Blake Loses ANOTHER Five Setter

It seems that James Blake is now 0-9 in five-set matches, the worst record for any currently active touring pro. Of course, after catching the reports of his loss to Max Mirnyi--"The Beast," a very tall serve-and-volley guy who's not especially noted as a singles players--I have to say I'm not surprised. I'm sure Mirnyi came in on the kitchen sink and forced Blake to hit pass after pass, when not scrambling to return a booming serve. Blake's game is not based on passing shots; it's based on jacking the court open with his forehand and looking to punish the weak comeback. In short, Blake likes to control the pressure, not have pressure thrown at him. I also think that even a slow-ish grass court (and there does seem to be such a thing) negates his speed. It's too easy for bangers and big servers to win cheap points and take away his defensive game.

I didn't honestly see him getting that far at Wimbly, even with his good Queen's Club result two weeks ago.

I look for him to be solid at the US Open however, if he can get through the hard court season without injuries.

Fed's Blazer

Here's a link to the story on Federer's Nike-designed blazer, the one that he has been wearing to court at Wimbly this week.

http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/photo?slug=75c471eaf2194559bac60eb7af136442.britian_wimbledon_tennis_xwim103&prov=ap

Rather sharp. It looks as though Nike actually tailored it. I wonder what material it's made of? Cotton? Linen? Silk/wool?

Thanks to the Tennis Warehouse forum for the link.

Hingis Out but Maybe Not Down

Martina Hingis' three-set loss to Ai Sugiyama (4-6 in the third) was both baffling and instructive, in terms of Hingis' comeback (actually, let's face it, she's back).

At no point in the third, mainly because she was up 3-0 with TWO breaks in hand, did I think Hingis was going to drop the match. But somehow, she did. Her concentration seemed to waver, even when she was dominating rallies. Sugiyama is a tough opponent for her: She hangs in there and looks to blast a backhand. Hingis has molded her comeback to deal with the power hitters. Boom! She runs into a retriever who keeps making her construct and reconstruct points, and then out of nowhere cracks a tough ball. And thus, frustration for the Swiss Miss.

Hingis can't really end a point with one shot, as the commentators pointed out. Unfortunately, in grass, this means she not getting any cheap points, and the name of the game at Wimbly, on both men's and women's side, is cheap points. Hingis plays beautifully, but until she develops I would say a better first serve, she's going to struggle to work her way through to the second week at Wimbledon.

There is plenty of time for this, of course. She is beginning to look a lot less slight, as if she's trying to add some upper-body mass, I'm assuming so she can power through more balls, add some heft to her shots to go along with her mesmerizing touch. Interestingly, I see a sort of Martina Navratilova aspect to this. Navratilova transformed her body halfway through her career and went on to become the best women's players of all time. Hingis might not be able to take it Navratilova levels, but she could borrow a page from Agassi's training book and strengthen her upper body.

The US Open is a bit of a toss-up. Maybe she'll be more focused there, ready to play every match rather than thinking too far ahead.

Henman Clobbered, Other Thoughts

The consensus among the commentariat (Pat Mac, Gilbert) on air at Wimbledon seems to be that maybe Federer is a tad pissed after his loss at the French and is sending a signal that...well, pardon my own French, but the literal translation from francais would be fuck not with moi. The man has destroyed his first two opponents, beginning with Gasquet, who is actually quite good, and now Henman, who though aging isn't exactly a slouch on grass. I mean destroyed, as if for the first time in several years Fed believes he has something to prove and genuinely intends to prove it. Like, without dropping a set. Like, by making all others looks, well... apologies again, but the mot is "shit."

Frankly, I've watched the close competition, and at this point, I'm afraid Hewitt is the only one who has a chance, and a slim one, at that. Mama mia! Federer is freakin good! GOOD! Listen to me, fine folk: When I saw Pete Sampras just slaughter the competition on his way to his first US Open win, I thought something special was on the rise, a pure striker of the ball, a rare talent. Now we have Fed, an even more complete and nuanced player, who is, unlike Pete, now actually enraged, in his own suave way, as the globe has never seen him.

Jee-hosaphat! The Henman shellacking is instructive. Normally, Fed tosses him a few more games, because he knows the poor sod has fans by the gajillions hoping against hope that he somehow finagles a final berth.

Yeah, fuhgetaboutit. To quote Brad Gilbert, "Federer likes to drop the hammer." Hammer? He nuked poor Tim. He hammered the sad puss that was oozing from Tim's pulverized hopes. He smashed Tim like a feeble flea.

Here is the worrying proposition: Fed, who normally contains himself in early rounds, is letting it fly. This can only be, as has been noted, an announcement. Look, he ain't doing it with serves—he's doing it with SHOTS. SHOTS! A sure sign that a man feels he can and should win EVERY SINGLE POINT.

Oh my, Dick Enberg, oh my, you silly man. Brace yourself.

Anyhow, in other news, Roddick seems to be flirting with taking on Connors as a coach. Let's see...win the US Open with Gilbert...fire Brad, begin a slow decline into confusion and defeat...hire Connors as a show move to boost fan enthusiasm. Connors? What the hell does Jimmy know about a player with a monster serve? To quote David Foster Wallace, Jimmy had the serve of an "ectomorphic girl." Indeed, a competitive chap—we get to see him yearly spank the mighty Jimmy Arias on tape when things get slow at the US Open. But hardly renaissance material for Roddick, who has already played two tiebreaks to Fed's none in this year's All England campaign. And Forget that he's winning: He's NOT ATTACKING THE NET! He seems to think he's playing on some surface other than grass.

I have called his comeback at Wimbly for months now and if he proves me wrong it will be due ENTIRELY to the disarray on him team. There's nobody at the rudder there, clearly. Game plan is as follows: Thump serve, thump forehand. And if that is being challenged FIRST ROUND, as it has been, we Roddickians are in BIG trouble.

And so it begins...

I didn't seen the match, but evidently Federer blew Richard Gasquet off the court in his first-round match at Wimbledon. Reports have it that Fed also walked on court in a white, Nike-designed blazer! I haven't been able to find a photo, but when I do, I will post. It's interesting, as I was recently watching some old Davis Cup footage and lamenting the loss of the blazer as pre-match-wear. Presto! Nike read my mind. Must have been quite an entry, as Fed has a regal manner, anyhow.

Blake v. Hewitt (AGAIN!)

In the realm of sub-rivalries, it seems that James Blake and Lleyton Hewitt may be forever linked. They wound up going at it again at the Stella Artois champs in London, over the weekend.

Blake looks better that I thought he would on grass, though he seems oddly uncomfortable with the whole serve-and-volley thing. He has something of a hit-it-and-fall-down serve, anyway, not a flowing motion that carries him into the net, so I wouldn't expect him to be able to adapt to the classic grass court style (Federer doesn't have a classic S&V approach, either). He's more of a power counterpuncher, always looking for opportuntites to use his forehand.

Unfortunately, Hewitt is the definitive counterpuncher. He has also taken a page out of the Fed playbook by dialing back his serve and going more for placements. Ditto his winners. He has won four Stella Artois (Queens Club) tourneys, so he knows how to prepare for Wimbledon.

As for Blake, he did knock Roddick off in the semis. That to me was a shocker and changes my view of how Wimbledon might shake down this year (I've been predicting it to be the place where Roddick stages his comeback--if you can be a top five player and need one, which he does).

Dust in the Wind

All I have to say about the Federer loss to Nadal yesterday is that, after the first set, I thought history would run its course and destiny would be fulfilled--and that Fed's achievement would act as a sort of foil to Sampras 14-slams milestone--but I still had this nagging sense that all was not right. Nadal is simply too tough to fold up, even after a thrashing such as he received in the first set (6-1). And that talent was proven: He wore Federer out, so that by the fourth, Fed has abandoned his attacking game and reverted.

But reverted to what? Fed's big advantage over any other recently dominant player on clay is that he actually grew up playing on the stuff. So he has a much better chance to pull of the Grand Slam than, say, McEnroe or Sampras did. However, on clay, and especially when the going gets tough, I think he reverts to the style of his youth, more of a backcourt, basliner, move-the-ball around strategy.

When he overcomes this and begins to create the midcourt attacking opportunities he needs to defeat Nadal on clay, he'll probably win the French. Shame it couldn't have been this year.

Yes, I called the Grand Slam--calendar year, by the way--a month or so back. Not sure Fed will ever have this good a chance again: easy wins leading up to final, energy-preserving semifinal forfeit by Nalbandian, memory of a near-win at Rome fresh in his mind. But we'll see.

On an other front, look for the resurgence of Roddick at Wimbledon. Hey, imagine that Fed plays the same three guys in slam final for the next five years? Nadal at the French (and eventually at the US Open), Roddick at Wimbly, and say Nalbandian at the Oz. It would be weird.