The Thriller on the Centre Court Villa

Sometimes in sports, we sports writers over indulge in grandiloquent adjectives and ambiguous analogies like this sentence.

And at times, we have a habit at dabbling with them at the wrong moments. They make our job more difficult than it seems, and we place distraction on the readers and ourselves instead of focusing intently on what we are seeing with our eyes. We make the job more difficult than it should really be.

Instead of letting what we witness come to our minds, we fall into a trap of creating or, even more perilously, fabricating a reality that isn’t congruent to what actually happened.

In essence, it would do a total disservice to mention an element that had nothing to do with this match. In fact, even the pre-match hype and the post-match breathtaking moments to think about the glory that transpired in front our irises, retinas, and every part of our ontological perspective can’t be tied together to this 2008 Wimbledon gentleman’s final.

That match made those outside factors become irrelevant the moment that fourth set concluded, though the standard of play, coupled with the rising drama of the day, had long ago made it so.

“The thriller on the Centre Court Villa.”

It was a match that was all about itself. And nothing else.

It wasn’t about the talk of a legendary figure’s last defense of his lofty throne at his first and most precious domicile. It wasn’t about the rivalry generated from the determined brilliance of his Spanish counterpart on the other side of the net, trying to get the title precious to his soul. It wasn’t about a sixth title or a first title. A 13th Grand Slam or a 5th one. It wasn’t about whether their previous match would factor in. And it wasn’t even about what else transpired during the first 12 days of the fortnight.

It was about that last day, and with all respect to the mixed doubles final and its participants of the Bryan brothers, Samantha Stosur and Lisa Raymond, this was the final match of this tournament.

A match that was thee match on its own merit.

A duel that will equal the top duels in tennis history, probably establish itself as the greatest final in the sports’ history.

But forget the comparisons to yesteryear. This match is in its own stratosphere, its own assortment of memorable moments cased by two indelible figures. But they weren’t the only ones apart of it, because the weather certainly made sure it factored in with its great gust of wind and tears from the sky. So did those impassioned fans, who went from concerned about the match ending in straight sets to becoming rapped along in a spectacle drama. Only that was possible by both players entering a unique and near unconscious zone titled “Refuse to Lose.”

“Refuse to Lose” is a place for solely the exceptional. It’s more perfect than any worker’s utopia, more defined than just entering “The zone.” It is an area that encompasses an amalgamation of sheer will along with disciplined nerve. It can leave you breathless with how the fight to prevent one’s self can capture the human imagination. And it can capture the human soul.

“Refuse to Lose” came into inception in this match, when Roger Federer was facing a deflating three sets to love defeat in the eyes at 0-40, 3-3 in that third set, at the hands of Rafael Nadal. From that moment on, from that survival in that game to stave off that horrible feeling, to serving that clinching ace on set point to get the epic comeback belief pumping, the Swiss had joined the Spaniard in that realm.

“Refuse to Lose”, a motto both of these men enthuse to everyone tuned into their duel to the utter death. The fourth set hit your sense of euphoria if you were a neutral fan of this match. Once again, instead of harboring on things to compare the events of this match, just the description will only come close to matching the actions that inspired them:

Federer “refusing to lose” by getting out of a 0-30 jam at 3-4. Nadal “refusing to lose” not trying to give him any itch by surrendering any break points in the set. Federer “refusing to lose” his serve to force the set into a tiebreak.

The match, itself, “refusing to lose” its chance at being something to saver forever, because only it knew what was about to unfold.

The second tiebreaker of the match was an 18 point display that seemed to matter more than any other one in history.

Both players, already masters of the defense to offense and vice versa, took it to a level the game’s greats had nothing seen before. The defense to more defense in order to get that precious offense. The defense that turned out to be actual offense. The offense that ended up as the unfortunately as defense.

It was a constant mutation of who would be the puncher, who would be the counterpuncher, and who would play to their roles at the same time perfectly.

They raised the stakes by following their own formats, their own ways. “Refuse to lose” vociferated through their minds. It wavered in Nadal’s head when he was 5-2 up, two points from winning. A double fault, his last of the match, followed by a backhand into the net. The first time you ever saw signs of tension getting to Nadal.

But “refusing to lose” quickly came back to his soul immediately. Down set point, Nadal scrambled enough like always to force Federer to an easy forehand miss. Change sides, six all. Then, he coerced him into another inaccurate forehand.

First championship point.

But “The thriller on the Centre Court Villa” wouldn’t be anything if neither gentleman exited the “Refuse to lose” zone, no matter what they faced. For Federer, he was staring again at the door, trying to get pushed out by Nadal. He controlled his own destiny on the first attempt, an emphatic serve winner.

Then, came that forehand past at seven-all from Nadal. That spectacular running forehand effort that went by a stretching Federer. For most, that would have been the end of a match. A resignation of “Just too good today” or “It wasn’t meant to be for me after all” type statements. Most would have certainly left the “Refuse to lose” zone after seeing such a devastating blow hit to them.

Not this man, not this prideful champion, not like this.

Second championship point, Nadal looking for that glorious win, going for that moment with more conviction than at 5-2 and 5-3. A deep forehand with a purposeful charge to the net, playing it like the champion at Wimbledon he wanted to be, just like the man across the net. He denied that moment that Nadal wanted so badly with a one-handed backhand pass for the ages. It couldn’t be struck better, by anyone better.

8-all.

Two points of supreme aggression later, from the one on the cusp of leaving the “Refuse to lose” zone just a minute or so ago, a fifth and deciding set hits us. Hits the television cameras, the phtographers’ lenses, the irises and the retinas of those fortunate to have them properly working. It even hit the endocrine system of the man desperate to keep his coveted position, leading him to take a quick bathroom break before the famous finish unveiled itself to us.

Fifth set of “The thriller on the Centre Court Villa”, begin.

The same themes continued though the first four games, with another rain delay in between. Thoughts of whether this match would be grand enough for one day loomed larger and larger, in similar proportion to the drama it was producing. Both men clinical on serve at the resumption of play, revealing in the all court war of explosion that each inflicted on each other. The fans seemly divided into an imaginary demarcation of being on the side of one “R” or the other “R.” Both sets of supporters, whether it was Federer’s longtime girlfriend Mirka or Nadal’s parents, about as tight as their players’ headbands. It was truly a moment when you felt like holding the hand of maybe even your mortal enemy.

The rain stops, play resumes as the night beckons.

Deuce, 2-all. Federer responses with two serves, Nadal can’t touch either one of them. 3-2, then 3-3, then 4-3.

Then, it seemed like Nadal finally was feeling the effects of being so close but yet so far. He the one now placed in the teetering position, on the edge of the “Refuse to lose” door. 30-40, five points away from a lost that would feel ten times more painful than the final score would show. But like Federer, he doesn’t want to leave this place. Powerful forehand that Federer can’t handle. He holds.

4-4. Then 5-4, then 5-5.

Once again, all of a sudden. Federer is pushed to that exit door. 15-40, Federer facing two break points, Nadal five points away from victory again. His response: Another timely ace, and then a forehand that Nadal can’t control on his backhand. 6-5, pressure back on Nadal.

Just like Federer felt on that backhand past at 7-all in the fourth set tiebreak, most would have been devastated and demoralized losing two break points, losing two match points the way Nadal did. And just like Federer however, he wasn’t ready to leave that “Refuse to lose” zone. 6-6.

Pressure back on Federer, in a 0-30 hold again. He gets out of it with that clinical serve of his, 7-6. Pressure back on Nadal, pressure erased again by him. 7-7

Suddenly, it was getting to that time in the match when destiny would have to help one man usher out the other out of the “Refuse to Lose” zone. It finally had to facilitate in the dirty work of ending something near and dear to our hearts.

It had to make one made the winner, and one the loser.

0-30 down again was Federer, and then two points later, 15-40 position of woe returned. So did him stepping up to the occasion, another ace, and another aggressive dictation with his forehand. Deuce.

Two points later, a second deuce.

And then, destiny and Nadal pushed Federer one step out of the door. It caused one miss on that faithful forehand at deuce, and another one on the sixth break point of the set for Nadal.

8-7 to Nadal, one game away now on his serve, entering the 16th game of the ultimate set.

The match resumes

The forehand long from Nadal to begin the game. 0-15.

The serve and volley out of nowhere. 15-all.

“Refuse to lose.”

Another clutch serve and volley winner, the unexpected of the unexpected in a match where that is the sole measure of standard. 30-15.

Another timely, placid backhand pass from Federer. 30-all.

Nadal forcing play with an intrepid spirit to get a backhand wide from Federer.

Third championship point.

Federer once again, for the umpteenth time in a match that will be remembered for umpteen centuries, shows his intrepid spirit, producing improbable magic with a backhand return followed by several “OH MY GOODNESS” from around the world. Deuce!

He’s not ready to leave.

Does this moment not faze either of them, at all?!

Nadal steps up, somehow broken only one time in this match and still not the winner at a quarter past nine. Three match points gone, and all of them producing not a single choke job from him.

They all resulted from the guts and glory of the man on the other side of the net. Any other person would have said “This isn’t my day, it just can’t be.” But this man from Mallorca, along with this man from Gstaad, takes full residence in the “Refuse to Lose” zone.

Ball toss in the air, and two strokes after seeing another backhand go past him on a match point, Nadal had forced a fourth one. “Refuse to lose” now transformed into something different, because at this stage, no one was a “loser.” Nadal step up again, bouncing the ball with no more threats of a time violation from Pascual Maria, waiting patiently for the final cries from the fans of whomever they backed.

First serve in.

Forehand return from Federer.

Backhand cross court from Nadal.

Then, on the fourth stroke of the 413th point of this masterpiece, Roger Federer didn’t leave the “Refuse to Lose” zone, even if he hit a backhand in the net to suffer the lost of his throne at his most valued home.

Instead, Rafael Nadal entered the “I Won” zone.

Down in relief, stretched out on the ground he was after four hours and 48 minutes of tennis that was more than about tennis. It was about the brilliance of the genre we call sports. The flash bulbs were in total effect for photos, whether digital or other, will hopefully never be deleted from our minds or our cardiac muscle.

There’s no need for direct quotes or psycho-analyzing to see how happy and elated Nadal and his camp is and will be feeling. There’s no need to do the same to look into how dejected and sad Federer and his camp is and will be feeling. That’s for another time, another piece.

Because “The thriller on the Centre Court Villa” speaks only about itself. And it has every selfish right in the world to do as so.

Knowing Your Place

Serena Williams thought she was going to out tough her sister again. The 2002 and 2003 champion of Wimbledon figured once the final with Venus was an actual reality that she was going to follow the same script and hector her older sibling off the court.

And could you blame her for not using the same strategy? It’s the Serena way, and if you thought that was always going to be a little tempered down because Venus Williams was across the net, just like Bill Simmons you haven’t been watching tennis for the last decade.

It was working just like it did the last five finals that they have played for a Grand Slam title, a reason coming into the match why Serena had eight Grand Slams, all the majors, and why Venus had six. The first two games were thro dominations, making Venus play for putting in second serves and delivering serves like did against Agnieska Radwanska and Jie Zheng.

Already up 2-0, imposing her will yet again.

Then a moment happened in the match that may swing the battles that these two sisters may have in the future back into the hands of the elder. It wasn’t the sole reason for why the four time champion became a five time winner instead of the second time titlist becoming a third. But it was the paradigm for the 7-5, 6-4 result not going the way of the younger sister.

Because when Serena tried to hit a backhand passing shot right at Venus to try and force deuce in a third game that was a must hold for the title holder, there were no signs of faltering from the one coincidently sharing the same name as the titled trophy. Instead of dumping it into the night and submitting to Serena’s at times intimidating will, all Venus did was hold her ground and deftly volley a double hander right across the net. On the scoreboard, simply by making the best statement she could make at that instance.

No signs of early capitulating, no signs of mental fragility against Serena this time around, no matter how hard she tried to induce it. Venus Williams showed to her 26 year old sibling that today was going to be different.

And at match’s end, it certainly was.

“I hung in there and managed to get the break back,” said the now seven time Grand Slam champion to Mary Carillo after the match. “It was all about the serve and who was going to be able to return more serves, so I tried to focus on that.”

Oh did she indeed focus closely on that critical aspect of the match. After that first game of the match, where she paid the price for missing her first serve, Venus bucked down deep whenever she had to hit her second delivery. It was either feast or be famine, because she knew anything short of top quality was going to be belted by Serena. Somehow though, the aura of Centre Court and this tournament make her second serve (and forehand) go from self-destruction shots to critical constituents in her title pursuits. Her seemingly indefensible slice delivery out wide has been a staple of her legacy at SW 19. But it plays second fiddle to the one that’s near and dear to her heart.

“The body is my favorite here,” said Venus in the press conference. “I’m hitting it with a lot of pace, too.” And in a statement that you would expect more from her finals’ counterpart, Venus left one that truly represented how not only her confidence in her punishing serve, but how she wanted to win this title, even against her sister.

“ You can’t defend it.”

Serena’s response to that integral part of her sister’s game plan?

“I think that was her tactic, to serve every ball into the body,” she said. “I’m glad she did it, because next time I know what to expect.”

You had to chuckle at that response from Serena Williams there. As with Venus’ description of how effective her body serve was, that soundbite from Serena is evidence of how annoyed she was with not winning the title. It may serve as even more motivation for her than her three defeats to Justine Henin last year or her two wrong decisions to a then 17 year old Maria Sharapova in 2004. In fact, it may drive the still eight time Grand Slam champion more than even losing to Venus earlier in her career like she did.

Regardless of that fighting spirit, her tactics against her sister may need to be slightly altered. No more can she just simply rely on being tougher and outslugging her sister into submission. Normally against any other opponent, Serena would have tried to hit a cross court passing shot against Venus in that third game. But she tried to test her sister with an emphatic shot right at her, only to get burn by a volley that gave Venus the crucial point to just get a game. That costly decision was more of a staple for her defeat than the number of missed break point opportunities or her second fiddle status in the long rallies of the match. Her movement, through still good, was no where on the level of her sister’s.

And that played a huge factor in the all important transition game, where the best passing shot she could come up with against Venus was on break point in the fifth game of the first set. Unfortunately, even that cheeky backhand flick did not cause a Venus’ volley into the net. Instead, it produced a crisp winner that serve as one of the 11 break point opportunities the world number six failed to convert. Most importantly though, because the number of missed break points is so misleading, is the number of games in which she had a break point on serve that she didn’t win. In the four game on her opponent’s serve where she had break points, Serena only broke in two of them. And that second one came at the hands of Venus’ slipping on the court in the third game of what proved to be the final set.

Other than that, Serena was at the mercy of her sister’s bombing serve, especially when she was apart of Venus resetting her 129 mph record. Despite trying to stay as calm as possible out on the court (she grunted less than she did in the latter stages of the first set) with a few nice forehands and approach shots, she lost the precision that she had on serve throughout the tournament, especially in the last two matches she played. And with that, her frustration failed to wane, a massive obverse to the consistent serenity that Venus shows anywhere on any court at any time.

It was that placidness that maybe was the reason why Venus couldn’t take the title at Wimbledon against her sister in the past, why she lost five consecutive times in the big matches, in the big moments, against her. With that, she was determined to over come those past demons without changing a simple thing.

“Obviously I wanted to try and improve the record, and I didn’t want the same trend to keep happening and then be like 6-1,” she said. “So I climbed a tiny little notch up, so it’s 2-5. Still behind, but I’m working on it.”

While she goes ahead and works on that, there is no need for her to be more diligent than she needs to at Wimbledon. Five titles, two behind Martina Navitalova and four behind Steffi Graf, today sealed her status as one of the greatest grass courters of all time, if it wasn’t already sealed. And really, even at Graf’s best, could you really see her mustering up enough magic to beat Venus? Even her staunchest supporters, and Andre Agassi, would be considered irrational if they didn’t think that Venus would still own her.

Serena thought she was going to owe her sister again through her own one-way traffic approach, but was certainly abashed after the match as was dejected. She now has only five defeats this year (six if you count her withdraw to Alize Cornet at the Italian Open), but three of them now have come at the worst possible of times. She was the best player the first eight days of this year’s Australian Open, only to play a horror of a match against Jelena Jankovic in the quarterfinals (and receiving probably an imaginative letter from Maria Sharapova thinking her so for that). With Justine Henin’s shocking retirement, she looked to be in prime position to win her second French Open, only to be plagued a myriad of blown easy shots and power driven out of Roland Garros by Katrina Srebotnik.

And now, with those two defeats, she was desperate to end her Grand Slam drought by ending her Wimbledon one simultaneously. She displayed that form coming into the final, and everyone favored that her gameplan that had work against Venus in the past was going to be the difference in the match favoring her.

Instead, a look of sullenness and regret took the place of the happiness that she saw against Venus in 2002 and 2003. All the hard work that she put in wasn’t good to defeat the assiduous attitude that her sister also displayed throughout the year. “We both worked really hard this year,” said Venus. “And I think the results showed here, both in the singles and doubles.”

For Serena in the singles however, it wasn’t the result that she wanted.

“I just lost my rhythm and then I just made a lot of errors,” said the downtrodden figure. “I just couldn’t get the balls in, nothing I was doing was seeming to work.”

Including most importantly that game plan of hers. A game plan that Venus Williams doesn’t take from anyone, including her sister. And she may not take it anymore.

Euro 2008 Final Review: Just in the Nick of Time

Fernando Torres’ entire tournament was the embodiment of his country’s history from the last time they won the European Championships to their successful triumph in Vienna. Heavy expectations growing into a major competition only to bitterly disappoint.

For “El Nino”, in all honesty, the harsh treatment that he ridiculously got from some in the press, whether they were his countrymen or not, was so bad it made TMZ.com a reputable news source. They acted like he blew had legitimate chance after chance constantly, creating a narrative for some who may not have watched the tournament thoroughly (to each his own I guess) to assume that he was blowing it again for the “Rojo y Armarillo.”

With the roles reversed, it was David Villa who became the star man instead of the Liverpool forward, and you know there were some fools who thought literally that he should have been dropped for Cesc Fabregas in the starting lineup. Of course, with Villa out for the final against Germany, Luis Aragones didn’t even have to think about any such stupidity, and most importantly, Torres wasn’t fazed at all. The striker is accustomed to this, because he has been a polarizing figure ever since his emergence on the world since in 2003:

Pegged to be a superstar at Euro 2004 at the age of 20, only to engulf himself as part of the latest disappointment team for the Spanish.

Never ascending to the consistency of a world class 20 goal scorer like many thought he would be when he was Atletico Madrid and nothing less.

Failing to take the next level again along with his country two years ago at the World Cup in Germany.

And being already labeled as a bust and a terrible signing when Rafa Benitiez looked to everyone to have overpaid for him last summer, when Torres didn’t even step onto to the Anfield pitch. In four years Torres has felt his share of criticism. Whether some were wanted and some undeserved, the man had eviscerated all those talks about not being a world class forward in the Barclays Premier League this recent season.

Once again, his credentials were being placed under the microscope internationally after failing to register any goals going into the final. Was he too tired for the longest season of his domestic career? Was he not a step slow in making the runs that would get him quality service from Xavi or Andres Iniesta? Was he unlucky to not be in the spots that his partner Villa placed himself in the tournament? Was he feeling the pressure?

Sadly, there were enough voices asking this question. The one that told the real story instead of idiotic near-jerk reactions where you thought some writers needed to start breathing because oxygen couldn’t have been going in their heads with their irrational statements.

Was the press not focusing on all the other unselfish things that he was doing on the field?

No one talked about Torres giving space to Villa to exploit the Russians in their convincing opening match win. No one gave him credit for his intense work rate and effort against the impervious Italians, focusing more on him getting subbed out than his commendable on the field performance. And no one wanted to give him any credit for his diligence in the rematch against Guus Hiddink’s side. Fernando Torres was not coming through they said, through Spain was scoring two goals a match. But since he didn’t score the goals, I guess that means he wasn’t doing a damn thing, right?

Well for those foolish doubters, Torres certainly got the last laugh. His winning goal in the 33rd minute passed the terrifically offensive but just decent defending fullback Philip Lahm to toe poke one past Jens Lehmann quieted all the doubters of both him and the nation he plays for. It was a feeling of utter satisfaction for his man and his state, ending a 44 year drought of being labeled soccer’s undisputed underachievers with their 1-0 win over Germany.

Enthralled with his forwards performance, the tough minded Luis Aragones showed signs of light-hearted rapture coincided with his team and his nation’s jubilation. Highlighted in his happiness was the approbation he gave to Torres.

“Fernando is a great player for Liverpool and for our team and he can go anywhere because he has really extraordinary speed and he knows how to dribble,” said Aragones after being lifted up and down by his players after the match. “We always tell him he's a player who is so young that he can learn to do everything and there is no doubt he can be one of the best players in the world.”

For Spain, of course there were plenty of other heroes by Torres. Xavi, who seems will finally get the recognition he deserves as of the best midfielders in the sport instead of just being “underrated”, was named the player of the tournament. But it could be argued that he wasn’t the most influential middle man for this loaded Armada.

Cesc Fabregas was arguably the most critical man in this team’s side, handling Aragones’ decision of starting on the bench while Xavi’s partner was Marcos Senna with tremendous professionalism about. He knew he would get his chance to shine, and he definitely showed why he’s just as good as his Barcelona counterpart. Senna has created the argument that he and not Javier Mascherano is the best holding midfielder in the world right now with his top shelf performances. If the Villarreal man is challenging Mascherano, than Iker Castillas is threatening Gigi Buffon heavily on Earth’s premiere goalkeeper front. And Carlos Puyol proved all the doubters of his age wrong by putting in a Fabio Cannavaro type effort in this tournament.

All of them were able to place their staple on Euro 2008 from the get-go, covering any frailties that Torres may have had coming into the final. But when they were no longer able to shield him from their impressive three weeks, El Nino stormed in just in time to be at the center of the party.

“I am happy because my job is to score goals and I have done my job tonight,” said the forward in total felicitation. “But this was a victory for the unity of the group - it doesn't often happen that a group gets along so well. “

Then again, maybe he was at the center of the party from the get go.

Maturing Instead of Moping

Three years ago, he would struggle mightily to even push this match beyond a straight set defeat. If it was held two years ago, he would have emulated his run on empty effort just like he did against Marcos Baghdatis. And if he had played this encounter with Richard Gasquet last year instead of being injured, Andy Murray would have surly became more negative than Gordon Brown’s approval rating.

All of those results, no matter their various characteristics, would make you believe that the Murray you saw on Centre Court today is a bloke that hijacked the body of Scotland’s (and England’s, Wales’ and Northern Island’s) great hope. Because there would have been no way the one known as “Moping Murray” (labeled that dubious moniker in hypocrisy by Patrick McEnroe since Andy Roddick can be accused of doing the same sometimes) came from two sets down the way he did to win the match of his career. Way more so than his straight set mastery of Roddick in 2006, the new golden man of British tennis’ comeback victory over Gasquet is a full testament to his new found self-belief and obvious maturity.

He could have easily gave up and given his Wimbledon aspirations of getting deep into the second week up to the ghost with the way things transpired in the initial two sets. Gasquet once again displayed again for a second consecutive year how grass somehow shows to the world why he is a mercurial talent. Despite all his cons, to dismiss his pros while he is still just 22 years of age is foolhardy to say the least. It was an impressive display from the Frenchman in the beginning of the match all the way to its official middle. He was serving like he was 6’4 and 195 pounds instead of his 6’1,160 pound frame, and did a brilliant job of making Murray look about as valuable on his return of serve as, well, we won’t bring up a certain American again for the third time now.

And with him mixing, bombing, or just being strong with his delivery, it propelled Gasquet to sometimes even hit his forehand bigger than his backhand, winning the crucial “whose going to stay right on the baseline” battle essential to success in this sport. Heck, throw in perfectly timed serve and volleys to counter Murray’s short returns, and it looked like the semifinalist from last year was going to dash the hopes of the British fans who thought a new Murray had arisen.

However, just like he did throughout the whole match in serve games that went to deuce because of a bad forehand or backhand into the net, Murray tested the fans patience and hopes to the highest maximum in the turning point of the match. With Gasquet serving for a most impressive straight set win at 5-4 in the third with no breaks against one of the premiere breakers on the tour, Murray didn’t cast any slump shoulders or any other disconsolate body language. On the contrary, Murray began to show the new sides of him: a stay positive spirit amalgamated with a significantly updated endurance odometer.

Yes, Gasquet got tight, real tight. He double faulted to give Murray a second life to even the set at five-all, but Murray didn’t give up his first life neither in this match. He forced that break in this battle’s turning point by staying aggressive with his backhand return and securing a love-40 lead. And after missing on the first two chances, the gift from the eighth seed was the opening that Murray finally received on his opponent’s serve.

“I think he got a little nervous at the end of the third set.”

The fans, obviously with Murray from the get-go, erupted when he finally received that coveted break. They would explode even more with the brilliance the United Kingdom’s number one displayed in the tiebreak, clinching what turned out to be the middle set with a one handed backhand pass while he was going well off the court. One word to perfectly illustrate the moment?

Ridiculous.

It propelled Murray to higher heights as Gasquet went disproportional to the ascending Dunblane resident. A fourth set rout set the stage for the papers to write their 50 page accounts of this historic moment for Wimbledon history. And through some mental credit must also be given to Gasquet (definitely a sentence that you can’t believe you will actually write at this or any other moment in his career so far) for not folding in the third set, Murray will surly deserve to feel he has a chance against Rafael Nadal. He was clinical in the ultimate set, with the numbers supporting that statement: five aces, no double faults, 18 winners to nine unforced errors. He only faced one break point in the set and handled it the way of a player having that possible career defining moment.

The emotion was just terrific form all constituents in the final match on Centre Court today. Gasquet played the tennis that still shows he has the talent to win Grand Slams if he can get ever get even a sniff of a champion’s mentality. The crowd, who has for now put an end to any uneasiness they may have felt about Murray, was about as terrific as you would want a home audience to be. Most importantly however, the reason for both Gasquet and the fans deserving praise is all due to the world number 11 into his first Grand Slam quarterfinal. Murray brought the best out of the former junior world number one and those who paid to watch him hopefully continue his run. He certainly did that.

On his upcoming match with the Spaniard, Murray favors his chances much higher than most do. “When I played him on the faster courts I had a chance to beat him, “he said to the BBC after the match. “And I feel I’m a lot better player and I’m certainly much fitter.” Based on his demolition of Mikhail Youzhny on Court 1, no natural is favoring Murray to prevent Nadal in his road to a possible third final against Roger Federer. In fact, most may feel that he won’t push Nadal the distance despite almost doing that at last year’s Australian Open.

They were also probably the ones who felt Murray was still susceptible to moments of horrendous posture, before they witnessed his second two sets to none comeback victory in his career today. And maybe realized, at least for one match, this is a different Andy Murray who won’t mope when the going gets tough anymore.

Welcome to "The Deft Volleys"

The worlds of tennis and international football (or soccer in America) are two of the most captivating sports on the entire planet. The global affection for both of these sports is apparent in how many participants from almost every continent take part in them, and the fans’ fervor in competitions between countries such as the World Cup and Davis Cup bring is something that isn't restricted to one region or country in the world.

However, in America, despite a rise in television time for both of their big events as well as new channels dedicated solely to their fields, let’s be real here: they no where near get the love that football, basketball, and baseball receive. In the big sporting magazines such as Sports Illustrated, ESPN the Magazine, and the Sporting News to name a few, you will only see good attention given (if any) on the big events that no magazine, regardless on how low they view these sports, can’t ignore. The same can definitely be said of nationally renowned newspapers in big city markets.

With that, sometimes the coverage of these two athletic fields here in the United States isn’t necessarily as good or closely analyzed, scrutinized, and debated as it should be. The obvious or basic stories are written for just the casual sports fan who don’t have a consistent interest in even massive (but not the number one event by far in the sport) contest like the UEFA Champions League Final or the Italian Open. They only deliver devout attention to these sports whenever the World Cup comes or whenever the four Grand Slams are in play (and it can be both argued that both the Australian and French Opens don’t get the love equal to Wimbledon and the U.S. Open from the mainstream American media).

Even ESPN, in their pursuit of truly representing the mantra “Worldwide Leader in Sports”, has been criticized heavily by regular fans of both tennis and soccer for their intensive, but questionable coverage of these sports. Whether it through impartial commentating, dubious hours of taped-delayed action or mediocre in depth discussion on the topics that are near and dear to the fans of the sports, ESPN has also played a part in alienating the core followers of “the beautiful game” and the “green ball extravaganza.” Not only that, but it has also placed even some feelings of anger towards both the specific soccer and tennis communities on who is going to get the most attention of being ESPN’s dubbed “niche” sport.

“Why are they showing so much tennis on here” or “Why is soccer cutting into tennis time” are the questions that may arise on some soccer or tennis forums, especially the one that raises up either question doesn’t care about the other sport in the least bit.

I, on the other hand, clearly have affection for both of these sports, as well as a myriad of others. Through the NBA, MLB, the NFL, and the NCAA’s in the sports of basketball and football will always be among my favorites (and there are several others like track and field that I enjoy), tennis and soccer are two of the sports that are near and dear to my Brooklyn soul. And with that, the idea of bringing them together was formed.
There needed to be a blog that brings both of these two terrific sports together in a spectacular way. Through one is a team game and the other either presents itself as an individual or duo sport (singles and doubles of course), one usually has a set time limit while the other can go as long as it wants to, and one allows you to use your hands while the other bans everyone except one player for using their upper appendages, both soccer and tennis share close similarities as well as sharp differences. They are extreme running sports where going side to side is common, they are globally accepted but in America semi-disrespected, and they both contain their share of, there I say, deft volleys.

Yes, deft volleys.

“The Deft Volleys” is the name of the blog and it’s something that I am happy to create for not only the fans of both the tennis and soccer world, but even the casual fan who may need a perspective or update on these great sports and realize that there’s nothing “third-rate” about them. Just as important, however, is that it could bring both soccer and tennis fans together (if they aren’t already unified) in a way to officially end any discourse with each other. I don’t mean to get all United Nations cheesy here, but the blog will simply be dedicated none other to tennis and soccer (or soccer and tennis if you want to put it that way).

Because Swiss clinical combo Roger Federer and Alexander Frei certainly have “deft volleys.” Spanish sensations Rafael Nadal and Cesc Fabregas have “deft volleys.” And (only tennis fans will get this one) Roman Pavluchenko and yes, even Maria Sharapova, have “deft volleys.”

About one of the few things bring these two sports together.

Tears of Disarray from Despair

In just a mere two days, the thoughts that there was no real depth in women’s tennis have been annihilated faster than Maria Sharapova and now, Ana Ivanovic here.

All those years of cupcake first week talk, where the usual quote was “now the real tournament starts for the women” seem now about as antiquated as Bill Simmons tennis brain (if there is any left that is).
For those wishing that people would simply shut up about the women’s game not being as strong in numbers as the men’s game in terms of depth, hope maybe currently unfolding in front of our eyes.

Of course, the emphatic example of this sudden, legitimate aggrandizing of the power throughout the women’s field will only be compete if Venus or Serena Williams somehow become part of the upset bug-a-boo this fortnight like they have been a number of times in the past. Or if Jelena Jankovic finally realizes that this is the time to actually serve and play offensive tennis worth the mantle of a Grand Slam champion.

She certainly won’t shed a tear for Ivanovic of course, whose days at number one for the moment could be transient to say it in a benevolent way. Instead of propelling to higher heights after swimming with the sharks of Natalie Dechy two days ago, the recent French Open champion did the opposite in 6-1, 6-4 beating 131st ranked wild card Jie Zheng delivered to her.

If Sharapova was tentative and terrible against Alla Kudryavtseva’s, Ivanovic was ghastly and gloomy in her own shocking departure.

In a performance that was just as bad as some her displays in 2005 and 2006 while she was maturing, Ivanovic let the expectations get to her in the worst possible fashion, in the worst way. Over the last few years, Vera Zvonareva and Anna Chakvetadze, who has had a pleasant revival during the first week, had public moments of crying that they were criticized heavily for. Denunciation sadly may have to be given to this three time Grand Slam finalist as well for exhibiting conspicuous sullenness at such an unnecessary time.

Still well in the match at 1-6, 2-3 during the changeover, Ivanovic turned the water works on for the world to see how vulnerable she was. It was a stunning moment that you wouldn’t expect from her after all that she has been through in tennis the last 13 months. Despite going off the boil after the first two games of her French Open final last year against Justine Henin, she never showed signs of disconsolation. When Venus Williams outclassed her last year at Wimbledon and frustrated her to no end at the US Open, there was no water works shown. And even against Sharapova at this year’s Australian Open final, when she had her chances at 5-4, two points away for taking that first set, there was nothing from her façade containing extreme depressed emotion after being defeated.

But all of that was before she ascended to the apex of the sport. She had proven all year long that she was the best player, and she was thought by many to be ready to at least give it her best try and seize her new found elite status. There would have been no shame and questioning of her credentials to be a force if she had lost a thriller to Serena or Venus later in the tournament. And even with this lost, there sill may be some that will she say she just had “a bad day”, like Sharapova.

However, just like the American Russian, the questioning of whether Ivanovic can really handle the pressure when she’s the one with her name next to the number one slot or atop the odds makers table will be justifiably brought up. Just like those stunning tears.

The one who helped produced those tears, Zheng, is another captivating story in her own right. The Chinese world class doubles player looked like every much bit a premiere soloist in many facets, overcoming her debilitations from injuries last year and the devastating earthquake in her town less than two months ago. One of the future representatives for her country at its Olympic Games in Beijing, Zheng drove Ivanovic crazy with her counterpunching and combination of speed, shot selection, patience and aggressive. Her compact backhand, just like Kudryavtseva’s one against Sharapova, was slow or fast, short or deep. And maybe the key reason to this latest stunning result was the way Zheng served, or the way Ivanovic returned those deliveries.

“I liked the grass,” said a delighted Zheng after the biggest win of her singles career. “I stay low (and) it’s tough for her because the courts no jump too high.”

Quite frankly, it was the horrendous of the horrendous in the game of Ivanovic today. More so than even her own serve, which showed up about 12 games too late today in itself. She converted only one of seven break point chances against Zheng, but even more painful to watch was her lack of anything threatening to her opponent’s serve as the match progressed to its conclusion. She was jammed too easily by Zheng’s moving first serve, and whenever she got a look at a second offer that most of the times was slower than some groundstrokes, the WTA’s top ranked player choked it away with either a stroke into the net or the most telling point of this match: an overly aggressive second serve forehand return well wide that gave Zheng two match points.

And after falling to emulate her survival or receive lady luck again in her epic against Dechy, Ivanovic is the latest example of the diminishing days of talent only bestowed to the top five or 10 players in the women’s game, with a few underachieving ones mired in the mediocre 30’s, 40’s, and 50’s in the rankings. Her mulligan will be painful, and it will give her and her camp more time to analyze about her altered mindset since winning in Paris some 19 days yonder.

“It’s tough, you know,” said a more composed Ivanovic in the press room than she was on Court one. “But I think she played well today, (and) it was a tough match for me.”

Though the increase of dangerous talents in the women’s game still has some ways to go in order to compete with the men’s quality in numbers (picture Sveltana Kuznetsova with her talent ranked as low as say, Marat Safin or someone in the women’s game winning a Grand Slam like Goran Ivanisevic did in improbable fashion with a wild card in 2001), only the most critical skeptic could call these upsets just bizarre flukes.

Suddenly, Kuznetsova and Jankovic, who has been talked about so little at the AELTC this year to the level that you didn’t think her and Jaime Murray mixed double partnership made the papers go crazy , have a legit shot at being number one now at the end of this tournament.

As the depth grows, so does the disarray in women’s tennis. Seems a new topic has arisen where people can tell others possibly to shut up about.

"The Favorite's" Unforgettable Day

Maybe it was the pants. Maybe it was competing with Roger Federer and Serena Williams to be Nike’s fashion darling over the fortnight. Or maybe it was the thumb injury to Michael Joyce.

But despite all those possible reasons, immense pressure was the definitive answer for the shocking demise of Maria Sharapova on Court one.

“I was pretty tentative,” said the number three seed after suffering the biggest upset of this tournament, the biggest upset of this tennis year: a comprehensively beating by 154th ranked Alla Kudryavtseva in a 6-2, 6-4 scoreline that will make those who didn’t watch the match question if the right player is on the left side of the letter “D.”

Gone is all the momentum of coming back from a woeful 2007 and winning the Australian Open. Gone is some pundits’ maddeningly belief that she would dominate the game the remainder of the year.
And what happens to all the good feelings about Sharapova coming into to this year’s Wimbldeon tournament?

N’Sync doesn’t even have to sing the word to you.

The signs of this happening weren’t showing at all. Despite her contentious and painful lost to Dinara Safina at the latter preliminary stages of the French Open, Sharapova had improved her form enough at Paris to consolidate all the confidence she had in the early part of the year. She was the oddsmakers favorite even after it was revealed that Venus Williams was in her half of the draw . And that she hadn’t come close to beating Serena Williams since losing three match points against her at the 2005 Grand Slam opener.

No matter to Sports Illustrated’s Jon Wertheim and many other experts however, as they felt somehow someway that the American Russian was going to hoist her second title here. But despite their lack of definitive reasons for picking her to take the tournament, if anyone prognosticated her to egress Wimbledon in the second round, they seriously need severe medication. And even with their “out of this stratosphere” prediction turning out to be an actual truth, they still should get a dose of “What were you smoking?”

Nevertheless, the domination that Kudryavtseva placed on Sharapova was felt in every facet of the game. Kudryavtseva, who failed to take out the elder of the Williams sisters last year when she had her on the ropes in round one, refused to stop laying the blows this time around. At times in the second set, from the first two games to the seventh one when Sharapova survived two break points, it seemed she was going to recapitulate a match against a top player again. Instead, not only did she earn the match by keeping placid and strong, it was also the person on the other side of the net that made this the most jaw dropping result here since Jill Craybas knocked out Serena three years ago. Even bigger than Marion Bartoli dispatching Justine Henin the way she did in the third set of their semifinal last year.

“You think I played great, why thank you so much,” said a humbled and obvious enthralled Kudryavtseva. “For sure beating her is a big moment for me.”

Always against Sharapova, showing her that you have the controlled belief to beat her in the incipient stages of the match is crucial to whether you will do so. Establishing that mental frame and keeping it at the same level is integral against her. And Kudryavtseva displayed that so beautifully that Nadia Petrova should take notes from her 22nd ranked countrywoman on how to close out the 1st ranked one. Even through she failed to convert on break point opportunities in the first two Sharapova serve games, Kudryavtseva didn’t get down on herself. On the contrary, she continued to be clinical and sharp on her serve games, avoiding her own self-destruction and still taking the initiative with her compact strokes that work so well on the grass.

“I didn't say I was confident I'm going to win,” said the improbable winner of this match. “But I just thought I have to put myself in the frame of mind that if I have a chance I have to take it.”

Take it she did.

That mindset lead to the exact opposite on the other side of the net, as Sharapova equaled her holler of a performance at last year’s US Open to Aggie Radwanska to put it in the running of worst match of her career. The serve is of course the said be all of her game. But more essential to success for the IMG client though is what’s in her head. And especially important, the alpha key for whether Sharapova will ever be the consistent champion beating everyone at their best when the expectations are on her to do so will be how her head handles the pressure. The moments when someone challenges her all the way to pushing her on the brink of a crushing defeat, showing the spirit of refusing to submit to the vociferous grunts and intense style of Sharapova’s play.

Today, like her match against Safina in Paris, Radwanska in Flushing Meadow last year, and the beatdowns that Ana Ivanovic and the Williams sisters delivered to her in the recent 12 month epoch, Sharapova crumbled. And any of her fans would contest that she was the epitome of brutal like never before. Even more so than against the Polish teen in Queens last year.

It wasn’t just the fact that she was broken five times in nine serve games. How it unfolded had to be disheartening to her supporters. As Kudryavtseva was consistent and cynical, Sharapova was tense and terrible. The 2004 titlist at a stunning 17 year old stunned herself four years later with how awful she was on the baseline and in the middle of the court. Forehands into the net, backhands into the net and getting wrong footed constantly by her slightly younger, vastly less successful opponent, it was an array of negatives for Yuri Sharapov’s daughter. And though it was an amazing moment to see Kudryavtseva rise to the moment with a brilliant running forehand to seal the famous victory, the main story of the match was the unbelievable departure of Sharapova.

A shocking departure that can’t be attributed to those new garments or her assistant coach’s weird injury. Rather, folding to the expectations expected of her proved to be the reason for an embarrassing victory that most will remember, but that Sharapova will want to forget completely.

Welcome to "The Deft Volleys"

The worlds of tennis and international football (or soccer in America) are two of the most captivating sports on the entire planet. The global affection for both of these sports is apparent in how many participants from almost every continent take part in them, and the fans’ fervor in competitions between countries such as the World Cup and Davis Cup bring is something that isn't restricted to one region or country in the world.

However, in America, despite a rise in television time for both of their big events as well as new channels dedicated solely to their fields, let’s be real here: they no where near get the love that football, basketball, and baseball receive. In the big sporting magazines such as Sports Illustrated, ESPN the Magazine, and the Sporting News to name a few, you will only see good attention given (if any) on the big events that no magazine, regardless on how low they view these sports, can’t ignore. The same can definitely be said of nationally renowned newspapers in big city markets.

With that, sometimes the coverage of these two athletic fields here in the United States isn’t necessarily as good or closely analyzed, scrutinized, and debated as it should be. The obvious or basic stories are written for just the casual sports fan who don’t have a consistent interest in even massive (but not the number one event by far in the sport) contest like the UEFA Champions League Final or the Italian Open. They only deliver devout attention to these sports whenever the World Cup comes or whenever the four Grand Slams are in play (and it can be both argued that both the Australian and French Opens don’t get the love equal to Wimbledon and the U.S. Open from the mainstream American media).

Even ESPN, in their pursuit of truly representing the mantra “Worldwide Leader in Sports”, has been criticized heavily by regular fans of both tennis and soccer for their intensive, but questionable coverage of these sports. Whether it through impartial commentating, dubious hours of taped-delayed action or mediocre in depth discussion on the topics that are near and dear to the fans of the sports, ESPN has also played a part in alienating the core followers of “the beautiful game” and the “green ball extravaganza.” Not only that, but it has also placed even some feelings of anger towards both the specific soccer and tennis communities on who is going to get the most attention of being ESPN’s dubbed “niche” sport.

“Why are they showing so much tennis on here” or “Why is soccer cutting into tennis time” are the questions that may arise on some soccer or tennis forums, especially the one that raises up either question doesn’t care about the other sport in the least bit.

I, on the other hand, clearly have affection for both of these sports, as well as a myriad of others. Through the NBA, MLB, the NFL, and the NCAA’s in the sports of basketball and football will always be among my favorites (and there are several others like track and field that I enjoy), tennis and soccer are two of the sports that are near and dear to my Brooklyn soul. And with that, the idea of bringing them together was formed.
There needed to be a blog that brings both of these two terrific sports together in a spectacular way. Through one is a team game and the other either presents itself as an individual or duo sport (singles and doubles of course), one usually has a set time limit while the other can go as long as it wants to, and one allows you to use your hands while the other bans everyone except one player for using their upper appendages, both soccer and tennis share close similarities as well as sharp differences. They are extreme running sports where going side to side is common, they are globally accepted but in America semi-disrespected, and they both contain their share of, there I say, deft volleys.

Yes, deft volleys.

“The Deft Volleys” is the name of the blog and it’s something that I am happy to create for not only the fans of both the tennis and soccer world, but even the casual fan who may need a perspective or update on these great sports and realize that there’s nothing “third-rate” about them. Just as important, however, is that it could bring both soccer and tennis fans together (if they aren’t already unified) in a way to officially end any discourse with each other. I don’t mean to get all United Nations cheesy here, but the blog will simply be dedicated none other to tennis and soccer (or soccer and tennis if you want to put it that way).

Because Swiss clinical combo Roger Federer and Alexander Frei certainly have “deft volleys.” Spanish sensations Rafael Nadal and Cesc Fabregas have “deft volleys.” And (only tennis fans will get this one) Roman Pavluchenko and yes, even Maria Sharapova, have “deft volleys.”

About one of the few things bring these two sports together.