I woke up an hour ago and just now realized that I hadn't seen the rain-delayed Ana Ivanovic-Martina Hingis final on TV yesterday, with Pam Shriver, John McEnroe and Feliciano Lopez "judging" (god knows what; I don't remember anymore), and with Patrick McEnroe commentating on the fact that Feli turns heads and is a great pick for the panel.
Disturbing. I never have dreams I'm not in. I feel like I'm crossing some sort of fandom threshold.
Regardless, speaking of finals, Andy Roddick beat Juan Carlos Ferrero for Cincinnati, his first title of the year, and a spot in the top 10. With the victory, he also wins the US Open series and has serious OOMF going into the US Open. Roddick was back to his old self out there--spectacular serving, big stick strutting, firing himself up--as well as looking much more comfortable at net. Jimmy Connors, well done. Dare we say it? Andy seems to have finally found his mojo.
ETA: Here's a good piece on the revitalized Roddick from Tom Perrotta: For Roddick, Timing May Be Key to Success
Also, the lovely Feliciano Lopez (pictured) is blogging from New Haven this week. He dishes a bit on doubles partner and best buddy Rafael Nadal--Rafa's in New Haven to practice (he'll be hitting with James Blake (!) today), but so far it's pretty uninspired stuff.
Don't worry. I can empathize on the intense tennis fandom syndrome :)
Honestly, I find Feliciano Lopez weird looking. His features look to smooth and structured for me to consider him handsome.
I want Roger to blog - I wonder if that will ever happen?!?
Posted by: alette | August 21, 2006 at 12:09 PM
As much as I love the Rafa-Roger rivalry, Im really enjoying watching other players stepping up their game and making it to the finals. Its becoming more interesting now cuz their are a handful of contenders for the US open slam title instead of two.
Posted by: icyswirls | August 21, 2006 at 03:35 PM
that article about roddick's timing and ish has got to be the most insulting thing to roddick ive ever read. i mean its pretty true but it doesnt need to be written about.
Posted by: sensationalsafin | August 21, 2006 at 08:06 PM
It just seems like every tournament there is, if Fed and Rafa are in it, it is an automatic Fed Rafa projected final. When someone does beat one of them its like this huge deal and they act like they are undefeated for the season. As much as I like Fed and even as much as I don't like Rafa, I'm sick and tired of only hearing about Fed v Rafa finals. I kind of hope that there is a suprise final at this years US Open just to prove that other people can win grand slams.
Posted by: Kelly | August 21, 2006 at 08:16 PM
yeah but seriously though federer's gonna win it. no one's gonna upset him. and nadal wont make it to the second week so dont worry about a fedal final.
Posted by: sensationalsafin | August 21, 2006 at 08:32 PM
i want fed to win, but i wouldn't be so cock-sure about it.
i've always wanted to use that phrase.
Posted by: ancicfan | August 21, 2006 at 09:27 PM
lol. u sure about that? whos gonna beat him? u saw how dominant he was at wimbledon after a miserable halle. same thing will happen here, i garuntee it.
Posted by: sensationalsafin | August 21, 2006 at 09:36 PM
O please, Centre Court at Wimbledon is Fed's house. You walk out of the tunnel knowing it. Whereas on clay or even on a hardcourt Fed is vunerable to win a lot tougher matches, if you could even call him vunerable. He will win, but if the court is playing quick, i think that he will have a tougher time getting through the draw. He lost to Andy Murray on a quick hardcourt. All we can do is wait and see what will happen in a week.
Posted by: Kelly | August 21, 2006 at 10:04 PM
any of the young guns could pose a dangerous threat to federer. iono he has this thing about losing to teenagers. look at his history: murray, gasquet, berdych, nadal even ancic way back when etc. etc.
an in form big hitter could pose a threat especially like berdych or maybe a playing-out-of-his-mind dima. iono im just throwing out names here.
just saying it isn't impossible. but god forbid it happens. the conditions have to be just right. he has to be below his average and the other guy has to be playing out of his head.
Posted by: ancicfan | August 21, 2006 at 10:18 PM
I think an important factor at The Open - most aren't considering this - will be just how mad is Roger? From the looks of it and if history is any guide, the lion roars. Expect him to be out to put the fear of God into a few people.
Posted by: Peacemaster | August 21, 2006 at 10:54 PM
thats exactly what im saying (peacemaster). when it comes to slam time, federer plays his very best tennis. he goes in a dominates everyone whos beaten him outside the slam. like sampras he has the ability to raise his game for the occasion. he is obviously mad about losing even though he wont say it or show it with a gesture or facial expression. he just takes it out on his opponents with his tennis racket. he lost to murray on a fast surface because he was tired and it was tough after playing in montreal. and why r u singling out federer on tendancies to lose to young players. young players r a threat to every single player out there. becuz theyr bringing in the next generation of tennis and who really knows what kind of style that is. when safin was young he came out and beat top players and everyone was like "WTF who is that, how is he so good". same happened to sampras when federer beat him at wimbledon. same happened to roddick when murray beat him. gasquet, berdych, murray, all of them will be great despite how much u might like or dislike them, but theyr still young and inconsistent, theyr trying to get used to the mental pressure of beating top players. this is why nadal is so damn amazing. hes so mentally tough its really just wow, what more can u say? federer's lost 3 hard court matches in 2 years, where is he vulnerable? im telling u he wont lose a set coming into the final unless one of the juniors or hewitt or even safin are playing unbelievable tennis (only 1 set might be dropped except for with safin, u never know with him).
Posted by: sensationalsafin | August 22, 2006 at 12:27 AM
sensationalsafin: the point you have is true, during slams Roger ups his level of his game just so far above everyone else that you need to play your best tennis and have a near perfect match to beat him, for example Safin in Australia in 2005. Yes he has bad days, but even when he has a "bad" day he's still playing better than everyone else.
Posted by: Kelly | August 22, 2006 at 10:07 AM
thats why a lot of credit should be given to murray for beating roger even on a bad day. but federer will win it, simple as that.
Posted by: sensationalsafin | August 22, 2006 at 10:27 AM
I never said that murray doesn't get credit, he should get a lot of credit, he deseerved the win.
Posted by: Kelly | August 22, 2006 at 11:10 AM
Roger will be a different beast to handle at the Open. He's so much tougher to beat in a best of five sets match. A guy looking to beat him will have to sustain a high level of play for longer or hope Federer struggles with inconsistency throughout the match - which he almost never does.
The only guys that have beat Roger in a five-set match the last few years have been Nadal on clay and then Safin and Nalbaldian in two matches that were both tough five-setters that Federer easily could've won.
I don't know if I see anyone out there capable of beating Roger in a five-set match at Flushing Meadow this year. Nadal and Nalbaldian would be my top two contenders but both have been struggling during the hard-court summer.
Posted by: Stellcat | August 22, 2006 at 03:05 PM