Australian Open - Week 1

Venus and Serena

Not unexpectedly, Venus and Serena Williams both lost in the first week of the Australian Open, thus making this their worst performance in a major as a tandem. While I’m not a fan of the Sisters Williams, it is hard to watch their spotty performances over the last year or two and not wonder what’s going through their heads.

After Venus’ first round loss and Serena’s third round loss, both sisters claimed to be well prepared and fit for the year’s first major, but the video evidence disputes this. Venus committed 65 unforced errors in her loss to number 94 ranked Tszvetana Pironkova of Bulgaria, and in her press conference she repeatedly referred to these errors as if there was some sort of magic switch that could turn the errors off and she couldn’t find it in time to win the match. The plain fact of the matter is that Venus’ game has been wracked with unforced errors for the greater part of the last 2 years and she’s done absolutely nothing about it. Winning Wimbledon last summer may have been the worst thing for her long-term career tennis plans as it validated her lackluster approach to preparation. The same could be said of Serena’s victory at the 2005 Australian Open. Many of the holes in Venus’ game today have been there since she started playing on the tour: forehand errors (although her backhand let her down this week), poor serving mechanics, and a tendency to tighten up under pressure. It’s hard to believe that not only has she not addressed these weaknesses, her game may be in worse shape now than it’s ever been.

When Serena arrived in Australia this January, the Australian press had a field day with the size of her back-side. When I saw Serena on court for myself, I have to admit that I was stunned. She is huge and I think her outfit may have accentuated that. Any claims by her of being fit for these championships are ludicrous. After watching her for ten minutes in her second round match versus Camille Pin, it was clear that she did not have the energy or movement that made her a dominant tennis player in the past. She, like sister Venus, also seemed to be fascinated with making as many unforced errors as possible. Apparently, she can’t find that magic unforced errors switch either.

The disturbing thing about the demise of the sisters is that they are lying to themselves. They are deluded in thinking that they are the most dominant players on the tour when in fact they are on the precipice of dropping off the radar completely. When they arrived on the tour, they took physicality and athleticism to a new level, and reaped the benefits of that. Now that much of the tour has caught up to them in that regard, Venus and Serena have little to fall back on. They haven’t been willing to work harder to continually raise the level of their abilities, both mental and physical. Instead, they have chosen to parlay their fame into other opportunities that demand much of their time. It’s difficult to be critical of them for capitalizing on their celebrity status, but the window of opportunity in a sport like tennis is short, and not to take that opportunity to leave a legacy in the game may be something that they regret at a later age. Short of a radical re-dedication to tennis, I expect that the performances of the Williams Sisters in Melbourne will be a portent of things to come for them in 2006.

Other Thoughts on Week 1

· One benefit of the Williams sisters being out of the tournament is that ESPN2 won’t subject us to watching their matches round the clock. While I’m very appreciative that ESPN2 dedicates so much time to their coverage, it’s still overly provincial with regard to American tennis. A case in point was on Sunday evening when number 4 seed, David Nalbandian, was in a 5th set, yet ESPN2 chose to show us the beginning of the Taylor Dent match. Surely, the drama of a 5th set should trump the beginning of a match involving a mid-level American player – one who is not even good enough to play Davis Cup for the US. Decisions like that tend to infuriate me because they overestimate the desire of the tennis viewing public to see American tennis players only. The majority of people that tune into the Australian Open are interested in watching quality, dramatic tennis, not just a name. Of course, that notion flies in the face of convention for sports television programming today.

· While the comeback of Martina Hingis is a very nice story, ESPN2’s Tim Ryan committed some serious over-hyping on Sunday when he claimed that Hingis was “one of the game’s most popular champions.” Honestly, I erupted when he said this, as it was blatantly untrue. How popular was she in Paris during her French Open final loss to Steffi Graf? Not very. Because of some of her outlandish statements and occasional on-court antics, she was a more villainous champion than a popular one. If Ryan had referred to her as one of the game’s most respected champions, I would have been on board. Tennis fans have missed her in the last three years because of her brand of efficient and intelligent tennis (an extremely rare commodity on the WTA Tour), not because of popularity.

· Is there anyone left in the tournament who can challenge Roger Federer? Federer is playing brilliant tennis again and the majority of players that have troubled him in the past aren’t in Melbourne (Rafael Nadal, Andre Agassi, Marat Safin). David Nalbandian has had success with Federer in the past, most recently at the ATP Masters Cup in Shanghai, but the Swiss master looks to be in better form than he was in China.

· I miss Rafael Nadal at this tournament. His enthusiasm and competitiveness are magnetic. Brad Gilbert was dead on when he commented that the field was fortunate that Nadal wasn’t there bringing his relentless heavy spin to the high bouncing Rebound Ace courts. If the heat is causing the courts to play like clay, no one would benefit more from that than Rafa.

· It’s hard to believe, but I don’t hear anyone talking about Ivan Ljubicic. Aside from Federer and Nadal, no one had a better 2005 than the big Croat. If he wins his next match versus Thomas Johansson, he has a potential date with Andy Roddick in the quarterfinals and I expect Ljubicic to come through that and reach the semis. Federer v. Ljubicic final???

· Is it time for the Australian Open to consider a change in surface as well as in tournament dates? The extreme heat is one thing, but the Rebound Ace courts seem to magnify it. As someone who has had heat issues in the past, I feel for the players because the conditions become the driving factor in the quality of tennis. While some players are lauded for being extremely fit – Dominik Hrbaty for example – it’s not always about fitness. Body chemistry is an important part of how one deals with heat and hydration. Yet a change in the schedule could alleviate the problem. If the tournament were moved to March, the heat wouldn’t be a factor and the players would have ample time to prepare for the first Grand Slam of the year. The Australian Tennis Federation hasn’t been open to such a change so far.

Check for other Aussie Open thoughts throughout Week 2.