Wimbledon finals

Later today is the Wimbledon ladies’ final with the gentlemen’s title being decided tomorrow. More on the gentlemen’s final below, but of the two the ladies’ final looks like it could be the more interesting match. Serena Williams upset both Petra Kvitova and Victoria Azarenka en route to the final and will face Agnieszka Radwanska, who has managed to advance fairly quietly to the final. Being the incredibly partial person that I am, the most notice I took of her up to now was probably when she beat Heather Watson in the third round. Her path was somewhat cleared ahead of time by Sharapova losing, however, and she never really seemed to have a ‘big’ match up to now.

Radwanska and Williams should make for an interesting match because they have very contrasting styles. Williams is a powerful striker of the ball, to use some parlance usually reserved for T20. She is almost a tennis version of a T20 player, though; her game almost begins and ends at hitting the cover off the ball. She serves very hard and hits a lot of aces, whereas Radwanska is more defensive and focuses on cutting out errors. To continue the cricketing analogy, Radwanska is one who plays tennis in a manner reminiscent of Jonathan Trott or Alastair Cook playing cricket. It’s not terribly flashy or expansive, but it tends to be very technically correct and without a lot of risk of errors. Williams has defeated Radwanska in both of their previous head to head matches, but both were four years ago. In this tournament at least, I think the contrast of style favours Radwanska.

Looking at the stats from their first six matches, it is quickly clear that Radwanska has won a lot of matches through her opponents errors, whilst Williams has won hers with aces and winners. Radwanska has got this far despite conceding more winners than she has hit, but her opponents have committed twice the number of unforced errors that she has. For Williams, the inverse is true: she has committed one more unforced error than her opponents, but has hit close to twice the number of winners. It is certainly possible for Williams to overpower Radwanska. However, Radwanska will not give Williams very much at all and Williams is going to have to be fairly accurate with her shots. If she starts to have a comparable number of unforced errors to winners then Radwanska will find herself in a very comfortable position. It is on that point that I expect the match will turn and for two reasons I think Radwanska goes into it with an advantage. The first reason is the simple one of adrenaline: Williams is a seasoned competitor, but she has been away from the top for some time and I would be quite surprised if there is not a bit more zip to her shots. This can lead to inaccuracy at the best of times, but especially when combined with the other factor: weariness. Williams has also reached the doubles final with her sister and has thus been playing every day all week, sometimes more than once due to the rain. Tired players in any sport tend to be less precise and Williams’ schedule could be her undoing.

I would not want to be nailed into a firm prediction, but that is how I think the odds favour and I do hope that I am correct as I very much dislike the way Serena Williams plays. It is an awful, ugly ‘brute force’ style of tennis and one that I very much do not want to be rewarded. If she finds success it will simply encourage other players to follow that style. Already the women’s game is showing signs of turning into a game of errors and Williams winning will only worsen it. Furthermore, her attitude toward the officials bears a striking similarity to that of a New York Yankee. We saw it most clearly at the US Open last year; there is a strong sense of entitled smugness and I hate it. Beyond any desire for my analysis to be correct, I simply hate watching her play tennis and I hope she loses and loses badly.

Of course, it is the final on Sunday on which most will focus their attention. Regardless of the winner, some sort of history will be made: either Andy Murray will become the first British man to win Wimbledon since 1936 (and he has already become the first one into the final since then) or Roger Federer will return to the number one ranking and break the record for most weeks at number one. The former would certainly be more dramatic, but it is the latter which is far more likely. Djokovic may have been a bit below his best in the semi-final, but Federer was still extremely impressive. Murray has had the benefit of Nadal going out early and has never really looked convincing. He has certainly done well, Tonga and Ferrer are not pushovers, but still he has never really looked dominant against the opponents he has faced. One very strongly gets the impression that Federer will not let Murray off the hook if the latter slips a bit, but that Murray might let Federer off if the reverse happens. Britain has ended her wait for a gentlemen’s finalist at Wimbledon, but I expect her wait for a gentlemen’s champion will go on for a bit yet.

Aussie Open QF preview

I haven’t written about tennis in a while, mostly because it’s never on telly and I can’t come up with a very good analysis when it isn’t. The Australian Open is on TV though, at least when ESPN deign to show me the matches, and the quarter-final matches start tonight/tomorrow morning. There have not been a lot of surprises on the men’s side of the draw so far, the biggest story was a pair of unseeded Australians, Bernard Tomic and Lleyton Hewitt, making it to the fourth round. Unfortunately for the home supporters they had the misfortune of facing Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic respectively and rather unsurprisingly they both lost. The only upset that has had ramifications for the quarter-finals is Kei Nishikori defeating sixth seed Jo-Wilfried Tsonga to face Andy Murray. It’s good news for those of us who want Murray to do well, because whilst I think he would have overcome Tsonga he should have a much easier time against the 24th seed than the sixth. The other quarter-finals on the men’s side are Djokovic v Ferrer, Del Potro v Federer and Berdych v Nadal. None of them really scream ‘upset’ to me, the best chance is probably for Ferrer who has played well, but I don’t see Djokovic giving him much of an opening. It would be bad news for Andy if I’m right, as there seems little chance of him overcoming Djokovic in the semi-finals.

There have been rather more upsets in the women’s draw, with two unseeded players in the quarter-finals. The more remarkable of the two is Ekaterina Makarova who beat the seventh and 15th seeds to book a match against Maria Sharapova in the quarters. The other, Italian Sara Errani, had a rather more favourable draw, but still had to beat 29th seed Nadia Petrova in the second round. It may also qualify as an upset that last year’s Champion Kim Clijsters won an incredible match against Li Na, saving three or four match points in the second set. Clijsters will face world number one Caroline Wozniacki in what I think will be the best of either the men’s or women’s quarter-final matchups. (Though I’m also really looking forward to the Makarova-Sharapova match.) In the other two matches, I doubt Perta Kvitova will have too much trouble getting past Errani and Victoria Azarenka v Agnieszka Radwanska might be a pretty good match, but I think Azarenka will win reasonably comfortably. Between this and the two cricket matches starting soon the next few evenings should be a lot of fun.

Andy’s still British!

Andy Murray won the Shanghai Masters for the second consecutive year yesterday. (Or the day before? I don’t know what the time difference is.) It always looked on the cards; not only was he in excellent form, but Nadal suffered a shock defeat in the third round. Until he faced fifth ranked David Ferrer in the final, his most illustrious opponent was world number 19 Stanislas Wawrinka who he beat in the third round 6-4, 3-6, 6-3. As a result of the win Murray will move into third in the ATP rankings, ahead of Roger Federer. Read that again: Andy Murray is better than Roger Federer. It’s quite some result, but not undeserved. Since his loss at Wimbledon the Briton has won 28 out of the thirty matches he has played, won four tournaments and led Great Britain to a pair of Davis Cup victories. Since going out of the US Open he has won sixteen consecutive matches. It’s still a while before the Australian Open, but at this rate he may only need Djokovic to injure himself.

Andy you’re a star

Andy Murray overcame Rafael Nadal to win the Japan Open last night. (Well it wasn’t night there, but you know what I mean.) I didn’t see it, because the rugby was on, so all I know comes from the Guardian coverage of the match.

I’d liked to have seen it, though (and I did try). Apparently Murray’s victory came with a final set whitewash (against Nadal)! It is Murray’s 12th straight victory and his 20th career title. Hopefully he can keep his purple patch going through the Australian Open in four months.

I’ll be thinking of an unrelated thing

If you look very carefully in the sports section you will see that some events other than a pair of miserable England performances took place yesterday. Buried down below the rugby post-mortems, below the analyses of the football performance in Montenegro, down just above the foreign football results and the CLT20 news you will see that Andy Murray made it to the final of the Japan Open.

Murray has been playing very well recently. Last week he easily won the Thailand Open and has won eleven consecutive matches and 22 of his last 23. The problem he will face in the final is Rafael Nadal. Nadal the #2 in the world. Nadal who has inflicted two of Murray’s last three defeats and knocked him out of the last three Grand Slams. Murray has defeated Nadal before, of course. Most memorable was in the quarter finals of the 2010 Australian Open, but also in the final of the ABN AMRO World Tennis Tournament. (Yeah, I had to look that up.) The latter tournament is on the same level as the Japan Open, so there is a smidgen of hope for Murray. Fingers crossed.

The match, near as I can tell, will be on Sunday (9 October) at 06.00 BST, 00.00 CDT. It might also be two hours earlier. I saw two different statements on the tournament’s website, and I’m not certain I correctly translated from Japanese time to BST. (All of the news stories on that site, by the way, are punctuated with double exclamation marks. Somehow it seems appropriate.) Unfortunately if I’m right this is the same time at which the third RWC quarter final starts, so I’ll probably be watching that.