Day 1 Brisbane International Blog

It was a muted start to proceedings at the Brisbane International, on a very rainy and windy day. At most venues, tennis would have been cancelled but in Brisbane, they have shaded covers on both Pat Rafter Arena, and on the two outside courts. But no covers for anyone watching on the outside courts, only for the players.

To make sure that as many qualifying matches were completed, all the ATP first round matches were cancelled which was disappointing. I hesitated buying a ticket and ended up on the back row. The whole stadium was almost sold out, which is quite amazing for such an early stage of the tournament.

First impressions of the view: Not bad at all. The positive part of the Pat Rafter Arena is that you feel very connected to the crowd, not completely distanced from everything if you don’t happen to sit close like in Hisense Arena at the Australian Open. If you’re going to sit near the back, it may as well be on the back row where you get the added view of being able to see Show Court 1, enough to be able to track what they’re up to, if you happen to be situated on the correct side like me. There you get just as much a feel of the atmosphere outside and you can hear anything loud that goes on instead of everything being confined.

At first it’s hard to concentrate but after a while, you get used to it. That is, until it starts raining. On any other day, these would have been great seats but the weather has kind of ruined it. First up, the qualifying match between Matheson Klein and Xavier Malisse, probably the only player I would want to watch from qualifying. Still, I was cynical of whether Klein would be able to turn this into a decent match. Fortunately, he put up a good fight and it turned out to be a good match.

A couple of minutes into the match, and it seems to be a very backhand-oriented match, both guys trading shots to that side continuously on a frequent basis. It was smooth and effortless. Klein hits two superb backhand down-the-lines and breaks serve early on. These guys seem to be both technically sound with nothing overly strange jumping out in terms of their shot production. Though Klein hooks his forehand above his head, which seems to look uglier the harder he hits it. It’s nothing like that smooth backhand of his.

Malisse is better at getting on top of the ball and creaming it. It’s the urgency with which he gets up there combined with his racquet preparation that makes it intimidating and it allows him to finish points with the earlier ball striking. Malisse has more variety on the backhand too, able to throw in slice backhands which really helps break out of those backhand crosscourt rallies that Klein really enjoyed in the first set.

Klein threw away his break of serve lead with a sloppy game at 3-3, but for the next ten minutes, Malisse raised his game and played his best tennis of the match. He started throwing himself more into forehands, and running around more backhands. He tried a few early on, but only had moderate success. For a moment, his forehand caught fire, and I became reminded again of what it looks like on Malisse’s good days. He tends to become more athletic in his stroke production almost jumping on top of everything, and hitting a lot of forehand winners. Because Malisse hits his forehand close to his body, he’s much better hitting the forehand from the left side of the court compared to crosscourt. Unfortunately it didn’t last long, and soon enough we were back to seeing Malisse casually trading groundstrokes. At least the good part of this match was that both players were relatively consistent.

With a series of deep returns of serve, Malisse breaks Klein’s serve to serve out the set. Klein hit back with one of his most inspired points at 5-6, a big approach shot followed by a superb reflex volley only to be beaten unexpectedly by a great lob from Malisse on the first point. That was enough to deject Klein and Malisse served it out without the loss of a point 7-5.

The second set was more of a grind, not as smooth and effortless, and more rough around the edges. More of a battle, particularly from Klein who had decided to switch his attack to revolve it around his forehand. Far more of those faster-paced hooky forehands. I’m surprised whenever he manages to successfully hit it down-the-line. It seems more like a guiding shot more than anything else. I think it was his way of trying to step up his game.

It was a battle the whole way in the second set, and Malisse didn’t seem to try to do anything in particular to create a lead for himself. He simply focused on being steady and being good in an all-round way as Klein’s game started to show more holes as the match went on as if he had to specifically put in a big effort just to keep up. Malisse started picking up his return game getting better depth, and often utilising the deep down-the-middle return. I think in a subtle way, Malisse’s movement improved as the match progressed. Klein recovered one break as a final effort suddenly increasing pace on his shots but Malisse broke back to take the match 7-5 6-3.

I think if Kim Clijsters wasn’t on the Sunday Order of Play, I might not have bought tickets. She might just have been the most impressive women’s player I’ve seen, though don’t read too much into that because I haven’t seen that much. Let’s wait until I get to see Henin, if I do at some point!

Clijsters got off to an error-prone start in the first couple of points but it was no big deal because she was clearly the “controller” of the match. What’s impressive about Clijsters is the fact that she seems to be able to bludgeon any ball she wants, as in suddenly increase the pace of the ball. I’ve never really noticed this before. Yes, she does hit her average shot hard, but she has the ability to hit it even harder anytime especially on the forehand. She also takes the ball earlier than I thought she did.

In the warm up, it’s clear that Clijsters not only has powerful shots, but she also hits a heavy ball. I love her movement around the court and the liveliness of her movement. She seems to be doing everything at a speed faster than everyone else, for example, how she will split step in between shots in a much more lively way compared to everyone else. It’s also little details like that, which show how much Clijsters enjoys playing, at least at this point of time.

I thought Garbin would put up more of an even battle, but she appeared to be intimidated. Maybe appropriately so, or knowing she’d get overpowered in a longer rally. I don’t know whether it’s the right thing to do, for the less powerful player to be the one to shorten the points. But that’s what she did, seemingly throwing in a large amount of short crosscourt slice backhands and dropshots, and approaching the net as soon as possible. The thing is, you can’t just hit an approach shot to the opposite side of where Clijsters is standing expecting that the width of the court will be enough to get Clijsters off balance. She’s too good of a mover for that, and so she passed Garbin almost every time. Though I think in trying to hit a good approach shot, Garbin also often put herself in knots by not giving herself enough time to find a good net position.

The problem with Garbin’s game is that her topspin backhand is weak, lacking in pace. She cannot flatten it out, and her wrist is not strong enough. It looks like more of a flick than a drive. Regardless, it’s clear that Clijsters is at a different standard and forehand winners seemed to be coming at a rapid rate. Soon enough, Clijsters had bludgeoned her way into a relatively comfortable victory, though perhaps Garbin’s tactics showed that she never believed herself that she could win anyway.

What a comeback for Kim Clijsters in this year's US Open

Some people will consider the run of Kim Clijsters as a sign of weakness in the WTA tour that it could be possible for the Belgian to come back and win a Slam after a two year hiatus. Clijsters did it the hard way too. For all the upsets and surprises of this year's US Open, Clijsters needed to defeat both Williams sisters on her way to the title. The form that she showed over the course of the week was quite superb showing very few signs of a rusty player, of a player that had been away for so long.

Since Clijsters retired, the top of women's tennis has changed significantly and it's tempting to want to compare how Clijsters played here, to the other top players of today. Though I think at times it can be difficult to remember what Ivanovic, Jankovic and Safina were like even at their peak, but the combination of athleticism and controlled aggressive tennis that Clijsters showed, to me seemed more impressive than what we typically see from the previously mentioned players.

The biggest difference is that Clijsters appears to have very few noticeable weaknesses whereas I could name one thing for either one of those players and her movement is exceptional. Only time will tell as to whether Clijsters will begin to show more signs of weakness, of shots breaking down on her when things aren't going her way.

The interesting thing to me is that I never really looked at Clijsters' game with that much enthusiasm back in those days, thinking she was just as much of a one-dimensional player as most of her peers. The only thing I remembered her for was her trademark splits, which she seems to do less of these days, but given the more error-strewn nature of the WTA these days, it was simply refreshing to see someone not pull the trigger on almost every shot and hit wayward groundstrokes everywhere, yet have the ability and firepower to hang with the very best players.

Maybe over the years, the women have become even more accustomed to flattening out on their groundstrokes, because those loopier balls and occasional slices that Clijsters likes to throw in to enhance her defensive game look like shots I haven't seen much of before in the past. I like how well Clijsters gets behind every ball, always prepared so early both in her backswing and footwork, setting herself in the right position to be able to launch herself fully into the shot.

When Serena Williams played against Clijsters in that controversial semi-final, it looked like Serena didn't really know what to do, and at times tried to hit her way out of the match. Whenever she was down in a match, she felt a sudden urgency to bludgeon her way into the match with as many winners as possible. It was almost a cocky way of playing, though in all likelihood it was simply Serena not thinking straight, of thinking that by hitting harder and playing better, she could take Clijsters out of the equation just like that.

But Clijsters was in it for the long haul. She played with freedom and brought a consistent energy on the court, while remaining composed the entire evening. She was patient and had her eye on the bigger picture, which the same could not be said of Serena. It's interesting because the mood swings that were prevalent in this match from Serena, aside from the final game of the match are probably not much different from how she has handled herself in the past. Serena has always been transparent and dramatic with her emotions and on-court antics, it's her way of driving and pushing herself to do better in matches. It's that refusal to be content with her current form in any given match that allows her to raise the bar in crucial situations. She's one of the few players on the women's tour that is capable of using her emotions to her advantage, to find her best tennis when she really needs it. And Serena really needs that extra element to her game, because her effort levels and overall athleticism can vary significantly over the course of a match.

Despite Serena's renowned athleticism and foot speed, she can often be seen sluggish and her footwork nowhere near as precise as it needs to be. She doesn't naturally enjoy chasing for balls in a way that Clijsters does, and for some reason it isn't all that automatic for her. She really needs to send internal messages in her head to be tough and show that extra desire. Though I have a feeling that Serena was sending herself all the wrong messages against Clijsters. Rather than calling on her fighting abilities or looking to increase her energy levels, Serena wanted to do it the easy way. The problem was not only that she tried for too much too soon, but she couldn't sustain it. The lack of purpose in what she was trying to do really cost her. It was a fascinating spectacle though, with every shot selection and rally, a reflection of Serena's current mood, sheer unpredictability on her part as to what she might come up with next.

It was such a stark contrast seeing Clijsters on the other side of the net, so composed and patient. She never let herself get caught up too much on the scoreboard and played every point as if it was the same magnitude. She had a clear plan to lengthen the rallies, and to not give Serena too much pace to work with, or at least not the kind of pace that can be easily returned off the racquet. She used the full width of the court, and moved her shots around nicely, enough to keep Serena consistently moving.

The match-up against Caroline Wozniacki was a different matter however. The match was always in Clijsters' hands, with the outcome depending on whether she could execute her shots the way she needed to. Had this been an earlier round match, there would have been little doubt that Clijsters would have been able to. But the pressure on her was immense, easily the favourite to win the championship.

I noticed straight away that from a technical point of view, there are a lot of similarities between Clijsters and Wozniacki on the groundstrokes, how they both have that solid base that allows them to maintain some sort of consistency when setting up for their groundstrokes. They have the same consistently energetic footwork, where it seems like their feet are consistently moving all the time whether it's to recover from the previous shot, or running explosively to the next. Whereas I'd say for example, that for Serena and Venus, they probably only make that effort to make that explosive movement when they have their eye on a shot to run down, it's not consistent. Other less athletic players have had to work hard on their movement, and it's not automatic for them. You don't really see Clijsters or Wozniacki make a whole lot of errors out of poor footwork, or catching themselves in knots. If anything, it's a problem with their follow-through, backswing or racquet head acceleration.

In the end, there wasn't a whole lot to notice about this match, except that after a slow start, Clijsters got herself together enough to win the match in a convincing fashion. She easily had the better shotmaking ability out of the two, and she made the most of it. Wozniacki surprisingly has a decent all-court game, more of a willingness to come to the net than the majority of players even though technically her volleys are not all that sound. I'm not sure much can be read into Wozniacki's run into the final, aside from the fact that anything can happen in a Slam on the women's side these days, and that Wozniacki has the mental strength and consistency to take advantage of that.