2013 Wimbledon Finals: A Place In History Beckons?

                    As I mentioned in my Wimbledon preview post, I have been a tennis neutral for the entire Wimbledon fortnight, and as a result have been able to enjoy some truly outstanding tennis. From controversy, to shocks, to outrageous shots, this year's tournament has had it all. What would have rounded everything off perfectly, in my opinion, would have been to have a Goran Ivanisevic-esque fairytale victory at the end of it. A Murray-Djokovic final in the men's singles means that that dream will have to wait another year. Shame. However, the shocks in the women's draw means that a final between two unexpected names has come to fruition, with Sabine Lisicki seeing off favourite Serena Williams on her way to meet Marion Bartoli in today's showpiece.

                    One of the two women involved in the match today will take their place in history as a first-time Grand Slam winner. Whilst Bartoli has more experience of Grand Slam finals than her opponent, I do not believe that in any way makes her the strong favourite for the match. Lisicki has shown in the past two weeks that she is more than capable of upsetting the apple cart and rising to the big occasions. If this was something we hadn't seen in her exit in the Wimbledon semi-finals a couple of years ago, it is certainly something we saw against Serena just a matter of days ago. In this post, I will be reviewing the form of both the women, and the men's finalists, before deciding who I believe should be the favourite.

                     In terms of the title of this piece, however, it is not difficult to see what it is I am referring to. The presence of Andy Murray in a Wimbledon final for the second consecutive year means another chance to end Britain's incredible barren spell at Wimbledon. Whilst I explained in my opening post why I personally do not feel inclined to support him over any other athlete, he has certainly performed well over the past two weeks and deserves his place there. Whilst all will remember his emotional speech after defeat to Roger Federer in last year's final, many will be hoping for better fortunes this time around. A Murray victory tomorrow would certainly see an eminently forgettable page of British tennis history consigned to the memory banks, and a breakthrough of even greater proportions than that of his US Open victory last summer.

                    However, regardless of whether he takes that place in history tomorrow, there is one thing that will be forever untouchable, in my opinion, to the Scot. I have been saddened to hear the BBC commentators debating whether Wimbledon's iconic Henman Hill should be renamed in Murray's honour. I have issues with this. Firstly, Murray Mound sounds rubbish. Secondly, I believe that Tim Henman as a tennis player sums up not just the traditional British tennis player, but the entire British mindset in terms of sport. Starts with a vast overestimation of ability by the press and the crowd, who all proclaim that 'this will be the year', only to be eliminated at the quarters/semis. If tennis had penalties, this would sum up another sport incredibly accurately. I think, as a reminder of our typical British disappointment, Henman Hill is an essential part of Wimbledon, and should always remain as such.

                    Getting back to the matches over the next two days, it is worth looking at the run that each of the finalists have had, and therefore who should be considered the favourites. Starting with today's women's final, we see that both of the competitors went through their opening games in straight sets, with Lisicki particularly convincing in a 6-1, 6-2 victory over the usually strong Francesca Schiavone. Another pair of straight sets results followed in the second round, with the German once again being more emphatic in her victory. The third round saw a change in the pattern, as the Bartoli progressed in two close, but straight sets, whilst Lisicki was pushed all the way to three by the fiery Samantha Stosur, eventually winning 4-6, 6-2, 6-1. What happened in the fourth round made the tennis world sit up and take notice. Serena Williams, the shoo-in favourite for the title after the carnage of the 26th of June, was unceremoniously dumped out by Lisicki. After a strong first set, which the German won 6-2, the American world number 1 came storming back to take the second 6-1. This led analysts to assume that Serena would just steamroller her way through the third set. But it was not to be, with the German Lisicki picking up arguably the most memorable win of her career, and continuing her incredible record against French Open champions at Wimbledon.

                    Whilst Bartoli did win in straight sets on the same day, it was nowhere near as impressive as the Lisicki victory. This also started to shift fan support towards the German underdog, as the British crowd are always likely to get behind that! With another pair of straight sets victories in the quarter finals, Lisicki and Bartoli were only one game away from a place in the pinnacle of tennis. A stroll for Bartoli, who came through her semi-final 6-1, 6-2 against the novice Flipkens of Belgium. Lisicki on the other hand, had another tough game against number 4 seed Agnieska Radwanska. An enthralling semi-final, which swung first one way and then the other, ending with an incredible 6-4, 2-6, 9-7 to the German. After an energy sapping semi, along with the draining victory against Serena, I fear for Lisicki's energy levels. If they hold up, however, the tough tests she has endured should give her a fantastic platform to claim the first piece of silverware of her career.
                
                       Moving onto the men's final, we have to consider the advantage that the crowd gives the Scot in his quest for his first Wimbledon title. Whilst I have made my feelings about the crowd's hypocrisy clear, there can be no doubt that they will hold a key role in the outcome of the match tomorrow. The form may give an initial indicator, but the adrenaline and momentum shift that the crowd can give is another variable. In terms of the route, both were imperious in the first week, successfully avoiding the drama and progressing with ease to the quarter final stage. There, Djokovic claimed another straight sets victory over Thomas Berdych, but Murray, despite having the crowd on his side, toiled against Fernando Verdasco. Comprehensively outplayed by the Spaniard in the first two sets, the Scot fought back to level the match. The final set was a tough and edgy affair, with both players fortunate on several occasions to hold serve. But it was Murray who claimed the decisive break to take the match 4-6, 3-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-5 and progress to the semi finals.

                        Yesterday saw arguably the most incredible semi-final in Wimbledon history, with Novak Djokovic and Juan Martin Del Potro contested another memorable 5 set match. Played in fantastic spirits, with both players in fine form and sportsmanlike mood, we saw a number of incredible rallies and at times unbelievable passing shots. Nowhere was that more evident than in the fourth set tie-breaker. With Djokovic two sets to one up, and at 6-4 in the breaker, Del Potro had two match points to save. The first one was particularly memorable. After a number of excellent shots, two incredible gets from Djokovic made it look as if Del Potro was going home. But the Argentine pulled out an incredible forehand to force the Serb to stretch and put the ball long. This changed the momentum, with Del Potro eventually taking the fourth set. The fifth maintained the frenetic pace, with no sign of letting up. After more incredible rallies, Djokovic broke the Argentine, and, after four hours and 45 minutes, the Serb took the match to set the record for the longest Wimbledon semi-final. Murray's route was considerably easier, beating the inexperienced Jerzy Janowicz in four sets. After fighting back from a set down, the Scot took advantage of the 22 year old's unforced errors to lead by two sets to one. After a brief delay as the roof was closed, Murray closed the match out in fine form, eventually winning 6-7, 6-4, 6-4, 6-3.

                          In terms of the favourite for tomorrow's final, I slightly favour Djokovic. Murray will inevitably feel the pressure after the events of last year. However, I would not be in the least bit surprised if the crowd lifts Murray, or the nerves fade after the victory in Flushing Meadows. I personally think that Murray has more to prove, but equally has the greater support. I anticipate one of the great Wimbledon finals, with a five setter on the cards. Eventually, my choice comes down to experience, with the Serb having more experience of the victories in finals, especially against Murray. However, whatever the result, both the men's and women's tournaments have been fantastic viewing, and those that come out victorious have deserved the titles.

Wimbledon 2013: 26th June: A Day of Attrition

          Who said tennis was a predictable sport...? I think that idiot may have been me. In my French Open post, I made a big point about how tennis now is all about the four big names, with no-one else likely to get a look-in for the foreseeable future. How wrong I was. Today's events have left a gaping hole in the bottom half of the male draw, a hole that a relatively inexperienced player will inevitably fill. This gives an unbelievable chance to someone, and arguably, the net winner out of today is Andy Murray, who analysts now start to see as having a fairly straight-forward run to the final. If he doesn't win it this year, you fear for his chances against a full pack.

           I thought yesterday's events were dramatic, with the world number 5, Rafael Nadal, fresh off the back of his French Open success, struggle with an injury and depart to the hands of the relatively unknown, world-ranked 135, Steve Darcis. In my Andy Murray and Wimbledon opening post, I made a brief suggestion of how I expected the two weeks to pan out. I predicted that Nadal would make a slow start. I did not expect that to be backwards! However, given his clear agony throughout, particularly in the latter stages, it was clear to see that he was not at his best, and as a result, my prediction can be vindicated slightly (a thinly veiled excuse, I'm sure you'll agree!) I fully expected this to be the major shock of the two weeks, especially when we consider the Lukas Rosol incident of 12 months ago.

           However, today's events have utterly eclipsed the drama of yesterday afternoon. Even before play had started today, the number of drop-outs began to climb. First, the huge John Isner retired injured from his match, having only played 2 games. Then, Rafael Nadal's conqueror, Darcis, had to pull out, citing the decision as 'the hardest of my career'. The first massive name fell just before play started on the show courts, with womens' number 2 Victoria Azarenka withdrawing at quarter to 1. After a horrendous-looking fall on the opening day, this decision came as little surprise. Her departure added further controversy, as she publicly stated that the courts were too slippery, bordering on dangerous. Given the amount of injuries we have witnessed over the past three days, her claims are certainly substantiated. However, I have yet to see a year where the ground staff do not perform their tasks effectively, and, as a result, we must trust the All England Club to rectify any problems with the court surfaces. Also, the fact that by this time in most years it has rained at least once should mean that the courts are comparatively drier to previous years. At the very least, players should be able to cope with the slippery and wet surfaces, having tolerated them every year for as long as the tournament has been in existence.

            If we thought the early withdrawals would be the main talking point of the day, the high profile exits started. 2002 champion Lleyton Hewitt was the first to go, being defeated in four sets by the flamboyant Dustin Brown. An unconventional style and breath-taking execution of shots led the 27 year old German to his biggest win to date, netting him a cool £63,000 in the process. Womens' 13th seed Ana Ivanovic was next, with 19-year-old junior champion Eugenie Bouchard dumping the former world number 1 out. The shock results in the womens' draw continued, with number 9 seed Caroline Wozniacki beaten by unknown Czech Petra Cevkovska, before what was the shock of the day, with heavily fancied Maria Sharapova eliminated at the hands of world number 131 Larcha De Brito. Further withdrawals of Queens' finalist Marin Cilic and world number 6 Jo-Wilfried Tsonga due to injury took the day's total to 7 walkovers/withdrawals, a record for the tournament. The overall total currently stands at 10, and with injuries happening wherever you look in SW19, the number threatens to climb even higher by the end of the week.

             All of this drama will have inevitably led to many British fans being fearful for the survival of Andy Murray. They needn't have worried, with the Scot coming through his match against Yen Hsun-Lu in straight sets. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would be very suspicious about the possibility that Ivan Lendl had tampered with the water supply for Murray's competitors, or had over-watered the courts on which his potential opponents will play! These suspicions are only strengthened by this evening's events. Murray's main competitor in the bottom half of the draw, Roger Federer, played on Centre Court against the under-rated and dangerous serve-and-volleyer Sergei Stahovsky. Having won the opening set in a tense tie break, the match was levelled in another tie break. With the 17 Grand Slam winner struggling to adapt to Stahovsky's style of play, he lost the third 7-5, putting his run of 36 consecutive quarter-finals in severe danger. The reigning Wimbledon champion started the final set badly too, going a break down at 3-1. A Federer fightback ensued, with the Swiss breaking back to force a third tie break. After another nervy and tight encounter, the former world number 1 saved one match point with a stunning passing shot. However, he succumbed to the pressure of a second, slicing a shot wide to hand Stahovsky an incredible win, and put the cherry on top of the day of shocks.

               Today's events have decimated both the men's and women's draw, leaving the door wide open for less prominent players to reach the latter stages. It also pours doubt on my earlier assertion that tennis is becoming predictable, as anyone who made a bet on today's results will have made a touch more than a small fortune! However, today's results will be forgotten to a certain extent if we end with a Murray v Djokovic final, and a Serena Williams womens' victory, as the finals will still look predictable. So long may the shocks continue, and I truly hope we have a Goran Ivanisevic winner this time around, that will last for another generation.

Wimbledon Begins: English Expectation on Scottish Shoulders

          The highlight of every British tennis fan's summer begins today, with SW19 playing host to the iconic grass court tournament. Get prepared to see shots of perfectly lined grass, strawberries and cream (whenever it happens not to be raining) and explanations of how the roof on Centre Court closes (when it inevitably does rain). As with every year, the British fans search in desperation for a potential winner from this small island. And with every year in recent memory, we have been disappointed. However, there are mutterings that perhaps this could be the year when the duck could be broken, when a British player could lift the iconic trophy.

            I am, of course, referring to Andy Murray. After a superb second half of last season, where he won the gold medal at the Olympics, and then Britain's first Grand Slam for 65 years at the US Open, the world number 2 will fancy his chances at his home event. This is also reinforced by his devastating defeat in the Wimbledon final last campaign, where all will remember his emotional commiseration speech. However, I personally, despite being a tennis fan from Britain, will not be supporting Andy Murray in the next two weeks any more than any other player. This blog post will explain why I feel this way, and what we should expect to see over the next two weeks.

           Getting straight to the crux of my argument regarding Andy Murray, I often feel as though the vast majority of fans are being hypocrites (and in recent months, glory supporters) when they blindly follow the world number 2 in Grand Slams. One of my early memories of Andy Murray is an interview conducted with him as a youngster, asking him about his future. One of the questions posed to him was: 'Would you consider yourself British?'. His answer: 'Scottish first, and British second'. Whilst I have nothing against the Scots, or any other nationality for that matter, the fact remains that Wimbledon is a tennis tournament held in England, a sport (and a country) that the Scots seemingly have little interest in. Therefore, English candidates should be the only ones that should receive whole-hearted backing from the home support. However, here is where we see aspects of glory supporting. After the decline of Tim Henman, it was only the Dunblane born youngster that showed any promise of winning tournaments. And so Britain followed him, dubbing him with the rather unfair tag of 'if he wins he's British, if he loses he's Scottish'. This unfairness is just one of a number of reasons why I will not be giving him special treatment.

              For those of you who are now thinking 'but he's British', I have three further arguments for you. 1) In no other sport do we apply the same principle. For example, we do not support all the home nations in the 6 Nations rugby or World Cup football (in fact we often directly oppose them). 2) Scotland may not be 'British' for much longer, with a referendum on the union scheduled to take place next year. And if the vote is 'yes' to leave, will fans abandon Murray then for being 'not British'? (I doubt it due to his success-another piece of evidence of glory supporting). And 3) The idea that he identifies with Britain as a union is challenged somewhat by his complete disdain for the Davis Cup in recent years, which has seen the national side slip down the rankings dramatically. If he really believed himself to be British, rather than the Scottish nationality he claims to put first, he would participate in these events. I must reiterate, Murray is doing nothing wrong by identifying himself as Scottish. All I intend by this post is to challenge the assertion that English fans should follow him blindly.

               Another reason I will be remaining neutral is to do with the commentary on Murray's matches. Again, not the fault of the player himself, as he can do little to affect the commentary of the BBC, but I still find it irritating. I have found a remarkable bias in play in all matches involving Murray, where commentators tend to exaggerate how well the Scot is playing, and often keeping him in matches long after he has effectively lost them. Often they just flat-out lie. Lines like 'Murray has dominated the first set, and been unfortunate on the important points' used to be commonplace when playing Federer, Nadal and Djokovic, and losing the set comprehensively. It is this bias that, perhaps unfairly, has led me to become more and more annoyed at the coverage, often watching on mute, and has caused me to become a tennis neutral.

                Finally, having explained that I have become a neutral, mainly due to things beyond Murray's control, I therefore follow those people whose game I find most entertaining, and whose personality is most likeable. Whilst Andy can certainly claim to have as entertaining a game as many of the players around him, he lacks massively on the second half of the sentence. This is sort of confirmed by the fact that the BBC felt the need to run a biographical piece with the world number 2 this week, attempting to dispel the 'dour Scot' look that he so often carries. I am sure that, away from the court, he is exactly the same as any other normal person, with a good sense of humour (i.e. normal human emotions), making the documentary, in my opinion, fairly irrelevant. On court, he comes across as moany, grumpy and occasionally petulant, in complete contrast to the likes of Federer and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, who are both highly likeable figures. Whilst Murray's on-court demenour has improved in recent years, if I were to support anyone this campaign at SW19, it would be someone who had a nice on and off court personality.

                 As for what we can expect over the next two weeks, I shall sum it up briefly: A Federer early masterclass, slow starts from Nadal and Djokovic, perhaps a couple of shocks along the way, pretty much a pre-determined women's final, with Serena and Sharapova looking strong, and hopefully, the nicest people win, and not necessarily the fans' hypocritical choice.