energy. Perhaps it’s reminiscent of Pete Sampras, not that I have much memory of him. It’s more like what I’ve heard about him, from commentators. Petzschner is playing with a similar attitude of not trying to engage in any rallies, and I don’t like it. I like the generation of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. Great shotmakers without compromising consistency. It just doesn’t look impressive to me, not being consistent, and playing like this clearly requires a strong reliance on serve to make up for all those cheap errors, so I’ve decided to switch courts to something else. Petzschner might have taken a set, but Raonic was the far more solid player, and also a better server so always looked to have the advantage, I thought.

I couldn’t get into Tipsarevic’s match, so I settled on watching Marcel Granollers playing against Frederico Gil. Not exactly the most appealing match on paper, but somehow the intimate view makes it all look more impressive, the way both players are competing hard, constructing their points and basically striking the ball impressively (within their limitations, that is). The first thing that stands out to anyone watching is the Granollers grunt. He basically grunts loudly on every shot, while not really doing anything special with the ball. It’s very misleading, because it makes it look like he is hitting the ball harder than he really is.

When I first walked into the match, Granollers was a break down, but he was still competing and trying very hard. Grunting loudly tends to give that impression, but also his body language was still very positive. Even when he went down two breaks, he was still quite enthusiastic about trying to get one of those breaks back! He did end up getting one break back, and I did enjoy watching his determination to get to every ball, even if it looks like the point has been practically lost. That’s the thing I have been surprised about these few days, how some players can get to a shot that they’ve only just managed to reach by slicing underneath it just before the end of its bounce, then somehow turn a point from an impossible losing position to end up winning it. It’s amazing. Granollers does that quite a lot, as he likes to get down low and dig balls back. He doesn’t give up on shots. Another example is seeing awesome defensive lobs that completely reset a point – another favourite of mine watching live tennis.

It felt like watching a claycourt match of patient point construction, using the angles frequently to open up the court, and finally coming into the net when there was an opportunity to. It also had that claycourt mentality of trying to outmanoeuvre opponents rather than hitting winners through them. It was enjoyable to watch. But it also meant that both players were somewhat limited in their shotmaking, not as capable of changing directions and going down-the-lines as the better players. Also, not that capable of changing the pace. Whenever they went down-the-line, it was often to move the ball around from side-to-side so it went much higher over the net, and was hit as a safe shot. Gil was clearly the more aggressive player of the two. The big difference in this match was Gil’s forehand which he can hit inside out extremely well, and also he can increase the pace on it.

Sometimes Granollers has the ability of adding an extra dimension to his game, by coming into the net and mixing things up, but it didn’t seem to work well for him here, and he got discouraged sticking to a more predictable game. When Gil leaked some errors in the second set, Granollers took advantage of it but Gil cleaned up his game late in the third set, just in time for the crucial part of the set. There were a lot of people coming and going in this match, just taking a peek than leaving, as if it were of no interest to them. Later on, there became a more vocal group of people supporting Gil. He noticed them, and started directing his fist pumps over there, which was nice, I thought.

Nearing the match’s completion, I headed out of Melbourne Park for a break. I can’t really understand the weather, or how it feels sometimes. When I arrived, I was sure it was a nice, cool day with a breeze, and it still was even walking around the grounds. But whenever I get to those showcourts, to those seats which have heat reflecting on them, then when I sit down and the sun seems to be going straight to my pants and heating them up, somehow it just gets much hotter. I walked along the river, and I was reminded, that the weather is actually perfectly fine outside. But it’s always worse in the stadium courts, on the seats, where the tennis is being played…

After the quick break, I went back into the grounds. I couldn’t get into Gasquet’s match, because it was full. I couldn’t get into Margaret Court Arena. If there are Australians playing, you can be sure that the stadium will end up being full. So I went to Court 6, to watch Dominika Cibulkova against Greta Arn. I wasn’t really interested in that. I was just waiting for Simon’s match against Benneteau to get underway. I wasn’t expecting that much of a wait, but there was so much choking and errors all over the place that they took ages to finish their match. It went to 10-8 in the third set. Finally Arn took it, when Cibulkova was in the lead so many times I think.

It was then time for Gilles Simon and Julien Benneteau to get on court. Two Frenchmen playing against each other. They walked out on court, almost walking right next to each other, whereas usually one is far in front or behind the other player when they get on court for matches. I found this match to be incredibly fascinating, since they probably know each other’s game inside out, so I would have found it hard to believe that the match would simply be a case of “I’m going to play my own game.”

As the match begun, both players were exchanging light rallies with each other, almost as if they were just practicing except hitting with better accuracy. Target practice perhaps. They were both hitting the ball incredibly soft, nowhere near as hard as they’re capable of. It was very strange. I tried to watch for the subtle changes of pace, or figure out what they were trying to achieve with this tactic. Well, for Simon, it probably wasn’t really a tactic, but what about what Benneteau was doing? He had probably played a practice set against him before and noticed that going all out aggressively wasn’t working.

It was funny, because early on, I wasn’t really sure what Benneteau or Simon were trying to do. Lull their opponents into sleep, or hit a crappy short ball to bring them to the net and hit the pass? The more I watched, the more I could see looking back that the first set was kind of a warm-up of things to come.

Benneteau wasn’t having enough success with this very, very careful aggression. Simon served for the first set, but couldn’t convert. That’s when Benneteau started stepping in on the backhand to take it earlier and hitting it down-the-line more often, coming into the net far more often, and I think that was basically the turning point of a match. Coming into the net doesn’t only change that aspect of the game, but it changes the baseline aspect too. Benneteau’s play from the baseline started to become more confident with clear intent, unlike Simon who primarily stuck on the baseline.

Simon started muttering a lot of things to his coach from midway in the second set onwards. I have no idea about what, but I can’t really understand what he would have to complain about. He could either just change what he’s currently doing, or just move on with it. I guess he could have been complaining that he was making too many errors (surely the worst thing for him!), even though he wasn’t making that many. But maybe it was a bit more than usual for his standards. From then onwards, I noticed that he was flattening out his forehand more, which was good.

He played such a good second set tie-break to start with. He put more penetration on his forehand, started hitting deeper and refused to give much opportunity for Benneteau to create anything. But Benneteau created a few chances for himself at the net, and Simon dumped a forehand into the net on a very long rally on set point. There was a choke from both players – a double fault from Benneteau on his first set point, and also a double fault from Simon late in the tie-break. But Benneteau also hit two aces/service winners in that crucial moment, and ended up going up two sets to love. The third set was a massive concentration lapse from him, then it was getting late and I really wanted to leave by then.

It was my first time watching a night match outside of Margaret Court Arena, and it certainly is a much more quiet experience out there. The lighting is poor outside of the court, so it’s dark near the stands and there is a lot of space around you, where you can see that not much is going on. There were birds flying around in the sky, and sometimes they would land on the court in changeovers. Ball kids had to chase them away. I could hear noise from everywhere. The support for Lleyton Hewitt in his match against Andy Roddick on Rod Laver Arena was probably most distracting of all. Then you could hear the noise from Troicki’s five setter, the umpires calling out scores everywhere. You just start to get this sense or feeling that everywhere else is more exciting than here, though I don’t think it necessarily was, it was just the impression.

After the first two sets, many people left their seats. I stayed until the end of the third set. I would be willing to bet that by the time they got to the fifth set, the atmosphere was probably dead and gone completely quiet. At the time I was there, it was sparsely populated, though it felt like everyone that was still left was cheering for Simon. They wouldn’t even clap when Benneteau hit a great approach and volley. I clapped for Benneteau. I don’t know why these sorts of things happen at the Australian Open. I just thought all good shots should be applauded. Granollers didn’t get much in his match either.

Wednesday second round action in Brisbane

It’s clear that the Brisbane International has grown in popularity over the years. It’s great for the tournament, and nice to see such huge support and interest for tennis here in Brisbane, but as a spectator, it can be such a pain. I hadn’t really found myself thinking about the good old days in the past, but today I found myself flashing back into time an awful lot, thinking of how back then, I could have sat anywhere I wanted to on an outside court, as long as there was still play going on in Pat Rafter Arena. Whenever you sit on small outside courts, there are always plenty of crappy seats, particularly anything that is blocked by an umpire's seat. Whenever I pick seats, it is always my main criteria - just anywhere without the umpire's seat in the way, please.

To accurately reflect the special circumstances under which I watched these matches, I decided to take accurate photos, rather than ideal photos. I could have of course zoomed in very closely, moved the camera up to avoid heads, waited for the players to be in the right position of the court to get the best shot. But photos are supposed to capture experiences, aren’t they, so I went for the more realistic choice.

Transport is always more relaxing when there’s nothing exciting on the schedule to start the day with, so I timed my arrival pretty well to get there close to the start of play. In the line-up, they were handing out free newspapers to everyone, which is a good deal. Almost everyone took one, but scanning around stadiums and seating areas all day, I hardly noticed anyone reading one. I guess it was all eyes on the tennis today.

I had some unfinished business to do from Monday. I went over to Tennis Central, as they call it, the entertainment area down the stairs. Before walking down the stairs, I stopped for a moment to take a look at what it looks like from higher up. It’s just funny how these things can appear to be more appealing to the eye the further away it is. As I walked down the stairs, the footing appears to be unstable and it’s clear that everything has been temporarily set up here. Nothing wrong with that, as it makes complete sense, but I was highly amused by the design of the pathways which lead to nowhere, so you have to walk through the artificial grass to get through to the dining area.

After taking a bit of time to figure out where to walk, I headed back to Pat Rafter Arena to watch Gilles Simon play against James Duckworth. I wasn’t too enthusiastic about that. End with Gilles Simon on Monday, start with him on Wednesday. If I didn’t know him any better, I could have thought that Simon looked like he just got out of bed. I was sitting in the back row, so there are some things I can’t see. But even from this far away, it’s easy to see Simon casually strolling around in between points. I wonder what it would be like trying to cheer him on, as a coach or fan. I wouldn’t bother to, because he doesn’t really look like he’d be bothered to step it up another level, unless if he was clearly losing.

From this view, I couldn’t really see what Duckworth looks like, so I’ve kind of made up a picture in my mind based on what I can see. I don’t have the ability to make up new faces, so I’ve decided that he looks like Sam Querrey without the cap from far away, and maybe made him look a bit more attractive or regular looking. From the start of the match, he looked very keen on putting in a good performance here. I liked the scorching forehand return winner in the first game. He broke serve in the first game, but it went downhill from there. He was the more aggressive player, and more adventurous in terms of shot selection, but the errors cost him the set, and perhaps he wasn’t really capable enough to try pulling off playing at this level, not that I would know.

As the match wore on, I started to lose interest. Simon was up an early break in the second set, though I did notice by the time I left that he was leaking more errors than usual. For such a one-sided match, it would have been nice if Simon could have shown more of his abilities, but he was as predictable as ever. Not taking a commanding position in the match, letting his opponent have a chance.

Sitting in the back row has a larger amount of distractions than anywhere else where the stadium is closed off from the outside. From here, I can smell food from the outside, which is a problem near lunch time. I can hear the sound of the Nova radio announcers who read out the schedule of play every 15 minutes or so. I can hear the sound of coffee being made. I decided I didn’t care anymore about the outcome, and the smell was luring me away, so I left for an early lunch break. The crowd erupted soon afterwards as Duckworth broke back.

It was not a great day for me. I spent much of the day being tired and distracted, and hardly ever getting a good seat. With Tommy Haas’ withdrawal, the court scheduling had been changed to move some Court 1 matches to Court 2. One of them being Radek Stepanek’s match against Jarkko Nieminen (see the photo for an idea of the crappy view I had to watch this match on). This match looked potentially interesting on paper, but the match-up wasn’t as interesting as I thought it might be. Stepanek didn’t mix it up all that much in the first set, resembling too much of a normal player for my liking. I tried to look closer, but as far as I could see, there wasn’t anything particularly clever in his play, a bit disappointing for such a deliberate player (he usually does everything for a reason). Nieminen hits the ball harder from the back of the court than from what I would have thought watching on television. He swings right through his backhand and gets a huge amount of racquet head speed on it.

Nieminen doesn’t look particularly expressive on his face, but he was frequently hitting balls into places in between points, throwing his racquet around, nothing too extreme for the most part. It’s very strange, because it feels like it’s coming from nowhere. About to lose the second set, he smashed a ball into the back fence without looking where he was going and nearly took out a ballkid. It doesn’t seem right that he gets a code violation for that, while Petzschner gets the same code violation for hitting a ball into the roof/court cover.

The second set, Stepanek was playing more intelligently, following up certain shots into the net. They weren’t noticeable net approaches. They didn’t come from completely opening up the court, so it must have taken a good eye and quick reactions to be able to pull off that kind of play. Nieminen was making a ton of errors, and watching live, it looks more appropriate that he would because he doesn’t hit the ball as safely as a lot of other players. It’s not as controlled and restrained.

Having watched that match with the umpire chair in the way for the most part, I was happy to be able to move on to watching Philipp Petzschner’s match against Santiago Giraldo. Surely with Jelena Jankovic playing at the same time, this would allow some additional comfort and breathing room in the stands. I arrived early with some women’s doubles still going on, and there’s this person sitting next to me taking an awful lot of photos of Carla Suarez Navarro sitting down cheering them on. I don’t know, it just looks a little stalkerish, though had I spotted someone I liked, I might have done the same thing.

I was a bit excited about watching Petzschner play. It’s always interesting to watch unique players live, or to have something in particular you can concentrate on, or notice. Giraldo on the other hand, is not one of those kinds of players. I watched him a few years ago, and I still can’t really recognise what he looks like, or the technique on any of his shots. But I did notice that he seems to have improved since then, and his forehand appears to be more of a weapon than it used to be.

Petzschner was fun to watch in the beginning. But you can tell he has a limited skillset. His game clearly revolves around his serve and forehand. His serve is huge. You can tell just from the sound that comes off his racquet, when he serves. His backhand slice floats across the court more so than the majority of players. Whether this is a positive thing or not, I don’t really know, but it looks artistic. Whenever he hits a forehand, he steps right into it, almost as if he was hitting an approach shot all the time. He doesn’t appear to have anywhere near the same level of consistency as most other players, as in, he doesn’t even attempt to have it. He prefers to play recklessly. Players hit to his backhand frequently. He slices it patiently crosscourt almost every time, and it’s like whenever he gets a forehand, he’s been waiting so long to get one, that he needs to rip it even if there isn’t any space in the court to justify doing it.

The matchup here wasn’t a good one. Clearly Petzschner’s slice backhand wasn’t being hit well enough, because Giraldo had plenty of time to run around and hit a forehand on the majority of them, while hardly making any errors. A player’s strength versus a player’s weakness. It’s clear to see who would win this battle.

After an underwhelming day of tennis, I decided to watch one more match, a rematch of last year’s match between Alexandr Dolgopolov and Igor Andreev, in very different weather conditions. Considering that I found it very hard to stay awake the previous match, it was probably helpful that I had a very strange older couple sitting next to me, who were commenting on everything. The lady was cheering for Dolgopolov so that she could watch more of the match, though it took her quite a while to figure out how to pronounce it, and what his first name was. Her husband cheered for Andreev, as a response to every time she yelled out, ‘come on Alex!’ Once they got into the third set, they switched roles, since the wife wanted the match to continue while the husband wanted it to finish. The husband kept saying, ‘More power, Igor!’ in this weird voice.

I also had to look through a fence for most of the match, since it was completely packed. It was nice to see two interesting players play against each other, something to admire from both sides. I started watching from late in the first set, and Andreev was definitely playing better than what I had seen from him in the past live. Clearly, winning in the qualies has given him some confidence in the main draw.

Andreev’s forehand is so much fun to watch live. It might appear to be one-dimensional on TV, but it just never stops getting exciting live. It draws gasps from the crowd, it looks and sounds like it’s dangerous enough to take anyone out, but it’s probably easier to defend against it than you would think. Or at least Dolgopolov’s backhand held up pretty well against it. Towards the end of the first set, Andreev was on this roll where he would hit all these forehands which were still in mid-air for the most part, until dropping right on the baseline at the last minute making it very difficult to return.

I was reminded again of how Dolgopolov is exciting to watch live as well, with his very energetic game and how he likes to mix it up constantly. Though in this match, it was Andreev doing most of the dictating. He should have won the match on his first match point, but he misfired a forehand long, while the rest of the tie-break seemed to be filled with tense moments containing long rallies, big forehands and excellent defending from Dolgopolov. Once Andreev had lost his opportunity, his game went downhill in the third set, playing nowhere near as consistently as he did when I first started watching. Occasionally he was still a threat to break back, but he couldn’t convert, so Dolgopolov went on to win the match.

Another Year at the Brisbane International - Monday's Play

It’s New Year’s Day holiday here in Brisbane, and I’m pretty sure the crowd attendance figures I saw today were the biggest I’ve personally seen since the tournament began in Brisbane. They had a Kids Day initiative going on today, where kids 16 and under can get into the grounds for free, play mini-tennis on Centre Court in between matches, have access to more tennis games and entertainment than the standard amount and also get a free information pack, which presumably includes information on how to join a tennis club. I think it’s a nice initiative.

It’s always a familiar feeling coming back to the Brisbane International every year. In the past every time I’ve come back, it has looked exactly the same, so it was a pleasant surprise to see that this year they’ve made a few upgrades. In particular, the much-needed shade covers above the temporary stands on the two showcourts have been added, which will surely increase the popularity of the tournament. Also, they have doubled the amount of seats on Showcourt Two making it the second biggest court outside of Pat Rafter Arena. They’ve also expanded the entertainment area, which I didn’t really get the chance to check out because I didn’t notice it until after I left.

Attending the Brisbane International is still a must-see event for me years later, despite my regular Australian Open attendances each year. It’s a chance to see what Brisbane, the community is like, what our interest in tennis is like, etc. Also, since I happen to know many people who play tennis, I usually wonder how many people I will see that I know. Today’s count: 3. Though considering there were huge crowds, there were probably heaps of people that I just didn’t see.

Anyone that has been following the blog over the years will tend to know that if Florian Mayer plays in an event that I am going to, I am probably going to blog on it. I have had some very fond memories following Mayer over the years in Australia. I guess this match against Denis Istomin, probably wouldn’t rank up there with one of them. Though I didn’t really think it was one of his horror matches either. Maybe the first three or four games were horrible, but I’d put that down to rust.

First of all, I’ll backtrack to where I was standing. I woke up this morning with a really cool idea. I thought, I’m going to try something new and different. I’m going to stand and lean over the fence to watch Mayer today. I started to get really excited about it, as this kind of closeness is impossible to experience at the Australian Open so it was something that needed to be done today. I’ve got memories doing the same thing, watching Alexandr Dolgopolov and his dropshots from last year, while leaning over a fence. Once I’ve got an idea in my head, it’s pretty hard to get rid of it, because I might think that I’m chickening out if I don’t do it.

So I looked behind on the grassed area and everyone that is on it is sitting down, trying to watch tennis by peering through the fence. Those that don't want to peer through the fence, are of course on the other side. There are still some spare seats over there, if they'd prefer to have a better view. There’s no sign that says, no standing up here on this side of the fence, so I figured I should be right. However, further analysis of the situation and seeing that no one else has stood up against the fence the entire day shows to me, that maybe I was being rude, inconsiderate, etc. I do remember that this was normal behaviour when watching Gael Monfils two years ago though.

It would have been a perfect opportunity to personally cheer on Mayer, however I became too much of a nervous wreck being the centre of attention as it was, to the point where it was a bit hard to concentrate and appreciate the match. I was the only one standing one side leaning against the fence. I will not do it again.

As for the match, the first five games or so were dominated by serve, with both players not really finding their rhythm on both sides. Though I’m keeping myself busy looking at the little details, like Istomin’s smooth service motion, how low over the net and slow in pace Mayer’s slice backhand is, how amazingly hard Istomin hits his double-handed backhand. I think Istomin hits his backhand harder than his forehand.

The crowd are slow to react to clapping on some points, and whenever a winner comes out of nowhere, the crowd don’t notice it quickly enough to clap it compared to a rally where a player has opened up one side of the court and hit a winner the next shot. Based on that theory, you can tell that a lot of Mayer’s crosscourt forehand winners come out of nowhere, because hardly anyone would ever clap them.

As the scoreline suggested, the match was completely even the whole first set until the tie-break. Mayer was flashy at times, but not as consistent as he can be on his better days, and perhaps his movement was not at his best either. His forehand was much improved after a poor start, but his backhand was inconsistent. He missed two crosscourt backhands wide to lose the tie-break from 4-5 (on serve). Istomin was up 5-0 in that tie-break at some point, but lost some concentration after the huge lead.

Istomin was composed and reasonably consistent throughout the match considering how flat and hard he hits it, and he took his game to another level in the tie-break. The best point was definitely the third point in the tie-break, when Istomin nailed two double-handed backhand crosscourt shots that looked like winners, and would have been winners if Mayer had been moving like he did in the rest of the set. I just remember thinking at the time, how funny it is that they stepped it up for the tie-break.

From early on in the second set, Mayer started muttering a few comments to his coach or whoever it was, which was probably the only thing that made me suspect that maybe an injury concern was there. Not to mention that after that, in the next few points, he didn’t make much of an effort to move as if to prove a point. It’s always hard to tell the difference between negativity and injury. But one thing was sure. Based on that body language, he seemed like the clear underdog. Yes, that is what you can do when watching live tennis. Make a prediction on a match purely based on how a player is walking, or how many hand signals they’re making. So Mayer retired soon afterwards at 6-7(5) 3-2. Perhaps the fact that he didn’t call the trainer indicates that he already knows a bit about his injury.

After taking a short break, I headed into Pat Rafter Arena to watch Serena Williams play against Chanelle Scheepers. The last time I saw Serena play, I wasn’t exactly paying attention, so this time I felt I was better able to appreciate the experience. I really like watching how explosively Serena moves onto her forehand on the run. I think how she moves onto the ball is surely what separates her from many women’s players, which allows her to be such a good shotmaker even from a more defensive position. Also, all of her shots look so technically sound that it’s very aesthetically pleasing. Perhaps the technical aspect is another reason why she has been able to play so well in the past, coming back from injury.

I tend to pay more attention to matches early on than afterwards, and one of the highlights for me was seeing one of Serena’s scorching running forehand winners, then seeing the stare down of intimidation afterwards. It was just such a cool reaction. It didn’t seem as manufactured as it does on TV. It looked like a natural reaction, a very confident one. However, Serena went on to lose that service game, and took on a more relaxed mindset afterwards allowing herself more shots to play to control points, and she also started to serve better.

Despite Scheepers giving a good effort, there was always the sense that Serena had the upper hand with her greater weight of shot. Serena didn’t need to make it flashy straight away. Every shot she hit put her another foot in front of Scheepers until Williams could win the point. It felt inevitable, but Scheepers did well to prolong it in the second set. Unlike Serena’s serve, Scheeper’s serve looks like a wobbly mess, with how stiff she keeps her right arm when launching into the motion. There is no explosiveness in the action. It is like it is in slow motion, unlike Bernard Tomic’s super fast abbreviated motion (yet both arm motions in a way are similar). I think it is abbreviated, but maybe not entirely. The decisive break of serve in the second set came after Serena stepped in early on a second serve return to rip for a winner, then faced with a similar situation, Scheepers double-faulted with the threat in sight. Serena won 6-2 6-3.

Now onto the best match of the day which was between Bernard Tomic and Julien Benneteau. This was Tomic’s first appearance in Brisbane without a wildcard, and it is nice to see some improvements in his game from past years, such as the improved faster pace forehand which was probably the standout shot from the first set. Tomic does have the ability to sometimes rip winners on some shots, and even after he does it, I still don’t really know if the timing was clever. To me, it just seems more like completely random. But the forehand definitely does look like a much more potent weapon when he injects some extra pace into it.

Tomic raced off to a 5-0 lead but it didn’t seem entirely indicative of the match to me, because Benneteau was close to breaking back on one of those games earlier on. Despite the massive gap in the score, I decided that I really like watching Benneteau play, because of the way he moves onto the ball and also with his point construction. He makes so many little split steps when he moves that it’s great to watch, but it also looks incredibly tiring. I had a brief look at Tomic’s footwork, and he probably makes half or one third the amount of steps in comparison. Some might call this lazy footwork, or simply being more efficient.

Benneteau controls points once he hits an aggressive shot, and he tries to keep it there, with accurate ball-striking and good point construction. This also means that if he hasn’t started the first few shots aggressively that he’s likely to have to play more defensively after that, because he doesn’t have the same ability as many other players to hit impressive defensive shots. At least not to the same level. In the first set, Benneteau butchered a few key rallies that he had created in his favour, and his serve was also not up to scratch, not that I really noticed (heard the interview afterwards).

The second and third sets anyway were enjoyable to watch, filled with long and highly competitive rallies where both players appeared to be having difficulty with finishing off rallies. I’d say the rallies were filled with accurate, controlled ball-striking, so it wasn’t like the match was filled with passive rallies. In the end, the deciding factor was with Benneteau’s legs, and I guess it was understandable given all the running he did in the match and with it being the first match of the year.

Tomic could have made it easier for himself by converting one of his earlier match points, but in the end, Tomic finally pulled through on his sixth, helped by Benneteau double faulting on the match point. The result was 6-2 4-6 7-5. The crowd here in Brisbane have been extremely quiet, seemingly paying some sort of respect to the players by not talking during the matches, or very quietly if so. Only in the final stages, they started to show some support to Tomic. I guess you could say everyone was saving their breaths for when they really needed it.

So that was three matches done for the day, yet it still felt early. I left Pat Rafter Arena, and was able to see again that it was indeed a very, very crowded day at the tennis centre. I stood there waiting for the end of the Haas/Stepanek doubles match, catching people leaving at the end of the match to grab myself a seat for the match between Gilles Simon and Ryan Sweeting.

I had never seen Ryan Sweeting play before, or read anything about his game previously, so it was funny to see Andy Roddick’s service motion without expecting it. I wonder if he tried any other service motions before deciding to settle on this one. Anyway, his serve is good, but not great. The first serve seems incredibly flat, and with little margin for error unlike Roddick’s service which kicks up quite a lot. I was not at all impressed with Sweeting who seems to be a very loose cannon. He bases his game around a huge forehand, but misfires a lot with it. He also hits a slice backhand quite frequently, but its purpose is more just to extend the point to allow him to hit a forehand.

This was the perfect matchup for Simon. No expert strategy required, or any need to go out of his comfort zone. He could just use the pace he was getting from Sweeting, to keep returning the ball cleanly with interest, and also to hit great passing shots on the run if required. After the first three games or so, the way this match was going was almost inevitable. Sweeting was mainly only winning the short points, and not having much success on return though he did come close in that final game failing to convert two break points. This was a nice way to wrap up the day, I thought, as watching Gilles Simon can be a relaxing experience, how he so easily seems to have perfect timing on his shots particularly off the backhand.

Gilles Simon Defeats Out of Form Davydenko in Marseille

It was supposed to be a nice contrast of styles, when Nikolay Davydenko and Gilles Simon drew each other in the first round in Marseille. The problem with this match-up is that the way Simon plays largely has to do with the way Davydenko plays, so when Davydenko seemed completely unsure of himself and lacking in confidence, it was a bad spectacle all-round. Simon only plays as well as he needs to, and he prefers to use the pace of his opponents.

Davydenko is definitely going through a rough patch at the moment. His game doesn’t even look the same as it did to his off days when he was in the top 5. When he makes large amounts of unforced errors, they’re different kinds of errors. He doesn’t have anywhere near the same amount of racquet acceleration. Short balls are usually the easiest shots for professional players, but it was painful the way Davydenko showed no confidence whenever he had a short forehand to put away for a winner. Instead it was more like, “Oh no, I should hit a winner off this” so he’d aim it near the line but not really try to hit a winner.

The match started strangely with four consecutive breaks. The first set was the battle of two very indecisive players that didn’t know what to do with the ball once they got into an extended rally. The execution of the shots felt half-hearted, which is what happens when you don’t fully believe in the shot you’re trying to hit.

Davydenko was making all kinds of uncharacteristic shot selections. It was the worst to begin with. Most of his shots landed in the middle of the court, the complete opposite from his trademark accurate game. He came into the net from approach shots that landed down the middle of the court, then predictably he’d lose the point up at the net. You know there’s something very wrong with Davydenko when he’s trying to come into the net before he’s even hit a good enough shot. Yet it’s also very strange. It’s more common to stick to a more typical game in poor form, but does he really think he has a better chance at shortening the points and using the net than playing his standard baseline game?

Still Davydenko being willing to extend the rallies and hit with wider margins from the lines than usual kept the match competitive in the first set. Both players returned serve well in the first half of the set. It was like everything was much easier for them when they didn’t have to think about actual rallies and point construction.

The match made a sudden turnaround after Simon became the first player to hold serve for 3-2. I would have thought that would have been the equivalent of a break of serve, but instead they both held serve from then onwards.

Despite the rather drastic change of holds/breaks, the match still had a similar feel to me. I never know what Simon is actually trying to do with the ball while playing. He plays with such a reactive mindset. Even if his tennis isn't defensive all the time, his shot selection is based so much on what his opponent feeds him. Davydenko fed him plenty of errors so he happily took advantage of it.

The first set tie-break was perhaps of the best quality in the match, with more of the typical rallies that I expected from the match. Davydenko had a set point but missed a routine forehand, a pattern which repeated itself many times in the match. Then Simon won the set with a return winner.

In the second set, Davydenko sprayed errors everywhere to go down a double break that by then, I had lost all interest. He tried to play something closer to his usual game, but the more aggressive play didn’t pay off. He was actually close to levelling the set again and recovering the break, but in the end, Simon was able to hold off Davydenko and finish the match later on.

Australian Open 2011 - Day 1 Blog

Sometimes the first day of Grand Slams can be underwhelming and routine, but today was a good day for me. It was a day filled with competitive matches, a variety of styles, and good tennis for the most part. Conditions were cold and windy with the occasional spitting of rain, which is better than the heat I suppose. However, one recurring problem seemed to present itself throughout the day, and I fear it will throughout the rest of the tournament.  From what I gathered today, there seems to be an increase in the crowd turnouts this year on the outside courts.  Either that or poor scheduling.

There were many formerly good players playing today, that the tournament organisers took very little notice of. Nikolay Davydenko, Gilles Simon (however he just won Sydney last week) and Richard Gasquet were all playing on courts where it was difficult to get a seat. The problem was that even if you did end up getting a seat, chances are it would be a horribly obstructed view, with not only the umpire’s chair in the way, but also with plenty of shade covers over the players’ chairs.

Before my seating troubles started, I headed over to Show Court 2 to watch Sam Querrey in action against Lukasz Kubot. I arrived quite early and took the second row from the front. It’s a great view, without any obstructions. Better than watching on a tiny, intimate court in my opinion.

Querrey arrived about 8 minutes late, much later than Kubot and that is very rare in a Grand Slam, I think. I couldn’t hear what he was saying but I saw a rather large amount of gesturing with his hands, once he got onto the court, as if to suggest he was misguided somehow into not finding his way to the correct place.

Play got underway soon afterwards, and it didn’t take long for the Polish fans to make their presence known. They were very frequent with their chanting and support, especially to start with, using any minor pauses in between points to make some noise. I kept trying to take photos of them while they were standing up but those pauses were really short, so I kept missing, and ended up giving up.

When Querrey started serving in the first game, I couldn’t believe the difference between his first and second serve. His first serve was hard and flat, and makes the kind of sound that comes from big servers. In comparison, his second serve seemed to float there forever after its bounce with plenty of time for players to take their racquet back and do whatever they want. He did improve it later on though, as it started to become a softer version of the first serve, but it still seemed to land mainly in the middle of the court.

In the early stages, Querrey’s forehand was nowhere near as potent as I thought it would be. He played mostly a counterpunching role to start with, hitting loopy shots with plenty of margin over the net, but he was okay when he was forced to go for it, like having to hit a passing shot. It’s amazing how many players seem to find it difficult hitting winners, but when presented with a “do-or-die” situation, they can do it pretty easily.  Of course that is also because it is more difficult for the net player to run it down once it goes past them. Some players probably wished their opponents would run to the net all the time.

I’m not sure Querrey is one of them though. He just has better passing shots than expected. Especially on the backhand side, and his ability to hit down-the-line on that side is better than I thought too. He keeps his racquet very still and low while hitting it, and it’s more reliable than the forehand which is more prone to shanking or late timing.

The match was an entertaining contrast of styles, a battle between an aggressive all-court player Kubot and the counterpuncher Querrey.

Kubot is a strong player, hits the ball hard from both sides, seemingly throwing his weight around the court. By that, I mean, using it to generate penetrating groundstrokes and to move athletically. Kubot doesn’t have the best side-to-side movement, but he makes the transition from the net to the baseline extremely well. Today, he was often up there before I even noticed. He also rarely seemed to need to hit a low volley. Though I did find it odd that he was either passed or had an easy volley to hit every time he made it to the net. Perhaps Querrey didn’t even think about making Kubot hit that many shoelace volleys.

I watched the first two and a half sets of this match, and it was quite a streaky match, but mostly at a good standard. Querrey was still finding his timing and too passive in the first set, but after the first couple of games, his serving improved so much that it gave him an edge and Kubot’s high risk game abandoned him in the crucial stages when he needed it.

In the second set, Kubot started swinging away and making shots right from the beginning, as if the pressure from the first set had been suddenly relieved. I have been interested lately to see how players handle low and high pressure moments, letdowns in the beginning of sets, and how they play when they are down on the scoreboard.

In this case, being down on the scoreboard really helped Kubot kick off the second set impressively. He carried on this sudden wave of confidence to hit through Querrey with countless forehand winners, though also Querrey’s serving quality had decreased allowing him more opportunity to. By then, Querrey had also improved his baseline play so this became a better spectacle. Querrey’s backhand did more damage in this match than the forehand, presumably because the match-up with Kubot’s backhand is better.

Returning first in the third game, at first I thought Kubot would continue his practically flawless display when he got off to a 0-30 start in the first game. But it didn’t eventuate and both players ended up struggling on many of their service games. When I left the match, Kubot had broken back Querrey to return to level terms.

Nikolay Davydenko’s match against Florian Mayer had just started, not that I knew. The only scoreboard updates I get are the changing scorelines each changeover in the stadium courts, except that it would never cover all the matches, and often skipped on Court 7, where these two played.

The match was in its early stages, 2-1 in the first set when I joined and I immediately started to regret my decision after noticing that the stands were completely full. Eventually I found a spot where I could peek through the blue sheet covering the side of the stands, though this is obviously not the ideal way to watch a tennis match. I simply wanted to find out what this match was like so far. I most definitely wasn’t going to watch the whole match looking through the blue sheet.

But the match looked good. Plenty of long competitive rallies, where you couldn’t guess who would get the better of it. Of course, there were also plenty of rallies with the trademark variety of Florian Mayer. Mayer broke serve with some great shotmaking. He digs so many balls back when he’s playing, and he always looks like he’s trying to catch up when he’s playing against the top players, but he often hangs in better than it looks like he will. That is, if he is dealing with a player, that uses a lot of pace. He likes the pace.

Meanwhile, the lack of pace was really making it difficult for Davydenko to finish off points. Even if he could handle it, he wasn’t able to push Mayer around the same way he pushes his other opponents around. Especially not when Mayer was buying himself additional time by not giving Davydenko much pace.

After the initial break of serve, I found that there were many people leaving all the time in the changeovers. Many people walked up the stairs not knowing if they’d find a seat, so I followed and ended up sitting on the stairs for a while. They don’t have any security for monitoring this on the smaller courts. It was an extremely cramped position on the stairs. I hoped that I would make it to the actual seats soon, but it was a little difficult because whoever closest to that empty seat would usually get it. It wasn’t on a first come, first serve basis.

After going through three or four changeovers, I was finally able to grab myself a real seat, and I was rewarded for my patience. The kind of patience that I don’t necessarily always have, but what I saw in this match kept me hanging around long enough.

The first set contained many entertaining rallies, with a wide array of shots from Mayer. Davydenko didn’t play that poorly, but couldn’t seem to finish Mayer off. A change of tactics allowed Davydenko to convincingly win the second set, choosing to sneak up to the net whenever he had Mayer stretching out wide often finishing it with his favourite angled touch volleys. Suddenly the amount of extended rallies had drastically decreased.

It seemed like Davydenko had found the formula, and I thought he was on his way to winning the match. But the third set turned out to be a very inconsistent set from both players, with many losses of concentration. It was almost like both players were trying to conserve energy for the battle ahead. Mayer needed to fight through a service game early on, so it came completely out of the blue when he broke Davydenko’s serve to lead the match yet again. Mayer took a more aggressive approach this set, and he wasn’t always successful. But he needed to do so, as a weapon against Davydenko’s increasingly aggressive approach.

Mayer held onto his serve all the way through that set until he tried to serve for the set. At Deuce 5-3, Mayer dropped his racquet after his service motion then picked it up again to play a competitive, long rally. He ended up firing an impressive forehand crosscourt winner, but the umpire awarded the point to Davydenko. Mayer then smashed his racquet in frustration after losing the next ad point with a forehand error. Actually it was very much at the level of a Gonzalez racquet smash. I don't know why the umpire didn't stop the point earlier. One of the guys behind me repeated this story about the racquet drop and smash whenever his mates would walk past, so it happened a couple of times. It was obviously a dramatic moment.

That racquet smash really heightened the tension of the match, as it was drawing into the closing stages of the third set. Mayer was in a mentally fragile state, but also in an extremely fiery mood. Despite losing that break of serve, the energy and adrenaline going through him in the third set tie-break helped him raise his level, and ultimately win the set. Davydenko’s subdued body language and attitude surely didn’t help his chances, though the other reason is that he leaked a few key errors.

The fourth set was a continuation of the third set tie-break for Mayer, while Davydenko’s error count started to pile up immensely. At times, when he missed a shot, he’d have a dejected expression on his face, which is more rare than you would think in professional tennis. He looked sad and disappointed, not angry.

Mayer had break point chances in all of Davydenko’s service games in this set, and he really should have secured a second break to make it much easier for himself. After failing to convert in two separate games, Mayer lost his serve, then broke back again.

Despite Davydenko playing poorly for the most part in this set, there were a couple of games where he played some great tennis. The contrast between those two standards was really obvious, and I couldn’t believe how he could change from one extreme to another just like that.

The final game where Mayer served for the match was one of his great games, but not enough for him to fight back. That game had a controversial overrule, changing Mayer’s shot from an ‘out’ to ‘in’ call. Davydenko seemed to have a whole new intensity that game, nothing like what I saw from him in the last two sets. He threw everything he had at Mayer, and Mayer showed more determination than normal to get it back, and eventually he’d finally find the right time to pull the trigger himself.

Realizing how tough some of those last games were, Mayer was thoroughly happy with his win, celebrating by lying on the ground for a short while.

After this match, I quickly browsed the outside courts to see what was going on, then made an impulsive decision to watch the end of Philipp Kohlschreiber’s match against Tobias Kamke. Kamke had won the first two sets, Kohlschreiber had taken the third and was up a break in the fourth.

This was a relatively inconsistent match from the point where I started watching, where it became quite difficult to sink my teeth into it. Rather than trying to win in an outright way, it looked like it was more a matter of both players trying to manage their own games and fight through the match. Kohlschreiber was much more consistent in the fourth set, and that was the big difference. He was mixing it up more than I usually see from him on the backhand, hitting just as many slice backhands as drive backhands. Kamke was making plenty of errors, but seeing his play in the fifth set, might suggest that he was not exactly fully focused on the task in the fourth. Or either he was not as fired up anyway.

I’ve seen it often, players being less motivated to finish off a match in a fourth set (if struggling with tiredness, or poor play, or something else), but have a completely different mindset when it comes to the fifth. I suppose, it comes with knowing that the match will be over soon either way.

Kamke was down an early break in the fifth set but broke back. His consistency and execution of his aggressive shots improved greatly in this set. He really likes to step in and go for the backhand, but too much is going on before he hits the stroke, and he is prone to make errors on that side. Later, Kamke’s inconsistency came back to haunt him, losing the crucial break of serve.

One of the spectators sitting near me was constantly complaining about why the match wasn’t over yet, and wishing that it was, which was rather puzzling since there were plenty of other choices. Not to mention that leaving the grounds is another option. It was already around 5pm anyway. Eventually, after 15 minutes of complaining (or possibly more), they did leave.

After this, I thought about watching Gasquet’s match against Dancevic but the stands were already full, and on this court, there are only stands on one side. In my experience, that court is always overcrowded. So I referred back to my order of play sheet, and headed over to the court where Gilles Simon was playing to see if it had started yet. It had.

Simon was playing against Yen-Hsun Lu, who traditionally receives a lot of support from the Taiwanese fans. The same was true today, and the left side of the stands looked like it was filled with red, or at least bits of red everywhere. In between points, they would swing their flags around, but again I was not quick enough with the camera to capture it well. Sometimes they would do their chants which sounded a bit like "Aussie, Aussie, Oi Oi Oi" in another language, but whether it really was exactly the same, I'm not sure.

The stands were full, but on the right stand, people would leave often and there would be vacated seats. As soon as I sat down on one, I could see why. The view was terrible. This court seems to have a few additional shade covers on where the players are sitting compared to the court that Davydenko and Mayer played on. I can’t understand the need for all these “view blockages”. Make them sit in the changeovers in the sun for our benefit, or hold an umbrella themselves if they really want to. I quickly got up out of my spot and decided to stand up instead on the corner where I had a better view.  From this view, whenever Lu comes over to the side where I'm standing, I can hear him loudly exhaling.

This was the battle of the consistent baseliners. The kind of match where it doesn’t take long to have a look, and think, they’re going to take all night. Despite a couple of 6-2 sets thrown in there, it did take a long time. The match also rarely changed from the original model that the match started with. In the beginning, Lu was like a slightly better version of Simon. Hitting the ball harder and taking more chances, going closer to the lines. On the other hand, it felt like Simon’s tactic was to make every rally as long as possible. This means not taking any chances. I wonder if this is how he played before he showed sudden improvements in 2008. The kind of tennis that earned him the tag of being known as a pusher.

The other thing that can be frustrating about Simon, is that sometimes it doesn’t look like he is giving it 100%. Because of that, it also looked like he could run all day, and play all day while running around just as effectively as before. After all he was barely breaking a sweat, as in everything seemed to come very easily to him. Gilles Simon makes tennis look very easy. Or more accurately, Gilles Simon’s B-grade standard is tennis made to look easy.

Today he was hitting every groundstroke at about 70% pace, compared to his full pace, and rarely changing it up. Hitting so many balls into the court, I often found myself wondering why he doesn’t try to do things differently. Again, he mostly stuck with going crosscourt, and they exchanged a ridiculous amount of backhand crosscourts with each other.

It was a real battle, but after the first set, Simon’s consistency began to improve, with the gap in unforced errors widening significantly between Simon and Lu. Lu had about 60 unforced errors, while Simon had around 30.

Sometimes when Lu was down in a match, he’d try to go for more, thinking that he would need to do more, and it would cost him an additional break in a set.

In the end, Simon’s continuing consistency was too much of a problem for Lu to overcome. The match ended with a really nice handshake, and I can see why, given how much both players battled in this match.

Brisbane International - Monday Blog

It’s not often I arrive early to a tennis tournament, so I found myself feeling slightly lost while also sensing a unique opportunity. I’d have to say I usually take a very one-dimensional approach to attending a tennis event, and that’s watching many matches and doing little else. I guess I would call that the “watching as if it was on TV” approach. Though I always find myself amused when I walk past a top player practicing and hear comments on what sets them apart from everyone else. I can’t tell anything from practice, and I don't bother to either.

The Brisbane International isn’t a place for watching players practice anyway, with the fencing surrounding the players. Great for their privacy, but difficult for the fans. I didn’t find anything of interest, until I spotted Radek Stepanek, but then I quickly walked off after taking this photo since it looked like he wasn’t playing.

There was still around 20 minutes until the start of play, so I thought I would go measure the speed of my serve, which ended up being a slightly traumatising experience.

I picked up the first racquet I saw, and it turned out it was a kid’s racquet. Now I don’t usually write about anything other than the players, but I was very grumpy when the reading showed me 75km/h, then 85, then 90. All five of my serves in that range. I didn’t care what the reading said, I was sure I could serve much better. After all I served 100km/h when I was 12 years old.

I spontaneously decided to take another turn before the lady interrupted me, and told me I should let others have a turn. The line wasn’t exactly in the shape of a line, so I didn’t know if anyone was waiting. While waiting I tried to concentrate on tossing the ball forward so I could hit it while moving forward. I picked up the adult’s racquet this time, then the first serve I hit was 130km/h. What a relief, but still a nuisance that I failed so badly the first time. Oh well, I still think I could do better, if I tried bending my knees more…

Enough of this evaluating of myself, it was time to focus attention on the players, even if they weren’t ready to take the court yet. I decided to sit down and relax for a while.

 

After a short break, Michael Berrer and Dudi Sela took to the court. I hadn’t thought much about the match-up beforehand, but a quick look at their statures reminded me that this would be a nice contrast of styles. If being much taller and bigger wasn’t enough, Berrer decided to put on a bright neon yellow shirt to emphasise his point. Though this reminded me of a traffic controller or construction worker’s uniform.

This was a very enjoyable match, probably the best one of the day from an objective point of view (the subjective choice would be Florian Mayer’s entertaining performance). I was pleasantly surprised with Berrer. Stylistically I would consider him more of an all-court player, rather than a serve-and-volleyer, but he has the mindset of one. His commitment to playing outright attacking tennis, without worry of making errors or getting passed, is nice to watch. He doesn’t worry about execution. He just concentrates on trying to play the match the best way according to his own strengths and weaknesses.

His game is aesthetically pleasing in style, but limited in execution. He can play aggressively with his forehand, mix it up with his backhand slice, and he can take the ball early to come into the net. Sometimes it worked, and sometimes it didn't. When he was getting outplayed by Sela in the first two sets, it looked like it worked about half the time. He doesn’t move quickly enough into the net, and usually only makes high volleys. Shoelace volleys would often go into the bottom of the net. But he didn’t let the running passing shots from Sela phase him. I think it is this simple mentality that allowed him to hang into the second set, and nudge out the win.

Sela outplayed him for the majority of the match, and probably would have won the match, if only he had converted on breaking serve in the second set. His groundstrokes were accurate and controlled, with his running passing shots being a standout in the match. He also returned Berrer’s serve much better than the other way around.

Despite the 6-1 set scoreline in the first set, it was a relatively competitive first set apart from the final loss of serve. At least it seemed competitive up until the very long game at 3-1 on Sela’s serve, which Sela managed to hold onto. It was quite an intense match until that stage. Berrer brought out the extra loud grunt to try to get back into the match, but it ended up being more of a hindrance than a help, losing serve for a second time with overplayed shots.

The second set, was a slightly more patchy set of tennis. For starters, I couldn’t really understand why the score was still even despite all the errors Berrer was making considering Sela was barely making any mistakes. The only explanation I could make was that Berrer’s good shots (and Sela’s average shots) came at the right time, but he did have to dig himself out of some difficult games.

The second set tie-break was nothing like the rest of the match. Berrer won it with good, attacking tennis, and also by taking a more aggressive mindset on return than usual. It was a change to see him string together so many points like that. It was around this time that Sela started to become preoccupied with some sort of blister on his finger. He didn’t even bother to chase the shot on break point of the first game of the third set, and that was a sign of things to come.

The third set was basically a mental capitulation from Sela, though I can’t say whether he was distracted or noticeably hampered by the blister (or whatever it was on his hand). It did look like though, he was no longer able to play aggressively anymore, and his groundstrokes had significantly deteriorated. It’s hard to win matches while showing that kind of body language. Berrer continued the same way as he did in the second set tie-break, and not long afterwards, the match was his, 1-6 7-6(3) 6-2.

 

The completion of that match was timed well, as the rain began to pour soon afterwards, in what would repeat in brief intervals throughout the day. Sam Stosur was struggling against Lucie Hradecka while I was waiting outside the gate. She had just saved some set points, but after I made it inside, she barely dropped a game. She took it up another level in the tie-break, then carried the momentum into the next set.

It took me a while to adjust the surroundings of a big stadium, where I had to make an effort to look at the stadium. I couldn’t spend too much looking at what was adjacent to me, because that wasn’t in the same view as the same court. Tennis crowds are sometimes shown moving their head from one side to another, but in this case, I needed to keep it still.

As usual, Stosur did most of her damage with the serve and forehand, though to me, it felt almost like there was no one on the other side of the net, with the complete one-sided nature of the match. Don’t ask me how the first set was so close.

 

The scheduling of Australian players on Pat Rafter Arena continued on, with Bernard Tomic up next. Tomic, who is also a Queenslander strutted onto the court in his encounter with Florian Mayer. I can see why people call him cocky. He really does strut around the court, it’s not like a quiet confidence. Anyway, walking confidently is not going to intimidate anyone.

I had never paid any attention to the way Mayer warms up in his matches, but he mixes it up and hits as many low paced shots in the warm up as he does in the match, probably even more. I’m sure there are many players that like to use the warm up to get their energy up, but Mayer makes this impossible with his slow, lazy approach.

He came onto court wearing the same red shirt from the indoor season last year, and it seems like not much has changed since then. He is playing just as confidently as he did back then, though I wouldn’t call it good form yet after one match. His serve worked well, he was confident enough to play aggressively on the forehand and he was constantly changing the pace.

I noticed for the first time that I felt a sense of excitement whenever Mayer came into the net. He has such good touch up there, I always expect he will do something special. Such as creating a fine angle, or a delicate little dropshot. Most of the time, he doesn’t disappoint.

What Mayer does differently from most players is that he doesn’t use explosive shots on the run, at least nowhere near as often. He uses the slow floating shot or slow slice much more often to get back into points, to complete the glorious change of pace, which takes him from defense to offense. It really looks like his winners come out of nowhere when he does that. There’s just no way to see it coming. It’s not like a typical way of outmaneuvering opponents.

If there’s one criticism, it’s that he can get caught up with using too many floating shots on defense. He situates himself quite far behind the baseline, so it’s best to not hit too many consecutively. The slice backhand is nowhere near as effective, when it’s not combined with the drive backhand, and he was using too many in the first two games, perhaps focusing too much on how it might be a good idea to make Tomic bend his knees.

Once he started using the change of pace more often, he was completely dominant exposing Tomic’s lack of versatility, adaptability and movement. Tomic will need to improve his shotmaking ability on the run. He does seem to take overly large steps in his footwork sometimes, and he gets to his backhands out wide too late to plant his feet, to be able to hit a more aggressive shot. When he was able to take a good strike of the ball, Tomic played solidly, but he was not able to pose much of a threat. It was a convincing win for Mayer, 6-2 6-2.

 

The schedule on Court 1 was a match behind the main stadium, so I sat down to watch the start of Marion Bartoli’s match against Vania King. Of all the one-sided matches today, this was by far the most one-sided match. Bartoli basically just blasted winners through King, and her backhand is quite spectacular. Surprisingly a couple of her backhand winners, were the first time I gasped during the day.

King was basically a lightweight in comparison, and dropped the ball too short for Bartoli to attack sometimes. It felt like the first set was over in about 15 minutes. The second set was not as much of a display of winners, but with the same foregone conclusion.

 

The first upset of the day occurred soon afterwards, with Gilles Simon bowing out to Santiago Giraldo. That was a strange match, I thought. I must have spent the entire first set expecting Simon to improve his standard of play, and trying to figure out whether he had shaken out the rust yet.

I think what made it particularly difficult to figure out was that Simon didn’t exactly seem to know how he wanted to play the match. He definitely hadn’t figured out how he should play these rallies to maximize the percentage of points won. Occasionally, he’d show flashes of brilliance, where he’d suddenly decide to take the ball earlier or speed up the pace, that I thought he’d try to repeat that more often. His court coverage is so impressive and his shot production is so efficient, that he definitely has the ability to hit aggressive shots on the run. But he didn’t use it.

Just like how he didn’t take advantage of the strength of his backhand, instead choosing to knock it back crosscourt almost every time. There was one particularly great rally in this match where both players knocked it fast and hard at each other, and Simon won the battle of “absorbing pace” where I thought for a moment that Simon really does play like a wall. I mean that in a more accurate way, than simply saying that he gets the ball back all the time. He reflexes the ball back, and often in the same direction as where the ball came from, as a wall would. He also has the ability to always return a better version of someone else’s shots, which a wall also does.

I wouldn’t say that Giraldo put in an impressive performance exactly, but he was more consistent and slightly more aggressive, more willing to change directions with down-the-line shots. Simon struggled with his first serve percentage, as noted by the statistics, and Giraldo took advantage of it. Of all the players today, Simon probably talked to himself and complained the most, closely followed by Dudi Sela.

In the final game, it started raining, and many umbrellas went up obstructing my view. It’s a strange situation in Brisbane, as play can still continue on the covered courts with rain, but it is very uncomfortable to watch as a spectator. I, and many others were pleased that Simon was broken for a second time to quickly end the match there, so we could take cover.

 

I thought that maybe that would have been the end of my tennis night, but the rain cleared up quite quickly, so after having dinner, I went back to Court 1, to see the remainder of Igor Andreev’s match against Alexandr Dolgopolov. They were up to the back end of the first set.

I initially tried to watch the match from the stands but the chairs were all wet, so I thought it would be a better idea, and also very cool to watch the match standing up, leaning on the fence of the court. I really enjoyed this different view, seeing how players use their body to generate more pace and explosiveness.

By now, the number of people on the outside courts had cleared up completely now that the night session had started. Most of the people there before were just waiting for Andy Roddick’s match to start.

I don’t know the exact details of Dolgopolov’s recent results, and I’m sure just having a quick look at the wins won’t tell the story. But his body language seemed quite confident to me. He had a spring in his step about him, and his movement into his shots was very impressive, and what allows him to play aggressively. He has nice touch too, hitting many dropshot winners, but also one particularly bad one.

Andreev didn’t play a good match at all. Probably his only bright spot was the serve, but Dolgopolov completely outmatched him in terms of variety of shotmaking.

Andreev isn’t ranked as highly as he once was, but having a close look at his heavy game, it does remind me of some of the players you come across that seem intimidating, but aren’t anywhere near as scary as they initially come across. Then again, he just doesn’t have time to properly prepare on this surface. He puts in quite a grunt, only for the shot to come off as mediocre. I got the feeling that Andreev wishes the shot he just hit was bigger and better than it actually was, and you can see that in some of the errors he makes when he overplays it.

Australian Open Day 6 Blog

(Tennis Week had some technical problems so they didn't put up my final blog, deciding it had been outdated after things got resolved. It is so obviously old news now. So here it is instead.)

Today was my last day at Melbourne Park, not a full day of action as I had to catch the plane later in the day. The weather conditions in Melbourne were quite possibly the strangest of the week, as I was sitting down in Court 2 early morning, it was cold and breezy for about 20 minutes, then hot the next 20 minutes or so. The kind of weather that I would never experience in Brisbane, where I live.

On Thursday night, I was enthralled watching the third set between Venus Williams and Carla Suarez Navarro on the big screen in Garden Square. So naturally given the options available of matches to watch, I headed out to Court 2 to watch Suarez Navarro apply her trade in person.



Suarez Navarro got off to somewhat of a slow start, merely trying to find her range of shots more than anything else while Martinez Sanchez, her opponent made her intentions clear from the outset, trying to take the first strike especially off that relatively flat and strange looking left-handed forehand. It’s not at all like some of the other left-handers I’ve watched, in that Martinez Sanchez clearly does not make use of her leftiness. It’s not like her shots are flat, and they seem to bounce up relatively high but that doesn’t look like spin to me, but merely her balls sitting up high.

Martinez Sanchez started off the match making most of the winners, and most of the errors. Dominating the match too much on her own terms, making it difficult initially to find anything in Suarez Navarro’s game. However, what was most frustrating about this match was the loud grunt that consistently came off the Martinez Sanchez end. I’m not usually one to be bothered by grunting on TV, given that the sound effects, including the sound of making contact with the ball is generally softer and not as sharp on TV. But this constant screeching sound was incredibly distracting and making it difficult to withstand for longer periods.

About three or so games into the match was when Suarez Navarro started unleashing the full range of her game. Her ability to penetrate her opponents without seemingly hitting the ball that far away from her opponent, because her shots move away from her opponent after its bounce. Her shots are especially difficult to return with the work she gets on the ball, if it lands deep and I like the way she slowly pulls her opponent wider and wider to open up the court, before finishing it off if necessary. Smooth, effective hitting while playing well within herself, at least compared to Martinez Sanchez.

I’m not sure how this kind of play would hold up against one of the top players, so from that point of view it was hard to rate that performance. It had the feeling of watching an early round match, in that Suarez Navarro looked like clearly the better player, and that it was more a matter of execution and playing aggressively enough to come out on top.

The second set was more interesting from a tactical point of view, although not necessarily more entertaining to watch. I was somewhat bemused that Martinez Sanchez decided that she should come into the net more often, and she even implemented serve-and-volley tactics at times. Her volleys technically do not look sound to me at all, and really the only kind of volleys that she seems capable of hitting are the mid-to-high volleys and she is not impressive on the stretch either, but somehow managed to make up for it with anticipation.

Maybe from the point of view, that her groundstrokes were not solid enough and that she wanted to avoid one of her bigger shots being neutralised were the reason behind this move. But what I found is that Suarez Navarro is lacking in the passing shot department. Given the greater topspin that she applies on her shots, it felt like she often hit passing shots that were either well within Martinez Sanchez’s reach or sitting up high to put up. Is she not capable of dipping it low at her opponent’s feet?

But in the end, Suarez Navarro proved herself to be the better player, the more consistent player. I was fascinated in the final game how Martinez Sanchez changed her game to play safe, solid tennis trying to take advantage of any nerves coming from Suarez Navarro. But Suarez Navarro passed the test with flying colours, playing patient tennis until given the right opportunity to strike, and finish off the point with a winner.



That match was more like an appetiser, a lead-up to the match that I was looking forward to seeing between Gilles Simon and Mario Ancic. The match that was preceding it between Flavia Pennetta and Anabel Medina Garrigues finished relatively early, at a similar time to Suarez Navarro’s match which clearly pleased me given that I was running on a tight schedule today.

I had a brief fright when I went in to walk into Margaret Court Arena to find that many of the entrances were closed off, despite the fact that both players were warming up. The entire stadium was almost at its full capacity, something that I had not yet experienced myself the entire tournament. But fortunately I was able to occupy a single seat, while other groups of people had to wait outside.

This is a match that promised much in terms of its match-up, Simon’s ability to consistently hit passing shots and counterpunch against any net play that Ancic would likely throw at him. Ancic trying to take the initiative in rallies, and finish off points by tactically playing a good match. It’s interesting to note straight away the loud noise of Ancic taking a deep breath during each shot, a sound that as a spectator you get used to after a while, but it’s still unusual.

The match started off with both players playing confidently to mix up their play, something that doesn’t necessarily happen as often as it should for both Ancic and Simon. Simon seemingly able to hit great shots out of nowhere, after merely rallying around with Ancic, with no sense of real purpose except for waiting for his opportunity to strike.

It’s like how people like to describe Andy Murray’s play at times, lulling his opponents before throwing in that unexpected attack. It’s interesting to note where Simon’s shots generally land on a normal rallying shot, high margin over the net and right down the centre of the court, limiting the options that Ancic has to attack.

Whereas Ancic’s shots are consistently closer to the lines, especially on the forehand side, and whenever he won points, it was more due to the consistent attacking of his play rather than the on-the-run or unexpected winners coming from Simon. I think Ancic’s groundstrokes look more effective and solid in real life, because I sometimes tend to think of them as being noticeably worse compared to the rest of the top players.

After an initially strong start from Simon, he started to play more within himself, mainly waiting for the shorter balls before pouncing, otherwise keeping it solid until he was on the dead run or needed to hit passing shots. I find it fascinating watching the seemingly lazy footwork on Simon’s forehand when defending, how he keeps his feet relatively close together in a relaxed stance, with one leg slightly bent. It was particularly interesting at the start seeing Ancic put in all of his efforts to hit deep, penetrating shots while Simon merely returns it back almost without any effort, as if to degrade the quality of Ancic’s shot.

It was mainly counterpunching from Simon, but that works particularly well against Ancic, who likes to come into net to take advantage of any big groundstrokes he hits. The approach shots had to be perfect. Even if Simon was on the stretch, he usually found a way to dig it down back low to set himself up for the following passing shot. From a tactical point of view, it was difficult to know just how much Ancic should be trying to come to the net.

The biggest difference in this match was how Simon seemed to be able to step up a gear in the crucial stages of the match. That even though he was playing within himself, he was able to step up his game at the important stages. It was a superb first set tie-break from him, one that featured numerous brilliant shots, and the manner in which he initially broke serve in the third set was also one of the highlights of the match. Also, Simon was the more solid player overall whereas Ancic was sometimes inconsistent off the forehand.

There was an amusing moment in midway in the second set, when Simon got a netcord in his favour for the second time in the same game. Instead of putting his racquet out apologetically, Simon looked towards the crowd and smiled, the first example of proper crowd interaction that I've seen in any match. Then he put his arms out and shrugged his shoulders at his own luck, as if to say that he has no idea why the luck is all going his way.