Archive

Archive for the ‘U. S. Open’ Category

Andy Murray: Solving The Final Puzzle

Sep 10, 2012 6 comments

The similarities are uncanny. It starts with their behavior. Both fellows love sarcasm, specially the dark self deprecating ones. Their on court behavior — while as different as night and sky — evoked much dislike among most people, while were a subject of fascination by the select few. Both possessed a style of play that was not received nicely during their respective times. Both had mental demons that to be relinquished in order to achieve the initial success. Both lost four major finals before finally breaking the ice.

While we would remember this as the breakthrough year for Andy Murray, it was also the year of gradual progress. As well as he played in ’10 and ’11, both his success and failures were expected. He did what he did best, and achieved results; he repeated what he did worst, and failed. But at Melbourne, it was the first time that his failure was not criticized. The only mistake he committed in the five hour, five set marathon against Novak Djokovic was to cool off in the fourth set, and that was partially because of physical fatigue, fighting against the fittest man on the tour. For the first time, he did not disappoint in a match of major significance ever since the mountain of expectations was thrown on his shoulders.

The progress continued at the grass season, when he won his first set in a major final. On his fourth try. Again, even though he lost, the loss was not considered a bad omen, because he played arguably his best match of the career, but was simply up against one of the greatest grass court player playing one of the finest match of his career. The common thing about the two losses was not only that he showed mental toughness and great play, but also the takeaways from these losses. After Wimbledon, he said “I am getting closer,” where as after losing to Roger Federer in ’10, he said, “I can cry like Roger, its a shame I can’t play like him.” The attitude had changed, the self belief was creeping in, and his game was no longer stagnant as it was in the previous two years.

He continued taking it one small step at a time. In Olympics, he finally registered his first significant win over the elite top-3 by defeating Novak Djokovic in the semis. It was still not the final, and it was still a best of three, and hence he made it better by defeating Federer on his home turf, in a best of five contest, and by which also securing a gold medal for his country. It was no Slam victory, but in itself, this was an achievement of highest magnitude. He believed. His country believed. From a person constantly under media scrutiny, he had become a national hero.

The continual progress took its final step at the final tennis junction of the calendar year. But it did not come easy. He struggled against the surprisingly consistent Feliciano Lopez, showed each and every trick of his artistic arsenal against Milos Raonic, was a bit lucky against Marin Cilic by winning after being a set and two breaks down. In the semifinal, he again showed his best by taking a leaf from Rafael Nadal — and his loss on a terribly windy day at Indian Wells — by committing less than 20 unforced errors on the windiest day ever at the Open. And yet, the struggle had not ended. It took him six set points to close out the first set, he failed to capitalize a two breaks lead in the second, before winning it through a Djokovic double fault and a botched overhead, threw the two sets lead due to fatigue, before finally saving his best in the set that mattered the most in the Open.

It was a remarkably tough ride for him, and it was his mentor — who struggled much like the mentee — who made him tough enough to handle the challenge. It is no coincidence that the start of Murray’s progress coincided with the addition of Lendl as his coach and he will be the first one to admit it. Sure, there are still times when Murray reverts back to his defensive shell, and others when he will feel yell and curse like the world is conspiring against him, but like the other members of top three, he has learned to deal with it and move on. The one who forever demands perfection, has learned that a perfect match is not where you do not commit mistakes — for it will happen rarely — but one where you do not let the imperfections affect you in the final outcome.

This was the puzzle that Murray had not solved yet, and it was the one which had kept the big three expanding into the fantastic four. And as this year has shown, the big three has finally made the credible transition to the fantastic four. Each of these members won a major this year, and not surprisingly, they won it on their favorite surfaces — Djokovic on slow hard courts, Nadal on clay, Federer on grass and Murray on fast hard courts. Isn’t it ironic that we are celebrating the opening up of men’s field at the same time when we are celebrating the consolidation of the women’s?

Advertisements

Slowing It Down

Sep 3, 2012 2 comments

How can you break Milos ‘Missile’ Raonic? By trying to return his serve. How do you return his serve whose second ball lands faster than many’s first ball? By making the serve ‘seem’ slower. It is hard. Very hard. And Andy Murray did it perfectly. He did it by anticipating where Milos was going to hit the serve, and his impeccable returning skills only made the job easier. As Murray later told in his post match interview, he had played him before (he lost their only match played between them before this), and started to understand his serving patterns better. After three very easy holds from both men, Murray got the hang of Milos’s serve, and it was Murray all the way after that.

As the match progressed, Raonic’s thumping bombs seemed slower and slower even though he was still clocking them above 130. The only difference was that Murray was getting racket to almost eveyr serve. The thumping effect as the ball hits the advertising boards on an ace was reduced to a slow deep return or a wicked sliced return — this was how well Murray absorbed the pace of Raonic’s serve and neutralized his single most biggest weapon which is as devastating as the tennis world has seen.

It was not just Murray’s returning ability at show. It was a complete tennis master class once the ball came into play. He sliced and diced, moved Raonic from corner to corner, brought him forward on some seriously good drop shots — how many times have you seen a player hit a forehand sliced cross court drop shot? — and to top it off, hit shoe laced volleys to perfection when Milos challenged him at the net.

To Raonic’s credit, he was the complete opposite of Bernard Tomic in the third set. He gave it his all, but even when he tried to go on the offensive with his huge forehand, Murray came up with passing shots that only Djokovic, Nadal and himself can claim to conjure up. “Raonic could not have hit this volley any better except for hitting it right on the baseline,” was what an announcer said.

Murray owned Raonic and Ashe today. To such a degree that he did not face a single break point in the entire match and broke the Missile four times in twelve tries. A match that was hyped up as a heavy weight encounter was reduced to a one sided match, but an entertaining one. So entertaining that it even managed to bring smile to the normally poker faced Ivan Lendl late in the third set. Murray has faced a tricky draw in the Open with a tough match against Feliciano Lopez in the third round, but based on his performance today, he looks certain to set up a semifinal date with Roger Federer.

The Bad Boy And The Nice Girl

Aug 30, 2012 5 comments

It is true that the game is greater than the any of the players, but it is also true that the combination of players make the game. In the long run, the game is not necessarily affected by the loss of one player or two as new — and many a times better — players are ready to fill the gap. But for a period of time, the game defintiely feels a little incomplete, if not poorer. The feeling is enhanced when we expereince the loss of two players, and even more so when their styles offer a contrast.

Our game relies on contrast. Bjorn Borg wouldn’t have been as great if not for John McEnroe. Andre Agassi brought out the best in Pete Sampras, and Roger Federer cannot be talked without mentioning Rafael Nadal. Andy Roddick and Kim Clijsters weren’t contrasting in styles, but in terms of character. Kim Clijsters is the girl next door, the quintessential nice girl who is universally loved, is affectionately called “Aussie Kim” in Australia, and also considered a local in New York. In fact, she is so nice, that even when she embarrases someone, she does it gracefully and elegantly, and without making the other person feel bad.

But the world would be boring with just nice people. And Andy Roddick is that bad boy in the town. Bad not in terms of … actually being bad, but being blunt and straight forward. One who always kept it crisp and short, and always said what he felt without caring about what the world thinks. To his credit, even though he seemed unreasonable or a brat (even a bully) many times, he was always straight forward. And as much as we like to despise the bad guys and love the good ones, the game would not be interesting enough.

Their retirements, at 30 and 28 years respectively, come oddly at a time when the average age in tennis has increased courtesy of Tommy Haas’s resurgance and Serena’s and Federer’s dominance, but they cannot be faulted for not giving enough. In fact, these two players are the exact examples of success against the odds.

Clijsters showed that it is never late to taste success and make amends for an unfulfilled career. She was the perennial bridsemaid, who was overshadowed by her more accomplished and talented compatriot. She took a break and came back stronger than before and is now leaving (again) being much more fulfilled than when she last left the game. She is the proof that nice guys do not always finish last.

Roddick, on the other hand, showed that hard work trumps talent. Never the one to shy away from the practice courts, he achieved early success, and rather unfairly, bore the expectations of American tennis after they were used to success during their golden 80s and 90s decades. He got eclisped by more talented colleagues, and tournament after tournament faced disappointments which peaked in the semifinals at Australian Open ’07. Still he went back to drawing board, improved his consistency and came back to challenge the most accomplished grass court player in the finals of the holy grail of tennis in his most disappointing loss of the career. But like Roddick said, he is not used to running away from things as he came back and triumphed at Miami in 2010 for one of his more celebrated wins of his career. And it is fitting, that he will go out on a winning note against the man who tormented him the most.

The Marathon Journeyman

Aug 28, 2012 2 comments

Has there ever been a journeyman tennis player as popular as Nicolas Mahut? The closest I could get to was Fabrice Santoro, and even he was ranked as high as no. 17 in the world, and was a winner of multiple major titles in doubles. Mahut is a proud owner of a tennis record, even though he ended on the wrong side of the result. It was no shame losing that match, especially when he had to serve to save the match for … I don’t know how many times. I was browsing through the live scores section on the official U.S. Open website and found his opening round match against Phillip Petzschner locked in the fifth set at five games all. I turned on the stream — this is one thing I like about U.S. Open. I just had to click the “live stream” button next to their score and I was enjoying the live action in high definition.

On surface, it just looked like another match between two journeyman — although Petzschner is more than that, having won two doubles’ majors — but it was much more. Here was a match between two aggressive single handed backhand players, who serve well, use the sliced approach shot and like to hit punch volleys even if they dump them into the net. Of course, we rarely come to know how good they are because usually they are battling against the top pros who don’t give them a chance to show us their full repertoire. They are very good players, have very good movement and are good to watch. They also compete fiercely, although for them it is more about the additional $16000 for moving into the second round. On watching these players, I feel that they show more desire to win a winnable match than the top pros. The extra $16000 is a huge deal for them compared to the top ones who win it more for the glory of holding a trophy.

Mahut portrays you that look which immediately develops an affection to him. Call it past history, or the fact that he was again serving to save the match after relinquishing a two sets to love lead, or just his expressions, you want to win. In addition, you have Petzschner on the other side of the set who has not earned himself a good name recently. Either due to his complaints during his Wimbledon match against Rafael Nadal, or more importantly, his act of unsportsmanship in a doubles match, or even his body language, he gives you that image of a villain, trying to destroy the dream of the helpless protagonist in Mahut. His long socks that go up to the knees doesn’t help, either.

After a routine Petzschner hold, the players changed ends. There was the familiar scene of the ball boys running behind the players with sweaty towels in their hands. Normally I watch this scenario only when watching the top pros, and it feels normal. But in a match of two journeyman on an outer court with sparse crowd and no commentary in the background, it felt weird. The umpire called “Time” and Mahut served it out for a routine hold. The match would have continued to eternity, but the is the U.S. Open where you won’t go 70 games to 68. The fifth set tie-break started. Petzscher started with an ace, but Mahut found himself in a rally. He punched a gorgeous looking single handed backhand straight to Petzscher and headed straight to the net. Bad idea. Petzscher hit his own single handed passing out down the line. Mahut’s stick cracked to the ground and he headed to the chair to take a new one. Just like the pros, he had each of his Wilson sticks packed neatly in plastic, and he picked one. Unlike the top pros, he unwrapped the stick completely and threw the plastic into the bin himself, and slowly marched back to the baseline. The top ones leave this job to the ball boys. They have the prestige and the aura. Mahut doesn’t.

His new stick helped him briefly as he got the mini break back, but another botched volley and he was down again. Petzscher threw an ace and a service winner as Mahut’s desperation grew amids chants of “Come on, Nico!” He tried his best, but Petzscher won another point on Nico’s serve. He then served it out with another service winner as Mahut’s head went down again for the last time in the match. Not unfamiliar with such events, he went to the net and hugged his jubiliant opponent, picked up his bags, and quietly went out of the stadium allowing his opponent to bask in the glory, which itself will probably end after two or four days.

Yet another journeyman completed his journey at New York. Unlike others of his type, though, he is a popular and evokes affection. One that many want to see win a match. Especially after yet another marathon.

The Top Five Contenders At The U.S. Open

Aug 26, 2012 11 comments

We are into the final Grand Slam and into one of the five most anticipated tournaments of the year. The tennis season will not stop at New York, but it is the final junction that this train will stop on after which it will go through numerous smaller stations that not many would be interested in. The U.S. Open is the tournament which usually salvages a player’s year (think Andre Agassi in ’94, Pete Sampras in ’96, Roger Federer in ’08) or it makes it (Andy Roddick in ’03, Juan Martin del Potro in ’09). So just like things happen at New York, we look into the top five favorites for the title on the men’s and women’s side without wasting any more time (and space).

Men

[2] Novak Djokovic: Yes, Federer beat him at Wimbledon. Yes, Djokovic lost to both Andy Murray and del Potro in the Olympics, and was bageled by Federer again at Cincinnati. But this is hard courts. This is Djokovic’s favorite surface. His offense is well known on asphalt, but it is his defense which achieves new levels here. If I were to pick a player with the best defense ever, it would be a toss up between Rafael Nadal on clay and Djokovic on hard courts. He is a wall. And even though it looks otherwise, he is coming into the Open in great form — a title in Montreal and a finalist in Cincinnati.

[1] Roger Federer: The current form indicates nothing but a Federer victory. And if he does win here, I will probably consider it as his best year ever given his age and the quality of his opponents. But it is also true that he has not won the Open for three years now, and has lost matches from winnable positions. In addition, he potentially faces Murray in the semis who just registered his first best-of-five victory over Federer and will come into the Open with confidence after winning a Gold metal for GBR. And finally, two consecutive best of five matches might be tough on him, regardless of how fresh, fit and motivated he is.

[3] Andy Murray: The victory at Olympics is important for Murray on two counts. One, he finally won a tournament of significance (read: A tournament that casual fans would remember a year later) and registered only his second best-of-five win over the top3, and his first in a semi or a final. However, caveats still remain. You can never be considered a favorite to win a major unless you have won one before. Given his early losses in the summer hard court season, and his early rounds vulnerability at the Open, it will be a tough ask from him.

[7] Juan Martin del Potro: He is proudly amongst the “been there, done that” section of the tour in Grand Slams, and at the Open, by beating both Nadal and Federer. He is on a high after winning a bronze for Argentina and finally registered his first win over the top-4 since his comeback from the wrist injury. Tournament after tournament, he is coming close to finding his form he displayed at the Open in ’09, but his recent wrist injury could be troublesome.

[?] The Dark Horse: Unfortunately, there is no sure shot fifth contender for the title. Tsonga, while explosive, is too erratic. Berdych is out of form. Ferrer can’t win a major without an explosive serve, forehand or a backhand regardless of how great his fitness and work ethic is. And Raonic? It would be a great tournament for him if he can even register his first win over Federer or Djokovic. However, the winner of the dark horse award goes to John Isner, who will not have to face any of the above four players till semifinals, and will have a fighting chance against Ferrer.

Semifinals: Roger Federer d. Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic d. John Isner
Champion: Novak Djokovic

Women

[4] Serena Williams: Serena won her fifth Wimbledon title on grass, flew across continents and dismantled the field on the hard courts of Stanford, and two weeks later went back to grass across continents and ruthlessly demolished the top two ranked women’s tennis players by losing only three and one games respectively, including a bagel set. In addition, she fired the maximum number of aces at Wimbledon across both men and women! She hit 24 aces in a two set match against Victoria Azarenka, one of the game’s best returners. I can go on, but it is clear that there is a big gap between Serena and the field. If Serena is even close to her best, the title is hers. However, she also have had epic meltdowns at the Open in the past two years, although the Serena this year has been really amiable and charming.

[5] Petra Kvitova: Yes, your heard it right. The woman, who was poised to take over the women’s field, and was 10 points away from the world No. 1 at the end of last year, has deteriorated in results. But she also won her first title of the year at Toronto, reached the semis at Cincinnati and won at New Haven, so she comes in with momentum, confidence and victories on her back. It looks like she has found her footing on this surface (she won just one match in the summer hard courts last year), and with Serena not in her half of the draw, can be more than a handful at New York.

[9] Li Na: I repeat, yes, you heard it right. On her day, she is one of the purest hitters of the tennis ball after Serena and Kvitova. She struggles with her temparent, but seems to have found it after hiring Justin Henin’s coach, Carlos Rodrigues, as evident by his finalist run at Toronto and the title at Cincinnati.

[3] Maria Sharapova: She had a banner year after completing her Career Slam and briefly getting to the top of the rankings, but might be low on confidence after a 6-0 6-1 beatdown at the hands of Serena in the Olympics, and has question marks on her fitness given her recent injury woes.

[1] Victoria Azarenka: She had a great start to the season going twenty six and O. She had left all her mental struggles behind during this run, but those flaws slowly creept back to her game through the European clay season, which carried forward to grass. A return to hard courts would be welcome, but she has also not gone past the third round even once since 2007!

Dark Horses: Angelique Kerber (the sixth seed, finalist at Cincinnati, and the defending semi-finalist at the Open, where it all started), Agnieska Radwanska (finalist at Wimbledon, but fatigue is creeping into her game as a result of overplaying), and because she is the defending champion, Samantha Stosur. And before I forget, Kim Clijsters, who has not lost a single match at the Open since 2006.

Semifinals: Petra Kvitova d. Li Na, Serena Williams d. Angelique Kerber
Champion: Serena Williams

Novak Djokovic: Completing the Domination

Sep 10, 2011 7 comments
Feeling of Invincibility

Feeling of Invincibility

It is no secret that Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal are the two greatest players of this era and rank at or near the top in the list of all time. It is not difficult to see how Andy Roddick would have won multiple Wimbledon titles, or Andy Murray would have ended the British drought if it were not for these two men. Novak Djokovic himself struggled to compete against the two for a while and has gradually improved himself to the point where he is almost unbeatable against the two — well, everybody. Look at how he monumentally increased his performance at majors this year. First, he beat the defending champion, Federer, in Melbourne. Then he beat Nadal, again the defending champion, at Wimbledon. To top it off he beat both, Federer and Nadal, at New York.

I have mentioned many times that the Miami finals this year was the turning point in the rivalry. Actually, the trivalry. He beat Nadal at his own game — by outgassing him in the final set tie-breaker. Even after beating Nadal four times in the Masters, we still thought that is a different task to take three sets off Nadal in a major final (Nadal had lost just two major finals before this year). He did that at Wimbledon. Today, he completed his dominance over Nadal.

A scoreline of 6-2 6-4 6-7 6-1 loos like a routine four set win, completed somewhere around 3 hours. It was anything but. The actual time of this match was north of four hours spanned over 268 points. Most of those 268 points were contested in brutal, physical rallies of the highest magnitude, ones which we have rarely seen. Each point had to be won two, three or four times. One of these games lasted 17 minutes and rarely was there a game not going to deuce. They battled from the baseline, came to the net to hit volleys, were lobbed and had to scramble back to start the point over …. I can go on. The physicality of this four set match was even more than most of the five set epics that Rafa has played in his career.

In the past, Rafa had made a career on outlasting his opponents. After magically winning the tie-breaker with his extreme fighting ability, he had finally turned this match into a physical battle. Djokovic called for the trainer and did not hit a first serve above 100mph thereafter. Everybody thought Rafa would take the match in five. Except Rafa, that is. Because he used his entire fuel tank to bring cramps on his gulten-free opponent. When Djokovic hit the final forehand winner, Nadal did not make an attempt to reach for it. The tireless opponent was also robbed off every ounce of mental energy by then to fight any longer.

What a difference a year makes. What changed? Nadal said, “less mistakes.” Federer said the same. Djokovic called the change in his “attitude.” But one feels it is more than that. Nadal was broken just five times last year but Djokovic broke him 11 times today. The latter has taken the return of the serve to an entirely new level. Everybody, including Djokovic, felt that he was lucky on the return winner down 15-40 to Federer, but he showed today that it was not

Solutions? Still Looking ....

Solutions? Still Looking ....

mere luck. When Nadal’s signature serves wide from the ad court are blasted for return winners, you know you are witnessing something special. It might not be an overstatement to say that Djokovic did a great job “holding” his return of serve. The most scary statistic: Nadal lost every second point on his first serve. And this was when Nadal was not playing bad himself. He broke Djokovic six times in the first three sets and saved 15 break points. Even though his backhand was no match against Djokovic, he kept himself alive in rallies using great combination of slices, forehands and change of pace. He fought from the deepest hole when Djokovic was serving for the match in the third to extend it for another set.

In the end he kept everything in perspective during the press interview by saying he is closer to finding the solution than he was at Wimbledon. Which he is, considering he kept the scoreline same on his worst surface (hard courts) compared to Djokovic’s worst (grass). Djokovic, on the other hand, is still trying to come back to earth. When asked about his accomplishments this year he rightly said it will take time to realize what he has done. For him, as well as for us. 66-2 and counting …

U.S. Open 2011: The Super Saturday

Sep 9, 2011 Leave a comment

The weather Gods have created havoc at Arthur Ashe, controversies were raised due to the schedule and the playing conditions, while a revolt was threatened surrounding the prospect of playing four matches in four days. Despite all this, the tournament has survived and the Super Saturday is upon us. Whether or not the players like it, whether or not the fans moan on the repercussions of playing back to back best of five set matches, it is hard to deny that a marquee line up like tomorrow’s makes us forget everything and anxiously wait for the day to begin.

For the second time in a major this year, the top-4 men have lived up to their seeding to secure all four semifinal berths. And it took extreme circumstances — Rafael Nadal’s injury and Jo Wilfried Tsonga’s magical comeback after being down two sets — to make sure that the remaining two majors didn’t end up this way. Each pair among the top four have set mini rivalries among them (and Federer-Nadal rivalry is already considered one of the greatest), have scores to settle, mental battles to win, and points to prove. The only downside of this is that a thrilling first match soaks out all your emotional energy and the second one usually turns into an anti-climax as it happened at the French Open. Regardless, this always ensures that tennis takes precendence over other television shows on the day and it is good news for the game.

If this is not enough, the women’s side also has enough drama awaiting. The top-half semifinal between Caroline Wozniacki and Serena Williams will answer a definite question — Is Serena still head and shoulders above the womens’ tour or is Wozniacki the real No. 1? The other half will answer us whether Sam Stosur has really laid the demons of her French Open defeat or not. Lets have a look at all the semifinal matchups.

Novak Djokovic (1) vs Roger Federer (3): Courage Under Fire

I have rarely seen the five time US Open champ look towards his camp right after the victory. One was when he defeated Nadal in Madrid ’09 and other when he won the World Tour Finals in ’10. It is even rare that he looks towards his camp during the match. Yet his camp received a lot of fist pumps and “Come On!”s yesterday when he played Tsonga. Clearly Federer has a point to prove, if not to the world, then to himself. The last time he was in such a position, he played the best match of this year and handed Novak Djokovic his only loss for 2011. The French Open semis was a near flawless performance and he will need to repeat this tomorrow.

Although Novak Djokovic has not looked at his best this tournament and one can sense fatigue finally creeping through the gulten free muscles of the Serb, he should have enough motivation to raise his level for the two final big shots of the year. As it has been the case for their last two encounters at the majors, the first set will be critical. Both times it went to the tie-breaker and both times its winner went on to win the match. Can the fans be third time lucky?

Prediction: Federer in four sets

Andy Murray (4) vs Rafael Nadal (2): Survival of the Fittest

They have played some great matches in the past even if they may not have gone the distance. Even though Nadal leads Murray 4-2 in majors, both of Murray’s wins were on hard courts. The situation is different this time as both players will play their third consecutive match tomorrow and physical fitness would come into play. Both of them are incredibly fit and can chase balls all throughout the day, but Murray will be at a slight disadvantage as he was stretched by Isner today while Rafa cruised through a semi-injured Roddick.

As comprehensive as Rafa looked against Roddick, his backhand still lacked the usual depth. The venomous cross court backhand winners were absent, and down the line was landing in the mid court. Roddick was not able to take advantage of it, but Murray will. Of course, it will depend on how fit Murray will be, tomorrow. Remember, he has a minor back pain too.

Prediction: Nadal in five sets

Caroline Wozniacki (1) vs Serena Williams (28): Best on Paper vs Best on Court

It is astonishing that a player who was out of the tour for more than a year, and who has played only two tournaments heading into the Open was the overwhelming favorite to win this tournament, and is the overwhelming favorite against the world No. 1. But that is how big a champion Serena is, and that is the level to which Wozniacki needs this Slam to shut her critics. Not that she cares about what the critics have to say, but her recent tirades against the media — self conferencing in Australia followed by the kangaroo bite incident, and most recently the mimicking of Rafa’s cramps — show that there is some insecurity deep down inside the Dane.

A win against Serena will definitely go a long way in proving her credentials as the world’s top baller even if she fails to win this tournament. If she loses, though, it will further distance Serena from rest of the tour.

Prediction: Serena in straight sets

Angelique Kerber (unseeded) vs Sam Stosur (9): The Other Semi

It might be easy to forget among the battle of the heavyweights that there is also a fourth semifinal taking place. Perhaps that is why this is the only semi which will be played at Louis Armstrong as opposed to Arthur Ashe Stadium. Not that both the women will mind this negligence. Sam Stosur is not particularly known to thrive under pressure, while lack of an arena like setting will suit the German as well, whose run is among the more suprising results seen in the recent past. Stosur will be the huge favorite to win this match, but so was the case last year at the French Open. Although, neither is this a major final, nor will she play at Phillippe Chatrier or Arthur Ashe.

Prediction: Stosur in three sets