Wimbledon 2013 Results: Highlighting Top Performances from Day 2
Day 2 at the 2013 Wimbledon Championships has been rather dull thus far compared to the excitement Monday's results provided. Instead of monumental upsets, we've seen most of the world's top players taking care of business.
Not to say there weren't any upsets, but none compared to Rafael Nadal and Sara Errani's early exits.
Elite players putting on a clinic against lesser opponents isn't as thrilling as watching an upset, but most true fans appreciate excellence just as much.
Though performing well in Round 1 means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things, these players took care of business in impressive fashion on Tuesday. Their easy victories set them up for a long run, provided they continue playing with the same sharp focus in latter rounds.
Here's a look at the players that put together the best performances on Tuesday, as of 1 p.m. ET.
Serena Williams (1) Defeats Mandy Minella
Williams' impressive play in 2013 continued on Tuesday, as she needed just 47 minutes to dispatch Minella to advance to the second round.
According to ESPN's Numbers Never Lie, it was Williams' 32nd win in a row, which has only been eclipsed once since 2000—by Venus Williams, of all people, who won 35 straight at one point:
Serena Williams just won her 32nd straight match. There's only been 1 longer women's streak since 2000... 35 straight by her sister Venus.— Numbers Never Lie (@ESPN_Numbers) June 25, 2013
Can anyone beat Williams right now?
The numbers in favor of Williams over Minella showed just how dominant she was. She earned seven aces, won nearly double the amount of total points of her opponent and crushed 25 winners to Minella's five.
It's going to take a miraculous effort by an opponent to defeat Williams right now, who is playing better tennis than any other woman in the world. Her game is perfectly suited to playing on grass, and nobody should be surprised if she easily repeats as the Wimbledon champion.
Up next for Williams in Round 2 is Caroline Garcia.
Laura Robson Defeats Maria Kirilenko (10)
Great Britain's Robson earned an impressive upset victory over Kirilenko on Tuesday, much to the delight of the home crowd. As The Independent noted, her victory helped "lift the gloom," as most British players have lost thus far:
Taking nothing away from Robson, it's worth noting that Kirirlenko's early exit isn't a huge surprise. She has never gotten out of the third round and has been ousted in Round 1 four times now in eight appearances.
Robson was the aggressor in this match, however, and she controlled the pace and action from the start. Scoring eight aces, three break points and 31 winners, the underdog easily came out of this fight on top.
It was an impressive performance by the 19-year-old hometown hero, who will move on to face Mariana Duque-Marino in the second round.
Novak Djokovic (1) Defeats Florian Mayer
Looking at the way Mayer was able to put up a fight against Djokovic, you might be inclined to believe the No. 1 player in the world came out a bit flat in this match. This wasn't the case on Tuesday, however, as Djokovic played well.
Mayer was really difficult to beat, because he didn't beat himself. With only 12 unforced errors throughout the three-set match, Mayer forced Djokovic to play with precision and focus to move on to Round 2.
Djokovic came through with flying colors, matching Mayer's sharp play with some of his own. He didn't allow a single break point, won 39 percent of his receiving points and smashed 40 winners to advance.
The match was highlighted by this incredible rally, as shown by 101 Great Goals:
Incredible Rally at Wimbledon 2013: Novak Djokovic v Florian Mayer http://t.co/BXV5mjVfPB— 101 Great Goals (@101greatgoals) June 25, 2013
Though it wasn't as pretty as Roger Federer's first round match, Djokovic proved he's ready for the challenges yet to come with a brilliant overall performance.
Follow me on Twitter @JesseReed78
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?