Now we’re in the meat of the tournament.
Also, my life is pretty much off the rails right now, so it’s a testament to how much I love you that I’m still writing and publishing today. With that in mind, you might notice a little … saltiness in the today’s writing.
The Men
Murray – Khachanov: Murray in straights, three, four and four. Khachanov has a huge power game, but he lacks the finesse right now to beat someone with as many tools as Murray. Khachanov is only 21; expect big things from him as his game matures.
Nishikori – Verdasco: Nishikori wins by the improbable score of 0-6, 6-4, 6-4, 6-0. They showed basically none of this match on the TV, so I have no insight to offer. Maybe Nishikori needed a set to get his legs under him after his five-setter against Chung the round previous?
Wawrinka – Monfils: Wawrinka in two tough sets and an easy final one. There is no player whom I want to punch as much as I do Monfils. He has physical gifts that no one–and I mean no one–else on tour can touch. But he is a goddamn headcase, and it makes me angry to see someone squander gifts like that. Yeah, I know, can you really call it squander when you’re talking about one of the top twenty players in the world? In Monfils case, you certainly can. Every time I see him bend over after a point, as though either winded or else convincing himself that he’s hurt, I want to kick him in the balls. “People would kill for your skills, you fucking baby!” I want to shriek at him.
So fuck him. I’m glad Wawrinka won.
Cilic – Anderson: Anderson retired down 3-0 in the second set. Haven’t seen a moment of Cilic play, but I note that he hasn’t even come close to losing a set. He’s apparently not someone to disregard in the next round.
Nadal – Bautista Agut: 6-1, 6-2, 6-2 to Nadal. Holy crap is he playing well. I watched a little of this, until it became clear that there was no real competition here. I found myself asking, “Can I articulate what it is that has Rafa beating Bautista Agut so handily?” Interestingly, the main thing I can come up with is that Rafa is simply across-the-board better. Which is pretty fascinating, if you really think about it. Bautista Agut was the 17-seed here. Can you imagine being one of the twenty best practitioners in the world at something, and there still being people who are head-and-shoulders better than you? Talk about the far extremes of the bell curve, eh?
Thiem – Zeballos: I saw none of it, but notice that Thiem still hasn’t lost a set, and the 6-1, 6-3, 6-1 scoreline here suggests he’s getting stronger as the tournament goes on.
Djokovic – Ramos-Vinolas: A first set tiebreak, and then two straightforward sets for Djokovic. Can a week or so working with Agassi really have gotten his head back on straight?
Carreno Busta – Raonic: No idea. I don’t think I could pick Carreno Busta out in a crowd.
One quick quarterfinal preview: Four interesting matches, but it is the Djokovic-Thiem match that most has my interest. After what Djokovic did to Thiem in Rome, one wonders just what kind of different match we’ll see here. I predict it won’t be nearly as one-sided. Thiem will come in with a gameplan. He may not yet fully have the tools to execute, but I predict we’ll see no 6-0 sets in this match.
The Women
Here I’m only going to talk about two matches.
Mladenovic – Muguruza: If you were wanting to make the case that the women’s game is vastly inferior to the men’s, this would be the match to point to. On paper, it looked good: Last year’s champion versus one of France’s darlings, who happens to be playing well right now. But it was crappy tennis all around. Mugu was barely a factor in the first set, losing 6-1. Somehow Mladenovic managed to lose the second set, mostly on the back of Mugu finally hitting some winners and Mladenovic starting to double-fault by the fistful. But the third set, sweet Jesus. Mladenovic was averaging two double-faults per service game and somehow she managed to win. Really think about that. She was giving Mugu two free points per game on her serve, and still Mugu couldn’t win. Do you have any idea how poorly Mugu had to play for this to be true? Good god. And these are ostensibly two of the best players in the game. Remember when I asserted that some matches, the only reason there’s a winner is that the rules dictate it be so, otherwise both players would lose. Bingo.
Bacsinszky – Venus: Bacsinszky was up 5-1 in the first set and lost the set. I figured this was just one more case of a so-called top women’s player lacking anything like the mental toughness to win, so I gave up on the match. Then she got it together and won two and one the rest of the way. Interesting. Don’t know what else to say about that, because I didn’t see it.
Other thoughts: Halep won 6-1, 6-1. Hasn’t dropped a set yet. Maybe it’s her year.
Venus looked strong through three rounds and not bad in the fourth. Clay is her weakest surface, but grass is her strongest. Serena remains out, the field remains wide open: Is it possible Venus could win Wimbledon?