Novak Djokovic Defeats Bobby Reynolds to Advance at 2013 Wimbledon
Men's overall top seed Novak Djokovic looked vulnerable early on in Thursday's second-round match against Bobby Reynolds, but showed why he's a former Wimbledon champion, running away with the first-set tiebreak and final two sets, advancing to the third round with a straight-sets victory, 7-6 (7-2), 6-3, 6-1, via Wimbledon:
Next up, Djokovic will take on the winner of Jeremy Chardy (28) vs. Jan-Lennard Struff. That match began on Thursday afternoon but was cut short because of rain, and will conclude on Friday.
The 30-year-old Reynolds, who was the last American man left standing, held his own in the first set against Djokovic, as neither player was able to break serve. But once the set went to a tiebreak it was all Djokovic, who won seven of the nine points to take a one set lead, via Wimbledon:
In the second set, the world No. 1 took control with his return game, winning 46 percent of his receiving points and breaking Reynolds twice in the frame to take a commanding two sets to love lead.
Djokovic finished the second set with 13 winners and just two unforced errors.
The third and final set featured more of the same from Djokovic, who showed little respect for Reynolds' serve. The 26-year-old Serb made it look easy on the return, winning 13-of-24 receiving points in the frame to take the set 6-1.
Reynolds' loss means that there are no more American men left in the singles draw in 2013. You have to go all the way back to 1911 to find the last time no American man reached the third round at Wimbledon, via Wimbledon on Twitter:
1911 was the last year that at least one American started the men’s singles, and no American man reached the 3rd round at #Wimbledon— Wimbledon (@Wimbledon) June 27, 2013
The victory marks the fourth consecutive year that Djokovic has reached the third round at the All England Club. He is 34-7 all time at Wimbledon, dating back to 2005.
Follow Bleacher Report Featured Columnist Patrick Clarke on Twitter.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?