Sunday, January 27, 2008

Aussie Final

Today I watched the final of the Australian Open with my good tennis buddy David Boyd. Jo-Willifreed Tsonga played Novak Djokovic in a battle of two players who had never won a grand slam before. This was such an opportunity for both players because most of the time, when you maneuver your way into a Grand Slam final, you find yourself battling against someone who’s already won one (see Baghdatis vs. Federer circa 2007). As a result, you get in about three games of balls-out go for broke tennis, then become completely overwhelmed by the situation and toasted in straights. Neither of these guys had that to worry about. And both came in feeling like they had a legitimate shot at winning a grand slam. Wow, what that must feel like…

Now because I have sworn off cable from my immediate life (it preys on my inability to concentrate – sucking hours from my day like a baby sucks bottles), I’d never seen Tsonga play. But as soon as I saw him walk into that stadium, I knew he was done. Tsonga simply does not have a tennis player’s body. He’s too thick, there’s too much weight in his legs, and since on top of that, he’s tall, he can’t possibly move well. Now , people had told me he was quick, which threw a wrench into my analysis. But as soon as I saw him I said, “He may be able to scramble for balls in the first set. But let’s see him do it the third”. As it turns out, I was exactly right (humble, I know). The guy was simply too late getting to balls. Easy forehand winners became a preview of Tsonga's next Pilates class as he was stretched into just about every position possible.  Is this tennis or Twister.(note: Chris has never taken a Pilates class - nor does he plan to). 

This led me to ponder why it was so easy for Tsonga to beat Nadal in the semis but upon about 12 seconds of reflection, I knew exactly why he beat him.  Nadal isn’t a guy who hits winners. He’s a guy who wears you down by hitting extremely high and heavy balls (and for anyone who’s played against guys like this – where you’re hitting eye-high balls with the kind of spin that breaks wrists – you know how agonizing it can be). But Tsonga is the perfect player to handle Nadaley. He’s tall and strong. Eye-high for us is shoulder high for him, perfect for crank-forehand-central. And the “heavy” ball doesn’t faze him cause he’s distantly related to Muhammad Ali. Nadaley better pray that the next time they meet, it’s on the red stuff.

And finally, this leads me to Djokovic. Djokovic (whose name is incredibly annoying to spell btw) has started to cause a little uproar in the community because of his arrogance. Well you know what I say? GOOD! It’s about time we have someone saying, “Guess what? I’m not afraid of Federer. Federer should be afraid of me.” (I don’t know if he’s ever said those exact words but it sounds better that way). This in contrast to wussy little Nadaley who offers pearls like – “He such good player. You have play best and you beat him but maybe not cause he most of time beat you. I am so lucky to play on court that he play. Slurp slurp slurp little Spanish accent.” I mean are there any MEN left?? Anyone left to talk the talk and BACK IT UP?? Tennis nuts, let me introduce you to Novac Djokovic – the first player in 20 YEARS not afraid to say what’s on his mind. And you know what I love about it? I love how Federer doesn’t know how to deal with it. He’s so flummoxed by the blatant disrespect and so bound to the “gentleman ambassador” role he’s embraced, that he can do nothing but pretend to be unfazed by it. But during those interviews, boy do his eyes tell a different story. It bothers him. A lot. And I love it. I mentioned something to Boyd’s live-in girlfriendo, Holley, about Federer. Everybody makes such a big deal out of the fact that Federer is so nice. He spends 20 extra minutes talking to the press after matches and is always there when you need him. Well of course he’s always there. HE’S ALWAYS WINNING! I’ll tell you what, I’ll give you the rest of my week if I win a match at the Australian Open. How freaking easy is it to talk about winning? “Oh yeah, I’m great. What can I say?” Times 1000. But what happens when 5 losses a year turns into 10? And the questions switch from “How does it feel to be so dominant?” to “How does it feel to be on the downside of your career?” I’m curious to see how “available” Federer will be then. Cause, you know, everybody just loves to pontificate about the myriad of reasons why they’re losing. [Cue any Roddick post-match interview.]

Now before you flip out, let me remind you that I love Federer. He’s the nerd who overcame the bullies. Who doesn’t like that story? But there’s no question that he needs more competition – and Djokovic is offering that. I’m of the belief that Nadaley will fade. He’s a clay-courter with loopy strokes and those guys are almost always doomed to career-ending injuries before they’re old enough to rent a car (can anyone say Guga?). It’s already starting. Trust me, this guy has maybe one more French in him then it’s bye-bye Nadaley. Which is fine by me cause to be honest, I don’t really like the guy. But I’ll talk about that another time.

Til then, GO OUT AND HIT!

1 comment:

Hollie Nell said...

It's actually Hollie...but hey, i, y or e, they are still useless and uncessary vowels! Thanks Mom and Dad!

It was fun watching the finals with ya, even though I don't know what the hell is going on.