The Tennis Chick

A Tennis Writer's Blog

lachicadetenis [@] gmail [dot] com

Subscribe here

Friday, November 27, 2009

My New Year wish of healing for Nadal

If Nadal lived in the US, his parents’ divorce would have been plastered across the front page of gossip magazines everywhere. Speculations about the real cause of the divorce would have been rife, and lovers would have been invented for both parties, with quotes being attributed to unnamed ‘close personal friends’ and ‘insiders’, to avoid lawsuits.

Nadal is Spanish and even though I am bilingual, I’d be lying if I said that I make a habit of reading ‘El Mundo’. So I honestly have no idea how his parents’ separation was reported in his home country. But I do remember speculation starting up after he lost at Roland Garros. In June 2009, tennis writer, Peter Bodo wrote in his blog at Tennis.com that, “the rumors that Nadal’s parents are about to divorce keep popping up in the gutter press and in my inbox via emails from acquaintances and sources.”

So I gathered that the Spanish gossip rags were preying on this family drama in much the same way they would have in the US. And it seemed that Nadal’s lackluster performance starting in the middle of this year might have been at least in part due to being profoundly affected by the news of his parents’ disharmony.

It is hard to imagine a dominant sports player in the US being so affected by parental divorce that their performance declines. Within the context of a culture that is highly individualistic, we have long lost any notion of marriage as representing a union of two families. The Williams sisters, for example, seemed more torn up by their sister’s death than by the parting of Richard and Oracene. In fact, Oracene has never looked better.

At the risk of stereotyping, I believe that this is because the typical American marriage is between two individuals, which in part may explain the over 50% divorce rate. It is not uncommon for an American child to go through two or three stepparents before reaching age 18. When a couple elects to uncouple, there may be some impact on the family but only in so far as people deciding whose side they are going to take. I have friends who are divorced and who never again ever saw, spoke to, or in any way kept in touch with former-in-laws. It’s like a phase of their lives had ended and they just moved on.

Not so in Mallorca, where Rafa was a boy and is still growing into manhood. Not so on any small island where everyone knows everyone and where it is not at all uncommon for adult children to continue living with their parents, not because the economy is bad and they have no choice, but because the sense of ‘la familia’ is so deep. In interdependent cultures, the ties to family can be so strong that divorce is almost like a kind of death.

I understand island culture. I have been shaped by island culture. My values run deep in Caribbean soil. I understand why the rate of divorce was only 10% in the Caribbean in 1997, (according to the UN’s “World Women, Trend and Statistics), and why although this percentage has increased since then, it is nowhere near the rate in the US.

I was also unsurprised to discover that a similar rate of divorce exists in Spain. It is one of the lowest in Europe. And I think that this has everything to do with the cultural centrality of the family. In cultures where marriage is literally a partnership between two families, the notion of uncoupling can be very difficult. In the Caribbean it can at times be downright impossible because powerful forces will collude to keep a family intact.

So I completely understand the emotional impact of his parents’ divorce on a player like Nadal. Around the middle of this year, he started giving clues as to the nature of his private distress. Following a loss to Del Potro at the Sony Ericcson in Miami, Nadal was quoted as saying “Always is a reason because you are not playing at your level during the tournament…Always is a reason, but it’s personal.”

Recently Rafa has been more forthcoming about how his parents’ divorce has affected him. In an interview quoted by the Guardian, Nadal reveals that his loss at Roland Garros and his decision not to defend his trophy at Wimbledon both reflected the impact of his inner emotional turmoil:  “My parents’ divorce made an important change in my life. It affected me. After that, when I can’t play Wimbledon, it was tough. For one month I was outside the world. I am OK now, but you need time to accept. And it’s more difficult to accept when you are outside home and don’t know what’s happening.”

Nadal has ended 2009 on a desultory note. My New Year wish for him is that 2010 brings him healing, not just from the many bodily injuries including the tendinitis that have plagued him this year, but also for his emotional pain. A strong and confident Nadal will make 2010 very exciting for us all.


BNP Paris Tennis Open 2009 - Semi Final, Nadal vs Djokovic




»»  read more

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Right now, men’s tennis is all kinds of awesome

I have been on such a high. My high started with the released photo of the group of men finalists all dressed in suits. Some of them looked as if they had never put on a suit before and couldn’t wait to wrench it off their bodies and go back to being sweaty. Others looked as if they were born to be dressed by Anna Wintour. Either way, they all looked all kinds of awesome, a group of men dressed in their Sunday best, representing the cream of the tennis crop.

I have previously expressed my disappointment in a similar photo of the women. But photos are superficial and do not necessarily represent the quality of the person underneath the veneer of make-up. Except that it turned out that this time, they did. The women looked a group of broken-down depressed floozies. The women proceeded to play tennis like a group of broken-down depressed floozies. What happened in Doha was shameful. What is happening in London is exhilarating, redemptive.

Is it unfair of me to compare? Perhaps. But one can’t help but get the impression that despite all of the background drama and all of the hustling for overpriced paychecks, men’s tennis continues to seem so much better managed. Of course I am not privy to the background shenanigans and the men may in fact be as miserable as the women clearly seemed to be. But if that is the case, it has not at all been affecting their tennis.

In a sense, I do not understand why the women seemed like such a group of broken-down depressives. And yes I know all of the arguments that the season is too long and that the women were exhausted by the time they got to Doha. I think that that argument is complete BS. I think that the same women who are complaining about the length of the tour will turn around and sign on for exhibition matches in all kinds of far-flung places so that they can earn their money at easier cost.

Furthermore, the notion that a group of women will inevitably show up in Doha looking all kinds of broken-down is not at all supported by the research. Research has consistently shown that not only can women endure more stress than men, but when it comes to physical stress, we are not too shabby either. Men may win marathons at faster speeds than women, but it is women who win super marathons. We are built not for speed but for endurance. Not that there was any evidence of that in Doha.

And in hindsight, I think that the problem in Doha was that some of the women who qualified had no business qualifying. Oh sure their ranking qualified them, but mentally there was no readiness to perform on that kind of stage. And then there were the women who were not there but whose presence would have made a scintillating difference. I am thrilled that Kim Clijsters and Justine Henin are back. I look forward to Sharapova being completely healed. I wish Sabine Lisicki could remain injury-free for more than two tournaments in a row. These are some of the women who would have helped to make Doha the event it was meant to be.

In the meantime, it’s been a thrill a minute with the men. I was worried that after six weeks off, Federer would show up looking all kinds of creaky and rusty. And to an extent this has been true, but only in the first set. That’s his warm-up set. That’s the set in which those synapses start firing as he is figuring out his opponent and creating his master plan for domination. It’s been wonderful to watch the execution.

Del Potro’s close win against Verdasco surprised me. I had expected him to dispose of his opponent in straight sets. But DelPo seems to be a player who gains confidence as the tournament proceeds, so I am not at all counting him out. And I have developed such a crush on Robin Soderling. There is something so sweet about his persistence. He just doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who would break Nadal in exactly the same way, twice -- in the last game to close out the set and then the match -- but that is precisely what he did. Soderling plays an unnerving kind of tennis that must piss his opponents off royally.

And what can I say about the doubles? It’s been wonderful to see the level of quality. The level is so high that the chest-bumping Bryans saw their gesture not only get co-opted by the likes of Knowles and Bhupati, but also found themselves on the losing end in straight sets. It’s been glorious tennis all around. I have been enjoying every minute of it. It’s been an awesome season of men’s tennis. I wish it didn’t have to end. 
Barclays ATP World Tour Finals - Media Day
»»  read more

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

The London draw, in haiku

Group A

(1) Roger Federer

Twin motives remind
The king, that win, draw, or lose,
Love still waits at home.


(4) Andy Murray

Irked by the sense
Of being discounted, eclipsed
London is his chance.


(5) Juan Martin del Potro

Full of Argie pride
He’s eager to show the world
That he is the best.


(7) Fernando Verdasco

At times dilettante
Next moment focused, in charge.
Which one will show up?


Group B

(2) Rafael Nadal

Uncle Toni frets.
Is it because of Xisca
Or is he fading?


(3) Novak Djokovic

To close out the year
With that final awesome win,
Would be redemptive.


(6) Nikolay Davydenko

His wife’s sweet kisses
Are inspiration enough
To give of his best.


(8) Robin Söderling

Thanks for small mercies
Federer’s not in his draw.
How long can luck hold?


Withdrawn: Andy Roddick

Is it cowardice
That he’d much rather play
With his wife’s mammaries?

Andy Murray Promotes Barclays ATP World Tour Finals At O2
»»  read more

Monday, November 16, 2009

Serena vs. Andre: A tale of dueling memoirs

I’ve mentioned before that I’m not keen on reading Serena’s memoir, which was ghost-written by the prolific Daniel Paisner. My concern was in part based on my perception that Serena does not exactly come across as a self-reflective or introspective individual. A memoir is best written by one gifted in the art of navel-gazing, not navel-baring.

Furthermore, I was concerned that the characteristic Williams’ reticence would win out in the end and that we would not be privy to anything that we don’t already know. And most of the reviews that I have read seem to concur with this prediction.

For instance, one Amazon Vine reviewer notes: “I was hoping for more in-depth knowledge about how Serena thinks, her loves, future hopes...even some juicy stuff. But none of that is in the book. Even when she talks about the events of 9/11 when she and her family were all flying that day, it reads like a dry gulch rather than the tear gusher that it should be. She refers to past loves as ‘so and so’, there’s just not enough details about the private Serena to make this a worthwhile biography. It’s all the stuff about the public Serena and then a few tidbits of stuff thrown in where she calls Venus a nerd. But even that doesn’t seem like sincere banter. OK, very light reading, perhaps read while sitting in an airport terminal somewhere and then leave for the next person to pickup and read.” Ouch.

Let’s be honest, whatever chance Serena had of selling more copies of this book was damaged by her outburst at the US Open. In fact, Serena’s initial attempts to apologize for the outburst were roundly criticized because she seemed to be more focused on plugging her book than on saying that she was sorry. Then came her nude cover on ESPN magazine which seems to have drained away some of the attention from the memoir instead of adding to it as I assume was the intent.

But the death knell seems to have been the publication of Andre Agassi’s “Open”. Andre’s memoir leapt out of the blocks and has been selling like hotcakes. Already we have been privy to a few of its eye-popping and highly controversial revelations.

Like Serena, Andre has been doing the rounds promoting this book. Like Serena he has been hopping from one continent to another, submitting to interviews and fan-filled book signings. Except that unlike Serena, Andre is a thoughtful and self-revelatory interview subject. Here is a report written by Elaine “Lainey” Lui, a Special Correspondent for Canadian TV who interviewed Andre in Toronto yesterday:

“Agassi is very intense and it was early morning so maybe he was more intense than usual, having stayed up the night before for an appearance at a book store with 800 fans. I almost withered under the eye contact. He never breaks. I wouldn’t say he’s super warm, not the friendliest individual, rather guarded in fact, even though he lays it all out in the book. But Agassi is honest and articulate and he is his own person. Did not arrive surrounded by sycophants and an entourage of handlers. He takes care of himself, he doesn’t need to be coddled or protected from the tough questions, and is willingly shouldering his beats – about the meth use, about his hair weave, about his fragile ego, all of it totally Open, his aptly titled autobiography that I powered through this weekend.”

I have not seen a single negative review of “Open”. By all reports it is a stunning book and extremely well-written. Of course I intend to form my own opinions after I read the book. In the meantime, here is Lainey’s assessment of Andre’s memoir:  

“It’s good. Really good. It’s the best sports memoir I’ve ever read and not only because of the scandalous details, but because of who helped him write it. LOVE J.R. Moehringer. “The Tender Bar” is one of my favorite books of all time. And this is what elevates Agassi’s “Open” above the others. The stories are there, sure. But J.R. Moehringer frames them so beautifully, it reads like something entirely different. If you follow tennis, you’ll love the tennis details: the match play, the locker room dynamic, the training, even how he strings his racket – all fascinating. And yes, the gossip too. I’ll never feel the same way about Pete Sampras again. Dude, he’s CHEAP.”

Go here for an excerpt from Andre’s “Open” and here for an excerpt from Serena’s “On the Line”. Each book will probably appeal to an entirely different kind of tennis fan. But at the end of the day, the dueling memoirs are going to be great for tennis.


Andre Agassi Book Signing Las Vegas
»»  read more

Saturday, November 14, 2009

The Super-Sebian versus the French Clown

I can’t wait for the Paris Masters finals tomorrow. Djokovic versus Monfils, the former totally expected given the awesome run of form he is currently enjoying, the latter my heart’s delight, but I fully expect Djokovic to crush him.

The upsets started early in Bercy, with Federer going out in the first round to Julien Benneteau. There is nothing like playing in front of your homies to bring out your best. We saw that the week before when Federer once again made it to the finals of the Swiss Davidoff. I felt badly for him that he lost in the finals in front of his home crowd and his mother. That must sting. But Benneteau (which my spellcheck keeps changing to ‘bonehead’ much to my delight), seemed to have been equally inspired.

Of course he came back down to earth in the next round in the match against Monfils. And this is as good a point as any to talk about how much Monfils frustrates me. Monfils is a puzzling character. On the one hand, he wastes a lot of energy clowning around on the tennis court. I wish he could learn how to control and channel his energy into winning points. On the other hand, he has this completely passive, lackadaisical style of playing tennis that absolutely drives me nuts. I find myself wanting to reach through the TV screen and shake him.

Monfils has a horrible habit of dragging out points. In the match against David Guez for example, whom any self-respecting top-20 player would have sent packing 6-0 6-1 (and the breadstick only because you don’t completely humiliate a man in front of his home crowd or his mother), Monfils eventually won 6-4 6-3. Most of the time he seemed to be returning the ball just to return the ball. He wasn’t creating anything, he wasn’t setting up anything, he wasn’t constructing anything. He seemed to have no game plan other than simply out-waiting Guez. And that irritated me. As much as I love him, it is very hard for me to watch Monfils play. He ends up irking the crap out of me.

Monfils’ passive and lame-brained approach to tennis will not work against Djokovic tomorrow. In fact, I did not expect it to work today against Stepanek. I am still stunned that it did. Indeed, after watching Djokovic blow Nadal off the court, I left home and went to play tennis myself, confident that I would come home to the news of a Djokovic vs. Stepanek finals. I have no idea what Monfils did to win that match. I can only imagine how mind-numbing it was, one ball-poker playing another. I guess youth may have been on Monfils’ side.

Well youth won’t make a crap of difference tomorrow. Djokovic is playing divine tennis. Always one of the more intelligent players on the court, Djokovic seems to have found his second wind late in the season. In fact, if he keeps up the form we saw last week in Basle and this week in Bercy, I will go out on a limb and say that he will be the one to beat in London.

I have previously credited Davydenko for playing smarter tennis than Nadal at the 2009 Shanghai Masters. Today Djokovic went at least 15 IQ points higher. He played Nadal’s backhand like a violin. He drove lethal winners into the Nadal forehand. His serve was on point, especially the serve out wide to the sideline. His placement was awesome, his movement spare and breathtaking, his nerves of pure steel, his body language relaxed and confident.

Djokovic not only had a definite plan but he went out and decisively implemented it. Nadal didn’t seem to know what hit him. When was the last time you saw Nadal completely give up on points? He seemed to know that he was being completely outplayed and that he had no answers for Djokovic’s game. Nadal’s words of congratulations at the net seemed sincere.

I don’t think I am over-reaching when I say that Djokovic is currently playing his best tennis ever. The Djokovic who showed up in Basle and Bercy will make mincemeat of Monfils tomorrow. If I were Monfils I would think twice about inviting my mother.

ATP Masters Series Paris - Day Six
»»  read more

Tennis News

Loading...

Interview Space: Roger Federer

BARCLAYS ATP WORLD TOUR FINALS

November 24, 2009, LONDON, ENGLAND
R. FEDERER/A. Murray 3-6, 6-3, 6-1

Q. How much does finishing No. 1 mean to you, considering you weren't No. 1 at the end of last year?

ROGER FEDERER: Obviously, that was one of my big goals for this season. And it's one of the greatest performances I think I've achieved, you know. Seeing also what happened, you know, off the court: getting married, having twin girls, reaching all four major finals, you know. Playing so well at the most important moments, it's been the key this year, and staying healthy. Especially after having a rough 2008, coming back this year and being able to dominate and play at the top when the depth in tennis is so, so great at the moment. I think it's a wonderful achievement. Of course, it's official. It's a wonderful feeling.

Q. Today Andy didn't feel that he played well. What did you think of the quality of the match today?
ROGER FEDERER: Well, I think we've always had up-and-down matches. So I think we both always come out thinking, Hmm, I could have done better. I just think it's our styles of play, that when they collide, you always feel like you can play better. Maybe we have a playing style that makes the other player not play, you know, the best tennis. When we collide, that's sometimes kind of the feeling you get walking away. I've walked away many times feeling like I could have done so much better. Today it's his turn. So it's unfortunate for him.

Q. Do you think Del Potro can jeopardize your qualification like he did in the US Open final?
ROGER FEDERER: I don't know how much he has to say really because I think the other guys are playing ahead of me on Thursday, so maybe that will already be decided. But he's definitely in for a shot maybe. I don't know. It could be a make-or-break match for us to get through. If that's the case, I'll give it all I have and try to beat him this time. Last time we played, it was a fantastic match in New York. And it seems like he's playing well, whereas in the beginning I thought he might have some issues maybe with his wrist or with his abdominal strain. But he seems fine now. So he looks like he's getting better as the tournament goes on.

Q. You've been nominated for an Athlete of the Decade award along with Lance Armstrong and Tiger Woods. Who do you consider to be the greatest athlete of the last decade in any sport? How would you make a case for yourself to win the award?
ROGER FEDERER: Oh, it's hard to talk about myself. I mean, of course I follow a lot of sports. There's been many great athletes, you know, through the last 10 years. I think obviously the ones who have been at the top for the longest, like Valentino Rossi or Tiger or myself, who have done amazing things at the highest of levels, you know.
I think our, how do you say, sport is tough. We play all year long, from January to November. We travel around the world. Yeah, I mean, it's very physical, too, very taxing. And I think with the knock-out system we have in tennis, you know, it's very hard to always keep on winning, because on a bad day, you're out of the tournament. It's just not an easy thing to do. But then again, so many other athletes did great things. So it's just nice, you know, being part of the greatest athletes of the this decade. We'll see if I win. It would be nice anyway...(continued)