I realize that today's blog is going to interest maybe about three people, but it's my blog and I want to talk about tennis, so I'm going to and there's nothing anyone can do to stop me. As I write, the first major on the tennis calendar is getting underway: the Australian Open. (Maria Sharapova is the opening match, so I'm currently switching back and forth between the football game and the tennis.) Now, mid-January always seems to early to be tennis season, but it's the middle of summer in Australia, so the timing of this tournament isn't changing anytime soon. And there's more buzz heading into the Aussie Open this year than there normally is. The women's draw is wide open without two-time defending champion Serena Williams, and on the men's side, Rafael Nadal is looking to complete the "Rafa Slam."
Winning the career grand slam in tennis is challenging enough. Only seven men, including both Nadal and Roger Federer, and nine women have accomplished the feat in history. Winning all four of them in a row is virtually impossible. The last person to do it was Serena Williams, who completed the "Serena Slam" at the 2003 Australian Open). (The last true grand slam, all four in one year, was last pulled off by Steffi Graf in 1988.) But Nadal enters the Australian Open looking to join that exclusive group, becoming the first man ever to pull off a non-calendar year grand slam and become just the third man to win all four consecutively (Rod Laver did it twice, in 1962 and 1969). As a Roger fan, I dislike Rafael Nadal so much he might as well be from Boston. I root against him every time he plays, and this tournament is no different. In fact, I'll probably be rooting against him harder than ever.
My heart tells me that Nadal won't win the Australian Open, and my head agrees. This is usually the most unpredictable grand slam tournament (Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Marcos Baghdatis and Fernando Gonzalez have been finalists here in recent years), and I wouldn't be surprised if that trend continues this year. However, I do think Nadal is among a handful of favorites for the title. Andy Murray beat Nadal in the quarters last year before losing to Roger in the final. Murray has never won a grand slam title (when two guys win them all, it's hard for anybody else to break through), but this might be his best chance. He ended 2010 on a roll and looked good in the warmup tournaments. Murray and Nadal would meet in the semis and Rafa's been having an issue with his foot. Besides, Murray isn't scared of him, having beaten him here last year and in the 2008 U.S. Open semifinals.
On the bottom half of the draw, Roger's the defending champion, and he's Roger, so you can't count him out. You also have Novak Djokovic in the bottom half. Djokovic has been number 3 in the world seemingly forever, but he did manage to break the Federer-Nadal stranglehold on grand slam titles by winning this tournament in 2008. He beat Roger in the semis of the U.S. Open last year, then almost single-handedly won the Davis Cup for Serbia in December (he won both of his singles matches in the best-of-five final). Then there's Andy Roddick, who's ranking has dropped to No. 8. Roddick had a bad year in 2010, so he really needs to bounce back. We're getting close to the point where Roddick won't be considered a contender at grand slams anymore, but I'm not writing him off just yet. Problem is he's in Roger's quarter.
Federer and Nadal haven't met in a grand slam final since Rafa beat Roger in a classic five-setter in the final of this tournament two years ago. But I'm not going to take the easy way out and say that they're on a collision course. They'll both get to the semis, but Nadal will lose to Murray, while Roger will beat Djokovic. Then in a rematch of last year's final, Roger defends his Australian Open title.
Without two-time defending champion Serena, the women's draw is more wide open than you could imagine. Last year, Justine Henin made her return to tennis at the Australian Open and reached the final as a wild card. She's seeded 11th this year and won this thing in 2004, so I'm tabbing her as the "favorite." But the contenders are plenty. Kim Clijsters is coming off her second straight U.S. Open title and has a pretty good-looking draw. Her only Australian Open final appearance was a loss to Henin in 2004, but she's made it to at least the semis five times.
There's also Venus Williams, who amazingly has never won a grand slam tournament other than Wimbledon or the U.S. Open. She usually ends up losing to her sister, so Venus might have a better chance to win without Serena in the field. My lovely Maria Sharapova, the 2008 Australian Open champion, is usually a contender as long as she's healthy. However, Maria's one of the most frustratingly inconsistent players in tennis. At grand slams, she either makes a deep run or loses early to someone you've never heard of. I can keep busting out the names of women's players who have a chance to win the Australian Open (Vera Zvonareva, Victoria Azarena, Maria Kirilenko), but No. 1 Caroline Wozniacki and former No. 1 Jelena Jankovic are two of the more interesting. The women's game lacks the two-headed monster the men's players have to deal with, so I'm supremely confident the ubertalented Wozniacki will eventually win a grand slam title. But I've also been saying that about Jankovic for years, and she's still waiting for her breakthrough.
I think both Wozniacki and Jankovic will fall to the Belgians in the quarterfinals. In the semis, I'm taking Henin over Azarenka and Clijsters over Kirilenko, with Henin beating Clijsters in the all-Belgian final. (For those of you who don't enjoy tennis, thank you for indulging me with today's post.)
No comments:
Post a Comment