Bleacher Report - Articles by Rohini Iyer

Near Misses: A Case Of Svetlana's "What If"

Rohini Iyer — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 13:43:53 -0500

The question of 'what if' is something that runs like a loop in one's mind especially if things do not pan out the way one wants them to; it plagues and demoralises the thought process, leaves one regretting and despairing over what could have been but yet couldn't be...

The Australian Open 2009 Quarter Final match between Svetlana Kuznetsova and Serena Williams is one such 'what if' situation; where the Russian could have defeated the younger Williams, she ended up giving the match away on a platter, thus making it a perfect 'Near Miss' scenario.

From being in a position to serve out the match, to finally leave the arena as the vanquished isn't exactly a situation that any player envisages for oneself and Svetlana wasn't an exception to the feeling that day.

And though she blamed everything and everyone under the Sun [or rather covered by the Sun] that day for her loss, it would have to be said that ultimately she and she alone was responsible for her loss that day.

In a match that oscillated right from the word GO, where serves were broken back and forth as though they were powerful baseline rallies; Svetlana did good—about time—by managing to capture the first set after a marathon of 48 minutes. her efforts [in pocketing the set] were laudable indeed considering that the Melbourne heat was actually roasting both the players at a temperature of 43 degree centigrade.

And while, Svetlana appeared to be a bit less intimidated and daunted by the heat, Serena, on the other hand was flailing helplessly. Twice in the first set she had managed to break the russian's serve, before finally succumbing and surrendering it for the third and the final time to hand over the set to her opponent. Blame it on the heat, though!

In the second set, Svetlana fared a bit better and Serena struggled a bit more; the exchange of break-and-be-broken merchandise wasn't repeated...till...Svetlana was serving for the match at 5-4 and till the officials decided to overlook the concept of solar energy.

And as finally the roof was brought out and all the matches in the outside courts were suspended, all hell broke lose in the Rod Laver arena. with the roof closed and her confidence suddenly making a dramatic comeback—Serena pocketed the set, while Svetlana was just confined to serving that game or rather 'serving for the match' , as it needs to be called!

It is as this stage that the most boring of matches gets interesting and this one was just warming up to the theory, as after breaking back Svetlana's serve, Serena proceeded to lead—for the first time—in the match. Svetlana had to hold on, not only to her service game but also to her pride as well.

But somehow she never managed to recover from that horrendous break of serve; she gave away her second game of the set [consecutive at that] allowing the American to take the match into a deciding third set.

There was, however, no deciding factor necessary in the third set, as Kuznetsova was completely unable to wage the third set war; it was clinical to the point of being humiliating, there were definitely no holes barred and every lose chance covered up before it could prove detrimental.

Finally, after 29 minutes of play, Serena finally ended Kuznetsova's 'roof woes' as she wrapped up the set and thereby the match with a score of 6-1; her yells and fist pumps testimony to her regrouping in a match that could have very well been the curtains in her 10th slam conquest.

Reverting back to Kuznetsova, while she was no doubt disappointed with her lacklustre presentation, her statements regarding the closing of the roof were somehow ludicrous and though, she might have meant about her concentration getting distracted, especially because she was indeed serving for the match when the roof was brought out or she might have just meant that the heat wasn't a ruling factor, there would be no denying that she did lose the match in the end, albeit painfully.

Thus, while Svetlana would have pondered about the 'what ifs' , her match has provided me with an article for an ongoing and catchy series...the only question being, "What if Svetlana hadn't lost the match?"

Some Random Ramblings...

Rohini Iyer — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:00:23 -0500

Eloquent are your words,

Poignant are your deeds,

Making me think, making me feel...

Inspiring, etching, and fulfilling;

Nothing like them, the treasures of my life!

Scathing are your thoughts,

Slashing through your actions,

Making me ponder, making me wonder...

Surprising, crushing, and demoralising;

How could you?, the curses that just won't stop!

Remarkable yet, is your achievement,

Worth idolising, is your glory,

Making me determined, making me believe...

Efforts, satiation, and faith;

Greatness is never far—just one step after the marathon of sweat!

Confusing, however, are your memories,

Ambiguous is your legacy,

Making me reflect, making me retract...

Black, white, and gray;

Define a perfect man, you never claimed to be anything else!

Rise of The Star, Yuki Bhambri: The Big Picture

Rohini Iyer — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 01:04:07 -0400

India's re-entry into the Davis Cup World Group after a gap of 11 years, not only reinforced Somdev Devvarman's abilities to stand up and be counted when it mattered the most, but also allowed people a sneak-peak into India's brightest new talent on the court: Yuki Bhambri.

This article is the second instalment in the two part collaborative piece that AntiMatter came up with; in his side of the story, he talks about the mechanics of this 17 year-old's game while this article attempts to prognosticate about what and where Yuki could be in the days to come.

Yuki's first taste of success came at this year's Junior Australian Open, when he, as the second seed, captured his first Grand Slam singles title and thereby became the first Indian junior player to win the Australian Open.

Thereafter, he hasn't looked back and right now, currently seeded first, is looking forward to add more accolades, not only to his name but also to his country's credit.

In India's Davis Cup World Group Playoff against South Africa, Yuki got a chance to display his ample talent against the South African Izak Van Der Merwe in the second reverse rubber tie.

The significance of the reverse rubber might not mean anything- considering that India had already secured their 2010 World Group position, when Somdev Devvarman won his reverse rubber encounter in a thrilling five setter-but for Yuki, the relevance penetrates far more in deep, as it gave him an opportunity to play in a tournament of such a large magnitude.

It gave him an exposure, a lesson of sorts which could help him in the days to come especially when he becomes a pro in the next year or two.

Winning in the juniors does provide a stepping stool for the stage of pro tennis, but at the same time, it's a point worth noting that not all junior level Grand Slam champions have been able to emulate the same success in their seniors' career.

And this is what Yuki needs to concentrate on in order to gain a berth in the upper echelons of the sport in the years to follow. He needs to not only do well in the juniors, but also try and capitalise on the opportunities on the seniors' front-as, and when, he is given the chance.

And while, Yuki looks to concentrate on this aspect, it is very important that he has a support system that hones and nurtures his talent to showcase it to the world. Just having talent isn't enough, it's equally important to make its sheen one of the very resplendent ones to stare at the face.

This particular aspect is very pivotal because being a tennis player in a country that follows cricket with a fanatic fervour, it shouldn't happen that the name of Yuki Bhambri disappears in the mist of the willow and the ball.

In The Zone With Andy Roddick

Rohini Iyer — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:35:37 -0400

The battle lines were drawn; the contenders were ready...each, a namesake of the other and yet there would be just one winner; inching forwards drowning the other...which one would it be; the Andy of the West or the Andy of the East?

Friday, July the Third, 2009

Of the two semifinals to be held at the centre court of the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club; one involved the mighty Federer, who, determined to regain his thwarted glory back, was slashing off his rivals like a pirate with a buccaneer in hand [melodramatic, it sounds and melodramatic it was, the way he was playing or rather executing!]

But, the excitement of the day wasn't exactly about Federer edging his way to the finals; with him in the picture, it was more a question of "when" rather than "how"! Therefore move along Federer and allow us to get into the main theme of "what" and "who" the day was all about...

[R]andy vs [M]andy

Their rivalry for the day was bookmarked with expectations and counter-expectations; each had something to prove, it was something more than "all in a day's work" for them. Winning mattered, everything else didn't.

Murray had the head start leading 6-2 in his eight match head-to-head against the American and the fact that he was still on the hunt to bag his first slam, in spite of doing well in the other tournaments, made him an injured animal of prey far more dangerous than an uninjured one.

And on the other side, there was Roddick who had transformed himself into everything that his fans hoped he would be one day. Andy Murray might have had a good season, but when it came to slam [or rather Wimbledon experience], Roddick had two past almost there success to bank on.

But, neither are tennis matches contested on paper, nor are they contested from memory; advantages and disadvantages fade just as the match begins and all that remains important is how each rival holds up to the other's pressure...

The Match

It began the way every other match does. Nerves, excitement, anticipation, a little bit of tentativeness, et cetera, et cetera; but as the match slipped into its rhythm, so did the players: Especially the American.

He came out too strongly for the home crowd favourite, who looked seemingly out of touch as though he was stunned into realising the place, and the relevance of the match for the first time.

And before he could come out of his thoughts, Roddick managed to get a break point, convert it and without any hassle, pocketed the first serve. One down, two to go!

But then, Andy Murray didn't look to be repeating his performance at the 2008 Flushing Meadows final, proving that he wasn't the same player that he was then. Maturity had shaped him and where he lacked in experience, he decided to go for guts and gumption to show Roddick his place in the match. Game, Second Set Murray to level the match at one set all!

But it all began from the third set onwards...where the first two sets had the two players swinging the match to their favour like an hourglass filled with sand, the third set heralded a full blown battle between the two rivals.

Perseverance met resilience, as each opponent played without any quarter; there was no cutting of slack anywhere, as both players fought for and fended off opportunities and threats with equal measure.

And this is where Roddick proved that he was in the zone that day with his brilliant serving, scintillating shot making and not to forget his new found quality of 'fledgling level counter punching.'

He loomed by and large from every part of the court; there was no place where Murray was able to outrun and outwit him to take a stranglehold in the match proceedings, not to mention some of Murray's let loose shot making which allowed Roddick to back in the match [fourth set tiebreak] in spite of trailing Murray at the onset.

And once he got the chance, Roddick never let it slip out of his hands again; before long he was at match point with Murray serving to remain afloat in the match, even if meant - just by a whisker.

But Murray wasn't allowed any lifeboat to keep his maiden Grand Slam win dream alive as, when he netted Roddick's return to his serve [from the far side of the court] to the net - it was all over for him!

On the other hand, Roddick collapsed to the ground, stunned and shocked by his own performance and anticipating what appeared to be a gleaming opportunity to try and capture his own maiden conquest at a surface which he relished but wasn't able to taste any.

He was as ready to face Federer in the final as much as he was ready to tackle the Murray bait and wasn't it just now proved: head-to-heads didn't really matter much, when the heart and the mind was set up on just one thing-Winning!

And though Roddick lost out on yet another chance to pocket his Wimbledon replica to take home, that match will go down as one of his all time best performances; he was there, just home...when Federer turned it all around. But that's another In the Zone saga, for both: The victor and the vanquished!

For the previous installment on Serena Williams, click here.

Creature vs Creature: Wozzy Gunning To The Fore?

Rohini Iyer — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 17:39:53 -0400

The 2009 women's singles final couldn't have been held without any more fanfare; to put it simply, it was agog with surprises right from the start and will end up in a surprise either way.

This piece is one half of a "CvC" for the 2009 US Open Women's Singles final; do check out Sudeshna's take on the prodigal [almost there] Queen of Comeback, Kim Clijsters.

Caroline Wozniacki: Records speak for this "Great Dane" this year; the 18-year-old is the WTA player who holds the record for the most number of wins this year, and after reaching her maiden slam final, will be hoping to add glory to glee.

Will win if: Displays the same level of tenacity and momentum that has helped her reach this stage in the tournament.

From her shots' perspective, it will be her backhand which will play a great role especially considering that her rival for the day, is a baseliner too, whose calculated maneuvers help her garner more points.

If Wozzy, utilizes her all round repertoire of variety to flummox Kim and draw errors from her side, then she stands a chance of snatching the comeback glory from the Belgian.

Will lose if: More often than not, it's the overwhelming emotion that causes a player to lose the final.

Andy Murray [2008 US Open] and Ana Ivanovic [2007 FO] to quote a few, who have gone through this surge of emotions and have lost the match even before they could catch and steady themselves.

If Wozzy isn't able to maintain her rhythm and concentrate fully on the game, then she faces a very strong contender who won't allow her any leeway into the game.

Apart from this, the fact the Wozzy doesn't come to the net and attack, can prove to be a decisive factor against Clijsters, who isn't much of a net player, but will nevertheless try to put the pressure back onto Wozniacki.

Intangibles: Crowd support will be equal for both players and therefore, won't be much of a tangible aspect in today's game.

My Call: Kim wins, but in a thriller three; for as much as Caroline has shown potential in this year, when it comes to the larger platform, Kim definitely holds the advantage in spite of her hiatus from the sport.

Mechanics: How Djokovic's game matches with Federer

Rohini Iyer — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 09:17:48 -0400

Introduction: This is a first time venture that Long came up with and since the topic at hand gave me a scope to understand and learn the intricate nuances about the players and their style, I decided to give it my best shot.

From the perspective of mechanics, while Long’s article takes an in depth analyses into Federer’s game, this article deals with the same from Nole’s side of the court and how they stack against each other in terms of their technical strengths.

Please do not hesitate to provide your feedback, for it’s the only way the idea can grow [and from a micro level so can I] and improve in the future.

Novak Djokovic:

Forehand: Even though Nole uses a Western grip that aids to generate a lot of top spin in his shots, there is no denying that his forehand is essentially weaker as compared to the other shots in his arsenal.

And since both the rivals in this occasion are right handers, in addition to the fact that Federer’s forehand is almost lethal, Nole will have a few problems while tackling the forehand shots [especially the down the line ones which as it is, is a difficult shot to perfect].

Backhand: This is Nole’s best bet. A two fisted backhand is generally considered to be better balanced than a single handed backhand which invariably ends up causing more cons than pros right from return of serve to giving a versatility of shot placements, plus camouflaging the intended shot from the opponent.

Federer’s backhand is the weakest chink in his armoury which comes more to light when opponents [Rafa, and Murray especially] pick on his backhand to prolong rallies from the baseline.

And against Nole, while there is no denying the fact that Federer will employ suitable tactical expertise to avoid Nole’s backhand [especially cross court rallies], he won’t be able to outshine Nole, at least in this department.

Net Game: Nole’s game at the net, while is not bad by any means, is just equivalent to a novice’s when compared to an expert like Federer.

Additionally, Federer is more active when compared to Nole with his net approach shots and given his precise placements of the same, he holds the advantage over Nole in this regard.

Serve and Return: Nole’s serve is relatively weaker as compared to Federer’s if we could put it simply.

His first serve is generally a flat serve while he prefers to serve out a wide second serve, but what happens most of the time is that the complex motions of his serving technique and the result [it involves the element of topspin once again] falters thereby conceding more points which has been the cause of his downfall more often than not.

The return of serve, however isn’t a major factor which could determine, explore and exploit the positives and the negatives of their serve artillery. Each is well placed to his own.

Movement: Court movements of both the players are balanced, though Nole’s court movements will be a tad under pressure as the match gets extended to being a best of five sets. His stamina will definitely be a restrictive factor for Nole in such a scenario.

General Match-up: Nole’s game is as equipped with strengths and weaknesses as is Federer’s. He has the potential to trouble Federer as has the vulnerability to cower down under Federer’s onslaught of expertise and calculative manoeuvres.

If he plays like he did towards the end of the 2008 season and Federer plays anything like he did at the start of 2009, then the prognosis of this match looks very very interesting.

To Sum-Up: It will be a close contest though the odds are in Federer’s favour, but at the same time, if Nole persists [and Federer loses his momentum] then Nole definitely can get the better of Federer to stop the Swiss from getting into the final for the sixth year running.

Creature vs Creature: Kim's First True US Open Comeback Test of Fire

Rohini Iyer — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 06:17:57 -0400

Going by the looks of it, at this juncture there seems to be no rival who looks to threaten Serena Williams's chance of defending her US Open title and grab her 12th slam in the process.

Thanks to all the upsets, it appears as though it's just a matter of time (hours even) before Serena gets back to where and how she started the year: as a winner following it up with the crown of the World No. 1, more than convincingly!

But yet, just one player stands in her way who is looking forward to make an assertion of her own that she is still well capable of playing the game in spite of a prolonged hiatus and strongly emphasise the saying once a player, always a player in the process.

Serena Williams vs Kim Clijsters is a match to look forward to; a renewal of a one-sided rivalry but interesting to follow in spite of the same, a match between two players who have disposed off their previous opponents, in a nothing less than clinical manner. It was all in a day's work for them.

But the situation is different now, the stage has been set and winning is not just a mere word; for the both of them, it's a route to the final glory and the heartfelt accolades to follow in the wake of a final victory...

And answering the who, why, when and how questions is all this Creature vs Creature about; Rajat, in his article talks about the Serena perspective, while this feature concentrates on the happening comeback star "Kim Possible."

Kim Clijsters: When she decided to hang her professional boots in 2007, her fans were left bereft though there was always an off-chance that Kim might give a second shot to the sport.

Starting with Cincinnati and Toronto, she supplemented her words of making a comeback when she delivered a more than decent performance at both the Masters events.

But even then, performing and winning at the masters is always different than doing the same equation at the slams; it's a monumental platform where one can't be sure as to when and where one's footing might take a slip.

Kim's performance, however, has not even come remotely to miss a footing and take a plunge; on the contrary she is bouncing from each and every match, gaining and garnering confidence, contributing to her share of upset causing, finally showing up as one quarter of the semifinal lineup quartet...

Will Win If: More than hit trick shots and confuse the opponent, Kim relies more on forcing her opponent to commit errors and this will play a pivotal role in her match against Serena who in her aggressiveness is known to dish out her share of unforced errors.

To Kim's advantage will be her superior athleticism and speed which she has still managed to retain in spite of all these years' absence—watching her play, it's like she never left the courts. It's absolutely ship shape.

Maintaining the same level of intense athleticism, throughout the course of the match will and should help Clijsters to overcome the Serena block which only gets stronger and stronger as the tournament enters its last throes.

Will Lose If: Serena's combination of tactics could be Clijsters's downfall. If Clijsters fails to read and return Serena's powerful serve and is unable to fend off the momentum that Serena gets once she is in her rhythm, then Clijsters will have to kiss her chances of making it to the finals good-bye.

In addition to, if Clijsters's isn't able to maintain a level a level of mental fortitude, then Serena stands at a much better advantage to clinch the match, with utmost ease.

Intangibles: Relying on Clijster's triumph over Venus Williams won't be of any consequence here, as in spite of all Venus's efforts that day, physically the Belgian was a better player than the American.

Thus, while this victory constitutes a great deal of importance while taking into consideration Clijsters's road back to professional tennis, it is nothing more than pyrrhic when her stand-off against Serena will be evaluated.

My Call: Heart demands Kim Clijsters while logic and reasoning argue about Serena in a tightly contested straight setter.

But, one thing is for sure...whoever wins this match, will be a winner but the other definitely won't be a loser!

Creature Vs Creature: Verdasco's yet another 2009 dream run at USO?

Rohini Iyer — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:07:59 -0400

Merely flicking cursory glances at the men's fourth round encounters for the day [Davydenko is already history], will not point towards any intrigue-inspiring match; though were one attentive enough, the match between 10th seeded Verdasco and the American John Isner is something more than mundane.

Of course, if everything had gone as per what the draw had envisaged, then this particular match, wouldn't have tempted the palate at all; but thanks to John Isner who ripped apart Roddick's dreams of making the cut at Flushing Meadows, the resultant scenario takes on a totally different light.

Exit Andy Roddick and enter John Isner, keeping the rival at the other end perfectly intact. The pros and cons begin to change; has its become easier for Verdasco to get an entry into the Quarterfinals, or will be the next casualty of the Isner storm taking over the already upset packed US Open?

Fernando Verdasco: He has not looked back since he defeated Andy Murray in the fourth round at the Australian Open this year and has been steadily improving since.

Considering that he belongs to the sect of tennis players, who are more comfortable on clay than anywhere else, Verdasco nevertheless is equally comfortable on the hard courts, though it took him a lot of time to peak in his career.

A gutsy left-hander, while he is full rhythm- he is a delight to watch providing a fan a thorough entertainment of high quality tennis [example; Davis Cup 2008 Finals Singles Rubber vs Jose Acasuso, etc..etc].

Will Win If: Verdasco's forehand is the biggest weapon in his arsenal and the one which, when he tries to get more aggressive from the baseline, gets thrashed for sure.

Against Isner, Verdasco will have to exercise a perfect control over his forehand; not making the movement rigid, but not allowing it to flex unnecessarily either.

In addition, he has to tackle Isner's strong serve which has been a strong point for the American. In the past three rounds, Isner has allowed just four break point conversions out of 13 break point chances, not allowing any quarter to any of his opponents so far.

Verdasco, not only has to deal with Isner's serve but also must test Isner's movement around the court. Owing to Isner's height, it is quite possible that his movements around the court will not be that free as Verdasco's would be in comparison; Verdy has to try and take advantage of this and as much as he can.

Will Lose If: There is nothing much that Isner needs to do in order to 'make' Verdasco lose; Verdasco's lapses in concentration are an effect of missing easy points [which happens a lot in his case] could cause the Spaniard to suffer a loss in the Quarterfinal berth.

Verdasco's serve, though not essentially weak, isn't great at the same time; double faults pose a huge threat, as Verdasco's serve has let him down on rope-tight situations in the past and more than once at that; any unnecessary faltering of serve,then he can very well add one more loss due to the same reason.

Intangibles: Playing five set matches won't make any difference to both players, as they have both shown the stamina and the endurance required to last as long as the match extends; it will just be "all in a day's work" in case such a situation manifests.

My Call: Another best of five. As much as I want Verdasco to win in a straight setter, going by Isner's previous conquests, this one should go down to the wire.

After all a bit of drama is always refreshing!

Creature vs. Creature: Will Andy Murray "Dent" the Dent Resilience?

Rohini Iyer — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:45:56 -0400

The most difficult question to be asked before the start of the third-round encounter between the American comeback hero and the British US Open wannabe (do names need to be mentioned?): On whom does the pressure lie?

Is it on Taylor Dent, who is facing the billowing and the full-steam onslaught of Andy Murray, or is it on Murray, who is facing not only a single opponent but also the countless American fans who will be rooting for their resurgent star—till the very last?

This is a Creature vs. Creature analysing all aspects from Murray's point of view, while Rob York's article deals with the American's side of the story.

Andy Murray

He is the second favourite entering the tournament and given the way he has taken the entire men's tennis fraternity by storm this season, he has proved that he has the ability to be what it takes to be a thorough winner.

At the US Open, he tasted his first success last year when he reached the finals before bowing down to Roger Federer eventually. This year, he will be hoping to repeat his performance, though with a different result; he isn't the player what he was this time around last year, he has traversed miles and miles...

Will Win If

Murray is an expert tactician who possesses the ability to both attack and counter punch the shots, whenever and wherever the situation demands; this particular trait of his is most effectively responsible for him flummoxing most of his rivals and cause upsets many a time in the season.

If Murray, against Dent, who is a great serve-and-volleyer, plays aggressive and turns on those lethal ground strokes of his and forces Dent to commit errors, then he could put the pressure on Dent, whose combined unforced error count has been well over the 90s in the first two rounds.

Will Lose If

Murray's serve is a bit of concern, when compared to his opponent's. Hovering around the 50s, if his first serve goes wobbly, then Dent could hope to garner points from his relatively weaker second serve.

Also, stamina plays a very important role; Taylor Dent has shown that he possess the ability to withstand five set matches. His second round match against Spain's Ivan Navarro was an epic of sorts with two sets going down to the full quota of 12 games, while two sets went down to the wire in tie-breaks.

Murray on the other hand, has played just one five-set match (against Fernando Verdasco at the 2009 Aussie Open) and wasn't able to emerge as the winner on that occasion, and if today's feature, by any chance, extends to the best of five sets, then Murray does stand a chance to lose.

Crowd Factor

The crowd will play an important factor, as almost each and every American fan is longing to see Dent make a strong and resounding comeback to the world of tennis, and if toppling Murray proves to be a stepping stone to the same, then it will be nothing less than gung-ho for the boisterous crowd at Arthur Ashe, not to forget the ones watching it from the electronic box.

My Call

Andy Murray in a nerve-tautening four setter, though I wouldn't mind a straight set victory in his favour.

It would be worthwhile to mention, though, that, irrespective of the outcome of the match, the late-night session at Arthur Ashe is a must watch for, today, resilience will spark off against resurgence and, quoting May the Best Man Win, won't merely suffice at all!

US Open 2009: A Show of Lleyton Hewitt's Hewitt-ism, Roger Federer's Federer-ism

Rohini Iyer — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 15:31:11 -0400

When Roger Federer took on Lleyton Hewitt today in the third round at Arthur Ashe Saturday, one couldn't have expected a much better contested match, though for some the final result turned out to be a bitter pill to digest.

But there again one has to admit: If valour defines Lleyton Hewitt, then he didn't disappoint any of his fans in the least. From the start till the end of those two-and-a-half hours he played at the USTA centre court, he made sure that Federer wasn't getting this match on a silver platter.

Point for point, shot for shot, Hewitt was blazing guns. Forcing Federer to remain well behind the baseline, he came to the net and attacked. And when it came to long rallies, he made sure that he exploited Federer's weak backhand and drew equal errors from Federer's second most solid arsenal: his forehand.

Till the sixth game of the first set, Federer's errors appeared to have been controlled and muted; he was not only able to hold his service games to love but was also able to break the Aussie in the fourth game.

Federer looked focused and poised to grab a straight-set victory to the fourth round, and, given the way he was working and mixing his shots at that point in the first set, it wasn't that difficult to assume or imagine.

But, post the sixth game it became a different ball game altogether, as Hewitt came charging and broke Federer in the seventh game, the fact heightened even more because Federer was leading 40-0 to take a 5-2 lead in the first set.

And from Federer's errors' perspective, they ended up transforming, and progressively so. The first six games could have very well been a lull before the storm, as the phrase goes.

And more prolonged were the rallies, more were the points that Hewitt was able to garner, which ended up giving Hewitt opportunities to break Federer's serve.

But in spite of being given so many free points generously (14, to be exact), Hewitt was able to break Federer's serve just thrice, as opposed to Federer's conversion of five break point chances out of the 11 he got.

And this brings us to the main demarcating point between Federer and Hewitt—the point that forms a pivotal reason for Federer's victory over Hewitt, in spite of all Hewitt's heroics and aforementioned "valour".

The serve. Federer's serve, when compared with Hewitt's even when he was missing all those easy points off his forehand, was by far better than that of Hewitt, whose wobbly first serve went down to as low as 36 percent in the third set.

Federer was able to mix and camouflage his serves well, making it difficult for Hewitt to read and construct his points, and even when Hewitt had chances to go up a break or two, he wasn't able to battle successfully against Federer's slyly crafted serves.

To sum it up, it would be easier said than done to quote the proverb The Winner Takes It All, for, even though Roger Federer came through this encounter just slightly bruised, he has a long way to go if he wants to reclaim that trophy for the sixth year running; banking on his serves alone won't be enough against the likes of the Berdychs and the Roddicks—it will be a different ball game altogether!

Andy Roddick: Straight from the Horse's Mouth

Rohini Iyer — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 01:52:55 -0400

Hey Guys,

It's so nice to see you all (it's been a very long time, isn't it?) and you know how busy I have been working and getting myself into shape (did you see me trouble Federer at Wimbledon? Weren't you guys impressed? I got myself a couple of more Brownie points with some girls—sympathy votes always count, period!).

Coming back to reality, I have learned to put the past behind me and the head-to-head doesn't even shock me anymore.

The Karma thing that Larry has put me into, has made me realize that I should be doing just my duty and not worry about the results: They come as they come and go as they go...no point in ruminating (the philosophy part is cool, its just the practical application which sucks, though).

Now for the US Open...it's my favourite tournament—Any guesses why?

If you remember, I won my first grand slam here six years ago (I don't think I need to remind you guys about those days) and now six years later (or is it seven? Math confuses me), I have heard the grapevine float that I am like the fourth or the fifth favourite to win the US Open.

That is cool, isn't it?? I mean, frankly I am a great believer in the proponent of numerology and some numerologist told me that three and its multiples are my lucky numbers and it actually makes sense, you know?

I mean, I won the US in 2003 and then I was a close finalist in 2006 and now in 2009, my form has returned and is booming. So keeping in terms with all these factors, I should be the logical favourite and not the fourth or the fifth choice; it's just not fair to me! CUT me some slack, guys! It's high time someone did!

But no, no one actually bothers about the element of fairness these days! take the draw as an example—no I am not talking about "You-Know-Who", didn't I just say that I have overcome all my emotions and frustrations when I play against him?—I am talking about my potential encounter against Nole in the quarters.

How does it make sense? He shouldn't have been in my draw (or I shouldn't have been in his draw: for the sake of emphasizing)...nada—absolutely not!

Before you guys assume (assumption, according to Larry leads to prejudice and closedness of the mind), I better make my thoughts on the subject on Nole very clear. not that I am wary of facing him-definitely not; its just that I have to mind my P's and Q's double of what I am actually used to.

And not only that, the crowd booing also zeroes down on to me, as if I hand each and every American "Hate Novak for US" passes! Moreover, how can the No. 4 and the No. 5 be in the same side of the draw (did the statisticians lose their mind over simple stats?)?

Or is there something going on behind the scenes (like "Behind the Baseline" hosted by Murphy Jensen) that ends up pulling one over me (what's a man supposed to do except vocalize his rants and then I end being the bad boy of tennis! What's the world got into, damn!)?

But hey, why the hell am I ranting? Didn't I just mention about the Karma philosophy and all that? See...that's what frustration reduces a sane and thinking man to end up doing! That's life I guess (I am getting adept at talking about philosophy, I could make it as my second career; now that would be cool, wouldn't it?).

PS: Guys, make sure you follow all my tweets; life is never boring on Twitter wherever else it might be!

PPS: I hope girls love my black checkered Tee and Shorts; it suits me more than white (Brooklyn mentioned that and I try never questioning her fashion sense—it irks her more than anything else!).

PPPS: Harry Potter fans, before you end up assuming (remember what Larry said about assumption) the "You-Know-Who" in this context was intended to be as a compliment and not otherwise (gosh! What all you are supposed to try and clarify in these times? God help me!).

Evonne Goolagong: An Aussie with a Difference

Rohini Iyer — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:50:16 -0400

Debating, discussing and gauging the potential and the achievements of the likes of Billie Jean Kings and Martina Navratilovas, who formed the pivot of women's tennis of their era, there is one such player in their midst, whose name deservedly merits a mention and is seldom done.

The name of Evonne Goolagong or Evonne Goolagong-Cawley, which though isn't a likely one to strike an immediate chord in the minds of more recent tennis aficionados, is still a name with laurels and labels attached to it.

And while, her professional graph might not show victories left, right and centre for her, Evonne was still one of the most formidable rivals of the early and mid-seventies, especially between 1971-1976 which could be regarded as her golden professional period.

Evonne's career graph and statistics, however isn't the intended topic construing as an article; her professional tennis accolades just form a tangent to the player that evolved from a society and community that formed a lower rung when colour of the skin was taken into consideration- a factor given importance, more than anything else.

Hailing from an Aboriginal background, in a family not very well defined in terms of money, Evonne's early acquaintance with the sport started at the age of five, as a ball girl for the local tennis club in her hometown of Barellan.

What started as an interest escalated into passion in her growing years as her ability to play excellent tennis began garnering the attention of many famous tennis coaches of that time to Barellan.

Especially, of Vic Edwards, who was instrumental in nurturing and honing Evonne into a successful tennis pro right from the time he took her under his wing at the age of 10.

Edwards, played not only the role of her mentor and coach, but was also Evonne's legal guardian, as she took her fledgling steps from being a small town girl into a potential tennis cynosure.

Under his tutelage, Evonne turned pro at the age of 19 and after winning several tournaments made her first slam appearance at the 1970 Wimbledon. Her performance, however was greatly disappointing as she bid an early adieu, losing in the first round itself.

By 1971, however, Evonne was more than ready to make her mark at the slam level and working along those lines, she notched up her maiden slam victory at Roland Garros, and iced the cake by grabbing the Wimbledon crown, just a year after she was made to bite the dust unwillingly at the same venue.

Evonne's success at the French Open was, in essence a first time- a first time that an Aborigine Aussie woman had achieved the title, and more importantly, the first time that a native Aborigine had won any event for the nation, outside of football and boxing.

This achievement was further accentuated, when Evonne was awarded an MBE by Queen Elizabeth in the year 1972; 10 years later, Evonne would go on to receive the Order of Australia [AO] for her meritorious contribution in her chosen professional field.

In 1988, Evonne was inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame, five years after she bade her goodbyes to the sport that had helped to shape her life, in a manner that she could have ever imagined and believed to be possible.

In a world full of prejudices and unimaginable beliefs, Evonne Goolagong, demonstrates a perfect example of "you are where you are, because you choose to be there" not only as a player, but also as a person!

Women's Power Rankings: Jankovic Grabs Pole Position

Rohini Iyer — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:53:54 -0400

1. Jelena Jankovic: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Winner], Stanford [Quarter finalist], Wimbledon [Third Round] and Eastbourne [First Round]. Total Points: 863.

Based on the new point system devised by Feng Rong, Jelena Jankovic features in the top spot of this week's WTA power rankings.

After her win at Cincinnati, the Serb, who had been playing some out-of-form tennis, looks to have fixed the glitch that was hampering her performance throughout the 2009 season.

2. Dinara Safina: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Finalist], LA Tennis Championship [Fourth Round], Slovenia Open [Winner] and Wimbledon [Semifinalist]. Total Points: 779.

The World No. 1's great show at the WTA tournaments marks her stay at the top of the power rankings for such a long time, though this week, she finds herself shunted as the numero uno among the ladies.

Moreover, with Toronto masters around the corner and given Safina's dominance in the masters, her position among the top three in the power rankings ratings looks very difficult to placate.

3. Flavia Pennetta: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Semifinalist], LA Tennis Championship [Winner], Palermo Open [Winner] and Wimbledon [Third Round]. Total Points: 663.

The Italian who has demonstrated an excellent show of tennis in the second half of the season, finds her name mentioned, for the first time in this week's edition of the power rankings.

And if her solid performance continues, one can expect Pennetta, to move higher up the rankings in the weeks to follow.

4. Elena Dementieva: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Semifinalist], Stanford [Semifinalist], Wimbledon [Semifinalist] and Eastbourne [Second Round]. Total Points: 552.

The Russian has always maintained her consistency, not only in the WTA events but also in the slams as well; her performances helping her to retain her top ten spot not only in the power rankings, but also in the official WTA rankings as well.

Dementieva's consistency is the key as she forms a regular mention in the power rankings concept.

5. Serena Williams: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Fourth Round], Stanford [Third Round], Wimbledon [Winner] and Roland Garros [Quarter finalist]. Total Points: 481.

For Serena, it's all about the slams as she fails to make much of an impact on the masters' events, while her slam performances belittle every other player facing her as the rival.

While, at the same time, her masters' performances are nothing to boast about, they are still enough to fortify her position in the power rankings system.

6. Venus Williams: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Third Round], Stanford [Finalist], Wimbledon [Finalist] and Roland Garros [Third Round]. Total Points: 431.

The elder Williams seems to have lost some of her old grandeur as she fails prey over and over again to lesser ranked rivals.

Her season so far has been nothing extra-ordinary, and with very few tournaments remaining in the year—not to forget just one last slam to go, Venus looks to have very little time in her hand to rejuvenate herself.

7. Svetlana Kuznetsova: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Third Round], Wimbledon [Third Round], Eastbourne [First Round] and Roland Garros [Winner]. Total Points: 315,

The French Open 2009 winner hasn't been able to deliver the same level of performance, allowing her form to dip after her euphoric victory.

Her lack of form, mainly to injuries have forced the Russian to compromise involuntarily with her playing potential forcing her to take a backseat when she could have improver her rankings substantially.

8. Daniela Hantuchova: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Fourth Round], LA Tennis Championship [Second Round], Stanford [Quarter finalist] and Wimbledon [Fourth Round]. Total Points: 300.

The Slovak, once a top 10 WTA player, now finds herself out of the top bracket; her recent performances, however, have provided a break through for her, as she manages to make a maiden appearance in this edition of the power rankings.

Will she continue to improve or will she allow herself to slide downhill will be clearer as the rest of the season runs it's course.

9. Caroline Wozniacki: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Quarterfinalist], LA Tennis Championship [Second Round], Swedish Open [Finalist] and Wimbledon [fourth round]. Total Points: 274.

The teenager, who looked set to settle herself in the top ten bracket, suffered a setback as injuries forced her out in important tournaments.

But, if her recent performance at Cincinnati is taken into consideration, Caroline's fans can and should hope for a successful run from her side for the rest of the season.

10. Samantha Stosur: Last Four Tournaments Played: LA Tennis Championship [Finalist], Stanford [Semifinalist], Wimbledon [Third Round] and Eastbourne [Second Round]. Total Points: 256.

The Aussie, is the third and the final player to mark her debut in the power rankings concept with her impressive showmanship at Los Angeles and Stanford; however, it will remain to be seen as to how far Stosur is able to deliver such gunning tennis as the likes of the Jankovic and the Clijsters look geared and poised to strike.

Outside Looking In:

1. Victoria Azarenka : Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Third Round], LA Tennis Championship [Second Round], Wimbledon [Quarter finalist] and Roland Garros [Quarter finalist]. Total Points: 227.

Azarenka has shown tremendous potential throughout this season, though her performances have also vacillated periodically at the same time.

Once featuring in the top ten slot in the power rankings, Azarenka's inconsistencies are responsible for her downslide in the power rankings, which she should improve, considering her potential.

2. Agnieska Radwanska: Last Four Tournaments Played: Cincinnati [Second Round], LA Tennis Championship [Quarter finalist], Stanford [ Second Round] and Wimbledon [Quarter finalist]. Total Points: 211.

Radwanska, to put it simply has shown promise and if that promise continues to hold along with her deliverance to the same, she could find herself re-listed alongside the top ten ladies of women's tennis like she was once featured.

In the Zone with Fernando Verdasco

Rohini Iyer — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:41:36 -0400

"Always prepare for the worst, hope for the best and as much as possible...try to avoid the unexpected..."

But then one ought to remember that on certain days unexpectedness has a mind of its own and when that mind starts acting and plotting, even a mere avoidance of the circumstance that breeds it becomes next to impossible; the one track determination of the unexpectedness governs everything that day—try as one might to curb it, it has come to succeed and success, it will find at the end of the day!

And an example of such "unexpected-ness" is the case of Fernando Verdasco defeating the raging and the billowing Andy Murray in their Fourth Round encounter of the 2009 Oz Open making him a perfect recipe for the topic of being In the Zone.

For a player who has been playing tennis since the age of four, Fernando Verdasco wasn't someone [at least prior to this match] whose name came to mind while talking about the sport - it wasn't as though he was a bad player, his performances were just not adequate for the mind to admit the significance of his existence in the sport.

But, the Spaniard was never always invisible; during the 2008 Davis Cup final between Spain and Argentina- he was the man who made it possible for Spain to win the cup, when he juggled, wrestled, and successfully noosed the reverse singles rubber from Jose Acasuso in a pendulumic five-setter.

But such powerful performances, once in a while, were not the only reasons that made him visible to the casual fan. His name wasn't enveloped in obscurity by girls who love to take in the looks of the player along with his ability to notch up victories on the playing surface against threatening and rampaging rivals.

But these were just by-the-by sort of affiliations for the Spaniard, who though he featured in the top 15, had next to nothing while counting his slam potential; he had absolutely nothing to show that he was capable of pulling it off in the big-stages.

And yet, Verdasco defied every punter and prognosticator on the afternoon of 26th January at Melbourne park, with such force that everyone was made to turn their heads in his direction: "take a look folks, Rafa isn't the only one holding the Armada fleet, he has company this time around."

Taking a look at the statistics before this match, there wouldn't have been any doubt as to who would emerge as the eventual winner; Murray had a 5-1 head-to head against the Madridian and the last time that Verdasco had defeated the Briton was six years ago when Murray was ranked at a lowly 774th.

To add insult to injury, when these two had met at the same venue previously two years ago, Murray had dealt a crushing straight-sets loss to the Spaniard in the third round.

Fast forward two years, and the result promised to be the same, of course with the difference being that Murray was the new hype surrounding the tennis masses. After opening the new season with a loud cannon bang, Andy Murray looked set to cross the threshold of the slam winners-he was running amok with a level of performance octane that only satisfying victories and confidence can bring.

Murray was prepared "for the worst", his hopes were pinned only "on the best" but he had not counted the "unexpected" element to his predicted victory podium and which disrupted his entire plans Down Under: Fernando Verdasco.

Verdasco was a man set in his mission- after suffering defeat upon defeat at the hands of the Briton, he had nothing but his pride to lose, which after taking beatings upon beatings had developed an "I am possible" attitude of its own like the mind of the "unexpected"; Murray was not only facing a physical form of Verdasco, but also a fortified and imposing caricature of the same person.

The match began in earnest and so began the assault by Verdasco's ripping forehands and powerful backhands on Murray; some of them were bang on target- Murray was unable to do anything but stare at their speed and intensity, while some spewed out of control giving Murray the chance to grab points as and when they were given generously.

Verdasco's shots and passes whenever they spiralled out of control, appeared as though he was losing control over himself, as though he fought a raging and building volcano from within himself; the situation was like he had drawn the battle line and was trying hard not to jump off from the cavalry and do a foolhardy concept of the infantry.

Yet, his warring self control paid the price as Murray captured the first set and thus was all set to show Verdasco all over again, who was the better player.

Intensity was met with intensity in the second set as Verdasco refused to cower down before the World No. 4; his forehand which only rippled in the first set became a full blown arsenal in itself, as he ran hither and thither on the court to cut Andy Murray no slack; pining and mostly out of breath, thanks to the running exercises choreographed by Verdasco for him, Murray was left gaping as to how in the world did Verdasco manage to pull a one over him!

The third set was retaliation and counter-retaliation; the shots flew back and forth, each man was determined to edge past his rival, Verdasco had the stamina while Murray possessed the mental coolness, enough to jeopardise Verdasco's new found resilience.

In these three sets, however, there appears to be equal hits and misses by both the players-each one tried to be in his elements, the long and hard rallies that each fended off did not show or bring out the stronger mettle of either of the two players-neither of them won nor did they concede- it was just bordering on being a "run-of-the-mill" contest at some point of time.

But the fourth and the fifth set, are the ones, where Verdasco brought out as to why he deserved to win the match more than Andy Murray did; if in the previous three sets he had played great shots, in these two sets he played scintillating shots, shots which made the palms of the one's hands sore and their throats hoarse, from all the claps and the vociferous applauses dished out to him.

The self control which had caught him without any guard, took pole position as he made Murray run pillar-to-post or as much as the court could offer him; the open and raised palm salute of "Vamos" started making more and more appearances as Verdasco breached the Murray armoury.

Rallies, aces and trickshots-whatever one could conjure about a class tennis player, Verdasco gave them all and even more; baseline rallies turned to net approaches as Verdasco found his rhyme and rhythm on the plexicushion, making Murray work and slog as he fought to redeem every last bit of his battered and bruised ego, before finally succumbing to the fierce and spirited Verdasco onslaught.

Verdasco was the man of the moment that day, he had done what a Federer and a Rafa didn't do-upstage the meteroic Andy Murray and that too at a place where the odds were firmly placed on his name to emerge as the ultimate winner on the second Sunday.

And by the time the enormity of the situation had sunk in, Verdasco had moved over to dismantle Jo-Wilfred Tsonga albeit a touch more easily and was ready to face Rafa in the battle of the Spaniards for a place in the finals...

And, while his "unexpected-ness run" was halted by Rafa in that epic of a match, Verdasco had already achieved whatever he couldn't in these past years in just a matter of hours; he had proved his temerity as a player, making sure that no one could and would ever take him lightly henceforth.

For the previous Zone feature, here's Antimatter's take on Robin Soderling.

Rewind 2001: Heralding The Hewitt Victory and The Prophecies In Its Wake

Rohini Iyer — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:09:16 -0400

The timing of this article couldn't be more ironic...

After watching Lleyton Hewitt getting socked by Juan Carlos Ferrero in the first round of the Montreal Masters, this article was the only way to get some semblance of sorts, and a sneak peak into the two Hewitts: circa and the present.

Presently, there isn't much to delve on Hewitt as a case study [speaking in a strictly detached manner], and if a newbie latching onto Hewitt would take the trouble to go through and compare the videos of his past performances and of one like yesterday's, the reactions to follow wouldl be worthy of attention of face-readers.

For, the past and the present versions of Lleyton Hewitt appear at first sight, to be starkly different not just physically but even mentally, before the comparison manifests into some nagging factor to which I can't point my finger; a factor which though enigmatically abstract, governs my mental picture of Hewitt.

This is the second in the series of articles under the US Open rewind series, and fittingly, an article on a player, who was predicted to be the future of the men's tennis world in the days to come, to rule unequivocally and whose transition from a boy to a man was completed in as many minutes as he had managed to bundle up and pack his rival on the court, in the match we are going to re-count here.

Speaking of the rival, one can hardly forget the credentials of the American who was standing as the last hurdle in the way of the brash, yet endearing Aussie, and who had battled his way into the finals fighting his own range of demons.

For Pete Sampras, this final raised the baritone of hope placed on him to an altogether different level; still seeking a record fifth US Open title, Sampras had crossed over to the finals, belting and whacking his way past three formidable rivals, one of them responsible for a crushing defeat a year before at the same place.

Quelling the likes of Pat Rafter, Andre Agassi and Marat Safin, Sampras looked completely poised to garner his fifth at Flushing Meadows, and the bustling Aussie was not the man touted to thwart him this time.

But the "bustling Aussie" had no such generous plans; he had come this far and he looked in his elements as he played, determined, so as not to leave the stadium without seeing his name engraved on the silver cup.

He played as though there was no tomorrow; from each and every corner of the court, Hewitt loomed and raged at the seemingly hapless Sampras who seemed to age during the match before everyone's eyes - just like that!

The counter-punching tactics that Hewitt employed against his opponent, outmanoeuvred Sampras completely and forced him to commit errors on many points.

Sampras's errors filled the statistics counter as though he had forgotten how to control and produce winners off his racquet; the man of the moment seemed to wilt under pressure somehow.

Tired by his mammoth feats prior to the final, Sampras was utterly devoid of his magic touch and looked like he was completely out-of-sorts with the game and what it was offering at that particular time.

The tone of the match, however, was set in the first game itself when Sampras's impeccable serve was broken for the first time after running for a course of 87 consecutive games in the tournament, and though Hewitt got his serve broken immediately in the next game, the serve-break became a sort of ominous sign that certain things were about to change.

Sampras lunged and Hewitt throttled, Sampras pounced and Hewitt swatted it like a fly; barring the first set where Sampras managed to take his opponent to a tie-breaker, the course of the next two sets was like prying off the Sampras hold from the match systematically, in a shrewd and calculating manner.

And then just as the tempest had begun...it was all over...11 years since the legend had won the same tournament as a teen, yet another youngster had etched his name on it; Lleyton Hewitt proclaimed to the world that he had arrived and was probably here to stay...his was the world to rule and after watching him play that day, no one could doubt his gumption, ability and perseverance to win the majors.

And this vehement prediction couldn't have been verified any stronger as Hewitt went on to win the year end masters and finish as the youngest World No. 1; the new kid on the block had arrived and very possibly...a domination from the guys Down Under had started yet again!

Although sadly, the prognostications about Hewitt didn't really take off much in the days to come, snipping what could have been an illustrious career to what is now merely, a shadow of the past.

Marat Safin: Sizzle Before You Fizzle

Rohini Iyer — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:51:43 -0400

There are three kinds of people in this world; the first- who attend to their purpose in life without any prompting, the second-who go on about their business after being at the receiving end of a million cajoling and finally the last- the kind which remain virtually unaffected under any circumstances...

And, Marat Safin who forms the discussion of the topic at hand, is one of those rare personas who has periodically vacillated in between all of the above three specified diversification, shunting back and forth throwing a curve ball when everyone least expected it [sometimes himself included].

And, since the topic of "curve balls" has been raised, the 2009 tennis season has contributed a fair share of them till now with some repercussions still not reeled in fully; such is their force and the magnanimity!

In fact, they can be classified as "major league curve balls" and "minor league curve balls" if such terms be allowed to use.

Rafa's maiden victory Down Under, Soderling capsizing the "Rafa Raft"
at Paris and Federer mastering his Paris nerves to clinch a "Sampras equaliser", Rafa's injury forced withdrawal from Wimbledon, Federer inching beyond the coveted American defeating another American in yet another Wimbledon five setter, all of these fall in the former categorisation.

While the comeback of the prodigals- Tommy Haas, Lleyton Hewitt and Andy Roddick forms the "minor league curve ball" digression or if we could term it in a much more subtle way: "sub-major-cum-minor curve ball genre".

These players found their unbalanced rhythm and their fans loved them getting back into their groove, it was as though they had always been there...a perfect sense of blending with the tennis canopy- once a tennis player, always a tennis player!

And yet, invariably Marat Safin's name has escaped this group of newly rejuvenated players; with his firm decision that he wouldn't be continuing past this year, his showmanship so far this year has been nothing extraordinary and something that he would want to showcase in his Tennis final year's scrap book.

All around him, his peers are playing as though there is no tomorrow and Marat seems completely unruffled, his actions don't show any iota that he won't be around next year to give it one more shot.

It's not always about winning, it's about trying...harder and harder in each and every match, there is no tomorrow, just today and this moment at hand; and Marat somehow hasn't been playing enough...just not enough to leave the sport on a positive note.

And as the season draws to a close, Marat has still not managed to deliver a single performance that would make his fans say "Whoa Marat, that's more like you" and would proudly reminisce after he bids a final adieu to the sport.

No victory would be pyrric at this stage and considering that the amount of tournaments left has dwindled to something that can be ticked off by our fingers, Marat's chances at a final resuscitation narrows and trickles down considerably...

And, as the final leg of the 2009 season begins to see action at Toronto starting next week before finally concluding at Flushing Meadows, it would be an almost perfect end, if not completely so, to the Russian's colourful career of sorts!

The Concept Of Integrity: Explicitly Ignored?

Rohini Iyer — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:31:37 -0400

Integrity, often synonymous with honesty, represents a person's capacity to stand by his righteous morals and values thereby not compromising with his conscience, especially, when the tug to perform any such immoral act dominates the keener sense of the mind and heart.

In day-to-day mundane life, such scenarios keep arising and most of the time we end up falling prey to the temptation, certain situations often demanding that we harden ourselves and do what is needed at that spur of the moment; in a way that's also integrity because we are doing what is right by doing a wrong because the "wrong" is what the "right" is at that juncture.

In the Middle East, at certain times, doctors have to lie by the skin of the teeth to protect the virtues of the girls so that they aren't abused sexually and physically; that's a lie that they utter but since it's for a noble cause, it's not compromising one's values but upholding the medical oath that the profession demands!

But the same when we take sports and sportsmen into consideration, alters the situation and the scenario immensely, transforming it into an act of cheating and sabotaging an opportunity that would have been somebody else's to cherish and relive.

It's easy to quote "All's fair in love, game and war" but the degrading deed that has been carried out, not only spoils and wanes the enthusiasm and the expectation of a player or a team, but also the fans' as well.

Take the match fixing saga in cricket as an example; when Hansie Cronje confessed that he had rigged some of the matches he had contested for money and the succeeding revelations that followed his act, the exuberance that the fans had for the sport diminished in a jiffy.

They felt betrayed, for their support, for their cries of agony when their team lost [supposedly due to betting], for their prayers to which no God could have paid any heed...their hearts were ripped and torn to shreds, without any preamble and just like that!

And it's not just Cricket and cricketing fans who have faced such moments in their life; during the 1986 FIFA World Cup match between England and Argentina, one white lie by the star player of that time wrecked a possible deserving chance for the English football team.

The "Hand of God" goal, might have brought World Cup success to the Argentinian football team but the goal will always be looked upon as a black mark in the career of the legend named Diego Maradona, never to be erased whatever excuse or justification he might have come up in the past with or is still pondering upon.

Marion Jones, after the 2000 Sydney Olympics; Mike Tyson in his boxing match against Evander Holyfield are all examples of sports stars with blemish and taint on their guilty conscience to what could have been a noteworthy achievement for them.

As many sporting action that the world sees today, to each of them, there are such "noble" hearted players who live up to the image of dishonesty and disregard to their choice of profession.

But more dramatic than their action, is the rigmarole that most of these "affected" professionals portray after their action is exposed is enough to land them a role in some weepy soap opera, as though they are the tormented victims rather than the accused.

The tears that they shed while accepting their folly, makes one wonder as to why the guilty conscience that struck them off so late and the tears that came pouring forth through their ducts, didn't arrive when someone else was weeping after seeing his/her hard work and sweat crumble to smithereens?

The show of bravery that they show while acknowleding to their fans and the stoicness that they maintain, makes one ask, why didn't their conscience prickle when they let go off the rightful spirit of the game and; when it mattered the most: between a choice of "winning is everything" and "winning is the only thing", why did they pick the latter than the former?

A Perspective of a Female Brett Lee Fan: to Be or Not to Be?

Rohini Iyer — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 10:07:05 -0400

When Brett Lee made his international debut in the 90s, there arose a rage among us Indians; partly because he was lethal in his bowling attack, dangerous- never failing to bait the target of the vulnerable Indian batting order, not to mention the passion induced fist pumps and yells he used to give after scalping the wicket.

In those days when he was at his prime, I still remember quaking in the knees whenever India played against the Aussies and praying that our batsmen should stand tall and erect like a monolithic rock in the face of high tides...

And it was not just me...there were countless other Indian fans who felt the same way when Lee used to prepare for his run-up to deliver those stipulated six balls..the tension used to be strung so tight that, after every ball of his, most of us used to exhale with a big "whew" as though the batsman's face was saved from a raging volcano!

Fear and detest coupled our admiration and appreciation for this talented youngster who was clearly predicted to be one of Australia's star studded players in the days to come; love and dislike vied for our attention when it came to this particular Aussie...dislike—more of a majority when it came to hard core Indian cricket fans who swore by the name of the sport while love took the majority, especially when the consensus came to girls!

Yes..girls...some of whom even though they had never followed or paid any heed towards the sport, started following it because "Brett Lee was cute" and they loved to watch him in action so that they could drool and fawn over him.

No, not that it's wrong to moon over a player but to be a fan just because he is cute, isn't properly justified, is it?

And considering that inadvertently I ended up being a part of this girlish mania in my school, I ought to explain my personal predicament when it came to dealing with such stuff.

Frankly, at that time I never understood those girls...I used to hate [no other word for it] this guy because of the torment he wrecked on our national squad- literally making them run with their tails between their legs while these girls had the audacity to be starry-eyed and mutter, "I am in love with Brett Lee!"

I felt it was traitorous to madly root for a guy because he looked good rather than following him for his play making [not that I would have appreciated the latter in Lee's case] but still, somewhere it does make some sense choosing the latter rather than the former.

The dilemma I faced at that point was further accentuated because, being a girl my friends expected me to behave in the same way and because somehow I never found Brett Lee to be cute among the adjectives that I associated with him.

And to break this news to those giggly "Brett Lee zombies" was a monumental task because after a certain point it became a question of absolute political correctness. The girls never understood my love for the sport in the first place- I was wacko enough for them without this matter aiding them in the procedure. With my ramblings about Sourav Ganguly and Sachin Tendulkar this was probably a huge blow to them!

So, when they expected me to provide some semblance to their "crush" and supposedly redeem myself in their eyes in the process, they were disappointed yet again...though they weren't kind enough with the choice of my priorities and somehow never got convinced with my justifications!

Thankfully though they didn't linger for much time and their obsession with the sport star not lasting long [read "someone else caught their eyes"] they left me alone and in peace to preach and practice my "Hate-Brett-Lee-Vendetta!"

These days after nearly a decade has elapsed, I have no clue as to who is the latest player to grab their attention though the last time I checked it was a tie between Kaka and Flintoff [both running neck-to-neck]...God save them both!

From my side though, after a decade of preaching "I-hate-Brett-Lee", there is a slight improvement in my Brett Lee radar these days- I don't hate him [maybe because it has gotten transferred to Mitchell Johnson and Nathan Bracken these days or maybe it's something to do with IPL] although, I have to firmly say that I still haven't found him cute for that matter!

Kim Clijsters's Comeback: A Welcome Change In The WTA Vulnerability

Rohini Iyer — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 13:35:56 -0400

The second half of the Masters series which sees action beginning from the first week of August, will mark the return of Kim Clijsters back to the rectangular realm of the sport.

For the former World No. 1 who will be participating as a wild card entrant in the upcoming Toronto and Cincinnati masters using these two events as a spring board for the us open, this will be a chance to present a strong show of her game once again, two years after she took a sabbath prioritising her personal obligations.

Not to mention the fact that her "second career" as she prefers to word it, rather than the usually coined "comeback" appears to be coming at a very opportune moment—at a time when the WTA system is inching towards making a mockery of itself.

It wouldn't be prudent at all to take a dig time and again at the haplessly choking Dinara Safina, but her performance at the slams makes it necessary that it's high time the WTA opened it's tightly shut eyes to the predicament.

At the same time, while seeking Dinara's supposed replacement to the crown- that's again a million dollar question; while Safina performs consistently at the masters and chokes at the slams, the Williamses are polar opposite, especially Serena for that matter.

While Serena plays brilliantly with gusto and gumption, she fails on these two counts at the masters platform, invariably getting thwarted by lower ranked opponents, thereby losing important and valuable ranking points.

Erratic performances are rife- the likes of Safina and Serena forming just a sliver of the whole bastion; and as such, the situation demands a player who can cater and deliver an all round performance, a few hiccups notwithstanding; a player who create an atmosphere of stability in the vulnerability prone WTA scenario.

And Clijsters's decision to re-enter the professional rat race, provides a beacon of hope in the murky women's tennis waters and though she has said that she will use these events to gauge and monitor how well she can adapt to the sport and her personal duties, and then decide about venturing even further; the optimism about her "second debut" is seeping deeply into the air.

Playing in the Wimbledon roof inauguration exhibition [if it could be termed that] alongside the likes of Agassi, Henman and Graf; Clijsters's display of tennis left no doubts in the minds of her fans as to her fitness and athleticism which still remains top notch and brilliant as ever as though she had never left the sport in the first place.

"Killing two birds with a single stone" is a popular phrase, which fits aptly in the current scenario; a highly awaited re-run of a prodigy, which could, if everything goes well, re-establish a stability of sorts till the likes of the under-developed mature well enough to engrave a name for themselves, when and where it matters the most!

Mario Ancic: Some Things in Life Do Deserve a Second Chance...

Rohini Iyer — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:53:32 -0400

When Mario Ancic defeated Roger Federer in the first round of Wimbledon 2002, he must have had no inkling that he had created a name for himself in the history books which would run for the course of the next six years...

"The last man to defeat Federer" became an unofficial tag line to his name as he propelled himself to open the floodgates of the sport to his credit; the trained eye of the critics starting to focus on him...he became the new kid on the block, as the popular saying goes or rather, if we sit to reflect now...he was "the (I am almost there) new kid on the block."

Nicknamed "Baby Goran" in the hope that he would re-create what Goran did, perhaps even inch beyond the maverick hero; Mario was betrayed and deprived time and again, to what could very well construe as a normal and decent professional career.

His playing career, pockmarked by injuries, has been a major setback to the gangly Croat; while his peers battled on-court rivalry most of the time, he has been engaged in a battle with his physical self more often than nought.

His professional life can be best summarised as being "intermittent"; one gets to see flashes of his game, before injury enfolds him in it's wake and forces him to literally abstain from the sport, not to mention the resulting fluctuation in his ranking standings which oscillates to extreme proportions.

Yet, in spite of such debilitating contributors, Ancic has managed to deliver some brilliant display of tennis; his achievements which though, are not that amassing in nature, are enough to make one wonder and question about the possibility of whether he would have been able to win a few Masters and perhaps even a Slam or two, had injury not been such a dominant factor in his professional graph?

Was there any chance of a rivalry between him and his other peers which got snapped and pulled from the root, thanks to the unwanted element in his tennis scrap book?

But these thoughts are quelled, for no one knows what could have actually happened; whether he would have been as successful as some might have pegged him to be or he would have ended up being a withering talent, lost and dissipated...just like that!

At present, Mario Ancic is still out there persistently battling his highly susceptible and injury prone body, but knowing that a person can endure only so much, the future at this juncture, doesn't really look that arresting for the Croat.

With competitors who are physically more tougher and unhampered by frequent injury burdens like him, Mario Ancic has a huge task cut out if he wants to bag a more pressing second chance to resurrect his career.

For, though he is not old by any standards at 25, he is definitely not young too to gamble and take too many chances...whatever dream he might have once envisioned and lost due to those unplanned guests, they are not coming back to reality again.

It's up to him now, whenever he gets a second round at the Roulette wheel to play as best as he can and create new dreams and success in the process.

PS: Article Inspired by Clarabella Bevis's article on tennis players' injuries; Thank You Bella.

How the Element of Surprise Enhances Sports

Rohini Iyer — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 09:29:14 -0400

What keeps a sports fan glued to his favourite brand of sport/sports?

A feeling of connectivity; not only with a team or a player but with every component involved in making the sport whole and complete.

Yet, apart from that there is one more "part of the whole" element which adds even more flavour to the fan viewership making sports something more than a by-rote or mundane affair.

Volatility is well appreciated sometimes, and when it comes to sports, then volatility or to call it in subtle terms "surprise" is more than welcome; surprise which almost borders on unpredictability.

Think about it. An almost rhetoric performance or display of sportsmanship won't garner any mass fan following, especially year-after-year and generation-after-generation; there has to be some zing or some flare up to bolster the "predicted" affairs of the game.

Take cricket for example; no one expected the English side to topple over the mighty Oz squad during the 2005 Ashes and when they did the honour, it added a twist, a sweet twist to the apparently prevailing one-sided Ashes saga and increased the anticipation for the next instalment of the series to be held after a couple of years.

Even in tennis, when Roger Federer defeated Pete Sampras—the defending champion and the crowd favourite at the 2001 Wimbledon, it jostled people out of their seats and out of a reverie that the tracks of the game were going to be changed like points on railway tracks.

And where people lamented the defeat of their favourite, a new favourite was being created at the same time who is still ruling the heart, mind and soul of the sport and his zillions of fans.

Thus, here emerges another positive attribute why surprise is essential for any sport; not only that it keeps us fans addicted but also helps churn out new found favouritism so that when the shelf life of a player becomes zilch, the fans just don't cease to follow the sport due to that reason.

A simple philosophy of "life must go on" reflecting itself in another field of professionalism; sport stars are definitely the backbone which constructs a sport but the backbone does need a body to make it itself valuable and fans provide that base, a solid and healthy base at the onset.

And to supplement the existing health and wealth of the body, a vitamin in the form of surprise is needed, while at the same time taking a look at it from a totally different aspect, it's a fostering borne out of optimism and pessimism.

Optimism when fans express their innermost desire and hope that their favourite will come through one day and pessimism when the same fans heart-of-hearts feel the tension and anxiety building about "what if...it doesn't happen"; a proper and neutral ground between a "glass half full" and a "glass half empty" scenario.

Ironically though, the same word doesn't bear the same emotion for two different fans; like Rafa's fans who hated the guts of Soderling after Roland Garros 2009 while the Swede's fans were enjoying the retribution of sorts.

A simple eight letter word which finds an equally simple meaning in the dictionary, becomes so complicated especially when tossed around with a fan's emotion and passion encompassing both the good as well as the ugly like a coin with two faces.

This convolution will and can never change; the word will and has to exist in the topography of sports and since it does so; no one can escape whatever good and/or evil it tows in with it.

Novak Djokovic: The Sun Will Peep Through the Clouds

Rohini Iyer — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:02:33 -0400

"Long long ago in the land of tennis there lived a Serb...when he made his grand appearance he ensnared and encapsulated everyone's attention toward him....his rivals started fearing him, the womenfolk fawned all over him...Nole...Nole...the shouts rang and echoed...the man of the moment, a rival to compete two of the biggest names in the nation's history had made it's presence felt...the dawn of a new era...a new champion in the horizon..."

Only if everything were a fantasy, a fantasy novel in fact filled with its customary "happily-ever-after" finishing touches, then Nole would have definitely been the best among the best in the sport.

But, sadly, in the realistic world this "fantasy" image of Nole appears like a mirage before one's eyes; like a straggler in the desert who keeps moving forward and forward thinking he has found an oasis, Nole raises and builds the hope of his fans before bringing it to a resounding crash before their very eyes...

He had the world at his feet when he bested Roger Federer at the 2008 OZ Open semifinals before emerging as the winner against Jo Wilfred Tsonga. He was poised to overthrow Federer as the world's second best player, thus solidifying and cementing his reputation as a brilliant tennis player at the beginning of this year.

Almost everything was at his command; he just had to raise his finger to get it across to him.

But it's the "raising the finger part" that went slightly wrong and almost left him awry; not that he played badly...no, definitely not! At some places he played and poured his entire being to the match, yet finishing just one stop short!

At the start of the 2009 season, he was just 10 points short of toppling Federer from his "I am still getting accustomed to World No. 2" position, but, before he could achieve his career-high rankings, he found himself going overboard thanks to a still "budding" Latvian in the opening round itself.

Then came the OZ Open; the defending champion withdrew in his quarterfinal match against Andy Roddick, citing medical reasons and drawing the ire of many, not to mention the newfound sobriquet that he was awarded in a demeaning and derogatory manner: "Chokovic!"

Months have flown by since these happenings, but his form still refuses to get resuscitated and revived. On the contrary, it's slumping and slipping to an abyss from which, at some point of time, staring at the steep cliff will only be possible.

At one time looming to threaten the top brass, these days Nole finds himself fending off challenges from lower ranked players eyeing and inching towards the top; a predicted favourite at one point of time, Nole finds himself jostling for space amidst the players who are supposedly in vogue these days...

A player who held promise, the only place where Nole's name finds mention over and over again these days is when the compilation of the so-called "One Slam Wonders List" is taken into consideration; that too only because the statisticians hover and debate whether he is capable of winning another slam or should they just add his name, hell with what happens in the future!

Such critics who predict the end of the road for him as though they are Nostradamus and as though he is well past his prime should realise how debilitating that would be to him especially after he has shown to the world once that if he wants to do succeed, then there is no stopping him!

At the same time, though, there is absolutely no denying that in order to regain some of his lost splendour and spark, Nole has to toil and slog extra-hard to overwhelm his inner demons in addition to physical ones before trying to successfully sort out his rivals on court.

Bringing out an aura and using it as a force shield both to attack as well as defend, Nole has to penetrate once again to the echelons of the sport—it's the only salvation and retribution that he can offer himself and the millions of his fans scattered across the world!

Adje Nole...Get well soon!

Tennis Tales, Pt. 1: The Wrong Phraseology Connection

Rohini Iyer — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:52:15 -0400

Beginning this week, I have tentatively decided to embark upon a weekly series highlighting several aspects of the sport in a lighthearted manner.

Going by the norm as is these days, I should have raised the curtain on the subject with none other than Roger Federer, but then considering the fact that he is the chosen muse for a lot of writers, I decided to pave the way with a slightly different topic..."Break a Leg, Roh!"

Yeah, this is the topic for my supposed discussion—the phrase, "Break a Leg"; the phrase originates as a theatrical form of saying good luck—a bit quirky, but the rationale that follows doesn't sound illogical at all!

According to the "Antonym Theory," the phrase "break a leg" was used so that if a person would say "good luck," but instead hard luck follows, the person to whom it was addressed would negate that negativity. It's weird, but superstitions have a way of making weird thing appear quite sane.

Coming back to the sport, then I guess Rafa became an exception to the antonym concept of the catch phrase because he did end up breaking a part of his legs if not entirely. So much so for hard pressed luck!

In Rafa's case, it inadvertently became an example of the popular Aesop fable of the shepherd who called out "Wolf..Wolf"; poor Rafa—his luck was running better before some wise and intellectually motivated person decided to ease off matters for him—awesome indeed!

Now, if we take into consideration some other players and their recent afflictions, then the manner in which the phrase could have got tweaked is intriguing indeed...

1. Roger Federer—Break the Back

The antonym concept at it's best again. Did he have a back injury problem until 2007? No, he didn't, but there it appeared like a bolt from the blue and almost took everything from him. Break the Back, anyone??

2. Mario Ancic—Break the Mono

The poor guy was doing well until he demolished Federer in the 2002 Wimbledon, and thereafter he slipped and slipped until he hit rock bottom. Again, Ancic made a brief appearance at the 2008 Wimbledon and then again suffered from a relapse.

Maybe someone said on account of his recuperation, "Break the Mono, Mario," and Voila! it made it's presence felt immediately.

3. Nikolay Davydenko—Break the Heel

He was always on the heels of the top-four players on any given day, wasn't he? There, someone meant it as a release statement from his perennial rankings and ended up giving him a foot/heel problem which disrupted his career for almost half the season.

4. Maria Sharapova—Break the Shoulder

There had to be some typo error somewhere when the supposed "good luck" measure was uttered to her, or was it the wrong person to which it was intended? Maybe Maria got struck in the crossfire between an irate "Maria" zealot and her father, and the spite got transferred to her unwarranted.

5. Sania Mirza—Break the Wrist

Her backhand must have been the cause of this best wishes-turned-bad-luck saga; "Break the wrist" to encourage her faltering backhand ended up almost jeopardising her career, which has been tottering on the verge of collapsing ever since!

POINT TO NOTE: The phrase, however, will not be of any effect on the likes of players like Marat Safin and Fernando Gonzalez, they do the needful though the luck part is hard to determine; bad luck or good luck—it will always be a double-edged sword for them.

Therefore, the modified version of "Break the racquet" is absolutely not applicable to these aggressive professionals!

Hamburg Masters: A Misfit in the Hard-Court Continuation

Rohini Iyer — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:15:34 -0400

Technically the clay court season is supposed to be done and dusted, but going by the itinerary of the ATP organisers, there is still one last event to be contested—The Hamburg Masters, or The Hamburg World Tour event in the advent of its most recent "downsizing."

The event, which always used to be held before the French Slam, not only got postponed because of the inclusion of Madrid Masters as a red-dirt competition instead of the indoor tournament it originally was, but also got demoted, or, to put it more politely, "downscaled" to an ATP World Tour event (500 points).

But even if its points contribution got re-shuffled in any way, the confounding part is trying to figure out the organisers postponed the event to a time when the sport and its players enter the neutral ground of hard courts?

They could have still held the event during the clay season as an addition to the already prevailing ones in the fray rather than push and postpone the tournament to a time when the sport and the players enter a common ground with regard to the playing surface.

Hard-court tournaments constitute around 80-90 percent of a tennis season, and, as such, every player is well-accustomed to playing on it, as opposed to a partisan attitude or a comfort level that he develops with either clay or grass.

Moreover, there is also a thought that the organisers at Hamburg aren't too pleased with the ATP's decision to change the tournament's status all of a sudden, because this would mean that most of the top-ranked players will consider giving it a miss.

If this is the case and the organisers are holding the event as a silent rebellion of their own against the ATP, and to make the top-ranked players participate because of the time gap created, then (again) it doesn't make any sense. Why? The top-ranked players will look forward to solidify their position in the hard courts and use them as a preparatory for Flushing Meadows rather than go back in time, so to speak.

It's common knowledge that the remainder of the playing action (not counting some of the Davis Cup matches) is going to be on this playing surface—both outdoor as well as indoor—and, as such, holding a clay-court tournament in the midst of these events is like taking a huge gamble, the organisers and participating players' benefit being the biggest thing at stake!

Jealousy: Destroying Every Ounce of Rationality

Rohini Iyer — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 05:47:45 -0400

I was six when the 19-year-old Monica Seles was stabbed at Hamburg in 1993. I was too young, naive, and innocent to understand the meaning of the word "jealousy," which I began to understand and comprehend fully as I grew up over the years.

Sidelining normal life and reverting back to the sports pages, the field is rife with fans who are jealous, not to mention some of the rivals who resort to crudeness in their jealousy-induced fervour.

I don't follow much of any other sport except cricket and tennis, though it doesn't take the mind of a genius to garner that every sport across the world will be agog and awash with such blatantness...

Monica Seles spent 28 months of her life "in absentia" from the sport thanks to Herr Gunther Parche, who, in his inspired wake, decided to give Steffi Graf a chance to climb back to the rankings; ah! As if Steffi had personally hired goons to tug her rival out of her way.

Did it make him famous? Was he awarded the highest order of bravery because of his actions? No, but he sowed a seed of unwanted animosity, and demonstrated the fanaticism that would have been building and building in the deepest recess of his deranged mind!

Fast-forward to the ninth year of the new millennium; we have two players in the world of men's tennis—both of whom have fans who trade crossfires back and forth like these people trade baseline rallies.

I don't need to even spell their names; they're implied by now, aren't they? They are the Swiss and the Spaniard, whose fanatical fans have literally drawn the battle line between them.

Rafa gets injured, and hardcore Federer fans say, "He is faking it!"

Someone please clarify, what would have been Rafa's advantage if he would have been faking it? The poor guy not only lost a chance to defend his title but also his highly slogged-for World No. 1 status.

Now, on the other hand, Federer won the French Open and the Wimbledon, and tongues have started wagging that Federer won because Rafa wasn't there.

Outrageous, just because Rafa added spice to the existing Federer persona, it doesn't mean Federer can and will win only if Rafa isn't there. It's an insult in fact to Federer's credibility as a tennis player!

In cricket, we have Sachin Tendulkar, whose name gets tossed up every now and then. For those who don't know Sachin Tendulkar, he was and still is what Roger Federer is to tennis, that's the highest order of compliment that his name merits.

When Tendulkar was diagnosed with tennis elbow injury a few years earlier, his haters started spreading the propaganda that he was faking it. It was surprising, because the guy has been living and breathing cricket for the past 20 years of his life.

Still, that was jealousy, because Sachin was...well, Sachin, and no one could compare and level on par with him. So muck his name, for all we care!

Also, there was the rivalry between the Indian and Pakistani cricket teams of the '90s. They used to hate each other, period! Rivalry was an understatement for what transpired between these two teams; any chance of sledging and slurring each other, they never used to let go. Jealousy, again...politically inspired and motivated!

Instances are many. One could go on and on about such outlandish behaviour. Jealousy inspires frustration which in turn leads to consequences which makes one shudder; does guilt ever feature in such a scenario?

Maybe it does in some corner, but then one does need to have a conscience, and scruples to heed to such "feelings." Given the mind state of such fans, it's like their hearts have been frozen, without any possibility of getting thawed!

Women's Tennis Power Rankings: July 5

Rohini Iyer — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 08:00:22 -0400

The Top 10

1. Dinara Safina; WTA Ranking: 1

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Semifinalist]; Ordina Open [Semifinalist]; Roland Garros [Finalist]; and Madrid [Winner].

The World No. 1, who has come up short of winning her maiden Slam time and again, still holds the Power Rankings' "numero uno" position despite failing short in the semifinals at the just-concluded Wimbledon Championships.

Given her habitual hiccup of choking when it matters most, Safina has still been consistent in her performance, managing to reach the last four stages in all the tournaments she has contested in these past few months.

With the hard-court season just 'round the corner, signalling the start of a few more WTA masters events, Safina's aptitude as the World No. 1 will be gauged and tested even more stringently before she gets ready to redeem her standing at Flushing Meadows.

2. Serena Williams; WTA Ranking: 2

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Winner]; Roland Garros [Quarterfinalist]; Madrid [First Round]; and Marbella [Second Round].

The World No. 2 captured her 11th Slam title at Wimbledon by outclassing the defending champion and her sister Venus.

Serena throughout the season so far has shown a great mettle at the Slams: winning the Australian Open, grabbing her third Wimbledon crown, and reaching the quarterfinals at the city of fashion.

Possessed with such a brilliant record at the Slams this year, Serena will be riding high on confidence as she steps into the waiting hard court events and most importantly as the defending champion aiming to repeat the feat at Flushing Meadows.

3. Victoria Azarenka; WTA Ranking: 8

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Quarterfinalist]; Roland Garros [Quarterfinalist]; Madrid [Third Round]; and Rome [Semifinalist].

The 20-year-old Belarusian has emerged as a strong contender to the top brass, especially when the WTA events are taken into consideration.

Given appropriate time and space, Azarenka possesses the ability to turn herself into a Slam winner; her game is definitely showing that level of promise and potential.

4. Caroline Wozniacki; WTA Ranking: 9

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Fourth Round]; Aegon [Winner]; Roland Garros [Third Round]; and Madrid [Finalist].

The 18-year-old Dane has been the choice of topic for many tennis aficionados—not only because of her cuteness, but also because of the way her game is shaping up.

The youngster is a possible threat to the top contenders, and, being one of the youngest in the fray at the moment, time is on her side to score more points with the fans and critics alike.

5. Svetlana Kuznetsova; WTA Ranking: 5

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Third Round]; Aegon [First Round]; Roland Garros [Winner]; and Madrid [Second Round].

The French Open Champion has failed to find the rhythm that helped her to win her second Slam. Losing against rivals who are ranked far lower than her, Kuznetsova is showing a vulnerability that is very unlike her knowing the full extent of her professional abilities.

6. Agnieska Radwanska; WTA Ranking: 14

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Quarterfinalist]; Aegon [Quarterfinalist]; Roland Garros [Fourth Round]; and Madrid [Second Round].

The Pole has upped the ante of her playing abilities, thereby adding her name to the unofficial "highly anticipated tennis prodigies in the years to come" compilation.

7. Venus Williams; WTA Ranking: 3

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Finalist]; Aegon [Second Round]; Roland Garros [Third Round]; and Madrid [Third Round].

The elder Williams sibling has struggled for most of this season with injuries and a considerable lack of performance, and though she is ranked as the World No. 3 by the WTA, she is yet to give a top-three-like demonstration (except at Wimbledon).

Even at SW19, she was unable to rise up to the occasion in the finals, perishing to her sister in a meek and submissive straight-setter.

Venus has a long way to go in the coming days and months if she wants to continue to remain at the top of the pile amidst the growing competition heightening with every passing event.

8. Elena Dementieva; WTA Ranking: 4

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Semifinalist]; Aegon [Second Round]; Roland Garros [Third Round]; and Madrid [Third Round].

The World No. 4 succumbed to yet another semifinal loss at Wimbledon, bringing her total count to four.

The 2008 Olympic champion, in spite of not having won or reached the finals of any Slam, still remains a resilient force at the top of the women's pile with her otherwise consistent performance.

9. Maria Sharapova; WTA Ranking: 60

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Second Round]; Aegon [Semifinalist]; Roland Garros [Quarterfinalist]; and Warsaw [Quarterfinalist].

The three-time Slam winner has been playing some good tennis considering her yearlong hiatus due to a shoulder injury, and even though she didn't rise to the occasion at Wimbledon, her performance—especially at Roland Garros—was really up to the mark.

10. Dominika Cibulkova; WTA Ranking: 12

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Third Round]; Ordina Open [First Round]; Roland Garros [Semifinalist]; and Stuttgart [Second Round].

The Slovak Republican has given a solid display of tennis, raising expectations across the board that she's another top-10 slot-contender in the making.

Outside Looking In

1. Jelena Jankovic; WTA Ranking: 6

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Third Round]; Aegon [First Round]; Roland Garros [Fourth Round]; and Madrid [Quarterfinalist].

The former World No. 1 has been struggling to maintain a steady level of performance and finds herself being shunted downward. With her performance deteriorating in her favored red court and in the lawns of Aegon and Wimbledon, Janko merits an "outside looking in" placement in this week's rankings.

2. Ana Ivanovic; WTA Ranking: 11

Last Four Tournaments Played: Wimbledon [Fourth Round]; Aegon [First Round]; Roland Garros [Fourth Round]; and Rome [Third Round].

Injury woes coupled with her own inability to deliver have sidelined Ana to a corner.

Having been forced to retire in her fourth-round clash at Wimbledon against Venus Williams with a groin injury, Ivanovic's chances to remain in the top 10 are getting slimmer and slimmer due to the stiff competition she will face from the other fitter contenders, not to mention her slight disability while playing the faster hard-court events.

Andy Roddick and His "Wimbledon Final" Chess Game Strategy

Rohini Iyer — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:20:23 -0400

The 2009 Wimbledon men's singles finals bookmarks yet another episode of the Roger Federer-Andy Roddick rivalry [ignoring the statistics, of course] and, to be really honest, given the way Roddick blitzkrieg-ed past the "other" Andy, doesn't he suddenly look threatening to foil the Swiss's chances despite having a worse head-to-head scenario?

Point-by-point analysing everything from every angle possible, Roddick looks to have mastered all of his deficiencies; of course, this point is sure to make everyone yawn and say "We know all of this; what's new?" Still, the latest-ness of this is not about Andy refurbishing himself but about the approach in which he has done the same.

These past few days, Roddick's game has started resembling a chess board with the coins neatly arrayed across a chiaroscuro of 64 squares, with every next move planned and played after gauging repercussions after repercussions to follow that particular move.

One doesn't need to be a Gary Kasparov or Bobby Fischer in order to understand how the basic-yet-convoluted game works, but when it's taken as a chosen profession and where winning is the only thing that matters, then one has to ascend and think to the level of these stalwarts and perhaps even inching beyond them in the process.

And Roddick has started doing that these days; his previously one-dimensional approach has been cut and shaped accordingly to fit the square-less arena of the tennis field.

He has become a perfect amalgamation of a pawn—ready to strike at the first call; a bishop—ready to move cross ways in order to sustain; a rook—attacking and marching forwards, a knight—valiant enough to try out new approaches, a queen—with an arsenal that is gunning where the others might fail. All this instead of his previous acceptance to the role of the king—helpless and unable to defend with very meagre amount of resistance.

And to test him fully and completely on his newly finished education process will be the newly anointed "GOAT" who is all set to regain his beloved silverware back; he is determined and like a man possessed and has been destroying opponents like a flash of lightning igniting a bare tree.

He is the man of the moment, the firm favourite enmeshed in the heart of every fan...he will be the heartthrob at the Centre Court tomorrow; nothing wrong with that considering all his previous achievements and accolades at this particular place, it's a thought that occurs naturally and without any volition.

And where Federer just can't afford to lose because of his reputation and standard here, Roddick has nothing to lose too albeit for a different reason; before he made his way into the finals, no one gave a second glance to this two time finalist...there was Rafa who was the hot debate and once he withdrew, it was all "Murray Mania" out there: pure and unadulterated Murray Mania! Of course, Federer being there all along...

Roddick should carry this lighthearted feeling over Federer when he steps into the centre court on the second Sunday of Wimbledon 2009; his mind in the right place, he has to think of Federer as the rival on the chess board...like in the days of yore, the kings who used the sport as a gauging medium to try and assimilate the possible methodology of their rivals, Roddick has to gauge every minute nuance about his nemesis tomorrow.

Chess is a mental game: Reactions, intuitions, and judgement form a pivotal part in the player's gaming process than anything else, which ultimately carve out a superior player of the two.

The same can be said for Roddick tomorrow; if he is able to conquer Federer mentally—not just psychologically but also strategically—he will end up shaking not just his Federer-induced cobwebs but, in the process, give a raise-up to his own professional competence as well.

The ball is in your court, Andy!

Dinara Safina: Losing is the Master Key

Rohini Iyer — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 01:07:41 -0400

A qualifier would have played the Wimbledon semifinal with a bit more seriousness than what Safina displayed yesterday and she is supposed to be the reigning World No. 1... any layman would turn his head twice to confirm this piece of news, a grapevine about sighting a UFO will be better digested.

Was she thinking or was she playing like she was playing any ordinary exhibition match, is something Dinara only knows; as the best player atop the ranking charts there was no moment in the match when she proved that fact.

Undoubtedly, the Williamses are better grass court players and clashing against either of the two is a tricky situation indeed, but then when you are the "numero uno" player aspiring and gunning to get your first slam, it's your determination that puts you in the forefront than anything else.

Where was Dinara's determination and perseverance at that time? For the agonising 51 minutes that she spent on the Centre Court, it seemed that those adjectives had gone to take a walk in the park and were snickering somewhere in the background at her helplessness.

And then she started yelling, ranting and muttering...as if that could aid her instead of her tennis playing abilities; and there was her coach [who glared and stared like he could freeze the hell out of Safina]. He himself gets so tensed sometimes, that one of these days in a fit of frustration one can expect him to come down from the coach's stand and start playing as a proxy whatever the repercussions might be later on.

A look at the match statistics will be abject misery for the Russian's fans; 16 unforced errors as opposed to one by her rival and a paltry figure of six winners opposite to 16 of them by the elder Williams. Additionally, Safina's matches which aren't complete without her giving double faults made her offer two of them at the Centre Court thus completing the perfect recipe of Safina's exit from the Championships.

Choking at the last stage of every slam seems to have become Safina's motto; 2008 French Open, 2009 Australian Open, 2009 French Open and now this. It's become more of a habitual ritual than anything else which will continue till the day she masters her own inner demons before she comes out on the playing arena to master her rivals.

This intangible inner turmoiled side of Dinara Safina coupled with the tangible-clumsy, clobbered and hampered movement on the court acts as Safina's downfall time and again.

She isn't by any chance the tallest woman on tour but her movements are worse than the tallest; rigidity and tautness are rife when she plays not to mention a complete lack of variety in her game which debilitates her when she is playing against seasoned rivals and players who outwit her with their unhampered court movements.

Her game is still incomplete and to be brutally honest she has a lot to learn, a long way to trudge if she really wants to hold on to the ichiban position in the women's draw with wins that substantiate the same.

Sadly after her semifinal down-in-the-dumps performance against Venus Williams at Wimbledon, it's doubtful as to whether she has managed to learn anything worthwhile from her previous mistakes or not.

Creature verses Creature: Andy Roddick Tames Hewitt's Hopes

Rohini Iyer — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:16:19 -0400

A first of sorts, this article is a creature vs. creature in the autopsy stage—providing a detailed and structured post match analysis from each player's perspective.

This analytical piece presents the American side of the game while Long's article deals with a succinct summary of the Hewittian side of the net.

In order to simplify things, the article has been bifurcated into four sub-categories each of which will be explained in due course.

Match Summary

The match lived up to the expectations it generated—a tight contest between the two combatants; though it can be said that while Roddick went bouncing from strength to strength throughout the length of the match, Hewitt displayed a tendency to wax and wane intermittently.

While Roddick obviously has strengths that stand-out in his game, it was as much these that helped him stay ahead of his nemesis throughout the match, as his now-vastly-improved all-court skills. The match spoke volumes about the balance Roddick has achieved in his tennis over the past year.

For both the players this match was more about strategy and execution than mental fortitude, which played, but only a secondary role.

In yesterday's match Hewitt was nowhere near the dazzling form he displayed in his matches against Radek Stephanek and Juan Martin Del Potro. It is however only fair to say that two five setter matches on two alternate days was in all probability, debilitating to him given his slow physical recuperation.

And though he dragged Roddick to a deciding set, faced three break points in the eighth game of the decider which, had he converted, would have enabled him to serve for the match; it was clear that he had just bitten more than what he could have chewed putting a stop to his Wimbledon dream in the end.

Why Roddick Won

Roddick displayed an all-round game yesterday; his serves were perfect as always (43 aces to Hewitt's 19), unforced errors were kept to a minimum, and he extracted more leeway into the game by exploiting Hewitt's weak serve which wobbled even more as the match progressed.

The highlight of Roddick's game yesterday, however is that he played tactfully, shrewdly and brilliantly on Hewitt's dominant areas. He forced the Aussie to commit more and more mistakes from that side.

His rallies for example, were long but not long enough to allow Hewitt a foray to win the point; Roddick just knew when and how to approach the net, and how to pass Hewitt, if he himself made an approach to the net.

Roddick's attack and defence was almost flawless and precise to the "T." In fact to be very honest it can be said that this match will be regarded as his best match in the tournament so far.

Where Roddick Lacked

The weakness in his recently upgraded armour were almost next to nothing in this quarterfinal encounter; the only thing that can be said to his disadvantage would be that he wasn't throttling Hewitt enough to win the match in a four-setter, especially when he was leading in the fourth set with a break and game to love.

How to watch out for the other Andy

Even though Roddick played what could be his own version of sublime tennis yesterday, it will still not be enough to deal with the 22-year-old Brit.

Hewitt had a lot of chinks in his rusted armour. Murray on the other hand is playing hard enough to justify the aspiration of his nation, and so far has come through successfully, fighting and fending off each and every rival he has faced.

The pressure will be on Murray, no doubt. But to get the better of him, Roddick has to come roaring out like the one-time Grand Slam champion and a two-time Wimbledon finalist, if he wants to put Murray behind him.

"Gumption" is a word meaning utmost patience and perseverance, and gumption is what Roddick needs to demonstrate if he wants to clear past the "Mandy" hurdle; and while there is no doubt about the fact that he put forth a complete and superior game, Roddick needs to raise the level still, outlast the Scot.

Creature Vs Creature: Will A-Rod Succeed in Holding the American Fort?

Rohini Iyer — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 02:38:18 -0400

Much has been discussed about Andy Roddick in these past few days; everything from his physique to his game makeover has been completely scanned, analysed, and approved by the fan and the critics' fraternity.

And Andy does deserve such laurels; he has always been steady at the Top 10 bracket right from the time when his game was more or less one dimensional until now, when he has widened the scope of his tennis arsenal.

At Wimbledon, Andy has managed to give a "summa cum laude" performance twice, and this year, he will try and reach out to the highest order of merit taking one step at a time; standing in between his way is the former Australian World No. 1 Lleyton Hewitt, who is equally determined to keep his career moving forward.

A Creature vs Creature, this opinionated article deals with the strengths and weaknesses from each player's perspective; this article speaks for Roddick while LJS's piece tackles the nuances of the Aussie's game and his chances.

Will Win If

Andy Roddick can win if he gets his first serve ticking perfectly; even now, though he has improved his all-around game, Roddick still relies heavily on his powerful serve and the fact that most of his opponents fail to read it and fathom it adds to his advantage.

He should try to keep the points short, since Hewitt prefers long and hard rallies from the baseline.

Roddick, on the other hand, does rally, but he is not comfortable when the points get prolonged; it just doesn't suit his game.

To serve and finish the points at the net is more of his style, and considering that Hewitt's athleticism at the baseline is far, far more defined than Roddick's, this facet of his game becomes even more important.

Capitalising on Hewitt's weak first serve, the percentage of which has been down in the 50s throughout the tournament, should be another master key for the American; putting pressure on his Hewitt's first serve and tackling his second serve should enable Roddick to garner a few valuable points in the course of the match.

Will Lose If

Urgency and laziness will be Roddick's pitfall in this game. Though there are several aspects where Roddick has the knife's edge over the Aussie, Hewitt's multi-faceted game will cause Roddick to struggle.

Taking the flipside of several of the above-mentioned positive pointers, his urgency to finish off matters as fast as possible will invariably cause Roddick to commit more and more errors; and when it comes to players like Hewitt, Federer, Murray, Rafa, and Nole once they sense their opponents weakening, they pounce on them like sharks looming not just physically, but also mentally thereafter.

Laziness comes into the picture when Hewitt starts dominating not only from the baseline but also from the net (Hewitt is no stranger to attacking games himself).

If he forces Roddick to remain positioned near the baseline and places his shots near the net, Roddick's retrieval will be next to nil, forcing him to bank excessively on his serve, which, in turn, will start wobbling under pressure.

Intangibles

Their head-to-head statistics won't help in any way; at present, Hewitt leads with a slender 6-5 advantage over Roddick, but figuring out the outcome of the match on the basis of their previous encounters is not advisable.

In fact, given the way these two players have shaped up their professional careers after initial hiccups, this match should be taken as the start of a new head-to-head count if it is so possible.

Prediction

Aggression, passion, and determination with a hunger to succeed is of utmost importance today; both the players have a lot of cobwebs to shake off—mental as well as physical—and the one who does it convincingly and supremely earns the opportunity to face yet another fire.

Like the giant chessboard in The Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone, Hewitt and Roddick are dealing with something that's not just tangible but something that extends to being more than physically present; it's a battle of wits out there, and the one who keeps his wits intact till the end gets to have the last laugh.