Federer on suicide watch?

If Federer doesn’t win this year, then I would put him on immediate suicide watch. To have his biggest threat taken out … it’s just been gift-wrapped!

– Roland Garros radio.

Photos.

Is the previous record too daunting?

I mean two of the greatest players in the history of  the sport have stumbled at it’s altar: Wimbledon and Roland Garros (five and four respectively)

Borg has got to be smiling real hard somewhere.

Is killer instinct of the extreme kind to blame, because they both have ample of the regular variety?

Or is this fumble close to not being able to close the deal like closing out the NBA team in game seven?

Is No. 14 the same kind of obstacle?

To just tie the record is one thing but to set a new one at that peak is altogether another.

Both Sampras and Laver deserves tons of credit for setting that bar (No. 14 and calendar Slams). These recent events prove how immensely difficult it must have been mentally, forget about everything else that goes into it.

Did Rafa win another round against Federer with this loss?

I mean this loss is clearly equivalent to Federer’s loss at Wimbledon. Even though it’s not against his arch rival, it’s still got to be excruciating even if the Soderling factor is eliminated.

There was so much he could have gotten accomplished in his claim to be a GOAT, may be more than Federer could at Wimbledon last year.

But he took the hit like a man in stark contrast to Federer’s meltdown, moving him a notch higher in another facet of the game.

I hope Federer at least makes a call to Nadal consoling him for this. It WILL mean a lot to Nadal at this low point in his life / career. Nadal will never forget it just like Blake never will that card.

I have a strong feeling Federer will if he has not already.

The ONE key to Federer winning Roland Garros now.

Take one match at a time, if not one point at a time. Duh!!! Why?

Because he has at least three ‘trap’ matches before he lifts that metal.

There’s no question Federer has already transported himself into the finals if not the winner’s circle. And if there’s any play left there, the media will finish the job for him before he goes on the court that Sunday.

Murray being alive for that Sunday will add another dimension to it for obvious reasons.

Although Nadal-Federer finals have drawn the highest ratings in the past, this final with Federer may surpass all that, irrespective of who shows up on the other side.

Given Federer’s mental frailty in the past, this is no easy task for Federer: to overcome the temptation to mentally visualise himself in the finals or lifting that trophy.

But given that all other BS remains constant, the title may hinge on this intangible.

Who will be in the finals now?

Here’s ONE huge lesson from Nadal’s loss – for future hall of famers.

Overly stressing about how you look on the court is the official start of your decline.

Federer’s coat and cardigan at Wimbledon.

Sharapova’s designer dresses.

Nadal’s pink BS.

Djokovic’s blue shoes?

Murray’s – oh never mind.

Nadal gets exactly what he was asking for / deserved: Loss at Roland Garros – by Soderling. Geeeeeezzzzz!!!!

Ever since the clay season started and Nadal’s schedule was made public, words Barcelona and Madrid stood out conspicuously as testament to the stupidity and foolishness of Nadal and his camp. 

How freaking moronic do you have to be to stay the course that has produced the wrong result – freaking twice: Loss to Federer and Ferrero. Both losses screamed for adjustment and modification BEFORE the big cart would get upset.

Sure, now that’s happened, you will make the adjustments. But given the lack of brain cells demonstrated by the track record, it would be a shock if there are some changes made next year.

Given how much was at stake this time at Roland Garros – from record fifth straight title to calendar Slam – you had to be a complete nut job to not be willing to sacrifice the small fish for the bigger picture.

Nadal and the camp fully deserved this loss. It has to be the MOST embarrassing moment for uncle Tony. It’s the height of stupidity. Go and gloss over those Barcelona and Madrid numbers instead.

The Madrid venue, with it’s altitude, the ball bounce, new setting etc. may have just escalated the inevitable from the finals to the fourth round, that’s it.

This was quite similar to the Del Potro match when Nadal was rendered helpless in the wake of physical and mental exhaustion. Hope someone with a brain in the camp takes note of this and MAKES the required changes or else this journey may come to an abrupt end sooner than even I expect.

If all this was not enough, the cherry on the cake was to lose to the tormentor, Soderling, of all the freaking people. Soderling gives a rat’s ass about moving to the next round or the monetary windfall it entails.

All he is delirious over is the revenge he exacted for whatever has happened between them over the years. It’s like Roddick stopping Federer here. Is that the second part of this act yet to come? 

So the similarities nonsense between Wimbledon and Roland Garros I spewed out earlier continues. Will Federer complete the cycle by winning it now?

If the Wimbledon loss is what Federer has so far considered the worst loss of his career, he may be able to surpass that big time by not winning this thing now.

Talk about handing it on a freaking platter. Nadal is out, Djokovic is out. What else do you freaking want now? Roddick too? Give me a freaking break.

All 13 Slams should be taken away from Federer if he fails here with this scenario. Or is Murray going to don the armor Nadal just got stripped off.

I mean the mental sway Nadal had over Federer for years. Murray may not be exactly there, but having defeated Federer what six straight times now, he may not too far either.

Add the tremendous pressure Federer must be suddenly feeling and the vulnerability may get blown out of proportion to freeze Federer mentally to let this golden opportunity pass.

Even though winning Roland Garros without defeating Nadal may still take some sting out of the career slam stat, at this point, Federer is more than happy to grab anything he can.

Obviously, Federer is not the only one feeling confident about winning the whole enchilada now with Nadal’s exit. He may be No. 1 in that respect, but Murray and Del Potro are not too far behind with Verdasco already out.

Both of them now have a very realistic shot at the big prize. Unless Gonzalez is able to summon his superior skills to eliminate Murray, Federer is likely to face both of them back to back to win.

On another note, maybe this is what Nadal needed to make a serious run at Wimbledon again. There was little doubt from Nadal’s clay schedule that the axe was going to fall sooner or later.

Queens and Wimbledon appeared more of a victim given Nadal’s expertise on Roland Garros clay. But if this loss has not given Nadal a rude awakening of his mortality – something that doesn’t come too easy when you are just 23 – he better pack up now.

After Wimbledon, Nadal needs to make some drastic changes to his hard court schedule based on his experience here and the track record of folding up in October and beyond to have any shot at winning the US Open to complete the career Slam to compensate for this painful loss.

The ripple affect of the biggest upset in tennis history may hit Federer at the very next match. Watch for any major fluctuation in his average numbers and stats as indication of how much this is already affecting him from aces to unforced errors to first serve percentage.

Given that Federer is expected to win with a lopsided scoreline against a 31-year old Haas will only tighten up that game.

This is still another opportunity for Federer to validate his claim of being mentally strong. If he fails, that knock on him will only get louder and stronger.

Even then as usual Federer is again caught up in that thankless net where a win will not give him his due credit while a loss will tear through what’s already teetering at the brink.

Nadal interview after loss to Soderling. From Dalia. Thanks.

DALIA

This is by far the saddest lost i’ve ever encountered in my tennis history as a Rafa fan…

R. SODERLING/R. Nadal

6‑2, 6‑7, 6‑4, 7‑6

An interview with:

RAFAELNADAL

THE MODERATOR: Questions in English, please.

Q. It was a great four‑year winning period. All things had to end, and it happened today, your series of wins. Did you expect such power tennis fromSoderling before the game? Were yousurprised during the match of the way he hit his ball consistently so hard,especially on the forehand, but also in general?

RAFAEL NADAL: No. No, no. He didn’t surprise me,because I know how he play, how dangerous he can be. Yesterday I didn’t play my best tennis. No, I didn’t attack in no one moment. I play very short, and I make him very easyto play at this level.

So when one player bad,must lose. That’s what happenedtoday. I have to accept with the samecalm when I win than when I lose. Afterfour years I lose here, and the season continue.

Q. Were you surprised that he was able to sustain the level of play that hedid throughout the match? Did you expecthim, at some stage, to perhaps have a little dip, which he never really did?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, you know, when, for ‑‑ I playedvery short, you know. I play veryshort. I didn’t play great. I didn’t play with calm at no one time duringall the match.

That makes him easy toplay at this level during all the match, no? So was my fault, and more than ‑‑ well, sure, he did well. He did very well, but I didn’t ‑‑ yeah,I think I didn’t play my best tennis. And I didn’t play not my best tennis, no? I didn’t play my tennis, and for that reasonI lose. That’s it.

I congratulate him and keep working hard forthe next tournament.

Q. AndyMurray said to us earlier that the wind was a lot trickier. The wind was a lot more difficult thanperhaps it seemed. Is that the reasonperhaps that you were playing a little too short today in the conditions?

RAFAEL NADAL: No, no, no, no. The wind is there for both players, so no,no? I not going to put any excuse rightnow. I think I played short because Iplayed short. I didn’t have my day.

Q. Do you think you maybe played too many tournaments lately? How are you going to prepare for Wimbledon?

RAFAEL NADAL: Yeah, when you lose, always everybody startsto analyze if I play too much. If I’mtired. The true, I won four years in arow playing the same. That’s the true. This year I play the same and I lost. What happen? I lost. That’s it.

That whathappened. I lost another opportunity towin a big tournament here. Always is abig loss for me. But in the end is onemore match, yeah.

Q. What about the preparation for Wimbledon? Are you going to play Queen’s?

RAFAEL NADAL: Right now, my preparation is for the swimmingpool of my house. (laughter.) Yeah, give me three more days to think aboutpreparation for Wimbledon.

Q. You looked tired. Do you feelexhausted? Do you feel tired physicallyand mentally?

RAFAEL NADAL: No.

Q. You look a bit tired.

RAFAEL NADAL: No, no, I feel okay.

Q. You’re handling this with humor, but how much really did this hurt, yourfirst loss at Roland Garros, honestly?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, is not my best day today, no? I am not very happy. That’s true, no? You know, is tough always losing in a GrandSlam, especially in one Grand Slam where you have the better chance to win thanthe rest than the others.

But I did. I did very well on Wimbledon and in Australia,and semifinals last year in US Open. Ihave to be confident on myself to keepgoing, keep working.

If I lost today, it ‑‑ well, the preparationmentally, I don’t know, it wasn’t perfect, no?

So I have to work harder to be readyfor the next big events.

Q. Youhad to know this day would come. Are yousurprised it came so quickly?

RAFAEL NADAL: What? (Through translation.)

I don’t know. If you think it’s soon after four years? (laughter.) Why do you think, no? A lot of playerswon four years here in a row? Is onlyanother one, no?

Q. Youwere so enormously strong last year in Paris. If you compare yourself, your level today andthe last years, are you mentally not that strong as in the last years, orphysically? What’s the difference?

RAFAEL NADAL: You know, guys, I lost. That’s what I can say. I lost. I didn’t play my best tennis today. I have to analyze why I lost today, but I think that the things are moresimple than if I am less strong than before, if I am less prepared mentallythan before.

I think today I didn’tplay my tennis, and I wasn’t ready to come back over a good player likeSoderling. We have to analyze that andbe ready for the next confrontations in big, important tournaments, no?

No, I think I was ready for everything. If I wasn’t ready here, I don’t know when Igonna be ready after winning a lot of tournaments and being my best at start ofthe season, no?

Q. Nowthat you’ve been knocked out, would you say Andy Murray or Roger Federer is thefavorite to win the title?

RAFAEL NADAL: We will see. I don’t know. Davydenko orVerdasco is there. Del Potro I think isthere. We will see. Federer is the favorite, in my opinion.

Q. What is it like playing against Soderling, and do you think he willreach top 10 in the future?

RAFAEL NADAL: How old are him?

Q. 24?

RAFAEL NADAL: Yeah, he can do it. Why not?

THE MODERATOR: Spanish questions, please.

Q. Asfrom the second set, some of us thought that you would be able to win thematch. What made you lose your calm?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, I never was calm; that’s thetruth. Instead of losing my calm, thematch started off very badly for me. Imean, the second set, I should have won it 6‑4. Then there was wind, and that wasn’t good.

Then not being calmenough to face the important points, so I had to fight. But sometimes it’s not enough fighting. You have to play a good level of tennis.

And sometimes people think I win because I’mphysically fit, but, no. When I win,it’s because I play well, and that wasn’t the case today. I must say that at key moments I couldn’ttake the opportunity because I was losing my calm, and I didn’t play well.

Q. Youalready answered this question in English, but can you do that in Spanish? Now that Djokovic is out and now that you’reout, who would be your favorite for the final?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, all those in quarterfinal have anopportunity, but Federer is my favorite.

Q. This defeat makes your victories even greater?

RAFAEL NADAL: No. No, defeats never make you grow, but you also realize how difficult whatI achieved up until today was, and this is something you need sometimes. You need a defeat to give value to yourvictories.

I’m 22. Well, 23 in a couple of days. But unfortunately, it’s the first time I’mnot going to celebrate my birthday in Roland Garros. I hope I’ll be able to celebrate more hereand be back next year and try and win.

Q. Two questions: Apparently younever felt comfortable during that match. How did you accept to walk in this room immediately after the match?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, you don’t think about this, youknow. I’m not saying this because ofyour question, but with ‑‑ I’ve stopped playing in altitude two weeks ago,so this is what ‑‑ I need to face the fact I didn’t play well thisweek. When I practiced this morning Ifelt good, no? I felt very good, but itwasn’t the case during the match.

Well, that’s the end ofthe road, and I have to accept it. Ihave to accept my defeat as I accepted my victories: with calm. So I have to stay calm and stay cool‑headed to try and analyze what Idid wrong.

I need to learn, and you learn more when youlose than when you win. I need to workon those points on which I wasn’t good, and from there try and do better for mynext tournament.

So as I said, this is not a tragedy,losing here in Paris. It had to happen one day, and this is anexcellent season for me.

Of course it’s a bit sad, but I haveto overcome this as quickly as possible.

Q. Wasit the wonderful game level of Soderling on this surface, or because you wereon a bad day or any other phenomenon, like you played in Barcelonathen in Madrid? Maybe you played too many tournaments.

RAFAEL NADAL: Stop it. Stop it. Had I played my bestlevel against Soderling, maybe the results would have been different. But he played a very good level of tennis andI didn’t play well, so the results are what they are.

I didn’t play at mybest level. I have days like this, andthis was one of those days. I hadsomeone playing very well in front of me.

I’m not going to modify the way I prepare,because I’ve always prepared in the same way for the last four years. So that wouldn’t make sense.

Q. 6‑0,6‑1 when you played Soderling in Rome. That was the last result. So is it because he was very aggressivetoday? Was it having an influence?

RAFAEL NADAL: No, not at all.

Q. Were you surprised by the level of his game?

RAFAEL NADAL: No, not at all. I’ve seen him playing quite a few times, andthat was not a surprise. It was my gamelevel that was a surprise to me today.

Q. A minute ago you were saying that, well, this day had to happen oneday. So were you prepared, or are yousurprised by this defeat?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, all of us athletes, we know that whenwe walk on the court we can either win or lose. I know it for a fact anything can happen, and I have to accept them bothin the same way.

You cannot collapseeither because you’ve won a match or because you’ve lost it. This is sport, and you can have victories ordefeats. No one remembers defeats on thelong run. People remember victories.

So I have to move forward. Well, I have little time left to prepare for Wimbledon, but I have to move forward and try and preparethe best I can.

Q. Whenthe crowd on the central court was supporting you in such a wonderful way, whatdid you feel?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, I didn’t feel anything, because I’mused to hearing the names of players being shouted, whether the crowd supportsme or supports my opponent.

But it’s a shame. I mean, this tournament is so important, sucha beautiful tournament for me. Well,that’s the way it is. Maybe at one stagethey supported Soderling more than me, and that was a bit sad.

But I wish when I’m back they can support mea bit more in key moments.

Q. Isthis the worst defeat in your career?

RAFAEL NADAL: Oh, please. I never lost a final. I neverlost here so far. It’s my first ‑‑it’s the first match I lose. It’s theround of 16. So once again, peopleremember about victories and not defeats. So it’s not the worst in my career. Not even close to that.

Q. You said that now that you’re out, your favorite player is Federer. Now, tell us, who would you like to seewinning the tournament, if you could pick one?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, no. Always one of my compatriots, a Spanish guy.

Q. If there were no one from Spain, would you like Federer towin?

RAFAEL NADAL: Yeah, that would be great. He’s tried to win it for many years, and hewas very unfortunate losing three finals and one semifinal. If one guy deserves it, that’s him.

Q. Rafa, could you please describe the moment when you met at the changingroom and what you said?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, what we say in the locker room staysthere, and we said nothing. I mean, youwalk in there, you sit on your bench, and you’ve lost and that’s it.

http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/news/interviews/2009-05-31/200905311243796048503.html?promo=personalization

Nadal vs Solderling highlight. From arbit. Thanks.

ARBIT

Is Federer asking for it now?

With two sets dropped in three matches, it may seem the other side of the spectrum given Djokovic’s straight sets loss after straight set wins.

So is this the slow torture Federer is on to now before a bagel and bread stick laden straight set loss surfaces?

If that’s what’s about to happen, it better happen against Nadal or at least Monfils. Haas or Roddick would be too brutal.

Roddick has got be drooling with the prospect of posting his biggest win on clay. That would be the perfect exclamation mark for his amazing run so far.

Or will it be just like old times with Federer suddenly finding his true form against Roddick and then bulldozing on.

Luckily for Federer the line up he faces from now on is not too drastically different from what he has already faced. But all that can be looked as an advantage only if just reaching the finals is considered a big deal.

Maybe it is, given how this season has gone for Federer and the beating he took from Nadal at last year’s final with a bagel.

The weak draw is not helping matters by forcing him to play down to the competition with a final almost guaranteed. It’s taking him a set loss and couple of tie-breaks to wake up mid way through his sleep walking to pull out a win.

Although an early loss here would not be as surprising as it would have been in year’s past, it will still take it’s toll mentally since Federer has reached a semifinal or a final at what ALL of his events this year.

Of course, a Hewitt-like sc0rline Nadal produced wouldn’t hurt. Haas should be a perfect candidate for it, don’t you think? The guy is 31 freaking years old, for crying out loud.

Djokovic crashes in straights to rob us of a juicy semifinal.

Will Verdasco compensate for it? Or will it be Murray?

This a typical non-veteran error from Djokovic reflecting the dire need to have a professional coach in his corner. Djokovic appears to get his head bloated after a few impressive wins so much so that he considers a semifinal or a final berth a certainty.

While in that delusional state, he further mistakenly assumes the non-top four will just roll over purely based on his recent results. That complacency and unwillingness to put in the work every time you hit the court emanates from improper instructions from the clown he currently trusts.

While his coach may be doing the best he can, it’s just not enough to drive that Bentley any further – consistently enough to carve out a career for the record books.

But this is another gift for Federer. It couldn’t have come at a better time having just dropped the second set of the tournament to Mathieu. The revised line up for Federer now looks like this:

Haas.

Monfils.

Del Potro.

Nadal.

With Monfils not 100 percent, Roddick may have just enough in him to take one more cat out of his bag. And if he does and faces Federer AND beats him, how freaking crazy would that be?

Will that be enough to soothen the beating he has taken all these years? After all he will be able to deny Federer the biggest prize of his career. Will that be called ‘having the last laugh’ then?

Nevertheless, with Djokovic gone, we have to now look at a Nadal-Murray and Nadal-Federer set up to step in to provide the drama Djokovic match was almost guaranteed to evoke.

Whatever Djokovic gained throughout this clay season may have all washed away with just one stroke here. Additionally he needed the momentum to carry over his clay exploits on to grass and hard courts to retrieve lost ground against Murray if not Federer.

Next ‘must’ matches to watch.

Nadal vs Soderling. Duh!!!

Murray vs Cilic.

Del Potro vs Tsonga.

Monfils vs Roddick?

Photos.

Djokovic interview after losing to Kohl. From Dalia. Thanks.

DALIA

P. KOHLSCHREIBER/N. Djokovic

6‑4, 6‑4, 6‑4

An interview with:

NOVAKDJOKOVIC

THE MODERATOR: Questions, please.

Q. Obviously it’s an awful disappointment for you. What happened? What are your thoughts now?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, look, I’m obviously disappointed a lotwith the way I was performing today. More or less that I, you know, lost the match. What is disappointing was that I couldn’tfind the rhythm throughout the whole match.

This is what I wasalways managing to do. You know, that’s why I’m in the top of the men’s gamefor a while now. But, you know, I wastrying not to be frustrated with a lot of unforced errors. Tried to be positive and just wait for thechances.

He didn’t give me a lot of chances. But yet again, I didn’t work for thosechances. This is the problem. I played too passive, and he played reallysolid from all the strokes. Socongratulations to him, of course.

He’s been ‑‑ he was playing a goodmatch. But again, next year.

Q. Ithink you played him once before at Indian Wells, and you defeated him. Was that the same player you were playingtoday? I mean, he was mixing well hisshots, and he had the upper hand in the rallies. Do you think he played the match of his life?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, that’s a question for him. He’s going to answer if he played the matchof his life. Certainly, he played reallywell. You have to give him credit forplaying tactically really smart and really good. Unfortunately, I had no solutions.

Q. Is your sense of frustration perhaps compounded by the fact that you hadsuch a good clay court season? You’veplayed some superb matches in Europe. Does that kind of mount the frustrationyou’re feeling at the moment? Coming inhere you were thinking you had the best chance of winning it.

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Yeah, but again, the good clay court season,very successful clay court season this year, only can give me a lot ofconfidence to try to continue the same run. That’s what I felt. First twomatches were going quite well, and then I felt good before this match. Suddenly on the court it was a differentstory.

I can’t really explainwhy. Physically I felt good, but it’sjust ‑‑ it’s just a bad day at the office, how they say it.

What can you do? This is sport.

Q. Perhapstoo much pressure, that can explain?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, look, I mean, pressure is there. The pressure is always there. If you’re, you know, for a while, third orfourth player in the world, top of the men’s tennis for a couple of years, ofcourse you always have expectation and pressure. This is a part of your life.

But I was alwaysdealing with the pressure in some way, quite, you know, quite good, and, youknow, quite consistent and having really good results in all the Grand SlamsI’ve played, except Wimbledon last year.

You know, as I was saying before the eventstarted, the opening rounds are very dangerous because the players are a bitlower ranked and they have nothing to lose. Philipp is a clay court specialist, and he went out in a five‑set matchand played incredibly well today.

Q. Youhad a good play three days in a row. Doyou think it affected your play today?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: No, no.

Q. Was his serve extremely difficult to control?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, it was my movement on the return thatwas difficult to control, to be honest. I wasn’t moving toward and just trying, move left, right, back, forth,you know, trying to find the comfort zone. Didn’t really work out. My legswere really stuck.

So if you have noexplosivity [sic] and your legs are not dynamic enough on this surface, youhave not a lot of chances if the guy plays such a high level as he playedtoday.

Q. You talked about Wimbledon lastyear. You were in the final in Queen’s,and then you lost second round, I guess. This year here you’re maybe one of the two top favorites, and then againit’s a bad day. How can you compare bothdisappointments and matches?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: It’s a different surface, you know. Different Grand Slams. But suddenly I haven’t played in the lastthree Grand Slams the way I wanted, and I don’t know…

I will try to changesome things for Wimbledon this year. Last year was really the worst match I’veplayed on that surface. I mean, I lostto Marat who later reached semifinals. Of course, he was playing really well in Wimbledonlast year.

I think I have a quite good game, but,again, I cannot allow myself to have such a bad performance as I hadtoday. I cannot allow myself to be thatdefensive. This is not me. This is not my game.

Q. Inthe third set, you were leading 3‑2. Youseemed to come back. At the end of thefifth game you were looking at the sky with your arms wide open. Were you kind of praying for a miracle foryour shots and game to come back?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: I couldn’t believe I made a forehand winnerafter three sets. (laughter.) That’swhy.

Q. You said you had difficulty moving well. Your feet were stuck. Do you havean explanation for that? Is it more aphysical reason for that, or is it more like you were tight or…

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Yeah, I didn’t find the rhythm. That’s all. It was not physically anything. Ithink it was more mentally just to find that zone, but I couldn’t.

Q. Nothing that was hurting?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: No.

Q. Today on the court you looked not to have the energy to fight on everypoint. Are you mentally exhausted afterthe season, middle of the season?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, look, I’ve played a lot, so mentallyI’m a little bit exhausted, yes. Butstill, that’s not an explanation for my loss today. That’s not excuse, for sure.

I mean, it’s a GrandSlam. Look, you know, I’m one of thefavorites to get far in the tournament. This cannot happen. Of course,it’s all my fault, and I accept the responsibility.

Q. Is there any chance at all that having a new fitness trainer and doingsome new things off the court, are you overtrained? Is there any possibility that just that changehas made a difference?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: I don’t think so. I really don’t think so. I’m going to analyze all the things I’vedone, but I don’t know.

I mean, to be honest, Ithink it was just me and my head today. I don’t want to blame anybody else.

Q. The strength and depth of the men’s game now is probably as good as it’sbeen ever. How hard is it to sustainyour level all the time against the quality of players that you’re facing weekin and week out?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, it is, you know. And it’s really hard as well to keep up withthe guys, top five guys who are reaching at least quarters or semis of eachevent they play.

It’s a really strongcompetition, but that’s the way it is. It’s a big challenge for all of us, obviously. I’ve been playing for three, four years onthis level.

I mean, okay, I took this loss quite badlyand I’m disappointed. But, again, I haveto try to focus for continuation of the season, and I hope for some goodresults on the grass courts.

Oooh – A Grudge Match! From imaginaryband. Thanks.

IMAGINARYBAND

Oooh – A Grudge Match!

Forget Federer/Djokovic – how about Nadal/Soderling! Can’t wait to hear about the fireworks in that one.
If there’s one guy who appears able to get under Nadal’s skin, it has to be this guy.

Things to watch for:
-Nadal taking extra long preparing for each point
-Soderling doing the same, only because Nadal’s doing it first
-Nadal grunting louder than usual and fist-pumping a lot more
-Soderling imitating Nadal
-No apologies for net cords from Soderling
-Nadal trying to rise above it all
-Soderling riffing on other ideas to get under Nadal’s skin e.g. “accidentally” messing up Nadal’s bottles at the change of ends
-Nadal spending inordinate amounts of time ordering his bottles and contents of shorts
-Timely injury timeouts
-Timely bathroom breaks
-Facial expressions and stare-downs
-Will there be a handshake?
-Nadal focussed (harder than usual) on beating the living daylights out of this fellow he really really doesn’t like.
-Soderling meltdown? and finally…
-Nadal losing it for the first time ever in Roland Garros… no – not the match – his temper?

Nadal hammers Hewitt so hard that both Ferrer and Roche soil their pants instantly.

There goes all your strategies and plans Roche and Hewitt must have worked so hard while not playing bingo at the assisted living center.

The onslaught is on. Ferrer, sensing what’s coming, wisely moved out of the way after clearing his pants. Roche may get cleared too – from his coaching gig.

While this was no Verdasco, it was more about the scoreline than the opponent at this time for Nadal. He needed to prove to himself and the world that the Madrid chapter is behind him.

With Federer dropping a set / two tie-breaks yesterday this should feel doubly good.

Soderling and Ferrer must be competing each other to lose. With the history Nadal has with Soderling, this may turn out to be one for the ‘humiliating’ rack.

Like that Ali fight against what was that guys name – Peterson? The fight where Ali won’t knock the guy out so he can dish out more punsihment with that constant ‘What’s my name’ tune.

Photos.

Whose body is most ripped?

Who is most likely to dance on that Sunday?

New shrieking queen? From overcaffeinated. Thanks.

OVERCAFFEINATED

And here is a sample of the shrieking of MLDB – first time I have seen her play and fudge me, it is a shocker. Not as loud as Maria’s, but verrrrrrrrrry long. Check out point #2 for a great sample

Well, well, well…the women’s draw is providing some interest this year – at least for this humble viewer – and it is not about the results. Day one was that fudge boring, underwhelming match between Diatchenko and Johansson, their weird-arsed powder puff serves, the pig squeals, the tears and the overall Diva attitude.

Today was a belter that was shown as a “highlight” during a change over in the Verdasco/Almagro match. Scenario: match point in the Michelle Larcher de Brito vs Aravane Rezai match. After losing, Michelle almost didn’t shake hands with Aravane and ended up giving her a sissy, “don’t touch me you germ infected creature” type handshake. WHY? A shriek / grunting complaint made by Aravane to the tournament referee! Michelle booed from the court. The only transcript I can find is from the FO site (As It Happens) and have filtered it below from http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/news/articles/2009-05-29/200905291243585915015.html:

11.43 am: Aravane Rezai has got the ref out, complaining that Michelle is grunting and screaming and grunting when she (Aravane) hits the ball! I’ve never heard that before! She does indeed have a long moan – ahh when she hits it, then ohhh when the ball lands. Amazing.

11.54 am: ML de B saves a break point, Aravane pings her racquet and the Portuguese prodigy holds. These two won’t send each other any Christmas cards, or “go on holiday together”, as the French say, i.e. there’s no love lost.

11.56 am: Aravane’s having another word about the noises that Larcher de Brit is emitting. The grunt-age seems to be less long now, but it’s no less remarkable. Nothing between the two players otherwise – 5-5, 30-30 on the Portu-geezer’s serve.

12.10 pm: Great tennis on Chatrier, despite all the noise pollution. Michelle dominates Aravane’s serve from the deuce (right) court, Aravane fights back form the Ad court. This works for a while but Michelle finally breaks back, at the fifth time of asking. Tie-break.

12.17 pm: Aravane pushes, Michelle nets and it’s 7-3. Iranian Mansour Bahrami (Aravane’s of Iranian origin) applauds in the crowd and gives it a big thumbs up. Larcher de B was making less noise towards the end – it’s all a question of habit. I love the way she plays but we don’t want to hear grunting like that. I’m not overly keen on Victoria Azarenka’s noise levels, much as I like her play.

12.25 pm: Rezai breaks to 15. All eyes on the umpire and the officials, but no intervention necessary.

12.39 pm: ML de B double-faults on game point and bashes her racquet into the hallowed clay, provoking whistles and catcalls from the crowd.

12.43 pm: Aravane holds, to the delight of the understandably partisan crowd, and leads 4-1. Verdasco leads 4-2 at the mini-change-over, mini-breaks again and now has two serves to take the set. Ooh, Michelle complains to the umpire that she’s not breaking any rules…

** MY PERSONAL FAVOURITE UPDATE**
12.49 pm: 5-1, Aravane to serve for the match. I’m asked whether we can make this page auto-refreshable: not unless I come round to all of your houses/offices and press F5 on your computers.

12.54 pm: After a deuced-up battle, ML de B breaks back with a great inside-out cross-court forehand. She rocks back, cocks her knee up, pumps her fist and belts out “Come on!” As well she might.

12.58 pm: Aravane breaks and wins! And the moment we’ve all been waiting for – the hand-shake. And… minimal contact! No eye contact, fingertips brush! ML de B gives the ump. similar treatment then applauds the crowd (ironically?) who whistle her as she leaves Hnmm…

Ahhh, the ignorance of youth. I still don’t get the grunting / shrieking though. It has just gotten worse since the days of my beloved Monica Seles – oh how I miss her.

Now an interesting comment by my favourite (cough cough) local wind-bag..err..commentator, Fiery Fred Stolle (father of former pro Sandon Stolle). He was commentating with Mark Woodforde for the Australian coverage and was talking about MLDBs shrieks and how MLDB made a comment during her match to the umpire about how Maria Sharapova shrieks far louder and gets away with it.

Fred pipes up with this doozy: MLDB cannot compare herself to Maria as Maria has won Wimbledon.

At this point I was thinking WTF!! Maria shrieked like a tortured pig on her entire way to the Wimbledon final that year.

Mark Woodforde then asked (in befuddlement) the question I asked: So it is ok for Maria to shriek because she has won Wimbledon? Fred: No, not at all.

Like I wrote on day one – Fred should give it up on the commentary. He no longer has anything relevant to say and hasn’t for a long, long time. Every tie break the “dumb arsed” viewers are reminded that it’s the first to seven with a margin of two points. Every time a final set rocks up, viewers reminded twice in the same sentence that there are no tiebreaks and it goes all the way to advantage of a two game margin. Reminds all viewers that the contenders in the championship match are not playing for the prize money, rather the glory of the trophy. Well fu*king duh – unless the player is a hack on that “one amazing, set you up $$-wise for the rest of your playing days tournament” (Verkerk, Rios, Cash, Stich, Johansson, Roddick, Norman, Baghdatis, Gaudio etc.); the increasing natter during points; the dire need to hear his own voice.

Now just hope there will be a bit of spice on the men’s side. Intensity of the Rafa / Hewitt match tonight should be interesting; however am hanging for the expected Roger/Joker SF matchup. This is about as catty as the men’s tour gets.

My final thought – and I can’t believe I am writing this: I want to see more of the women’s matches…and not for the rallies.

Dish network and the FO for US. From Murph. Thanks. I think Mike mentioned that too.

MURPH

To any of you (probably only Americans) whose TV provider is DISH Network, like I have, a non-tennis friend of mine 250 miles away on the west coast of California told me about 5 channels that are televising (free and live) the French Open of five courts starting with Phillip Chartier. Amazingly it’s commercial free with none of the soft spoken commentators American. Federer’s match today against Acasuso ended with a one-on-one French interview in a private room. The 5 channels are:

550, 551, 552, 553, 554

Even the redressing of the court between sets is shown. Hope many of you have this uninterrupted good fortune.

Hewitt the human sacrifice? From imaginaryband. Thanks.

IMANGINARYBAND

Is a human sacrifice about to be delivered to Nadal?

Good on him for his positive mental attitude and for being a fighter, but I fear Hewitt is about to become a human sacrifice on the alter of Nadal’s RG ambitions.

If I’m getting this sneaking suspicion, I can only imagine the destruction that Nadal is envisioning – there will be blood! Today is the key moment for Nadal to deliver some serious goods and make a point. Facing a “worthy” opponent (although, on clay this really is dubious – Hewitt lost badly last time), for Nadal this is probably the equivalent to Federer facing Safin on grass. A noteworthy former world number one, a solid performer on paper, but other than that… I just think Nadal will outgun Hewitt in almost every department. And he should – he has greater power, depth and consistency of his shots (especially under pressure), and also better movement on clay.

Unless that updated hip of Hewitt’s has bionic implants, at two sets down against Nadal he cannot fight back and surely he either fades out, or retires due to injury. He has no weapons that Nadal doesn’t also have- with added sauce. Sole exception possibly being his serve. But – like folks are saying – today we’re likely to see the extent of Nadal’s injury/tiredness if it is genuinely there, because Hewitt’s game makes his opponents work hard. And if Hewitt wins the first set it means he’s either playing the tennis of his life, or Nadal’s tired, and in the second case I actually like Hewitt’s chances.

Nadal’s ground strokes. From Peter D. Thanks.

PETER D

NYTimes has this feature on Nadal’s ground strokes.

Nadal: Drug testers ‘harass’ players. From Sarah. Thanks.

SARAH

Updated: May 29, 2009, 2:26 PM ET
Nadal: Drug testers ‘harass’ players

Click here.

“Noisy” Michelle. From Joao. Thanks.

JOAO

“Noisy” Michelle

She shrieks.

She screams.

She howls like dogs in the mist of “bad things” happening to them.

But, my friends, she can play.

Lost amid all the comotion, in the late morning hours of the sixth day of the parisian Grand Slam tournament, Michelle Larcher de Brito showed she can play.

She lost. I guess it had to happen. It was, after all, only her third game in a Grand Slam event. She was up against a player that was in the midst of a 16-2 run. A player that had just won her first ever WTA tournament. A french player, playing in Paris. A player that did what she felt needed to be done. Complained to the referee. The crowd got into it. It became a distraction in the game. It became the talk after the game.

Michelle lost because she made way to many unforced errors (11 more than her opponent). She lost because she gave 3 games (12 points) just on double faults. She lost because the other girl was better.

But, my friends, she can play.

And if you read the news tonight, people will talk about all the “sonic booms”, “the sonic barrage”, “the constant grunting”. It’s a fair point. The girl is noisy. The girl shrieks way to much. I don’t like it. I wish she didn’t do it. And she will suffer for it. Like Seles suffered. Like Sharapova suffered.

But, just like Seles, Cjisters or Venus Williams, she is one of only a few that has reached the top 100 at that early age. She might still learn how to play without the grunts. However she will problably work on her serve first. She needs it more than to learn how to play quietly, because no one will ever give her praise for shutting down if she doesn’t go on to fulfill all of her potential. As she said, her noise was not a problem in beating the number 15 in the world. It was not a problem in qualifying. It will became a problem in a Grand Slam event late stages, because people will be paying atention and will be judging. As they are judging her today. Both on her noise levels and on her tennis talent.

So, today, she lost. She lost deservedly against a better player. Let’s just hope that, when the red clay of Paris settles down, it will not be the last time we ear from her.

“Trim the bush to make the tree look taller!” From Mike. Thanks.

MIKE

Gillette’s new ad campaign: “Trim the bush to make the tree look taller!”

Any thoughts Mirka?? … lol.

The ONE stat that can take Roland Garros title away from Nadal this year.

It’s the unforced error number, duh!!!

And for Federer to win it, his number has to be inversely proportionate to Nadal’s.

Unforced error stat has been the loudest indicator of Nadal’s poor form at practically all of his losses throughout his career. It’s not the first serve percentage, the aces, the break point conversion rate, forehand, backhand etc.

And that number is more closely related to Nadal’s physical health than his form on any given day.

Unforced errors from Nadal rarely go past the teen mark when he is feeling good physically. Even if other areas of his game are not upto speed he is able to carry that extra load by being precise and accurate – consistently.

Watch for that number as he moves deeper in the draw. Any repeat of his 32 UE stat in the opening match will only strengthen the belief that he is still hurting from Madrid.

While the stiffer competition he is expected to run into soon (Ferrer, Verdasco, Djokovic /Federer) may temper that assumption to a certain degree, it still will be the ONLY number that can take down Nadal.

So ‘time on court’ is another stat to follow for that’s the root, unless a blister does it like it did against JC Ferrero last year.

Has Djokovic planted his men at Federer’s press conferences?

Did you hear that moron ask about Federer’s shoulder?

Was he still dreaming about the Sharapova match and the one he squeezed out last night thinking about it?

Did he even know where he was? Geeezzzzzzz!!!!!

Is groin next? Where was he going with it?

Federer hasn’t had a shoulder problem throughout his entire freaking career. Even a question on Fed’s non-existent sex life these days would have been more appropriate.

Shouldn’t there be question-screener before these nut jobs are let loose on these players? Some of the questions are downright stupid, dumb and neurotic.

Click here to watch it.

Federer first to drop set amongst the big cats. The good and bad of it.

Federer’s vital stats other than the unforced errors stayed within the average periphery. From first serve percentage to aces to points won on first serves.

Although it’s a minor setback, the fact that his vital stats didn’t join the unforced error party, something that’s become a fixture at most of his recent losses fueling the inconsistent train – point to the level of concern far less severe than months /years past.

Even though there are many obvious positives Federer and his camp can take from this, there are clear mental ramifications that cannot be ignored.

You see, when you are on the top of your game these kind of games only bolster your adrenaline rush to stifle the next guy to make a statement.

But when you have had the kind of ‘subpar’ season Federer’s has had, you need a strong will to not get tempted into doubting yourself, considering you are not only on your least favorite surface – clay – but you are on your least favorite ‘clay’ surface.

Add to it the fact that none of the other two contenders are having any difficulties dispatching equally or more seasoned players in their drive to that Sunday.

With Mathieu, Haas, Monfils and Roddick to follow, the competition is not getting any tougher too drastically even though the clay court specialist tag may be missing conspicuously.

Translation: Any repeat of this kind of showing will only reinforce the negatives of this match to make the transition into a war zone come semifinal that much more painful.

Ideally you need to build a rhythm from the opening round with graded and ramped up resistance to peak at the right time to win the title.

Of course, that’s not going to happen every freaking time you play at this level, specially Grand Slams, but the confidence and momentum you have built coming in helps you smoothen out the rough edges despite less than perfect set up.

But when that’s missing – the confidence and momentum – these kind of cold / hot draws tend to put added pressure to perform giving the ‘tomato can’ ingredient – comparatively.

If Nadal gets through his rough draw without dropping a set or Djokovic keeps putting up straight set wins against Kohl, Robredo and Del Potro, this kind of drop in the second round with far less conflict only accentuates the underlying problem piercing the already fragile confidence shield.

Is it going to be Roddick again, of all the freaking people to extend Federer and prepare him for the battle ahead, just like he did at Madrid?

While Aca – so – so is a clay court specialist, he is not even in the same continent compared to the three c0ntenders.

To go to the brink of almost three tie-breaks, after getting broken FIVE times out of ten opportunities offered, despite the lopsided fourth set – against a guy with this credential has to warrant a more focused and disciplined showing from now on out specially on the shot selection front to cut down from those nearly 50 unforced errors Federer had today.

On the positive side, it was Federer’s first real test on the unique bounce and speed of Roland Garros clay. Having pulled it off by out lasting the opponent physically among other ‘allys’ has to feel good moving forward.

But the greatest measure of the benefits of this match will be the straight set demolition of the next few opponents. Other than Monfils, most should be more than willing to oblige, IF Federer stays on course with all his vital numbers.

What’s got your attention @ Roland Garros so far?

Photos.

Roddick’s French ties go beyond tennis. From Sarah. Thanks.

SARAH

Roddick’s French ties go beyond tennis
Bonnie D. Ford

Click here.

Bullet dodged. From Overcaffeinated. Thanks.

OVERCAFFEINATED

A BULLET DODGED

So Roger scraped through a match against a dude who he should’ve technically belted to submission. Sure. The pundits and media might write and ask questions otherwise; and start to question Roger’s form etc. Let them. It will pretty much show they were not watching the match.

Yes Roger had a truckload of unforced errors, however he really did not play that badly at all. What he was up against was a heavier court, cooler temperatures and a dude who had a red-hot first three sets. So good in fact that he had the first break of the match; had a host of set points in the first set tie-break and blew each one as badly as Divine Brown did Hugh Grant; won a second set when some thought he would flake away; played out of his brain to 5-1 in the third and had Roger reeling… then he hit a flat or blew a gasket. Aka. he choked. On top of this, the level of play he kept – that insane level – started to falter.

Legs got heavier in line with the body tightening on the realisation that he was about to go two sets to one up. Even if this happened, no way he would’ve won this match. Roger’s supreme conditioning would’ve seen him through. Fumes only go so far. In this case, to 5-1 in a third set, for the wilt in the tie-break was of the Acasuso of normal, and the fourth set…well, he should’ve just packed his gear at the end of the third, or just sat with the rest of the spectators to watch the Roger show roll on.

Going back to Roger – he was in cruise control in the second and no doubt expecting to play a close match, but taking it in straight sets. Sure he was up against a red-hot dude who took a massive gamble on putting all effort/energy into three sets and wish for the best, however he hung in the second until he played some crap points and got broken. Sacre Bleu.

Why so close in the first two: Roger was hitting very short. I missed the third until he was 1-5 down. Then noticed Roger started hitting deeper and deeper. This really was the key to the turn around IMO, as his game was steady and serve was not bad either. He kept Acasuso pinned to the back of the court, and also benefited that Acasuso is scared of the net on the short balls.

Vintage Roger? Heck no. Actually quite a boring match despite the close score. Just something in the “spark” factor that was missing. Was great to see how Acasuso took it to RF, but not a great specatacle of the Roger / Rafa kind at Wimbledon 08 and Aust Open 09.

And rolling on to round three…Vamos Roger!!

Coverage getting better?

Anytime we lazy Americans can watch a tennis match – live – outside US borders – with toned down US presence – on the computer – with this quality of picture where you can actually follow the ball instead of the player’s movement to enjoy the match on clay…… either someone has gone bonkers or things can only get better.

If this is what’s possible at Roland Garros, I want the US Open to be played at my basement. Nothing else can now compensate.

I think very soon the website of each Grand Slam and then Masters Series will have to start streaming live matches just like Tennis Channel. Shouldn’t this have happened a decade ago when the technology was already there?

And I want to appoint my own cameramen for women’s matches. And I want to be the trainer too only when the injury needs a towel to cover. And we should be the ones asking questions at press conferences via e-mail instead of those dirt-bags with pea brains.

Make it interactive NOW.