Heather Watson started off the 2015 season with a bang. In Hobart, in the Brit's first tournament of the year, she stormed through the field to win her second WTA title. During this run, she did not drop a set and beat accomplished players like Sloane Stephens and Roberta Vinci before beating Madison Brengle, a fast riser on the WTA Tour, in straight sets to win it. After losing six of her last seven matches in 2014, this was just the start Watson needed to catapult her up the rankings. In fact, Watson got up to the best ranking of her career, number 38 in the world. So, what happened?
A champion, when they win a smaller tournament like Hobart, uses that run to propel them to greater heights in better tournaments. Look at Timea Bacsinszky, for example. Upon winning her first title in a very long time early this year in Acapulco, she went on to win the following tournament in Monterrey, make the Quarterfinals of Indian Wells, and just recently, make the Semifinals of the French Open and come within three holds-of-serve from the Final. Timea took the momentum and experience of winning this smaller tournament and used it to fuel her to greater things in her career. And although Timea's rise was extremely rapid, Watson could have certainly followed a similar (if less dramatic) path. Instead, Heather Watson shrunk.
Following the win in Hobart, Watson only got four games in a loss to Tstetvana Pironkova in a match in which Watson lost the second set 6-0. Perhaps you could chalk that up to a "champion's hangover". However, her straight set loss to Kateryna Kozlova, a player currently ranked number 150 in the WTA rankings, was a bit more shocking. Watson did have a run to the Round of 16 at Indian Wells, but, that could be because she was playing the unsteady Julia Goerges and Camila Giorgi before facing the slumping Aga Radwanska more than anything else. Watson's form got very poor following her time in southern California.
A First Round win in Miami was then followed by four losses in a row, two of them being to Polona Hercog and Mariana Duque-Marino. Now, no disrespect to those two ladies, but they are players that Watson has to be beating, especially after showing her form in Hobart. After all, Hercog is ranked number 81 in the world and Duque-Marino is ranked number 99 in the world. Those are players that Watson, if she truly had a champion's mindset, would be straight-setting, rather than losing to. Instead of using the momentum and form that she had following her win in Hobart, Watson totally dumped that form and let herself slip a bit.
Following that four match losing streak, Heather's form has not improved much. After her loss to Duque-Marino in Madrid, she then lost in her second match at Rome to Carla Suarez-Navarro in straight sets and then had another loss in the Second Round of the French Open, this time to Sloane Stephens. Perhaps the grass would revitalize her form? That doesn't seem like the case, as Watson lost in straight sets to Aleksandra Krunic, a player ranked only number 82 in the world.
Now, the easy response to all of this would be, perhaps Heather Watson only likes hard courts. After all, that is the surface where she won both of her titles on the WTA Tour. However, I do not believe this is the case. While Watson did go 2-5 on the clay, following her title in Hobart, she only went 5-5 on hard courts. In addition, during 2014, Watson only went 4-12 in WTA-level, main draw matches on the hard courts. In any case, when you had a tough season like 2014, a tournament win is vital for revitalizing your career, but unfortunately for Heather, it didn't seem to do much. It was the same ole' Heather following Hobart.
But, you might be asking, "What about after Watson's first tournament win? Did she show a champion's mindset there?" The answer is NO. At her last tournament in 2012, Watson won Osaka, only losing two sets in five matches and having the very impressive mental resolve of winning a third set tiebreak to beat Kai-Chen Chang in the Final. One would think that a big win like this would make Watson even more hungry for better results in the following season, and she would do everything in her power that offseason to make 2013 the best that it could be.
But, for Watson, 2013 was quite poor. She never won more than two WTA-level matches in a row and only advanced past the Round of 16 once at a smaller event in Memphis in which she only had to win two matches to the make the Quarterfinals. Even back in 2012 and 2013, one sees that Watson doesn't truly have the mindset of a champion. Mediocrity, with the occasional good tournament here and there, is perfectly fine with her, it doesn't matter whether it's 2012 or 2015.
In addition, let's take a further look into how Watson does when she played someone who is currently ranked below her current ranking of 65 (a big drop from earlier this year) following Hobart. This happened nine times following Hobart, and Watson is a terrible 3-6 in these matches. Yes, Heather Watson, after Hobart, has lost 2/3 of her matches against players who currently have a worse rank than her current ranking of 65. A champion beats the players that he or she is supposed to beat, but Heather flounders in these type of situations following her win. It's as if the knowledge that she actually won a tournament and is supposed to beat a player like Kozlova, currently ranked 85 spots below her, is too much for Watson to handle. Not to mention that, after Hobart, Watson is 4-5 against players ranked above her, so it's not like she is consistently beating players above her in the rankings either.
Heather Watson has a lot of thinking to do as she prepares for her next match against Varvara Lepchenko in her home country at Eastbourne. She needs to figure out how to stomp out players ranked below her and consistently challenge those above her in the rankings. It's not easy to have a champion's mindset. There is a reason that so few players win that elusive major title. But, a win just before the Australian Open in Hobart could have been what took Watson to the next level in her career. But, it almost seems as if Heather Watson is fine with not being the best that she can be. It's almost as if she has no problems with losing to players below her, while not raising her game to really challenge the best in the women's game.
And what does this tell me? It tells me that Heather Watson lacks a champion's mindset.
Sunday, June 21, 2015
Friday, June 12, 2015
ATP Stuttgart Semifinals Predictions
So, I've decided maybe once a week to do some Semifinals predictions for a tournament going on in that week and this is my first of this weekly installment. This week's tournament will be: ATP Stuttgart.
Rafael Nadal vs. Gael Monfils
In this big name clash, struggling Rafael Nadal takes on unpredictable Gael Monfils with a spot in the Final of ATP Stuttgart, an ATP 250 event, on the line. Both players are in, for their standards, mediocre form going into the tournament. For the first time since 2009, and only the second time since 2005, Nadal did not win the French Open. In fact, Rafa didn't even put up much of a fight in his highly anticipated clash with Novak Djokovic in the Quarterfinals of the French Open. Nadal lost in straight sets and was even handed a 6-1 third set loss to Novak.
But, although it was surprising in the way Nadal lost, the entirety of the late spring clay court season (which excludes Rio and Buenos Aires) certainly foreshadowed that Rafa's dominance at the tournament was not set in stone this season. Rafa lost in straight sets to Djokovic, Fognini, Murray, and Wawrinka, looking slow and off. In fact, Nadal has not looked right since his appendex issues at the end of last season. This tournament has been a struggle for Rafa, as well. He has been taken to three sets by both Marcos Baghdatis and Bernard Tomic and has not looked himself yet this tournament (or year for that matter). And although he was able to wear both Marcos and Bernie down in the third set, that is a much tougher task against Gael.
While Gael Monfils started the clay court season strong, he started to slide as the weeks went on. He started off the clay season in Monte Carlo where he made the Semifinals, including straight set wins over Grigor Dimitrov and Roger Federer. However, over the next two tournaments in Bucharest and Madrid, he went on to win only three of his next five matches, unexpected given his prowess on the surface. Monfils then didn't play at Rome, and then played three tough matches at Roland Garros before meekly bowing out to Roger Federer with a 6-1 loss in the fourth set against Roger.
In this tournament, Monfils took out clay courter Andreas Haider-Maurer in two tiebreaks, which was a good way to ease him into the clay court season. What concerned me about this match was Gael seemed more worried about putting on a show than winning, but Monfils proved that he was very worried about winning in his next match. Monfils had his most impressive win since Monte Carlo today, beating Philipp Kohlschreiber in Philipp's home country in three sets. For me, it was an unexpected win, but it showed that Monfils was taking this tournament seriously.
In the head to head, Nadal leads 10-2. It's important to note, however, that these two have never met on grass before. While they haven't played in 2015, the two have squared off in 2014, with Nadal winning both matches. While Nadal won in three sets in Doha, Rafa only gave up six games in demolishing Gael at the Australian Open. However, if we take away clay, which is the less like grass than hard courts and is also Nadal's favorite surface, Rafa's record is only 6-2, with him winning in straight sets in four of those matches.
Rafa has dominated this rivalry but is playing on what is by far his worst surface (although that's not saying much, he has won Wimbledon twice) and has generally looked shakier than Gael in his first two matches. However, I beleive that the concentration that Nadal shows on every point in comparison to Gael's numerous mental vacations during a match to be the difference. Rafael Nadal wins 6-3, 4-6, 6-2.
Marin Cilic vs. Viktor Troicki
The other semifinal match up is a very interesting clash between Marin Cilic and Viktor Troicki. Both players are no slouches on grass, with Troicki making the Round of 16 at Wimbledon before, and Marin having a great run to the Quarterfinals at Wimbledon, beating former Finalist Tomas Berdych in straight sets and even pushing Novak to five sets in their Quarterfinals match last year. It was the beginning of a hot streak for Cilic which concluded with him winning the US Open in September.
Both players were very shaky during the late spring clay court season. Viktor only won four matches from Monte Carlo to Roland Garros and accumulated a poor record of 4-6. This included three losses in his first match played. In five of Viktor's six clay season losses, he lost in straight sets too, so his level of competitiveness over the past couple of months has not been too high (including a poor effort at Roland Garros in which he lost to Simone Bolleli in straights, only winning nine games in the process).
At this tournament, Troicki is playing much better. He has only lost one set in three matches played, and today, he beat Sam Groth who was undefeated in his seven previous matches of the grass court season (although five of them were challenger matches). His win over Groth had a 6-1 second set, which is really impressive considering that Groth has won of the biggest serves on tour. Troicki should comes into this match full of confidence.
Marin Cilic also had a rough clay court season, although his Roland Garros campaign was a decent one. Before coming to Paris, Cilic had also only won four matches on the dirt, and put together a mediocre record of 4-5 from Monte Carlo through Geneva. This included two exits in his first match at a tournament, and four losses in straight sets. However, at the French Open, Cilic, who has been injured for much of this year, won his first three matches in straight sets, including a surprisingly-easy win over Nice finalist Leonardo Mayer. And although he lost easily to David Ferrer, Cilic had already made a statement that he was going to turn his season around.
Marin's good form continued this tournament. After a straight set win over Matthias Bachinger in his first match, Cilic managed to get past Mischa Zverev in a third set tiebreak. And while this might indicate poor form to an outsider, it is important to note that Mischa was playing in his home country and was on a five match winning streak, including straight set wins over Dominic Thiem and Andreas Seppi. Cilic did very well to make it out of that Zverev match with a win, and should be relieved and play loose against Troicki.
The head to head is very interesting. These two played (excluding a retirement) seven times, with Cilic winning four of the seven. However, the order in which they won is a bit odd. Marin won the first four matches, all on hard courts, only losing two sets in the process. However, in their past three matches, although the most recent being in 2013, Troicki won all three, not losing a set in any of the matches (two on hard, one on clay). This shows that perhaps Viktor discovered the key to Marin's game.
While Cilic's form is rapidly improving, Viktor is playing very well on the grass, and his straight set win over Groth today is very impressive. The fact that Troicki hasn't dropped a set to Cilic also suggests that he has become very comfortable playing that Croat. I think Troicki will be too strong. Viktor Troicki wins 6-4, 3-6, 6-3.
Rafael Nadal vs. Gael Monfils
In this big name clash, struggling Rafael Nadal takes on unpredictable Gael Monfils with a spot in the Final of ATP Stuttgart, an ATP 250 event, on the line. Both players are in, for their standards, mediocre form going into the tournament. For the first time since 2009, and only the second time since 2005, Nadal did not win the French Open. In fact, Rafa didn't even put up much of a fight in his highly anticipated clash with Novak Djokovic in the Quarterfinals of the French Open. Nadal lost in straight sets and was even handed a 6-1 third set loss to Novak.
But, although it was surprising in the way Nadal lost, the entirety of the late spring clay court season (which excludes Rio and Buenos Aires) certainly foreshadowed that Rafa's dominance at the tournament was not set in stone this season. Rafa lost in straight sets to Djokovic, Fognini, Murray, and Wawrinka, looking slow and off. In fact, Nadal has not looked right since his appendex issues at the end of last season. This tournament has been a struggle for Rafa, as well. He has been taken to three sets by both Marcos Baghdatis and Bernard Tomic and has not looked himself yet this tournament (or year for that matter). And although he was able to wear both Marcos and Bernie down in the third set, that is a much tougher task against Gael.
While Gael Monfils started the clay court season strong, he started to slide as the weeks went on. He started off the clay season in Monte Carlo where he made the Semifinals, including straight set wins over Grigor Dimitrov and Roger Federer. However, over the next two tournaments in Bucharest and Madrid, he went on to win only three of his next five matches, unexpected given his prowess on the surface. Monfils then didn't play at Rome, and then played three tough matches at Roland Garros before meekly bowing out to Roger Federer with a 6-1 loss in the fourth set against Roger.
In this tournament, Monfils took out clay courter Andreas Haider-Maurer in two tiebreaks, which was a good way to ease him into the clay court season. What concerned me about this match was Gael seemed more worried about putting on a show than winning, but Monfils proved that he was very worried about winning in his next match. Monfils had his most impressive win since Monte Carlo today, beating Philipp Kohlschreiber in Philipp's home country in three sets. For me, it was an unexpected win, but it showed that Monfils was taking this tournament seriously.
In the head to head, Nadal leads 10-2. It's important to note, however, that these two have never met on grass before. While they haven't played in 2015, the two have squared off in 2014, with Nadal winning both matches. While Nadal won in three sets in Doha, Rafa only gave up six games in demolishing Gael at the Australian Open. However, if we take away clay, which is the less like grass than hard courts and is also Nadal's favorite surface, Rafa's record is only 6-2, with him winning in straight sets in four of those matches.
Rafa has dominated this rivalry but is playing on what is by far his worst surface (although that's not saying much, he has won Wimbledon twice) and has generally looked shakier than Gael in his first two matches. However, I beleive that the concentration that Nadal shows on every point in comparison to Gael's numerous mental vacations during a match to be the difference. Rafael Nadal wins 6-3, 4-6, 6-2.
Marin Cilic vs. Viktor Troicki
The other semifinal match up is a very interesting clash between Marin Cilic and Viktor Troicki. Both players are no slouches on grass, with Troicki making the Round of 16 at Wimbledon before, and Marin having a great run to the Quarterfinals at Wimbledon, beating former Finalist Tomas Berdych in straight sets and even pushing Novak to five sets in their Quarterfinals match last year. It was the beginning of a hot streak for Cilic which concluded with him winning the US Open in September.
Both players were very shaky during the late spring clay court season. Viktor only won four matches from Monte Carlo to Roland Garros and accumulated a poor record of 4-6. This included three losses in his first match played. In five of Viktor's six clay season losses, he lost in straight sets too, so his level of competitiveness over the past couple of months has not been too high (including a poor effort at Roland Garros in which he lost to Simone Bolleli in straights, only winning nine games in the process).
At this tournament, Troicki is playing much better. He has only lost one set in three matches played, and today, he beat Sam Groth who was undefeated in his seven previous matches of the grass court season (although five of them were challenger matches). His win over Groth had a 6-1 second set, which is really impressive considering that Groth has won of the biggest serves on tour. Troicki should comes into this match full of confidence.
Marin Cilic also had a rough clay court season, although his Roland Garros campaign was a decent one. Before coming to Paris, Cilic had also only won four matches on the dirt, and put together a mediocre record of 4-5 from Monte Carlo through Geneva. This included two exits in his first match at a tournament, and four losses in straight sets. However, at the French Open, Cilic, who has been injured for much of this year, won his first three matches in straight sets, including a surprisingly-easy win over Nice finalist Leonardo Mayer. And although he lost easily to David Ferrer, Cilic had already made a statement that he was going to turn his season around.
Marin's good form continued this tournament. After a straight set win over Matthias Bachinger in his first match, Cilic managed to get past Mischa Zverev in a third set tiebreak. And while this might indicate poor form to an outsider, it is important to note that Mischa was playing in his home country and was on a five match winning streak, including straight set wins over Dominic Thiem and Andreas Seppi. Cilic did very well to make it out of that Zverev match with a win, and should be relieved and play loose against Troicki.
The head to head is very interesting. These two played (excluding a retirement) seven times, with Cilic winning four of the seven. However, the order in which they won is a bit odd. Marin won the first four matches, all on hard courts, only losing two sets in the process. However, in their past three matches, although the most recent being in 2013, Troicki won all three, not losing a set in any of the matches (two on hard, one on clay). This shows that perhaps Viktor discovered the key to Marin's game.
While Cilic's form is rapidly improving, Viktor is playing very well on the grass, and his straight set win over Groth today is very impressive. The fact that Troicki hasn't dropped a set to Cilic also suggests that he has become very comfortable playing that Croat. I think Troicki will be too strong. Viktor Troicki wins 6-4, 3-6, 6-3.
Tuesday, June 9, 2015
What's the Deal With Hyeon Chung's Schedule?
On the ATP World Tour, the amount of points you earn determine your ranking on the tours. However, it doesn't matter how you accumulate those points, just that you have them. For instance, you could get 90 points for making the Semifinals of an ATP 250 event, or you could try to win a $75,000 dollar challenger to get those 90 points. But, under this system, it doesn't matter how you get the points, only that you get them.
This brings me to Hyeon Chung This 19 year old South Korean is quickly rising in the rankings, and is currently number 74 in the world. Chung is heralded by the media, among others, as a "next generation" player, ready to take over once the Big Four + Stan Wawrinka decide to put away their rackets for good. However, the paths that Hyeon has taken is not allowing him to maximize his abilities. Let me explain.
Hyeon Chung burst onto the scene not for who he beat, but rather for how much he won. Over the course of a three tournament span, Chung won 14 of 15 matches and won two of the three tournaments. In fact, Hyeon only dropped four sets and went 12 straight matches without dropping a set. From the beginning of 2015 until now, Chung won three tournaments and made the Final of an additional two tournaments.
So, you might be asking yourself, "How come this kid hasn't rose to the Top Ten yet?" The answer lies in what type of tournament Chung is playing in. On the ATP World Tour, excluding special tournaments (Olympics, ATP Finals, etc.), there are six levels of tournaments. The lowest level of is on the ATP Futures Tour, with point values for tournament winners ranging from 18 to 35 points. Next is the ATP Challenger Tour, with point values for winners ranging from 80 to 125 points. ATP 250 winners get 250 points, ATP 500 champions get 500 points, Masters 1000 winners get 1000 points, and Grand Slam champions get 2000 points.
Hyeon Chung has played in the main draw in 12 tournaments this year. 10 of those 12 tournaments have been ATP Challenger Tour matches, with another only being an ATP 250 tournament. The 12th tournament Chung played in the main draw was when he received a wild card into Miami in March. As a result, Hyeon has not challenged himself against some of the upper-echelon players in the men's game, and is therefore not ready for the struggles that playing at tennis' highest level brings.
To show this more fully, it is important to note that Hyeon Chung's best win is a three-set win over Marcel Granollers, who is only six spaces ahead of him in the rankings. Chung only has had two matches against others players in the Top 50 (Berdych and Verdasco) and did not win a set in either of the matches. Hyeon has also never qualified for a major, and has a pedestrian 3-3 record at major qualifying, along with a two game losing streak at these major qualifying events. In addition, Chung has never actually qualified for a tournament bigger than an ATP 250 event and never won over two non-qualifying matches.
Despite Chung's rise in the rankings this year, it is quite apparent that he is still struggling to even qualify and win matches on the main tour, that he would realize that he actually has to consistently play main tour players in order to succeed at that level. You have to play other guys in 250 and 500 events if you want to beat them and not expect to show up to the occasional ATP World Tour event expecting to succeed. And given that Chung has had a lot of success in challengers since around this time last year, it is certainly time to make the leap. Chung might take a dip in the rankings at first, after all he won't have these easier challenger points to win, bur in the long run, battling tougher players will, in turn, toughen up Chung's game.
So, it was definitely encouraging to see that Chung attempted to qualify for s'Hertogenbosch instead of playing in the numerous challengers this week. It would have been easy for Chung to sign up for Surbiton, Prague, Moscow, or Caltanissetta and try to pick up some quick points. After all, Caltanissetta is a worth the maximum amount of points for a challenger event, at 125 points. Instead, Chung decided to put himself out there by not only trying to qualify for a grass tournament, in which he has never played a match before in his professional career, but also chose to attempt to play in a 250 instead of the grass challenger (Surbiton). And while Hyeon lost in straight sets to Nicholas Monroe, playing in this event showed that Chung was serious about rising on the ATP World Tour.
An interesting case study to compare Hyeon Chung to is Thanasi Kokkinakis. Kokkinakis is also 19 years old and is slightly ahead of Chung, at number 69 in the world. Kokkinakis' schedule is the antithesis of Chung's schedule. In 2015, Kokkinakis has played ten ATP World Tour events and only one challenger (which he won). This includes winning at least one match in both the Australian Open and the French Open, where he actually made it to the Round of 32. Another great tournament for Kokkinakis was when he made the Round of 16 at Indian Wells, beating tough veterans like Guillermo Garcia-Lopez and Juan Monaco in the process. What might be Thanasi's greatest feat, however, is how he's qualified every tournament he attempted to qualify for this year and has not had a losing streak this year of greater than two matches. Kokkinakis is proving that, as a teenager attempting to make it on tour, playing mostly ATP World Tour matches with the occasional challenger or two thrown in there is the best course of action for young players.
Perhaps it is even a good thing that Chung is on a three match losing streak right now, the longest losing streak he's had since another three game losing streak ending in January. This small losing streak can be a wake up call for Chung without seriously damaging his ranking. Chung needed to realize that playing as many challenger matches as he has played will not lead to automatic wins. Hyeon needed to see that the challenger tour will only take him so far and that the main tour must be the next step, and quickly. That's not to say that his last two losses were not especially embarrassing. After all, Hyeon only won one game against Jared Donaldson and the previously mentioned straight set loss to Nicholas Monroe, doesn't even have a singles ranking on the ATP website at the time I was writing this article. But, as more players hear about Chung's game and figure him out, Chung will need to adapt as well. And this adaptability can only successfully occur on the main tour. Hey, if Thanasi can do it, then so can Hyeon.
Hyeon Chung's schedule has not allowed him to make the most of his abilities so far. However, if his appearance in s'Hertogebbosch is any indication of his future plans, then Chung is certainly on the right track
*Note: this post focuses exclusively on ranking points on the ATP Tour and not the WTA Tour.
This brings me to Hyeon Chung This 19 year old South Korean is quickly rising in the rankings, and is currently number 74 in the world. Chung is heralded by the media, among others, as a "next generation" player, ready to take over once the Big Four + Stan Wawrinka decide to put away their rackets for good. However, the paths that Hyeon has taken is not allowing him to maximize his abilities. Let me explain.
Hyeon Chung burst onto the scene not for who he beat, but rather for how much he won. Over the course of a three tournament span, Chung won 14 of 15 matches and won two of the three tournaments. In fact, Hyeon only dropped four sets and went 12 straight matches without dropping a set. From the beginning of 2015 until now, Chung won three tournaments and made the Final of an additional two tournaments.
So, you might be asking yourself, "How come this kid hasn't rose to the Top Ten yet?" The answer lies in what type of tournament Chung is playing in. On the ATP World Tour, excluding special tournaments (Olympics, ATP Finals, etc.), there are six levels of tournaments. The lowest level of is on the ATP Futures Tour, with point values for tournament winners ranging from 18 to 35 points. Next is the ATP Challenger Tour, with point values for winners ranging from 80 to 125 points. ATP 250 winners get 250 points, ATP 500 champions get 500 points, Masters 1000 winners get 1000 points, and Grand Slam champions get 2000 points.
Hyeon Chung has played in the main draw in 12 tournaments this year. 10 of those 12 tournaments have been ATP Challenger Tour matches, with another only being an ATP 250 tournament. The 12th tournament Chung played in the main draw was when he received a wild card into Miami in March. As a result, Hyeon has not challenged himself against some of the upper-echelon players in the men's game, and is therefore not ready for the struggles that playing at tennis' highest level brings.
To show this more fully, it is important to note that Hyeon Chung's best win is a three-set win over Marcel Granollers, who is only six spaces ahead of him in the rankings. Chung only has had two matches against others players in the Top 50 (Berdych and Verdasco) and did not win a set in either of the matches. Hyeon has also never qualified for a major, and has a pedestrian 3-3 record at major qualifying, along with a two game losing streak at these major qualifying events. In addition, Chung has never actually qualified for a tournament bigger than an ATP 250 event and never won over two non-qualifying matches.
Despite Chung's rise in the rankings this year, it is quite apparent that he is still struggling to even qualify and win matches on the main tour, that he would realize that he actually has to consistently play main tour players in order to succeed at that level. You have to play other guys in 250 and 500 events if you want to beat them and not expect to show up to the occasional ATP World Tour event expecting to succeed. And given that Chung has had a lot of success in challengers since around this time last year, it is certainly time to make the leap. Chung might take a dip in the rankings at first, after all he won't have these easier challenger points to win, bur in the long run, battling tougher players will, in turn, toughen up Chung's game.
So, it was definitely encouraging to see that Chung attempted to qualify for s'Hertogenbosch instead of playing in the numerous challengers this week. It would have been easy for Chung to sign up for Surbiton, Prague, Moscow, or Caltanissetta and try to pick up some quick points. After all, Caltanissetta is a worth the maximum amount of points for a challenger event, at 125 points. Instead, Chung decided to put himself out there by not only trying to qualify for a grass tournament, in which he has never played a match before in his professional career, but also chose to attempt to play in a 250 instead of the grass challenger (Surbiton). And while Hyeon lost in straight sets to Nicholas Monroe, playing in this event showed that Chung was serious about rising on the ATP World Tour.
An interesting case study to compare Hyeon Chung to is Thanasi Kokkinakis. Kokkinakis is also 19 years old and is slightly ahead of Chung, at number 69 in the world. Kokkinakis' schedule is the antithesis of Chung's schedule. In 2015, Kokkinakis has played ten ATP World Tour events and only one challenger (which he won). This includes winning at least one match in both the Australian Open and the French Open, where he actually made it to the Round of 32. Another great tournament for Kokkinakis was when he made the Round of 16 at Indian Wells, beating tough veterans like Guillermo Garcia-Lopez and Juan Monaco in the process. What might be Thanasi's greatest feat, however, is how he's qualified every tournament he attempted to qualify for this year and has not had a losing streak this year of greater than two matches. Kokkinakis is proving that, as a teenager attempting to make it on tour, playing mostly ATP World Tour matches with the occasional challenger or two thrown in there is the best course of action for young players.
Perhaps it is even a good thing that Chung is on a three match losing streak right now, the longest losing streak he's had since another three game losing streak ending in January. This small losing streak can be a wake up call for Chung without seriously damaging his ranking. Chung needed to realize that playing as many challenger matches as he has played will not lead to automatic wins. Hyeon needed to see that the challenger tour will only take him so far and that the main tour must be the next step, and quickly. That's not to say that his last two losses were not especially embarrassing. After all, Hyeon only won one game against Jared Donaldson and the previously mentioned straight set loss to Nicholas Monroe, doesn't even have a singles ranking on the ATP website at the time I was writing this article. But, as more players hear about Chung's game and figure him out, Chung will need to adapt as well. And this adaptability can only successfully occur on the main tour. Hey, if Thanasi can do it, then so can Hyeon.
Hyeon Chung's schedule has not allowed him to make the most of his abilities so far. However, if his appearance in s'Hertogebbosch is any indication of his future plans, then Chung is certainly on the right track
*Note: this post focuses exclusively on ranking points on the ATP Tour and not the WTA Tour.
Monday, June 8, 2015
Cici Bellis Hinders Tennis Development at the French Open
We all remember the US Open last year for many reasons. Serena Williams finally tied Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova with 18 majors, Kei Nishikori stunned Novak Djokovic in the Semifinals, and Marin Cilic won the first major of his career. However, we also remember the 2014 US Open for Cici Bellis. Cici was the 15 year old (at the time) girl who defeated 2014 Australian Open Finalist Dominka Cibulkova in her first major on the WTA Tour. And while Bellis lost in three sets to Zarina Diyas in her Second Round match, it was a great start to Bellis' career.
To understand why Bellis hindered her development at the French Open, we must first look to last year. In 2014, Bellis played 11 tournaments on the ITF Junior Circuit. Being only 14/15 during that year, it was certainly understandable that Bellis did not play on the main circuit. Of these 11 tournaments, Bellis played the Juniors in three of the four, excluding the Australian Open, (more on this later) and even the prestigious Metropolia Orange Bowl International Championship. And Bellis, for the most part, succeeded on this junior circuit last season. Not only did Bellis make the Round of 16 in the Junior French Open and the Semifinals of the Orange Bowl, but she also made the Final of a tournament and won four other junior circuit tournaments.
So, the fact that Bellis not only grabbed the chance to play in the main draw of the US Open, but also won a match is not a total shock given her recent form on the junior circuit. It was almost as if the US Open were merely icing on the cake. Bellis would play a couple more tournaments on the junior circuit, but the Orange Bowl would be the last junior tournament she would play for a very long time. By the looks of it, Bellis was moving up the ladder of women's tennis.
Bellis' next non-Junior tournament following the US Open was not nearly as glamorous. Playing at Captiva Island, a $50,000 dollar , hard court tournament at the very end of the 2014 season, Bellis lost in straight sets to Tatjana Maria. And while Maria is a decent player, she beat (a struggling) Bouchard this year, she was definitely an opponent that Bellis could defeat. After her what seemed to be her last Junior tournaments she would ever play at the end of 2014, Bellis next played at the beginning of 2015, in a $25,000 dollar, clay court tournament in Daytona Beach. Playing in her first match at the tournament Bellis got only six games in another straight set loss to Arantxa Rus. This was an opponent that Bellis definitely should have beaten, so the fact that she went down so meekly was indicative that perhaps Cici wasn't ready for the rigors of the professional tour.
However, Bellis definitively proved the doubters wrong. In her next tournament, she qualified for a $25,000 dollar event in Sunrise, and this time, she beat Maria in her first match. She even won the last set of the match 6-0. And while she lost her next match. to win four matches in a non-Juniors tournament was very impressive. A few weeks later, in one of Bellis' biggest successes to date, Cici won a $25,000 dollar hard court tournament in Rancho Santa Fe, only dropping one set in the entire tournament and losing a total of two games in the Final. Bellis proved that she could contend, even if it was merely a $25,000 dollar tournament.
But perhaps Bellis' biggest triumph since the US Open was her run to the Round of 32 in Miami, a WTA Premier Mandatory event. Bellis only lost seven games combined in her two wins in South Florida. This included a 6-2, 6-1 win over Zarina Diyas, a fantastic win given the fact that Diyas is currently the 32nd ranked player in the world. And while Bellis got destroyed by Serena Williams in the Round of 32, it was a great learning experience for Cici.
So, you might be wondering, what does this all have to do with Bellis' development at the French Open? Well, there are two things that my readers need to learn from all of this about Cici Bellis. First is what I mentioned at the beginning of the post, that Bellis has had a ton of success on the ITF Junior Circuit and had not played a Junior match since 2014. This certainly suggests to that Bellis has outgrown the junior circuit. Second is that, not only has Bellis outgrown the junior circuit, but she is holding her own, if not thriving on the professional circuit. She won a match at the US Open, won a couple matches in Miami, and even won a small tournament in Rancho Santa Fe. Playing a Juniors tournament seemed to be a thing of the past for Cici.
However, as we learned at the French Open this year, that was not the case. Bellis signed up for, and played qualifying for the professional French Open qualifying draw for the chance to get into the main draw of the tournament. But, qualifying ended up being a full-blown disaster for the young American. Bellis played Paraguayan Veronica Cepede Royg in the First Round of Roland Garros qualifying. Bellis lost the match 6-4, 6-0 in an extremely disappointing result for her. It wasn't extremely disappointing in the sense that she lost the match, it was more the way she lost it. The way Bellis couldn't hang with Cepede Royg must have deeply disappointed Cici.
But, this type of loss didn't necessarily hinder Cici Bellis' development. Sometimes, you have to go through losing in order to experience the winning that follows. Sometimes it takes a poor loss to really motivate a player to practice harder and develop a winning attitude. It's quite possible that Bellis' development could have been advanced due to the outcome of her match with Cepede Royg rather than hindered. This was not the case, however, because Bellis decided to take the "easy way out". She did this by playing in the Junior French Open.
Cici Bellis made the decision to attempt to play in the women's French Open main draw when she entered the qualifying draw. But, really, there wasn't even a decision to make. She had previously played six professional tournaments where she even attempted to qualify and/or was in the main draw since her last Juniors tournament and had not played a Juniors tournament this entire season. It was quite obvious that Bellis was focusing on the main tour and that playing other women attempting to make it on the tour was best for her development. But, yet, Cici shot herself in the foot.
It was later learned that Cici Bellis had signed up for the Junior French Open tournament. Now, I'm not trying to claim that Bellis didn't win matches at the Junior Roland Garros, because she certainly had a good tournament. Cici made the Semifinals, only losing one set in her first four matches. But, I propose the question, What good did this really do for Bellis? Despite the fact that she could have gained confidence from the Junior wins, for one, a lot of the players she played in the Junior French Open and others that she could have played, depending on the draw, are of a lower caliber than Bellis would be (and should be) playing in order to sufficiently improve Cici's game. But, it's more than that.
Playing at the Junior Roland Garros teaches Cici Bellis that when you lose, you can get a second chance to try to make everything right in your world. The world of professional tennis is cutthroat. Cici has hundreds upon hundreds of women, young and old, fighting just like her for a spot on the WTA Tour main circuit, and these women don't normally get a second chance in a $25,000 dollar or $50,000 dollar tournament in some random corner of the world. And while a counter argument may be, "Well, what about lucky losers?" (and trust me, I don't like those either), my response would be that while those are given out randomly (hence the "lucky" in lucky loser), Bellis made the conscientious decision that she deserved a second chance from her failure in the qualifying draw. She made the decision that she was entitled to a second chance.
Now, another doubt that may enter your mind is, "Why aren't you getting on her after playing Juniors after two matches in the main draw of the US Open?". And my answer is simple, her mindset was most likely much different at the time. Before those main draw matches at the US Open, Bellis had never played a match at the professional level in her life. When Bellis got the wildcard to the US Open, she most likely intended on playing a match to see what the professional tour is like for a match before returning to the junior circuit. And while that mindset may have a changed a bit once she beat Cibulkova, one must give her the benefit of doubt that with such little time to soak in the win over Dominka, her mindset did not drastically change in such a short period of time. So, for the US Open, I give Bellis a pass for playing in the Juniors.
But, I do not give Cici a pass for playing in the Junior French Open. In fact, Cici Bellis hindered her own development as a tennis player at the French Open as a result her decision.
To understand why Bellis hindered her development at the French Open, we must first look to last year. In 2014, Bellis played 11 tournaments on the ITF Junior Circuit. Being only 14/15 during that year, it was certainly understandable that Bellis did not play on the main circuit. Of these 11 tournaments, Bellis played the Juniors in three of the four, excluding the Australian Open, (more on this later) and even the prestigious Metropolia Orange Bowl International Championship. And Bellis, for the most part, succeeded on this junior circuit last season. Not only did Bellis make the Round of 16 in the Junior French Open and the Semifinals of the Orange Bowl, but she also made the Final of a tournament and won four other junior circuit tournaments.
So, the fact that Bellis not only grabbed the chance to play in the main draw of the US Open, but also won a match is not a total shock given her recent form on the junior circuit. It was almost as if the US Open were merely icing on the cake. Bellis would play a couple more tournaments on the junior circuit, but the Orange Bowl would be the last junior tournament she would play for a very long time. By the looks of it, Bellis was moving up the ladder of women's tennis.
Bellis' next non-Junior tournament following the US Open was not nearly as glamorous. Playing at Captiva Island, a $50,000 dollar , hard court tournament at the very end of the 2014 season, Bellis lost in straight sets to Tatjana Maria. And while Maria is a decent player, she beat (a struggling) Bouchard this year, she was definitely an opponent that Bellis could defeat. After her what seemed to be her last Junior tournaments she would ever play at the end of 2014, Bellis next played at the beginning of 2015, in a $25,000 dollar, clay court tournament in Daytona Beach. Playing in her first match at the tournament Bellis got only six games in another straight set loss to Arantxa Rus. This was an opponent that Bellis definitely should have beaten, so the fact that she went down so meekly was indicative that perhaps Cici wasn't ready for the rigors of the professional tour.
However, Bellis definitively proved the doubters wrong. In her next tournament, she qualified for a $25,000 dollar event in Sunrise, and this time, she beat Maria in her first match. She even won the last set of the match 6-0. And while she lost her next match. to win four matches in a non-Juniors tournament was very impressive. A few weeks later, in one of Bellis' biggest successes to date, Cici won a $25,000 dollar hard court tournament in Rancho Santa Fe, only dropping one set in the entire tournament and losing a total of two games in the Final. Bellis proved that she could contend, even if it was merely a $25,000 dollar tournament.
But perhaps Bellis' biggest triumph since the US Open was her run to the Round of 32 in Miami, a WTA Premier Mandatory event. Bellis only lost seven games combined in her two wins in South Florida. This included a 6-2, 6-1 win over Zarina Diyas, a fantastic win given the fact that Diyas is currently the 32nd ranked player in the world. And while Bellis got destroyed by Serena Williams in the Round of 32, it was a great learning experience for Cici.
So, you might be wondering, what does this all have to do with Bellis' development at the French Open? Well, there are two things that my readers need to learn from all of this about Cici Bellis. First is what I mentioned at the beginning of the post, that Bellis has had a ton of success on the ITF Junior Circuit and had not played a Junior match since 2014. This certainly suggests to that Bellis has outgrown the junior circuit. Second is that, not only has Bellis outgrown the junior circuit, but she is holding her own, if not thriving on the professional circuit. She won a match at the US Open, won a couple matches in Miami, and even won a small tournament in Rancho Santa Fe. Playing a Juniors tournament seemed to be a thing of the past for Cici.
However, as we learned at the French Open this year, that was not the case. Bellis signed up for, and played qualifying for the professional French Open qualifying draw for the chance to get into the main draw of the tournament. But, qualifying ended up being a full-blown disaster for the young American. Bellis played Paraguayan Veronica Cepede Royg in the First Round of Roland Garros qualifying. Bellis lost the match 6-4, 6-0 in an extremely disappointing result for her. It wasn't extremely disappointing in the sense that she lost the match, it was more the way she lost it. The way Bellis couldn't hang with Cepede Royg must have deeply disappointed Cici.
But, this type of loss didn't necessarily hinder Cici Bellis' development. Sometimes, you have to go through losing in order to experience the winning that follows. Sometimes it takes a poor loss to really motivate a player to practice harder and develop a winning attitude. It's quite possible that Bellis' development could have been advanced due to the outcome of her match with Cepede Royg rather than hindered. This was not the case, however, because Bellis decided to take the "easy way out". She did this by playing in the Junior French Open.
Cici Bellis made the decision to attempt to play in the women's French Open main draw when she entered the qualifying draw. But, really, there wasn't even a decision to make. She had previously played six professional tournaments where she even attempted to qualify and/or was in the main draw since her last Juniors tournament and had not played a Juniors tournament this entire season. It was quite obvious that Bellis was focusing on the main tour and that playing other women attempting to make it on the tour was best for her development. But, yet, Cici shot herself in the foot.
It was later learned that Cici Bellis had signed up for the Junior French Open tournament. Now, I'm not trying to claim that Bellis didn't win matches at the Junior Roland Garros, because she certainly had a good tournament. Cici made the Semifinals, only losing one set in her first four matches. But, I propose the question, What good did this really do for Bellis? Despite the fact that she could have gained confidence from the Junior wins, for one, a lot of the players she played in the Junior French Open and others that she could have played, depending on the draw, are of a lower caliber than Bellis would be (and should be) playing in order to sufficiently improve Cici's game. But, it's more than that.
Playing at the Junior Roland Garros teaches Cici Bellis that when you lose, you can get a second chance to try to make everything right in your world. The world of professional tennis is cutthroat. Cici has hundreds upon hundreds of women, young and old, fighting just like her for a spot on the WTA Tour main circuit, and these women don't normally get a second chance in a $25,000 dollar or $50,000 dollar tournament in some random corner of the world. And while a counter argument may be, "Well, what about lucky losers?" (and trust me, I don't like those either), my response would be that while those are given out randomly (hence the "lucky" in lucky loser), Bellis made the conscientious decision that she deserved a second chance from her failure in the qualifying draw. She made the decision that she was entitled to a second chance.
Now, another doubt that may enter your mind is, "Why aren't you getting on her after playing Juniors after two matches in the main draw of the US Open?". And my answer is simple, her mindset was most likely much different at the time. Before those main draw matches at the US Open, Bellis had never played a match at the professional level in her life. When Bellis got the wildcard to the US Open, she most likely intended on playing a match to see what the professional tour is like for a match before returning to the junior circuit. And while that mindset may have a changed a bit once she beat Cibulkova, one must give her the benefit of doubt that with such little time to soak in the win over Dominka, her mindset did not drastically change in such a short period of time. So, for the US Open, I give Bellis a pass for playing in the Juniors.
But, I do not give Cici a pass for playing in the Junior French Open. In fact, Cici Bellis hindered her own development as a tennis player at the French Open as a result her decision.
Thursday, June 4, 2015
The Power of Twitter in Relation to Tennis
As someone who has on twitter for over three years now, I know twitter very well and love it dearly. I love sending out irrational, angry tweets to my 100+ followers who could probably care less what I have to say. But, as some random, unimportant dude who's tweets really mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. I've made tweets that, if I had any sort of stature in society, would get me ridiculed with sponsors pulling any support of me they previously had.
But, the good news? I don't have to worry about that because, as I said before, I am essentially Joe Schmo. However, for players on the WTA and ATP Tours, one is constantly in the spotlight. As a professional tennis player, whatever you say will be twisted, convoluted, and you will be blasted for something that you totally did not mean to say. But, in the case of some players on tour, no twisting is needed and what players say on twitter is quite powerful.
Perhaps the biggest example of someone who probably needs to censor themselves more on Twitter is Ivo Karlovic. We all surely remember Ivo Karlovic's passive-aggressive tweet following Serena William's 19th Grand Slam victory in Melbourne. When Serena closed out Maria Sharapova in straight sets to win the tournament, in showing her excitement, Williams started jumping up and down and hopped over to her Player's Box. Karlovic, upon seeing Serena's celebration, sent out a nasty tweet that said "Earthquake in Melbourne #jumping". The implication here certainly seems to be that Serena is overweight and her jumping is causing the ground to shake.
So, what were the implications of such a tweet? Well, of the direct responses to the tweet, some of them thought it was funny (but did not necessarily agree with what Ivo had to say) while many others ripped into Ivo and thought it was anything but amusing. In addition, tennis website tennis.com considered it a lowpoint and the tweet generated A LOT of discussion on the popular women's tennis forum tennisforum.com, in which, based on the first couple of pages that I read for writing this post, were not favorable. In any case, it was very inappropriate of Karlovic to (whether intentional or not) deflect the spotlight from Serena and onto himself.
This was not the only case of Karlovic making a spectacle of himself with jabs on twitter. Just last Sunday, Ivo lashed out in a tweet against Roger Federer, saying, "Roger said its dark so it's dark". What Karlovic completely ignored is the fact that it was cloudy out, and therefore would get darker earlier than usual, and also that Monfils could have probably used the rest, given that the world later learned he was sick for that match with Roger. So, while Karlovic had been trying to take a swipe at Federer, he ended up looking pretty stupid himself. Karlovic also has had many more cases in which he has written rude tweets, so he certainly has a track record with abusing his twitter account for the sake of putting down others.
So, why am I bringing up athletes and twitter today? This is because, today, I read a very rude and disrespectful tweet from Tara Moore, who is also on the WTA Tour (but is lightyears behind Serena in terms of quality of play, and I now know, in terms of quality of individual). It was learned before the match that Serena was very sick for her Semifinals match against Timea Bacsinszky at the French Open. Serena was very down on court, and was clearly suffering even more so than during the Australian Open this year. However, Moore was not convinced about Serena's performance and sent out a tweet in which she said, "Not only is serena one of the best women players of all time, she's also one of the best actresses #suckitup #learnhowtolose #pathetic". In my opinion, the hashtags at the end of the tweet are where Moore really crossed over the line and made a rude tweet into a disrespectful one.
So, how did this tweet go over for Moore? Well, almost every reply was negatively directed towards Tara, with Moore later even tweeting that death threats were coming her way. Moore tweet also got coverage at theguardian because of her tweet, which also reported that even injured tennis player Laura Robson sent out a tweet dismissing Moore's "#pathetic". All of this controversy over the 395th ranked women's player in the world in the live rankings! This should really not be happening and the amount of attention payed to Moore is certainly not proportional to the amount of attention she has received (almost entirely negative) due to this tweet.
So, a player like Moore should be desperately working to make her way up the rankings in order to really try to make it on the tour. Instead of sending out a nasty tweet about, arguably, the best women's tennis player of all time, she should be making sure the spotlight is off of her, so that she has no distractions on her quest to be the best that she can be. And the same can be said for Karlovic, as well. Since winning Delray Beach in February, Ivo has won a total of three matches. In the entire clay court season, he won a total of one match. And, when he sent out the tweet regarding Serena and an earthquake, he had made a Second Round exit in the Australian Open. Again, like Moore, instead of drawing attention to himself, Karlovic should be wanting to deflect all of the attention off oh himself and really focus in on his tennis.
I must say, though, I give a little more leeway to Moore regarding this issue (as of now) than I do to Karlovic. This is because Karlovic (as previously mentioned) definitely has a long history with sending out rude and hurtful tweets, where, as far as I can tell, Moore seems to be a "first time offender". And while she is an adult, and thus is totally responsible for whatever decisions she makes, perhaps she didn't quite realize just how bad her tweet had and the subsequent impact it would have, while Karlovic seems to tweet nasty things all of the time without batting an eyebrow. However, both Karlovic and Moore should feel ashamed about how they have presented themselves on their twitter account.
In any case, the main lesson here is that, for professional tennis players, twitter is very powerful. For players those who tweet with class and grace it can be a great way to connect with their fans. But, for those who do not conduct themselves in that manner on twitter, perhaps it's time to shut the account down. Maybe Ivo Karlovic and Tara Moore's twitter accounts need to be deactivated.
But, the good news? I don't have to worry about that because, as I said before, I am essentially Joe Schmo. However, for players on the WTA and ATP Tours, one is constantly in the spotlight. As a professional tennis player, whatever you say will be twisted, convoluted, and you will be blasted for something that you totally did not mean to say. But, in the case of some players on tour, no twisting is needed and what players say on twitter is quite powerful.
Perhaps the biggest example of someone who probably needs to censor themselves more on Twitter is Ivo Karlovic. We all surely remember Ivo Karlovic's passive-aggressive tweet following Serena William's 19th Grand Slam victory in Melbourne. When Serena closed out Maria Sharapova in straight sets to win the tournament, in showing her excitement, Williams started jumping up and down and hopped over to her Player's Box. Karlovic, upon seeing Serena's celebration, sent out a nasty tweet that said "Earthquake in Melbourne #jumping". The implication here certainly seems to be that Serena is overweight and her jumping is causing the ground to shake.
So, what were the implications of such a tweet? Well, of the direct responses to the tweet, some of them thought it was funny (but did not necessarily agree with what Ivo had to say) while many others ripped into Ivo and thought it was anything but amusing. In addition, tennis website tennis.com considered it a lowpoint and the tweet generated A LOT of discussion on the popular women's tennis forum tennisforum.com, in which, based on the first couple of pages that I read for writing this post, were not favorable. In any case, it was very inappropriate of Karlovic to (whether intentional or not) deflect the spotlight from Serena and onto himself.
This was not the only case of Karlovic making a spectacle of himself with jabs on twitter. Just last Sunday, Ivo lashed out in a tweet against Roger Federer, saying, "Roger said its dark so it's dark". What Karlovic completely ignored is the fact that it was cloudy out, and therefore would get darker earlier than usual, and also that Monfils could have probably used the rest, given that the world later learned he was sick for that match with Roger. So, while Karlovic had been trying to take a swipe at Federer, he ended up looking pretty stupid himself. Karlovic also has had many more cases in which he has written rude tweets, so he certainly has a track record with abusing his twitter account for the sake of putting down others.
So, why am I bringing up athletes and twitter today? This is because, today, I read a very rude and disrespectful tweet from Tara Moore, who is also on the WTA Tour (but is lightyears behind Serena in terms of quality of play, and I now know, in terms of quality of individual). It was learned before the match that Serena was very sick for her Semifinals match against Timea Bacsinszky at the French Open. Serena was very down on court, and was clearly suffering even more so than during the Australian Open this year. However, Moore was not convinced about Serena's performance and sent out a tweet in which she said, "Not only is serena one of the best women players of all time, she's also one of the best actresses #suckitup #learnhowtolose #pathetic". In my opinion, the hashtags at the end of the tweet are where Moore really crossed over the line and made a rude tweet into a disrespectful one.
So, how did this tweet go over for Moore? Well, almost every reply was negatively directed towards Tara, with Moore later even tweeting that death threats were coming her way. Moore tweet also got coverage at theguardian because of her tweet, which also reported that even injured tennis player Laura Robson sent out a tweet dismissing Moore's "#pathetic". All of this controversy over the 395th ranked women's player in the world in the live rankings! This should really not be happening and the amount of attention payed to Moore is certainly not proportional to the amount of attention she has received (almost entirely negative) due to this tweet.
So, a player like Moore should be desperately working to make her way up the rankings in order to really try to make it on the tour. Instead of sending out a nasty tweet about, arguably, the best women's tennis player of all time, she should be making sure the spotlight is off of her, so that she has no distractions on her quest to be the best that she can be. And the same can be said for Karlovic, as well. Since winning Delray Beach in February, Ivo has won a total of three matches. In the entire clay court season, he won a total of one match. And, when he sent out the tweet regarding Serena and an earthquake, he had made a Second Round exit in the Australian Open. Again, like Moore, instead of drawing attention to himself, Karlovic should be wanting to deflect all of the attention off oh himself and really focus in on his tennis.
I must say, though, I give a little more leeway to Moore regarding this issue (as of now) than I do to Karlovic. This is because Karlovic (as previously mentioned) definitely has a long history with sending out rude and hurtful tweets, where, as far as I can tell, Moore seems to be a "first time offender". And while she is an adult, and thus is totally responsible for whatever decisions she makes, perhaps she didn't quite realize just how bad her tweet had and the subsequent impact it would have, while Karlovic seems to tweet nasty things all of the time without batting an eyebrow. However, both Karlovic and Moore should feel ashamed about how they have presented themselves on their twitter account.
In any case, the main lesson here is that, for professional tennis players, twitter is very powerful. For players those who tweet with class and grace it can be a great way to connect with their fans. But, for those who do not conduct themselves in that manner on twitter, perhaps it's time to shut the account down. Maybe Ivo Karlovic and Tara Moore's twitter accounts need to be deactivated.
Tuesday, June 2, 2015
The Not-So-Random Stan Wawrinka
When one initially takes a look at the results of Stan Wawrinka, what one sees could puzzle him or her. There is seemingly a rash amount of inconsistencies. At some points you might ask yourself, "How can this man string together matches on the ATP Tour?". On other moments, however, you might ask yourself, "How has this man not consistently won majors during his career?" The answer to the second question is quite simple: The Big Four (consisting of Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, and Roger Federer) is just too good. And while this is less of the case now than it has been in the past (as evident today), the fact that Stan was able to win one shows just how high his level can be.
The answer to the first question has to do with Stan's mindset. Although this is not always the case (i.e. Chennai/Rotterdam), Stan sometimes does not show up mentally for non-major tournaments. This year, for instance, Stan has lost to players such as Sergiy Stakhovsky and Federico Delbonis in ATP 250 tournaments. However, his in-and-out mindset even applies to Master 1000 Tournaments. At Indian Wells, for example, Stan lost his first match to Robin Haase and at Miami, Stan lost his second match in straight sets to Adrian Mannarino. This is not showing disrespect to Sergiy, Federico, Robin, nor Adrian, however, it is frustrating to see now that the world knows just how well Stan can play. In addition, Wawrinka has lost in his first or second match of a non-slam tournament in six of his nine ATP Tour-level events. That just seems a little bit off, especially after watching Stan at the majors.
At the four Grand Slams (Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon, US Open), Stan Wawrinka is a totally different man. It's as if a light switch goes off in his head. This is best exemplified by the fact that from the 2013 French Open onwards, Stan has made the Quarterfinals or better in seven of the nine majors (including the 2015 French Open) during this time span. Of these majors he has made the Semifinals or better in four of the nine and won the 2014 Australian Open. This interesting trend has resurfaced because Wawrinka beat Roger Federer in straight sets today to make the Semifinals of the 2015 French Open where, if he continues to play as well as he played today, he will be near-impossible to beat.
So, what does this all say about Stan Wawrinka's mindset? To me, it shows that majors are his one and only priority. Whether or not Stan does well in a non-major tournament seems to almost entirely depend on how important he thinks a tournament is to do well at a subsequent major. Let's dive in deeper.
Ever wonder why Stan "randomly" shows up for Chennai, a measly ATP 250 tournament? Well, after a long offseason it is his only warm-up tournament before the Australian Open. Therefore, if Stan wants to have good form going into the first major of the season, it is imperative that he do well at Chennai. Unsurprisingly, Wawrinka has won the tournament two years in a row. It's also unsurprising that Wawrinka, "randomly" took out the 2014 US Open champion Marin Cilic in a Quarterfinals run in Cincinnati in his final warm-up tournament before the 2014 US Open. After losing the first set to Cilic, he lost one game in the final two sets combined, a very impressive feat considering how Cilic performed at the US Open.
Wawrinka made at least the Quarterfinals of two majors in one year for the first time in 2013, where it seems as if he started taking his job much more seriously. While Stan had won a couple of titles on clay at this point (nothing on grass), at the majors, hard court had certainly been Wawrinka's best surface. Stan had made the Quarterfinals of the US Open in 2010 and the Australian Open in 2011, but hadn't made the Quarterfinals of either the French Open or Wimbledon. But, when Wawrinka started taking his career more seriously in 2013, his attitude towards grass and clay warmup tournaments changed as well.
In 2013, on clay, Wawrinka made the Quarterfinals of Monte Carlo, the Semifinals of Casablanca, the Finals of Buenos Aires (although not a warm-up tournament) and Madrid, and was the champion of Estoril. And, subsequently, how did Wawrinka do at the 2013 French Open? He made his first ever French Quarterfinals. And while he bonked out early of the 2014 French Open, he showed that he took warm-up tournaments on clay seriously, winning Monte Carlo. This year, Wawrinka made the Semifinals in Rome, beating Rafael Nadal on the way. His efforts were rewarded this season, as he has a really good shot to win the French Open this year for his second major.
On grass, Wawrinka's desire to win Wimbledon, through the help of warm-up tournaments, has been rewarded as well. In 2013, in line with Stan's new attitude, Wawrinka made the Final of 's-Hertogenbosch, not losing a set until the Final. And while this did not pay off immediately, following a run to the Semifinals of Queen's Club, he finally made the Quarterfinals of Wimbledon, losing only one set in his first four matches and even taking a set off of Roger Federer in his quarterfinal. Stan's hard work on the grass paid off.
Now, I'm not saying that there are no exceptions to Wawrinka's norm form of play. For instance, Stan obviously decided to take the 2014 Year End Championship (where he made the Semifinals) and 2015 Rotterdam (where he won it) seriously. However, that might be just to the streaky nature of the Wawrinka game itself than his mindset. And it's not like he does well at every warm-up tournament either, as he clunked out in his match in Madrid last year and his second match in Madrid this year, for example. But, perhaps that's because he doesn't see the Madrid elevation, for instance, as a great warmup for clay now that he has established himself on the surface (which wasn't the case in 2013). Perhaps that's why he's only has had runs in the much-lower elevations of Monte Carlo and Rome in the past couple of years.
But, in any case, Stan Wawrinka on the whole has shown that, in 2013, he completely changed his mindset. He started taking the majors much more seriously and really seeing the value of warm-up tournaments. The next step for Wawrinka will be to take an even greater number of tournaments seriously as his career goes on.
So, while many may call Stan "unpredictable", in my mind, he's really not so random.
The answer to the first question has to do with Stan's mindset. Although this is not always the case (i.e. Chennai/Rotterdam), Stan sometimes does not show up mentally for non-major tournaments. This year, for instance, Stan has lost to players such as Sergiy Stakhovsky and Federico Delbonis in ATP 250 tournaments. However, his in-and-out mindset even applies to Master 1000 Tournaments. At Indian Wells, for example, Stan lost his first match to Robin Haase and at Miami, Stan lost his second match in straight sets to Adrian Mannarino. This is not showing disrespect to Sergiy, Federico, Robin, nor Adrian, however, it is frustrating to see now that the world knows just how well Stan can play. In addition, Wawrinka has lost in his first or second match of a non-slam tournament in six of his nine ATP Tour-level events. That just seems a little bit off, especially after watching Stan at the majors.
At the four Grand Slams (Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon, US Open), Stan Wawrinka is a totally different man. It's as if a light switch goes off in his head. This is best exemplified by the fact that from the 2013 French Open onwards, Stan has made the Quarterfinals or better in seven of the nine majors (including the 2015 French Open) during this time span. Of these majors he has made the Semifinals or better in four of the nine and won the 2014 Australian Open. This interesting trend has resurfaced because Wawrinka beat Roger Federer in straight sets today to make the Semifinals of the 2015 French Open where, if he continues to play as well as he played today, he will be near-impossible to beat.
So, what does this all say about Stan Wawrinka's mindset? To me, it shows that majors are his one and only priority. Whether or not Stan does well in a non-major tournament seems to almost entirely depend on how important he thinks a tournament is to do well at a subsequent major. Let's dive in deeper.
Ever wonder why Stan "randomly" shows up for Chennai, a measly ATP 250 tournament? Well, after a long offseason it is his only warm-up tournament before the Australian Open. Therefore, if Stan wants to have good form going into the first major of the season, it is imperative that he do well at Chennai. Unsurprisingly, Wawrinka has won the tournament two years in a row. It's also unsurprising that Wawrinka, "randomly" took out the 2014 US Open champion Marin Cilic in a Quarterfinals run in Cincinnati in his final warm-up tournament before the 2014 US Open. After losing the first set to Cilic, he lost one game in the final two sets combined, a very impressive feat considering how Cilic performed at the US Open.
Wawrinka made at least the Quarterfinals of two majors in one year for the first time in 2013, where it seems as if he started taking his job much more seriously. While Stan had won a couple of titles on clay at this point (nothing on grass), at the majors, hard court had certainly been Wawrinka's best surface. Stan had made the Quarterfinals of the US Open in 2010 and the Australian Open in 2011, but hadn't made the Quarterfinals of either the French Open or Wimbledon. But, when Wawrinka started taking his career more seriously in 2013, his attitude towards grass and clay warmup tournaments changed as well.
In 2013, on clay, Wawrinka made the Quarterfinals of Monte Carlo, the Semifinals of Casablanca, the Finals of Buenos Aires (although not a warm-up tournament) and Madrid, and was the champion of Estoril. And, subsequently, how did Wawrinka do at the 2013 French Open? He made his first ever French Quarterfinals. And while he bonked out early of the 2014 French Open, he showed that he took warm-up tournaments on clay seriously, winning Monte Carlo. This year, Wawrinka made the Semifinals in Rome, beating Rafael Nadal on the way. His efforts were rewarded this season, as he has a really good shot to win the French Open this year for his second major.
On grass, Wawrinka's desire to win Wimbledon, through the help of warm-up tournaments, has been rewarded as well. In 2013, in line with Stan's new attitude, Wawrinka made the Final of 's-Hertogenbosch, not losing a set until the Final. And while this did not pay off immediately, following a run to the Semifinals of Queen's Club, he finally made the Quarterfinals of Wimbledon, losing only one set in his first four matches and even taking a set off of Roger Federer in his quarterfinal. Stan's hard work on the grass paid off.
Now, I'm not saying that there are no exceptions to Wawrinka's norm form of play. For instance, Stan obviously decided to take the 2014 Year End Championship (where he made the Semifinals) and 2015 Rotterdam (where he won it) seriously. However, that might be just to the streaky nature of the Wawrinka game itself than his mindset. And it's not like he does well at every warm-up tournament either, as he clunked out in his match in Madrid last year and his second match in Madrid this year, for example. But, perhaps that's because he doesn't see the Madrid elevation, for instance, as a great warmup for clay now that he has established himself on the surface (which wasn't the case in 2013). Perhaps that's why he's only has had runs in the much-lower elevations of Monte Carlo and Rome in the past couple of years.
But, in any case, Stan Wawrinka on the whole has shown that, in 2013, he completely changed his mindset. He started taking the majors much more seriously and really seeing the value of warm-up tournaments. The next step for Wawrinka will be to take an even greater number of tournaments seriously as his career goes on.
So, while many may call Stan "unpredictable", in my mind, he's really not so random.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)