US Open summary [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

US Open summary

tennis2tennis
09-12-2007, 10:18 AM
Sunday, Sept. 9, 9:36 PM EDT
14 days. 256 players. 2 winners.
tennis channel blog (http://www.thetennischannel.com/roland_garros/winner's_blog/james_usopen.aspx)

Well that seems unfair. Why not spread the wealth, right? Let's hear it for the people who've made this one memorable US Open. For better or for worse.

Best Match (ATP): The American in me says Blake v. Santoro, but while there was no Will He Or Won't He fifth set drama, shot for shot I have to go with Djokovic v. Stepanek. Five sets of phenomenal tennis played by two men clearly enjoying themselves out there. And demanding the crowd to join in. Uncle.

Best Match (WTA): Venus Williams v. Jelena Jankovic. It wasn't supposed to be a barnburner. Jankovic clearly wasn't playing her best tennis this tournament. Venus was. But Jelena stepped it up, and Venus obliged, giving the crowd three sets of high drama, fearlessness and fun. That's not all it gave us.

Best Sports: J elena Jankovic and Radek Stepanek. To come so far to only have to go home empty handed after final set tiebreaks, these two had more reason than anyone to be insanely bitter. But Radek hopped the net to give Novak a hug, and Jelena smiled and gave a great speech to the crowd. They lost their matches but gained a slew of new fans

Worst Sport: Serena Williams. How many lucky shots make up a 6-1 second and final set?

Worst Match (ATP): Anything starring Andy Roddick pre-Federer. His opponents were either retiring (Gimelstob) or just plain retired (Acasuso, Berdych). At least Roddick himself went out with a bang.

Worst Match (WTA): While there were certainly groaners in the early rounds, by the time you reach the semis, you should be held to a higher standard. Nerves led to errors, which led to three sets of community park tennis. Svetlana Kuznetsova and Anna Chakvetadze, you're lucky people who bought tickets to your match got to see Justine and Venus as well, or they'd have every right to ask for their money back.

Breakthrough Performance (male): Ernests Gulbis.Puttin' Latvia on the map, baby.

Breakthrough Performance (female): Agnieszka Radwanska had the biggest upset, Agnes Szavay the best run. But I'm going with Victoria Azarenka. She took out Hingis in convincing style, and was the only one who left with actual hardware - the Mixed Doubles trophy, with partner Max Mirnyi.

Breakdown Performance (male): Mardy Fish, dumping a 4-1 lead in the fifth against Tommy Robredo.

Breakdown Performance (female): Cara Black and Liezel Huber. The top seeds lost serious steam in the second set v. Camerin & Dulko and saw their US Open run end in an early, and nasty, fall.

Best On-Site Booth: Ace Authentic. Partnered with the USTA, you can rest a little easier knowing that the memorabilia you buy here isn't secretly being autographed in a darkened van by a guy named Bubba. And they've got all kinds of fun stuff. Match-used balls, shirts sweated through by your favorite players... You too can own a piece of the net Elena Dementieva double faulted into!

Best On-Site Concession: Crepes. Better than in Paris. Go figure.

Worst On-Site Concession: Cheeseburger and Fries Better in Paris. Go figure.

Oddest On-Site Giveaway: A tote bag for a menopause drug. Allez!

Biggest Bully (male): Mikhail Youzhny, who allowed just three games to Nicolas Devilder in his first round beat down.

Biggest Bully (female): Esther Vergeer, unbeaten in Wheelchair since 2003, drops a handful of games on her way to yet another US Open title.

Best Dressed (male): Roger Federer. He looked like a groom at a leather bar, but it worked.

Best Dressed (female): Maria Sharapova. Her red Nike dress was a primetime hit. Too bad her third round match had to take place during the day.

Worst Dressed: You want me to say Bethanie, but I won't. I love that she goes for it (and lands tennis in Perez. Which, come to think of it, could be a dubious achievement...). Who refuses to go for it are the clothing giants who put all the players in the same ole boring rags. Where's the personality? You can't expect Ivan Ljubicic to supply it all the time.

Coolest Celebrity Appearance: Janet. Ms. Jackson if you're nasty.

Creepiest Celebrity Appearance: Anna Wintour. Is she alive? Someone, poke her.

Best Deal with the Devil: The USTA and Mother Nature.

Worst Deal with the Devil: The USTA and the Draw Gods.

Most Undeniable Fact: Justine Henin and Roger Federer are the best players in world.

Best Gig: Bringing you the ins and outs, and highs and lows, of the 2007 US Open. It's been a blast for me. Hopefully you've had a little fun, too. And maybe you've learned a thing or two. Rats can be pets. Belarus is just north of Ukraine. And Ahsha does know her name is a palindrome.

Thanks for reading. Til next time.

alansk
09-12-2007, 10:25 AM
Rats can be pets. Belarus is just north of Ukraine. And Ahsha does know her name is a palindrome.

:lol: Nice

Tennistunes
09-12-2007, 10:28 AM
Some great info and perspective in here...
The following is a question and answer session with Rene Stauffer, the author of THE ROGER FEDERER STORY, QUEST FOR PERFECTION, the first US published biography of Roger Federer. Federer won his record fourth straight US Open men’s singles title Sunday, defeating Novak Djokovic of Serbia 7-6, 7-6, 6-4 in the championship match. The title also marked Federer’s 12th career Grand Slam singles title, tying him with Roy Emerson for No. 2 all-time for most Grand Slam men’s singles finals, two shy of Pete Sampras’ 14 Grand Slam singles titles. For more info on THE ROGER FEDERER STORY, QUEST FOR PERFECTION, go to www.rogerfedererbook.com.





Q: What are your thoughts and impressions of Roger’s win at the US Open?



STAUFFER: Roger did not play his best tennis overall. It was more hard work than magic, but certainly his hunger and desire to win were as big as ever. That's what carried him through all those difficult moments in the semis and final. I'd say he won due to this desire, his mental strength and toughness as well as his ability to stay calm and positive, even facing set point after set point. He also won based on his experience in all these major finals and his ability to change his game if things did not work as well as he wished.



Q: How does Roger’s four straight US Open titles compare to his five straight at Wimbledon? Is this more significant of an achievement since the hard courts of the US Open are more of an equalizing surface and there are more players who have the ability to beat him on hard courts than grass courts?



STAUFFER: Good question. Actually Roger’s four US titles in a row are more meaningful and representative of his overall strength, because hard courts are a fair surface for everybody and there is much more competition than on grass, which doesn’t suit a lot of players well. But since Wimbledon was always closer to Roger than Flushing, even as a kid, his five Wimbledon titles mean more to him, and having tied Borg’s record this year, certainly stands above his fourth U.S. title and was the defining moment of 2007.



Q: Did you find it difficult to write a book about Federer's career while it was in progress?



STAUFFER: Of course this was a challenge. There are several risks involved and you need a little luck that things don't change too dramatically after the book is out, otherwise it might look very old very quickly (like injuries, form slumps, changes in his entourage etc...) So far, i was pretty lucky, but there is nothing i can do to influence that.



Q. With his legacy depending on the outcome on how Federer handles future matches with him, do you think this book will be obsolete in four years?



STAUFFER: I don't agree with this theory. In my opinion, Nadal’s influence on Roger and his legacy is far less important than that. A guy who won that many Grand Slam titles is an all-time-great in tennis, regardless of anything that will happen from now on. And there is a good chance that Roger is picking up more majors in the coming years. So I guess this book will stay interesting much longer, especially since one of it's main focuses is in Rogers early years, his upcoming and struggle to get to the top.



Q. Did you have trouble avoiding a hagiography given the apparently close relationship between you and Federer and Federer's family?



STAUFFER: I knew about the risk. But being a professional journalist for 25 years, I learned how to separate job and private life in the real important relations. Knowing somebody well should not mean that you loose the right for a certain distance. I know that there are some parts in the book that Roger would have written differently, and I can live with that.



Q. How, if at all, do Federer's interviews compare when speaking in German versus English?



STAUFFER: Since the Swiss German press conferences feature a smaller, more intimate group, they are much more interesting for us. Often the questions are more specific, and Roger is speaking more freely, using a broader vocabulary. Sometimes he is also less diplomatic in his mother tongue. That’s why we from the Swiss media appreciate him giving us special interviews after every match.



Q. What do you make of Federer's difficulty with coaches? Is it stubbornness or does he truly not need one usually? Do you think a coach would have helped his tactics in some of the matches with Nadal?



STAUFFER: I think Federer outgrows his coaches, because he is a very fast learner. Maybe there is a coach around who could tell him exactly how to beat Nadal, but I doubt that he exists. Otherwise, Roger might have found him. To be honest: I don't think that many coaches know as much about tennis as Roger. He is always adapting and analyzing. Just a reminder: he has won four of the last six matches against Rafa, one even on clay.



Q. How important do you think winning a French Open is to Federer and his legacy?



STAUFFER: That’s a good question, and I agree that the French is a very important point to clarify Roger’s legacy. In my opinion, you can really call him the greatest player of all time only if he wins there as well. But he should have some years left, and I really like his chances in Paris.



Q. How do you account for his reluctance to play for the Davis Cup team?



STAUFFER: Roger has played more Davis Cup matches already than most of the players ever will. He only missed three first round ties in 05, 06 and 07, and he only did it to focus on the Grand Slams. He had to sacrifice the Davis Cup for the Majors, and I think, that he made the right decision, if you look at his results. Of course he also tried to avoid injuries by skipping the Davis Cup first rounds. I am convinced that he will refocus on the Davis Cup again sooner or later.



Q. Does his friendly relationship with the media earn him free passes at certain times?



STAUFFER: It certainly doesn't do any harm.

Action Jackson
09-12-2007, 10:30 AM
Where is the link to the 1st one.

Stensland
09-12-2007, 10:36 AM
why would the "american in him" say that blake-santoro was the best match? just because santoro's a nice and funny guy?

the american in him should have said blake-haas. plenty of shotmaking and WAY more drama than in the santoro-match.

tennis2tennis
09-12-2007, 10:42 AM
Where is the link to the 1st one.

sorry here you go
http://www.thetennischannel.com/roland_garros/winner's_blog/james_usopen.aspx

Fee
09-12-2007, 06:03 PM
Wow, an MTF member is a bit of a celebrity. Cool. (I'll let him reveal himself if he so chooses). :)

tangerine_dream
09-12-2007, 06:10 PM
Where's the personality? You can't expect Ivan Ljubicic to supply it all the time.
MTF sarcasm at its finest. :p