2015 was a huge year for 20 year-old Elina Svitolina. How would she respond to a huge 2014? Her 2014 year included a title in Baku, a Round of 16 in Miami, a Quarterfinals appearance in Cincinnati, and she also made the Semifinals in Nuremberg, Wuhan, and Osaka. Svitolina could either sink with the pressure of a significant ranking points or swim and thrive on the WTA Tour. I think it's safe to say that Svitolina is swimming at the moment.
2015 got off to a spectacular spot for Svitolina as she made the Semifinals of Brisbane. I knew Elina was in for a special year when I watched her match against Angelique Kerber in the Quarterfinals. Elina was calm, cool, and collected, and was certainly not intimidated by the moment. She repelled almost anything Kerber through at her, and held her nerve to win in a tight three-setter. And although her run came to an end in the next round against Maria Sharapova, Svitolina showed that she was not going to slip into mediocrity in the new year.
While a Third Round appearance at the Australian Open a few weeks later could be seen as an average tournament for Svitolina, it was the way she played those three matches that impressed me most. In the first two rounds of the tournament, Svitolina acted as a seasoned veteran, beating both of her lower-ranked opponents in straight sets to play tournament-champion Serena Williams in the Third Round. Svitolina ended up being one of only two players to take a set off of Williams in that tournament, taking the first set 6-4. And while Elina would only win two games for the rest of the match, the fact that she could win a set against Serena showed her potential.
Svitolina's next good run of play occurred from Indian Wells till Marrakech. In Indian Wells, Elina made the Round of 16. However, it was her straight-set win over an in-form Lucie Safarova (won Doha a couple weeks before) that, once again, showed the world that Elina would be a tough out for whoever played her. The following month in Bogota, Svitolina made the Semifinals, showing once again that she can consistently win on the WTA Tour. Then, a couple weeks later, she won another title, this time in Marrakech, a clay court event. In the five matches she played in that tournament, Elina only lost one set and cruised to the title. Svitolina beat Timea Babos in the Final in straight sets to once again prove she wasn't a rising force for the rest of the WTA, she was a force that had arrived.
Svitolina's latest triumph has occurred at the French Open. She is currently in the Quarterfinals and is playing unbelievable tennis. The most impressive part of Elina's run is her maturity (and the composure that stems from that maturity). In two of Svitolina's first four matches, she has been pushed deep into a third set. But, each time, she came through. In the Second Round, Svitolina beat Yulia Putintseva 9-7 in the third set, while in the Third Round, Elina beat Annika Beck 6-4 in the third set. Even in the Round of 16, with Svitolina losing serve when serving for the match twice and wasting three match point in the tiebreak, when Cornet had a set point, Svitolina refused to let that set slip away. And when she let two more match points get away from her, Elina dug in and finally closed the match on her sixth match point. Svitolina had made her first Grand Slam Quarterfinals appearance ever against Ana Ivanovic.
However, it surely seems like it won't be her last Grand Slam Quarterfinals appearance ever. Elina Svitolina has definitely proved that she is here to stay. Who knows? A week from today, she could be a Grand Slam champion.
Sunday, May 31, 2015
Thursday, May 21, 2015
What Has Happened To Madison Keys?
When a player is ready to be great, the breakthrough becomes the norm. When a player is ready to be great, the results meet the expectations When a player is ready to be great, surprise turns into a steady focus. Madison Keys is not quite ready to be great yet.
Madison looked spectacular in Australian Open run in January. She made the Semifinals, beating great players such Petra Kvitova (in straight sets) and Venus Williams along the way. In fact, Keys only lost two sets en-route to the Semifinals and was within a two point swing of taking the first set from Serena Williams in an extremely tight first set. I remember sitting on my couch watching Madison rocket aces past Serena and thinking to myself, "This girl is unbelievable". Even though she lost that semifinal match against Serena, the world now knew Madison Keys' name, the breakthrough was complete.
However, the next step of the process is turning the breakthrough into the norm, which entails dealing the new pressures to succeed, dealing with the increased media presence (and outside distractions) surrounding you, and trying to stay humble. Obviously, this step is extremely hard to take,and it seems like Madison is having a very hard time taking this next step.
Following her great run in Melbourne, Keys went on to lose in her second match to a struggling (at the time) Jelena Jankovic at Indian Wells, and in her first match to Sloane Stephens in Miami to go a measly 1-2 in the spring American hard court swing. Gone was the jubilation of the run in Melbourne, replaced instead by the realization that the WTA tour (and the ATP tour for that matter) moves on with or without you.
Perhaps this was a wake-up call for Madison, because she performed quite well on the green clay in Charleston. I suspect, however, that this was more due to weak competition than anything else, as the strongest player Madison faced was Lauren Davis before the Final. However, I'm sure that these easier matches boosted Keys' confidence and allowed her to forget about her failures in Indian Wells and Miami. In the Final, though, Madison was leading 4-1 in the third set before collapsing and losing the third set 7-5, thus giving Angelique Kerber the tournament win. It took a lot of mental strength to make the semis in Melbourne (especially her tough win over Venus in the Quarterfinals), but it seems as if that mental strength did not transfer over to Charleston.
And Madison has not seemed to recover from that Charleston loss, losing in her first match in Madrid, in straight sets to Kaia Kanepi, and losing in her second match at Rome to Bojana Jovanovski, for another 1-2 record at big tournaments on the European clay court swing. At the small event in Strasbourg (currently going on this week), Keys won her first two matches, including a TOUGH match over Mirjana Lucic-Baroni, before withdrawing with an injury, unable to gain any real momentum heading towards the French Open.
So, what do I think has happened to Madison Keys? I think she is overwhelmed right now. Overwhelmed by the pressure to succeed within the game and the new pressures around her outside of the game. Her confidence from the Australian Open also seems to be gone too, so Lindsey Davenport will really have to work with Madison regarding her confidence too. Lindsey will also have to try to get Madison to focus in on tennis itself, and not worry about what's going outside of the game.
At the end of the day, I still see a great future for Madison. It just might not come as soon as many predicted.
Madison looked spectacular in Australian Open run in January. She made the Semifinals, beating great players such Petra Kvitova (in straight sets) and Venus Williams along the way. In fact, Keys only lost two sets en-route to the Semifinals and was within a two point swing of taking the first set from Serena Williams in an extremely tight first set. I remember sitting on my couch watching Madison rocket aces past Serena and thinking to myself, "This girl is unbelievable". Even though she lost that semifinal match against Serena, the world now knew Madison Keys' name, the breakthrough was complete.
However, the next step of the process is turning the breakthrough into the norm, which entails dealing the new pressures to succeed, dealing with the increased media presence (and outside distractions) surrounding you, and trying to stay humble. Obviously, this step is extremely hard to take,and it seems like Madison is having a very hard time taking this next step.
Following her great run in Melbourne, Keys went on to lose in her second match to a struggling (at the time) Jelena Jankovic at Indian Wells, and in her first match to Sloane Stephens in Miami to go a measly 1-2 in the spring American hard court swing. Gone was the jubilation of the run in Melbourne, replaced instead by the realization that the WTA tour (and the ATP tour for that matter) moves on with or without you.
Perhaps this was a wake-up call for Madison, because she performed quite well on the green clay in Charleston. I suspect, however, that this was more due to weak competition than anything else, as the strongest player Madison faced was Lauren Davis before the Final. However, I'm sure that these easier matches boosted Keys' confidence and allowed her to forget about her failures in Indian Wells and Miami. In the Final, though, Madison was leading 4-1 in the third set before collapsing and losing the third set 7-5, thus giving Angelique Kerber the tournament win. It took a lot of mental strength to make the semis in Melbourne (especially her tough win over Venus in the Quarterfinals), but it seems as if that mental strength did not transfer over to Charleston.
And Madison has not seemed to recover from that Charleston loss, losing in her first match in Madrid, in straight sets to Kaia Kanepi, and losing in her second match at Rome to Bojana Jovanovski, for another 1-2 record at big tournaments on the European clay court swing. At the small event in Strasbourg (currently going on this week), Keys won her first two matches, including a TOUGH match over Mirjana Lucic-Baroni, before withdrawing with an injury, unable to gain any real momentum heading towards the French Open.
So, what do I think has happened to Madison Keys? I think she is overwhelmed right now. Overwhelmed by the pressure to succeed within the game and the new pressures around her outside of the game. Her confidence from the Australian Open also seems to be gone too, so Lindsey Davenport will really have to work with Madison regarding her confidence too. Lindsey will also have to try to get Madison to focus in on tennis itself, and not worry about what's going outside of the game.
At the end of the day, I still see a great future for Madison. It just might not come as soon as many predicted.
Monday, May 18, 2015
So, Who is the Favorite at the French Open for the Men?
So, a major debate going on in the tennis world right now is: Who is the real men's favorite to win Roland Garros this season? Let's dig in.
Possible Favorites:
-Andy Murray: You might be thinking to yourself, "Huh? Not possible." But, I'm being dead serious when I include Murray in this section. Andy has been spectacular this clay season. After entering the clay court swing with no titles on the surface, he exits with two trophies and zero losses. He first won the title at the BMW Open in Munich, Germany. On the way he beat some pretty good clay court (and overall) players in Goffin, Bautista Agut, and Kohlscreiber (in a Monday Final!). Then Murray quickly went to Spain and played some of the best tennis, in my opinion, that he's ever played on any surface. He dismissed the new generation in Raonic and Nisikori, both in straight sets, and then rocked Rafael Nadal, only giving up five games in the process. Andy Murray has earned his place on my unimportant blog!
-Novak Djokovic: This guy is just incredible. After having won the Australian Open, Indian Wells, and Miami on hard courts, Novak continued his success on the clay. He then went on to Win Monte Carlo (also destroying Nadal, only losing six games to him) and then went on to win Madrid, beating clay courters like Almagro and Ferrer and also beating all-court players like Federer and Nishikori to complete a perfect clay court season (him and Murray either played different events or Murray withdrew). Djokovic also has the claim that he made the Final of the French Open in two of the past three seasons, with seemingly only Rafa being able to stop him.
-Rafael Nadal: I don't even think I have to say a word here. Seriously. This guy has won nine of the past ten French Opens (2005-2014 sans 2009) and has utterly dominated other clay tournaments in past years with zero mercy. Rafa is a clay legend. But, while he did pick up a clay 250 in Buenos Aires, Rafa has not done as well this clay court season. He made the Round of 16 in Barcelona, quarters in Rome, semis in Rio and Monte Carlo, and the Final in Madrid. For a lot of people, that is a great clay season, but not for Rafa. It also was the way he meekly went out in a lot of those matches (such as Murray in Madrid and Wawrinka in Rome) that has a lot of tennis fans worried.
So, who do I think the favorite is? Let me first rule out Andy. Although he has played really well this season, I can't get over how he had zero clay titles before 2015. While Andy has GREATLY improved on the surface, it's too big of a stretch to say that he goes from not having even won a 250 on clay to the favorite for the French Open. He might make a run, but until Novak and Rafa are out, he won't be the favorite. That leads us Djokovic and Nadal. A lot of tennis "pundits" think that Novak is the favorite, and while I can't fault them for their choice (he has played AMAZING this season), I'm sticking with Rafa.
First off, I can't get over how Rafa is a nine-time champion at a MAJOR and has won 90% of the major champions in Paris over the last ten years! Just think about that. 90%! So, that brings with it a lot of psychological advantages, which I think the media is too quick to say is escaping from Nadal. On top of that, Djokovic has won 0 majors on the surface, which says a lot about how he performs in Paris, NOT how performs on clay. In addition, Nadal is 6-0 against Djokovic in best-of-five on clay (Davis Cup and FO, excluding a Djoker retirement). The main court at Roland Garros, Philippe Chatrier, also suits Nadal perfectly, giving him A LOT of room to move around, which is super important for Rafa's game. Rafa also has the uncanny ability to grind an opponent down in best-of-five which one cannot see in a best-of-three clay court event. Finally, when I was looking at Djokovic's past results at RG, I noticed that every one of his losing matches from 2010-2014 were in four or five sets. What does that tell me? It shows me that Djokovic can play extremely well on the surface, but despite having extraordinary conditioning, on clay he just wears down. It's not that he's being outclassed, he's just wearing down. And that is a disturbing trend.
So, there you have it! Let me know in the comments if you agree or disagree with what I've had to say!
Possible Favorites:
-Andy Murray: You might be thinking to yourself, "Huh? Not possible." But, I'm being dead serious when I include Murray in this section. Andy has been spectacular this clay season. After entering the clay court swing with no titles on the surface, he exits with two trophies and zero losses. He first won the title at the BMW Open in Munich, Germany. On the way he beat some pretty good clay court (and overall) players in Goffin, Bautista Agut, and Kohlscreiber (in a Monday Final!). Then Murray quickly went to Spain and played some of the best tennis, in my opinion, that he's ever played on any surface. He dismissed the new generation in Raonic and Nisikori, both in straight sets, and then rocked Rafael Nadal, only giving up five games in the process. Andy Murray has earned his place on my unimportant blog!
-Novak Djokovic: This guy is just incredible. After having won the Australian Open, Indian Wells, and Miami on hard courts, Novak continued his success on the clay. He then went on to Win Monte Carlo (also destroying Nadal, only losing six games to him) and then went on to win Madrid, beating clay courters like Almagro and Ferrer and also beating all-court players like Federer and Nishikori to complete a perfect clay court season (him and Murray either played different events or Murray withdrew). Djokovic also has the claim that he made the Final of the French Open in two of the past three seasons, with seemingly only Rafa being able to stop him.
-Rafael Nadal: I don't even think I have to say a word here. Seriously. This guy has won nine of the past ten French Opens (2005-2014 sans 2009) and has utterly dominated other clay tournaments in past years with zero mercy. Rafa is a clay legend. But, while he did pick up a clay 250 in Buenos Aires, Rafa has not done as well this clay court season. He made the Round of 16 in Barcelona, quarters in Rome, semis in Rio and Monte Carlo, and the Final in Madrid. For a lot of people, that is a great clay season, but not for Rafa. It also was the way he meekly went out in a lot of those matches (such as Murray in Madrid and Wawrinka in Rome) that has a lot of tennis fans worried.
So, who do I think the favorite is? Let me first rule out Andy. Although he has played really well this season, I can't get over how he had zero clay titles before 2015. While Andy has GREATLY improved on the surface, it's too big of a stretch to say that he goes from not having even won a 250 on clay to the favorite for the French Open. He might make a run, but until Novak and Rafa are out, he won't be the favorite. That leads us Djokovic and Nadal. A lot of tennis "pundits" think that Novak is the favorite, and while I can't fault them for their choice (he has played AMAZING this season), I'm sticking with Rafa.
First off, I can't get over how Rafa is a nine-time champion at a MAJOR and has won 90% of the major champions in Paris over the last ten years! Just think about that. 90%! So, that brings with it a lot of psychological advantages, which I think the media is too quick to say is escaping from Nadal. On top of that, Djokovic has won 0 majors on the surface, which says a lot about how he performs in Paris, NOT how performs on clay. In addition, Nadal is 6-0 against Djokovic in best-of-five on clay (Davis Cup and FO, excluding a Djoker retirement). The main court at Roland Garros, Philippe Chatrier, also suits Nadal perfectly, giving him A LOT of room to move around, which is super important for Rafa's game. Rafa also has the uncanny ability to grind an opponent down in best-of-five which one cannot see in a best-of-three clay court event. Finally, when I was looking at Djokovic's past results at RG, I noticed that every one of his losing matches from 2010-2014 were in four or five sets. What does that tell me? It shows me that Djokovic can play extremely well on the surface, but despite having extraordinary conditioning, on clay he just wears down. It's not that he's being outclassed, he's just wearing down. And that is a disturbing trend.
So, there you have it! Let me know in the comments if you agree or disagree with what I've had to say!
Sunday, May 17, 2015
Should There Be Wildcards At Majors?
Over at Men's tennis forums, there is a nice debate going on about whether or not there should be wildcards at majors, and as I wanted to resurrect this blog, I thought that would be a good topic to resurrect with.
As you can see here, these wildcards for the French Open aren't going to the guys and girls ranked just below the main draw cut off or just below the qualifying cut off. We aren't seeing Dustin Brown, for instance, get rewarded for his hard work, not have to worry about qualifying, and instead get a main draw wildcard. Instead, these wildcards are going to mainly the French (although there are reciprocity agreements with Australia and the US), and are either going to young guns looking for a head start on the tour, or older guys/gals being rewarded for their time on tour (or recent success). The first group would be, in this year's selection of wild cards, players like Dodin, Halys, or Chung (for the qualifying draw) and the second group would be players like Mahut and Razzano.
So, I've read the vast majority of the thread on this topic on MTF, and from what I gather, there are two sides. The first (pro-wild card) side is that wild cards drive ticket sales, improve the atmosphere at the event, and generally just create a buzz around the community when a home wild card is playing. The other (anti-wild card) side says that more deserving players who just missed the cut off should get into the major instead of wild cards.
So, what side am I on? I admit, I'm copping out a little bit here, but if we stick to the eight wild cards for the main draw, I think that maybe six of the wild cards should be for local players (and possibly reciprocity agreements, although that is up for the majors to decide), and maybe two should go to players who have had a good run of form lately, but maybe just missed the cut off (the same general principle applies for qualifying too). That way we can get a buzz on the grounds for a young gun, like Halys for instance, but at the same time reward a couple of men and a couple of women who might not have made the cut, but are really playing well and are sure to be competitive in the main draw. An example of that, for instance, could be Kokkinakis for the men (although he is already getting a reciprocity wild card, the principle is the same). Perhaps say that whoever wins the Bordeaux Challenger, French or not, gets a wild card into the main draw.
Just my thoughts on this matter. Happy to be back!
As you can see here, these wildcards for the French Open aren't going to the guys and girls ranked just below the main draw cut off or just below the qualifying cut off. We aren't seeing Dustin Brown, for instance, get rewarded for his hard work, not have to worry about qualifying, and instead get a main draw wildcard. Instead, these wildcards are going to mainly the French (although there are reciprocity agreements with Australia and the US), and are either going to young guns looking for a head start on the tour, or older guys/gals being rewarded for their time on tour (or recent success). The first group would be, in this year's selection of wild cards, players like Dodin, Halys, or Chung (for the qualifying draw) and the second group would be players like Mahut and Razzano.
So, I've read the vast majority of the thread on this topic on MTF, and from what I gather, there are two sides. The first (pro-wild card) side is that wild cards drive ticket sales, improve the atmosphere at the event, and generally just create a buzz around the community when a home wild card is playing. The other (anti-wild card) side says that more deserving players who just missed the cut off should get into the major instead of wild cards.
So, what side am I on? I admit, I'm copping out a little bit here, but if we stick to the eight wild cards for the main draw, I think that maybe six of the wild cards should be for local players (and possibly reciprocity agreements, although that is up for the majors to decide), and maybe two should go to players who have had a good run of form lately, but maybe just missed the cut off (the same general principle applies for qualifying too). That way we can get a buzz on the grounds for a young gun, like Halys for instance, but at the same time reward a couple of men and a couple of women who might not have made the cut, but are really playing well and are sure to be competitive in the main draw. An example of that, for instance, could be Kokkinakis for the men (although he is already getting a reciprocity wild card, the principle is the same). Perhaps say that whoever wins the Bordeaux Challenger, French or not, gets a wild card into the main draw.
Just my thoughts on this matter. Happy to be back!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)