2015 French Open

[Troublemaker]

In about 10 hours or so, a player who owns a record of 93-1 in best-of-five clay-court matches is going to get pummeled in a best-of-five clay-court match at the French Open.

Or so the oddsmakers and tennis analysts would have you believe. And, you know what? I do believe them.

Rafa Nadal is going to get spanked by Novak Djokovic tomorrow starting around 4pm local time in Paris. He might lose in straight sets, but I'll predict Djokovic in 4.

Whether the oddsmakers are right or wrong, it'll be a thing to behold either way. The most dominant athlete-in-situation of the past decade has arguably been Nadal on clay. Will we see him go down or will we see him muster his old self to extend his dominance on clay? Either way, that's good sports drama.

I hope I'll have a chance to watch.

[brevity]

The most dominant athlete-in-situation of the past decade has arguably been Nadal on clay.

Given your exact criteria, I'd rank him third.

1. Jeter on date
2. Gronk in club
3. Nadal on clay
4. Phelps in water
5. Kruk with sandwich

[snowdenscold]

In about 10 hours or so, a player who owns a record of 93-1 in best-of-five clay-court matches is going to get pummeled in a best-of-five clay-court match at the French Open.

Or so the oddsmakers and tennis analysts would have you believe. And, you know what? I do believe them.

Rafa Nadal is going to get spanked by Novak Djokovic tomorrow starting around 4pm local time in Paris. He might lose in straight sets, but I'll predict Djokovic in 4.

Whether the oddsmakers are right or wrong, it'll be a thing to behold either way. The most dominant athlete-in-situation of the past decade has arguably been Nadal on clay. Will we see him go down or will we see him muster his old self to extend his dominance on clay? Either way, that's good sports drama.

I hope I'll have a chance to watch.

As many of you know, I am an enormous tennis fan (having really gotten into more the past several years, actually following the tours closely year-round and not just as the Grand Slam events).

So yeah, I'm pretty stoked for tomorrow's match! Unfortunately I'll have to DVR it, avoid spoilers, and watch tomorrow evening =(

PTI yesterday discussed an issue that perplexed me for awhile: after being so used to the NCAA tournament, where 1 always plays 8, 2 always plays 7, 3 vs 6, etc., it was confusing to watch tennis and see odd seeding matchups, especially since it is rarely explained.
But for those who are curious, 1 and 2 are on opposite sides of the draw, and then 3 and 4 have a 50/50 shot of getting switched. Then seeds 5 thru 8 are randomly dispersed against the top 4. (And 9-12 random against 5-8, w/ 13-16 against 1-4 in the Round of 16. I am not sure if they subdivide seeds 17-32 or just sprinkle them everywhere).
Thus there was a 25% chance that Nadal as the 6 seed (ranked 7th, but Raonic withdrew w/ injury) ended up paired w/ Djokovic in the Quarterfinals. Oh well.

Which is really too bad, since it's a match worthy of a final. Novak has been absolutely dominating the tennis world the past 7 months. He's won the 5 Masters 1000 events he's entered (one step below the Grand Slams), the Year-End finals in London, and the Australian Open Major (his 8th).

Nadal, meanwhile, has had a terrible clay court season, but obviously has always stepped it up at Roland Garros, winning 9 of the past 10 years (!).

Some have said that by playing Djokovic in the quarters, rather than later, Nadal will be fresher. However, that hasn't seem to have been a concern for 7 5-setters at any other time. Plus, you might argue the opposite and say he often plays himself into top form by the end of the tournament, and an earlier meeting gives him less time to hit that peak.

I'm bummed Fed lost (surprisingly in straight sets) to Wawrinka, but at least I won't feel conflicted now if Novak makes the final. Who, by the way, I will be pulling for tomorrow since I would really like to see him get his career GS.

Of course, if he does beat Nadal, you just have to hope there isn't a letdown to follow (Wisconsin 2015 anyone? lol) since there'd still be 2 more matches to go: Murray/Ferrer SF and then Tsonga/Wawrinka Final. He would definitely be heavily favored, but nothing's a given.

[BD80]

Given your exact criteria, I'd rank him third.

1. Jeter on date
2. Gronk in club
3. Nadal on clay
4. Phelps in water
5. Kruk with sandwich

Laettner against Kentucky?

Expanding date criteria to forever.

[CDu]

Yeah, Nadal is once again hobbled physically (it's been his bugaboo throughout his career, even when he was very young). And Djokovic is the best player in the world by a very wide margin. These are my two favorite players in the world (Nadal has long been my favorite; Djokovic has been climbing since he's figured out his conditioning issues).

Rafa is 29, so there is the question of whether injuries have finally caught up to him or whether this is just another speed bump from which he'll rebound. But he doesn't have a lot of years left as an elite player given his take-no-points-off strategy and the toll it takes on his body.

Djokovic is 28, but he seems to be only getting better. He didn't have a great early part of his career due to struggles with his fitness (changing his diet has seemed to fix that), but now he is the most fit player on tour. It will be interesting to see how long he can maintain his fitness level and dominance.

The match has started out like the experts predicted: Djokovic up 4-0 in the first set. Nadal is looking at a break point to try to get back one of the breaks of his serve, but he has a long uphill battle in this set for sure.

[CDu]

And suddenly, back on serve 4 all in the first. Some really impressive baseline tennis being played by these two guys. Hopefully the match continues to play at this level for 5 sets.

[Troublemaker]

And suddenly, back on serve 4 all in the first. Some really impressive baseline tennis being played by these two guys. Hopefully the match continues to play at this level for 5 sets.

For now, a straight sets win still looks like the most likely outcome. Ever since 4-4 in the first, Novak's been holding serve easily while putting incredible pressure on Rafa's serve.

[Mal]

For now, a straight sets win still looks like the most likely outcome. Ever since 4-4 in the first, Novak's been holding serve easily while putting incredible pressure on Rafa's serve.

True that. Rafa hasn't had a break point since the 8th game of the 1st set, and Novak's gone on to have about 10 more, and just converted another one to go up 1-0 in the third (and then held for 2-0). The end may be in sight soon if Nadal doesn't turn it around immediately, but he's just got no answers in the return game right now.

[CDu]

For now, a straight sets win still looks like the most likely outcome. Ever since 4-4 in the first, Novak's been holding serve easily while putting incredible pressure on Rafa's serve.

Yeah, since Rafa broke twice in a row to tie the match, Djokovic has broken him 3 times and held serve every time. Now up a break in the third looking to close this thing out in straight sets.

It will be interesting to see if Djokovic can win the French. If so, he has a reasonably good chance to complete the Grand Slam this year. His court coverage and groundstrokes (especially his forehand) are just unreal. He's been threatening to beat Nadal on clay for a few years now, and finally it appears that Nadal isn't fit enough to hold him off this year.

As for the French, I have trouble seeing any of the remaining guys being able to beat Djokovic. Murray is the highest seed remaining, but Djokovic does everything Murray does just better. Wawrinka and Tsonga are guys who aren't really best suited to play on clay. And Ferrer is a poor man's Nadal (even compared to the not fit Nadal).

[CDu]

True that. Rafa hasn't had a break point since the 8th game of the 1st set, and Novak's gone on to have about 10 more, and just converted another one to go up 1-0 in the third (and then held for 2-0). The end may be in sight soon if Nadal doesn't turn it around immediately, but he's just got no answers in the return game right now.

Yeah, so much of Nadal's game is out-efforting his opponent. His huge topspin (by far the most rpms on his groundstrokes) wear down his opponent over time, and his speed and fitness allow him to stay in points long enough to allow those groundstrokes to take their toll. But Djokovic is like the perfect foil to his game; Djokovic is every bit as fit, and his groundstrokes are superb. And with Nadal not playing at full strength, the tide swings that much further to Djokovic.

[Mal]

He's been threatening to beat Nadal on clay for a few years now, and finally it appears that Nadal isn't fit enough to hold him off this year.

I put less of this on Nadal's fitness at the moment, and more on his game. He's been hurt or recovering from injury for what feels like 60% of the time over the last 3 or 4 years, but it hasn't exactly been holding him back. It's now been 7 months since his surgery and he'd already played in 9 tournaments this season coming into Paris. He's never again going to be as Energizer Bunny as he was circa 2007, true, but he looks physically fine at this point.

It looks more to me like his timing's off and he's just not hitting the shots. To some degree that goes hand in hand with fitness, of course, but Nadal right now isn't failing to win clay court tournaments because he can't chase stuff down. It's because he's hitting a ton of unforced errors. He's lost 5 times on clay this year and in those 5 losses hasn't won a single set. There's more going on here than just conditioning, and there's more to it than Novak finally cracking the code or stepping up on clay - Fabio Fognini and Stan Wawrinka have made short work of him recently, too. Djokovic arguably beat him worse today than he did 6 weeks ago in Monaco, when undoubtedly Rafa wasn't as warmed up into the season and was struggling with his fitness more.

The road's not going to get a lot easier after today, at least not soon. He drops to 10th after today's loss (and will fall to 11th if Tsonga wins tomorrow), so he's going to be faced with a pretty high probability of needing to beat three of the guys ranked ahead of him to win tournaments the rest of the season. Instead of getting Ferrer, who he completely owns, for instance, in the semi's all the time (and having earned it, being the first or second seed) he'll have the possibility of getting something more like Wawrinka, Murray and Djokovic in succession. In fact, as long as he's below the 8th seed, he may start facing guys with higher seeding as early as the 4th round of the slams. On the flip side, those matchups will provide opportunities to climb back toward the top of the rankings pretty quickly. And any top seed who sees "Nadal" penciled in for a round of 16 match is going to feel royally hosed.

[Troublemaker]

It will be interesting to see if Djokovic can win the French. If so, he has a reasonably good chance to complete the Grand Slam this year.

I think Novak is a lock for the French at this point, barring catastrophic injury.

Right now I believe Novak is playing the greatest level of tennis that has ever been played. He's been the best return-of-server for many years now and has had outstanding groundstrokes off both wings for many years now, but recently he's also improved his serve and net game so much (perhaps due to coach Boris Becker.) He's now a great volleyer and drop-shotter to go along with everything else.

I'm not saying he's the best ever. He figured out the non-gluten diet too late into his career for him to rack up the Grand Slam totals needed to challenge Federer, Nadal, Sampras, and Laver for GOAT honors. (Maybe. A couple of Calendar Year Grand Slams [CYGS] this year and next would change that, obviously.) But, I think right now, this peak Djokovic is playing the best tennis I've ever seen. Even better than peak Federer or peak Sampras.

He's a huge threat for the CYGS this year, obviously. I think it'll be up to Murray to stop him at Wimbledon and (just a hunch) Nadal to stop him at the US Open.

For Rafa, I think his level of play will continue to rise as the season progresses. After all the injuries of the past few years, if he can play an entire season healthy and peak at the end, giving Novak a run for his money at the US Open, that would have to be considered a good season for Rafa. If he continues into next season healthy, he'll be my favorite to win Roland Garros #10, which is just a sick (and round) number of titles to win at one Slam.

[flyingdutchdevil]

It's the end of a great tennis era. Federer is most likely done, and Nadal isn't far behind.

Federer is 33 and turning 34 right before the US Open. I believe Sampras was the oldest Open winner at 32. Federer is like Tim Duncan - still playing great, effective tennis despite being older than everyone. However, Father Time catches up with the best of them!

Nadal, on the other hand, is only 29 and should still be in his prime. But Nadal is like T-Mac: plays with everything he's got and has destroyed his body too quickly. I'd be shocked if Nadal won another non-clay Open, and wouldn't be surprised if he didn't make it to the finals of another Roland Garros.

[CDu]

Right now I believe Novak is playing the greatest level of tennis that has ever been played. He's been the best return-of-server for many years now and has had outstanding groundstrokes off both wings for many years now, but recently he's also improved his serve and net game so much (perhaps due to coach Boris Becker.) He's now a great volleyer and drop-shotter to go along with everything else.

I'm not saying he's the best ever. He figured out the non-gluten diet too late into his career for him to rack up the Grand Slam totals needed to challenge Federer, Nadal, Sampras, and Laver for GOAT honors. (Maybe. A couple of Calendar Year Grand Slams [CYGS] this year and next would change that, obviously.) But, I think right now, this peak Djokovic is playing the best tennis I've ever seen. Even better than peak Federer or peak Sampras.

I would agree with this. I still believe Laver is the GOAT. Twice he has swept the grand slams in the same year, and he would have an otherwordly number had these tournaments allowed professionals to play them during his prime. He missed like 6 years worth of Slam events as a pro before they allowed pros, when he promptly did the single-year slam for a second time! After Laver, I'd go with Borg (only reason he isn't higher on the slam list is that he decided not to play the Aussie Open back when it was in December and he retired at 25), then Federer next (and I could certainly accept the argument that Federer go ahead of Borg due to his longer career of success), then Nadal, then Sampras. But Djokovic is closing fast on those guys. As you said, within a couple of years he could be sitting at 13 grand slams and breathing down the necks of Rafa, Sampras, and Federer for most grand slam wins ever.

Regardless, his quality of play right now is just otherwordly. His shotmaking ability is just breathtaking from all over the court. His fitness is at an all-time high. And his serve is no longer the complete liability that it used to be.

[Blue in the Face]

My main concern for Djokovic's calendar slam aspirations, even greater than Murray or Rafa, is that if he prevails this week in the French, I assume he'll then march on King's Landing, which will surely take away from Wimbledon prep.

[Troublemaker]

My main concern for Djokovic's calendar slam aspirations, even greater than Murray or Rafa, is that if he prevails this week in the French, I assume he'll then march on King's Landing, which will surely take away from Wimbledon prep.

Does Novak look like a character in Game of Thrones? I don't watch that show but I think you're making a GoT reference here, right?

[Blue in the Face]

Does Novak look like a character in Game of Thrones? I don't watch that show but I think you're making a GoT reference here, right?
I was, but not based on his physical appearance, just his inexorable conquering of the world.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I was, but not based on his physical appearance, just his inexorable conquering of the world.

The Djoker is good, no doubt. He's in his prime and playing great tennis. But he also lacks any major competition. The era of Federer is done, Nadal is more injured than the Cavs, Bulls, and Hawks put together, no one knows what the hell happened to Murray, and this new generation (Berdych, Nishikori, Raonic) are just too raw. I see Wawrinka as his only major competition this year, and he's about as consistent as UNC's 3pt shooting.

So, if and when the Djoker completes the Grand Slam, he'll deserve it, but the landscape of men's tennis today just isn't that impressive.

[1 24 90]

The Djoker is good, no doubt. He's in his prime and playing great tennis. But he also lacks any major competition. The era of Federer is done, Nadal is more injured than the Cavs, Bulls, and Hawks put together, no one knows what the hell happened to Murray, and this new generation (Berdych, Nishikori, Raonic) are just too raw. I see Wawrinka as his only major competition this year, and he's about as consistent as UNC's 3pt shooting.

So, if and when the Djoker completes the Grand Slam, he'll deserve it, but the landscape of men's tennis today just isn't that impressive.

Kind of like how Fed built up his resume from 2004-2007 until Rafa (and later, Nole') started getting it together on all surfaces.

[Mal]

But he also lacks any major competition...So, if and when the Djoker completes the Grand Slam, he'll deserve it, but the landscape of men's tennis today just isn't that impressive.

I get what you're saying, that winning the calendar year slam in 2015 doesn't look as impressive on the surface as it would have in 2010 or whenever, but there are always going to be factors making it seem less impressive in the moment than at some other time in the past when no one managed to pull it off. But I think hindsight can be overly rosy. For one thing, the fact that no one pulled it off in whatever past year may make it seem like there were more excellent players at the time, when it could just as easily have been that there just wasn't one truly special player at the time. There's also the fact that there's usually a very short window of one historically great player being in his prime simultaneously with another one or two historically great players, so most years someone's on the wane or not seasoned enough but if you look at it from 15 years on and see the big names you're likely to flash to each of their primes in your mind.

As for the competition right this moment, while we've officially moved on from the Big 4 Era, you've still got a guy with 14 slams who's only 29 in the mix, you've got arguably the best player of all time still in the mix (who is still relevant into his '30's because he was a skill player not as reliant on speed/power/fitness), and you've got another two-time slam champ whom Djokovic will need to beat tomorrow on a surface where he's been shining this year in the mix. Incidentally, I'm not sure how "no one knows what the hell happened to" Andy Murray when it's been less than 2 years since he won Wimbledon, he's No. 3 in the world, and he's won two clay court titles this season. I think you're underselling Stan, too - inconsistency plagued him through most of his career, but it's not really been an issue the last couple years (his age is, as well as the lack of full dimension to his game). My take on the younger guys is that there's more depth of talent right now than we've seen in 20 years. Nishikori, Cilic, Raonic, and Dmitrov suffer by comparison mostly because of who they're being compared to, I think. No, none of them are Lendl or Borg, but if you want depth of competition, you've definitely got it right now. There are more pitfalls on the way to the semi's than we've seen in a long time. (Just fyi, Berdych's not part of any "new generation" - he's older than Djokovic).

Djokovic has now won 8 slam titles: he beat Nadal in the finals of three of them (consecutively, between 2011 and '12, when Nadal was at the peak of his hardcourt powers), and he beat Federer in the semi's of the Aussie in '08 (when Roger was virtually unbeatable on hardcourts) to get his first major and again in the U.S. Open semi's in '11. He's beaten Murray in three other finals. I see any dominance he may have over the field for the next 18 months or beyond as the well-earned reward for having had to claw his way over two of the greatest players of all time to get to the top, rather than as something cheapened by the relative weakness of a post-peak Fed/Rafa landscape.

[tbyers11]

How about Serena?

Was out to lunch with work colleagues. We sat close enough to the bar to see the Serena-Bacsinszky match. Saw the end of the first set that Bacsinszky (#23) won 6-4 and the beginning of the second. Watched Bacsinszky break Serena on the 6th deuce at 2-2 to go up 3-2. Bacsinszky was pumped and Serena's body language was awful as they walked to their chairs for the change. Serena looked toast. We left at this point to go back to work.

Have a meeting at work when I get back. Sit down at my desk a few minutes ago and see that Serena won the next 10 games straight (4-6, 6-3, 6-0) to advance the final. Have no idea if the moment got to Bacsinszky and she choked or if Serena turned it up a couple of notches. Either way that is an impressive comeback for Serena.

[Mal]

Kind of like how Fed built up his resume from 2004-2007 until Rafa (and later, Nole') started getting it together on all surfaces.

Or how Rafa's still won 2/3 of his majors on clay and was never much of a threat on other surfaces until they all started playing slower than they did early in his career, or how Sampras never made the finals of the French Open, or how Borg couldn't solve the U.S. Open; or...

[weezie]

How about Serena?.

She's got the flu. Was fevered throughout first two sets. But, yes, the comeback was impressive.

[Bluedog]

The Djoker is good, no doubt. He's in his prime and playing great tennis. But he also lacks any major competition. The era of Federer is done, Nadal is more injured than the Cavs, Bulls, and Hawks put together, no one knows what the hell happened to Murray, and this new generation (Berdych, Nishikori, Raonic) are just too raw. I see Wawrinka as his only major competition this year, and he's about as consistent as UNC's 3pt shooting.

So, if and when the Djoker completes the Grand Slam, he'll deserve it, but the landscape of men's tennis today just isn't that impressive.

The thing that's funny about tennis (and I suppose other sports where it's a single competitor) is that somebody who is ranked as the #3 BEST PLAYER IN THE WORLD is viewed as "what the hell happened [to him]." Would you say the same thing about LeBron this year? He finished third in MVP voting, but I doubt people who say he's an also ran who had a bad year. Or use Westbrook (who finished 4th in MVP voting) if you don't want to use LeBron.

Obviously, it's apples-to-oranges, but just highlights the fact that in tennis there are a few guys that get all the glory and everybody else is seen as "okay" by the general populace. Berdych, Nishikori, Raonic, and Wawrinka are tennis' equivalents to Chris Paul, Anthony Davis, Blake Griffin, LaMarcus Aldridge, etc. These guys are AMAZING at what they do, but I guess when only one person can win it all (and not a team of 15), it really dwindles down who is viewed as elite. Somebody like American Sam Querrey (who is ranked #38 in the world) is seen as not so great, when that's basically the equivalent of Kenneth Faried or Klay Thompson (#41 and #38, respectively, in ESPN Player Ranks). Both those players are viewed as one of the best in the world, but nobody would say Querrey is.

Not picking on your post at all flyingdutchdevil as you clearly know a fair amount about tennis, but just sticking up for some of these amazing athletes as a tennis player myself. :D The money I guess just is not there...it's interesting that if you're the #1 tennis player in the U.S. as a high schooler, your pro prospects are VERY meager and you'll likely never make a living playing the sport, whereas if you're the #1 basketball player in the U.S. as a high schooler, you're basically guaranteed to be a multi-millionaire. (I obviously understand economics and realize there's a lot more money in basketball and that's reality -- I'm not whining about it, just pointing out the stark differences. I guess the same could be said for a lot of women's sports. Tennis players also don't earn money based on potential like team sports sign contracts, they have to earn it based on actual performance (i.e. tournament winnings).)

In any event, the game has evolved since the days of Sampras and Agassi (and obviously since Lendl, McEnroe, Borg, and other greats), but what Djokovic is doing is amazing. I would say competition is more fierce nowadays really, but just the style has changed. Tennis players are more athletic than they've ever been in history right now, in my opinion. But they are certainly aided by racquet technology so a differing style sometimes wins out which would not have won out in the past. (And, conversely, a style that would have been successful in the past, may not be successful now.)

[Troublemaker]

How about Serena?

I hope she wins.

It isn't brought up as much as Djokovic, but if Serena wins the French, then tennis will have two players on pace for the Calendar Year Grand Slam.

It has become a very interesting year in tennis.

[snowdenscold]

Ah, the old "He's winning everything because the field is so weak" vs. "The rest of the field looks weak because this guy's so good that he just wins everything" debate. Also available in plural form. =)

Similarly, the "Djokovic didn't have to face Federer when Fed was in his prime" argument works the other way as well. Though, as pointed out, Novak did get that one important win at the '08 Australian Open semi, interrupting a crazy consecutive final streak by Fed. On either side of that event he was in 10 straight finals and then 8 straight finals. So had he beaten Novak that day, it could have been 19 straight! Which is absolutely ridiculous.

Murray: he had back surgery shortly after his Wimbledon win, which is never easy to recover from. Obviously that made for a rough 2014 season (no GS finals, no Masters 1000 titles). Still, marriage has seemed to suit him! Since getting married, he is currently undefeated as of this post (though I expect that to change tomorrow), including his first 2 ever clay titles - with one of those beating Nadal in Madrid for a Masters 1000 event. Plus, he made the AO final earlier this year.

Speaking of life changes, fatherhood seems to suit Novak well too. Since he and Jelena became parents, he has been on the absolute tear I mentioned in my first post.


Serena: boy I hope she can recover for the final. She was part of the women's draw that had to do back-to-back QF's and SF's, so hopefully 2 days will give her just enough energy back to push past Safarova. 3 years ago at this time, who might have thought she'd be looking at 20+ Majors??


Coverage: I hope ESPN gets full rights to the FO next year like they have for Wimbledon. It's extremely annoying to only have them for a 5-hour coverage window the first week (then passing to Tennis Channel, which I don't get), have NBC pop in for a pre-defined 3-hour block on the weekends (meaning you might come in in the middle of a match, and often leave before a conclusion), then have ESPN get it back for Mon-Thur, except to randomly have it start way late on Tuesday (meaning the Federer match was over by the time they started), and then have to hand it back to NBC again today (missing most of the first semi) and for the finals.

I do like John McEnroe as color man, but everything else I prefer the ESPN coverage, especially w/ Fowler as play-by-play, and Brad Gilbert always cracks me up. Also at the FO, unlike the other slams, they don't have an anchor booth (usually led by Chris McKendry) where they do roundtable-style analysis, interviews, etc. Plus a much lighter crew here compared to the others (no Cliffie, no Pammie, no Tom Rinaldi, no Jason Goodall, etc.) So that's a bit disappointing.

[Tripping William]

Djokovic advances past Murray, but needs five sets to do it.

[Troublemaker]

Djokovic advances past Murray, but needs five sets to do it.

I'm impressed with Murray. Gives me hope that he can provide a worthy challenge to Novak at Wimbledon. I would make Murray a close second-favorite for that Slam in a couple weeks.

As for the Djoker, he's just so mentally strong now. He shook off blowing a two sets lead like it was nothing. He broke Murray right away in the 5th set to take control, and that was that. Novak's mental growth over the past few years has been just as impressive as the gains he's made due to the non-gluten diet and partnership with Boris Becker. To use a Coach K-ism, Novak's the best "next play" player on the tour right now, and advantage that I felt Nadal held over the tour for many years.

[Green Wave Dukie]

Serena just blew a 6-3, 4-1 lead, up 2 breaks in the 2nd. May Carillo had left the booth to go down for the post-match interview. Saparova just won the 2nd set tie breaker 7-2. She's playing a lot better and Serena's serve is falling apart. I bet Serena's body language in the 3rd set is trying to show she has the flu.

[Tripping William]

Serena just blew a 6-3, 4-1 lead, up 2 breaks in the 2nd. May Carillo had left the booth to go down for the post-match interview. Saparova just won the 2nd set tie breaker 7-2. She's playing a lot better and Serena's serve is falling apart. I bet Serena's body language in the 3rd set is trying to show she has the flu.

And yet Serena finds a way to Slam Title #20.

[Green Wave Dukie]

Serena just blew a 6-3, 4-1 lead, up 2 breaks in the 2nd. May Carillo had left the booth to go down for the post-match interview. Saparova just won the 2nd set tie breaker 7-2. She's playing a lot better and Serena's serve is falling apart. I bet Serena's body language in the 3rd set is trying to show she has the flu.

Got to hand it to Serena. Down 0-2 in the 3rd after a dumpster fire of a 2nd set, and she pulls it out. Impressive, and I am no fan of hers. And unlike Thursday when she seemed more focused on making sure everyone knew she wasn't feeling well than on actually playing tennis, she seemed laser like in her concentration, especially in the third set. 20 Grand Slam titles. Impressive, indeed. Now hopefully she is classy in victory. We'll see.

[Troublemaker]

I think Novak is a lock for the French at this point, barring catastrophic injury.

Umm, maybe not.

Where is this coming from, Stan the Man? You've not made it past the QF in any other Roland Garros.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

I haven't seen Wawrinka play all that much. But the power on his backhand has to be unmatched. I don't know how anyone hits it back when he gets a chance to really crank it. Some of his winners this match have been ridiculous.

[Troublemaker]

I haven't seen Wawrinka play all that much. But the power on his backhand has to be unmatched. I don't know how anyone hits it back when he gets a chance to really crank it. Some of his winners this match have been ridiculous.

The one where he slid it between the post and the IBM box was ridiculous.

Definitely the best 1-handed backhand in the game.

[Troublemaker]

Congrats to Stan!

Insane shot-making all match.

Best power in the game.

[Blue in the Face]

Hats off to Wawrinka. Agreed on his backhand - that's some lethal stuff. Djoker's a great player, it'd be nice to see him get the career, and maybe a calendar, slam at some point, but an extremely well deserved win for Stan today. Nice to see the emotional exchange between them afterwards.

[Troublemaker]

I'm still sort of shocked by Novak losing. Not that Stan isn't an extremely talented player who has given Djokovic problems in the past, but it really felt like destiny that Novak would win his first Roland Garros this year. I still think he'll win one eventually, but next year, I bet Nadal will be back in form so it's going to be difficult.

Oh, well. I resolve to never discuss CYGS again until we're actually halfway there. Serena's made it halfway at least!

[Mal]

Definitely the best 1-handed backhand in the game.

It may be the best I've ever seen. With due respect to Federer, who can place his backhand pretty much anywhere he wants (so long as it's not coming in with Nadal topspin, I guess), Stan's power with the backhand makes it a phenomenal weapon. I was lucky enough to be at the marathon Djokovic/Wawrinka semifinal at the U.S. Open in 2013, and when he uncorked it to go for the flattened out down the line winner, the ball made a popping sound I've never heard before. It just explodes off the strings.

I'm a fan of having Stan toward the top of the rankings. I find it refreshing to see a player be high-risk/high-reward and have it work at the highest levels. He's honed his skills enough that it's become not terribly fluky when he pulls off the aggressive go for it style for a bunch of matches in a row. He completely dictated that match yesterday after the first set. Djokovic looked a bit tired, but to me it appeared like if Wawrinka can get the right ratio of winners to unforced errors on a given day, there's literally no defense for his power. 60 winners out of 134 points won, against a guy who covers as much court as anyone and is nicknamed Gumby.