Hi Steve,
Maybe there's hope for me as a paparazzo after all. Here's the picture you requested of Tom Tebbutt, complete with the famous canary yellow eyeglasses. I even got some mock multi-tasking for the camera.
Quite a feat, because the Globe and Mail's tennis writer usually likes to stay as mysterious as the current state of his diplomatic relations with Greg Rusedski. Tom was very critical of the way Rusedski handled his shift in allegiance from Canada to Great Britain, but also refused to join the army of journalists baying for Rusedski's blood after he tested positive for nandrolone. A sort of detente seems to be in place at the moment.
He's also got a pretty good crystal ball, having won the Roland Garros prognosticators pool two or three times in the last five years, and is a walking compendium of player injuries -- the place to check whether Rafael Nadal's stress fracture last year was in his ankle or his foot (ankle) or get a full list of Mary Pierce's injuries so far this decade (rotator cuff tendonitis, tendonitis in both ankles, chronic inflammation of the lumbar vertebra, abdominal strain, groin injury, sinusitis... etc.) It's quite apropos that he was the one to break story about Pete Sampras having thalassemia minor in 1996.
The situation in Toronto is a little strange, because he's the only Canadian reporter who covers tennis year-round, and has the twin advantages of a) having done it for a long time b) a genuine love for the game -- but he doesn't cover this tournament per se. Because the Globe and Mail is based in Toronto, the paper usually sends one of its local sports reporters to do the news stories, leaving him to do a column each day.
Reporters from the other papers only cover tennis once a year, and are usually rotated out every couple of years. Net result: all the match reports are being written by people who don't really know they're doing, in tennis terms. (By which I don't mean being a technical or strategic expert -- witness how dull player and coach columns often are, despite the assistance of a ghost writer. I'm just talking about being able to contextualize and evaluate events instead of merely describing them.)
That creates some oddities -- one year, a Toronto Star reporter would keep saying players had "tanked" when in fact she meant they'd fallen apart. It's also hard to outdo this report, courtesy of the Toronto Sun: "Doubles specialist Al Costa won his match 6-4." Costa was, at this time, the reigning French Open champion.
In doubles, presumably.
There are sometimes subtle incongruities, such as a National Post writer once saying that only one Swedish journalist was there when Thomas Johansson won the Australian Open, and then commenting that Johansson celebrated reaching the semifinals of Toronto with a fist pump "so brief it might have been imagined." (Recall that Johansson celebrated inning the Australian Open with only the briefest of fist pumps, and that pervasive knowledge of Swedish reporters in Melbourne sits rather uncomfortably with complete unawareness of how Johansson celebrated his Grand Slam win there.)
But the prize for sheer cheek surely goes to the Toronto Star columnist for this effort last year: first, write a piece lambasting players for pulling out with fake injuries. Two days later, write a piece lambasting those who accuse players of pulling out with fake injuries.
Despite the inevitable pitfalls, however, I'm always impressed by the number of decent stories are produced during the week, by dint of observation and journalistic craftsmanship.
Contrast the revolving-door situation above with this brief conversation with Richard Eaton, a British writer working for various outlets, about -- well, mostly about pseudonyms, but touching on another writer who might be thinking about writing a book. He said the book wouldn't necessarily be about tennis, as the writer in question hadn't spent that much time covering the sport. "How many years?" I asked. "Oh, not that long," he said. "About 20 years."
The foreign presence here is usually a bit smaller than the local one. The main wire services have their various representatives, and L'Equipe usually sends someone over every year. There are also some other European reporters to follow Federer, the French players, et al. Bill Scott, writing for DPA and the Telegraph, keeps up with things via TV and a close eye on the internet; wild dogs couldn't drive him from the press room. In the last couple of years, Liz Robbins from the New York Times has been here gathering preview material for the US Open. Also around doing TV is John Barrett, whom I find a little intimidating -- not least because he looks a little like Ian Richardson's version of Francis Urquhart in The Final Cut.
Anyway, with Toronto being the tennis spotlight of the year for most of the local reporters and just another week in the calendar for the others, it makes for an interesting dynamic in press conferences. For one group, the story of Rafael Nadal's loss was its impact on the rest of his summer. For the other, it was its impact on the rest of the tournament.
Tomas Berdych was the one to feel that split most keenly, of course, with questions like 'how does it feel to defeat Nadal?' sandwiched between questions like 'how does it feel to wreck the tournament?'
The impact of the "wrecker" suggestion, incidentally, may have been amplified because it was asked twice. The first time was with somewhat better intentions, with the reporter at least trying to be tactful. The second attempt, which used words like "villain" and "the guy who wrecked the tournament," was made by a different reporter and was meant to goad Berdych
into reacting more strongly. It's not clear if were used on purpose, but it did raise some eyebrows. Berdych was clearly impatient with this line of questioning, but to his credit, he kept his answers measured and even had a little strained smile towards the end.
On the other hand, there were sometimes surprisingly meaty answers to questions tennis regulars might not ask. Some examples:
Q. You said, talking about Gasquet's serve, it's 'deceptively' big. What do you mean by that?
ANDY MURRAY: He's got a pretty quick action, and it's not like -- there's not like a huge, huge wind-up. He's not that tall either. Doesn't look like he's putting that much effort into it. But he times it really well. It's a quick action, so it's tough to kind of read when he's going to hit the ball. Most guys have a slightly higher throw-up and knee bend. He just hits it out of his hand. You know, he serves pretty accurately as well, so it makes it tough to return.
Q. A lot of different spins on the serve?
ANDY MURRAY: He doesn't put a lot of different spins; he just serves really accurate. He serves close to the lines. Against a lot of players, they can hit big serves, but it will be right in your striking zone. Against him, he might not hit it as hard as some, but he gets it away. You normally have to take a step to hit the ball. It's not so much the spin; it's just the accuracy.
Q. I guess this is 54 consecutive matches for you in North America. Why have you been so dominant on this continent?
ROGER FEDERER: I don't know, because I was really struggling over here in the beginning of my career. I thought it was always too windy, too humid, too hot, too not my style. Now all of a sudden I've turned this all around. I really enjoy playing here. The night sessions I like. I couldn't play before in the night either.
I guess it's just a question of getting used to it, a habit, you know, making a habit of playing over here. Also big secret for me was actually to arrive early at the tournaments, get over the jetlag. That's what I was not really doing before. I would arrive maybe Saturday, couple days before my first round, and I would wonder why I was so tired in the
first round all the time.
I've changed a few things. It's been paying off like crazy really (smiling).
Q. Do you have to guard at all against overconfidence? The questions we ask are all very adoring. You said you only lost to one player. You don't seem to take these guys for granted. Is that part of what puts you where you are?
ROGER FEDERER: Maybe it's because I used to underestimate many opponents coming on the tour. I remember in juniors it happened to me. On the ATP Tour level I would think this guy has a weird technique, he can't beat me. I have a beautiful technique. The next thing I know I lose 1-2 because I totally lost it on the court.
I paid many times very hard for not really respecting my opponent enough, I would think. Not in a bad way, but just his game. I've totally stopped doing that. That's what's actually now in a kind of way paying off for me now that I don't underestimate anybody anymore.
Q. Can you tell me about that shot you made from between your legs? Do you practice that?
FERNANDO GONZÁLEZ: I did one in LA two weeks ago. I won the point. It was a little bit different.
I don't practice it. But when I have a chance, I just do it. I like. When I practice, try to make some trick shots, you know, when I'm practicing. Tennis is my job, but it's a game for me. I try to enjoy.
But today I was a little bit lucky. Maybe you can do it 10 times, it's going to be one or two, especially in that moment. It was important moment. I was in the net. He pass me through. I say, That's it, I'm going to go for it.
Q. That shot at the baseline, you got it with your backhand, did you surprise yourself? Looked remarkable.
IVAN LJUBICIC: Oh, yeah, was a set point, first set. No, I mean, I went right. I saw it was there. I just turned and hit the ball cleanly (smiling). I do sometimes in the practice. You actually never try in a match.
It's just amazing, I think now he's seventh guy who pass me through the legs. I don't know if it's me or what is it. I barely ever see my opponent missing that shot. It's just incredible.
When I played that lob, I saw him go back. I said, Jesus, here we are go again. When I going right, he goes left. When I going left, he's going right. It's hard to predict. Plus he hit the net.
It is really frustrating. You play great shot. You see guy running back, through the legs. Where is it going? Who knows. Then, boom, winner every time. It was important point. Was end of the second set, something like that.
We had a couple highlights there. It was great match.
Q. Aside from the Croatian fans, you're still a bit of an unknown among casual tennis fans. Do you feel like a top five player in the world? Do you enjoy the anonymity?
IVAN LJUBICIC: I feel like number three in the world, which I'm going to be on Monday. I don't know. I'm doing whatever I can to promote myself. But it's not easy these days.
I have to say it's a little bit frustrating. Also in Gstaad three weeks ago, I was No. 1 seed, I was doing credentials, they ask me if I'm a coach or a player. Here I came, the woman asked me, Are you qualifier or main draw? It's fine when you're 20, 30. But when you're No. 3, 4 in the world, it's not easy.
Maybe, as you said, it's also big positive side of it. You didn't get bothered too much.
Getting a question about transcripts into the transcript, however, can only be managed by someone wearing canary yellow eyeglasses.
Some moments from the week:
Best matches
At the top of the heap is Gonzalez-Ljubicic - a great contest played in great spirit, with even the loser saying that the match had been fun. They finished with 105 winners between them, and the outcome was in doubt till the last point.
Previously the unthinking man's player, Gonzalez is reaping his rewards for all the work he's put into developing his game. That was demonstrated again during his three-set battle with Federer in the semis -- the second-best match of the tournament for me.
Third place goes to Benneteau-Baghdatis.
Best performances
Tomas Berdych doesn't look like he wants to fill the unthinking man's player spot vacated by Gonzalez, mixing things up to knock out Nadal in the third round. A bad loss the next day indicates he's still a contender for the Safin amusement park: "Watching Marat Safin is like riding a rollercoaster. It's more fun because you don't know what's going to happen next."
A joint silver medal to Gasquet, for obvious reasons, and to Murray, who had a bit of a rollercoaster ride himself when it came to closing out matches. But it was a good run otherwise and goes some way to answering the questions about physical frailty: 10 matches in 11 days from Washington to Toronto, and a 15-4 record since the beginning of Wimbledon. The player Murray most reminds me of is Karol Kucera, which makes sense since Murray's been often compared to Miloslav Mecir -- the sorcerer to Kucera's apprentice in the mid-1990s. A big test -- and a big opportunity -- will come against Federer today.
Finally, this category wouldn't be complete without The Mighty Fed himself, pulling off a win yet again despite some weary-looking matches towards the end. Now Cincinnati -- a big ask after this last week.
Time well-wasted
Day's wrap-up only half written. Blog entry pending. Evening news articles still unread. But when a seat in the grandstand for Nadal-Lopez vs. Santoro-Zimonjic is just calling your name, how can you say no? Nice to Nadal back out there in the evening after a disappointing singles loss, and make no mistake -- he was trying. He grimaced in frustration when Lopez
missed an easy volley, and barely gave him a high five as they walked back to the baseline. Could there be trouble in paradise? (Just kidding - no letters please)
The Rumour Well
...ran rather dry this week (or maybe I'm just saying that). The TV commentators did mention that Murray turned his back when Gilbert was speaking at a practice session this week. More trouble in paradise? Or is it just that if you always had to look Gilbert when he's talking, you'd never see another human face again?
Best sponsor
It's not often that I'm moved to include a category like this, but all credit to American Express for the revolutionary idea of giving people (i.e. cardholders) couches in the shade and providing free drinks, snacks and shoulder massages. Props also to Rogers for coming in to support the tournament during a difficult period a few years ago, on its way to buying up most of the city.
Wish I'd been there
Having to miss Safin-Tursunov vs. Blake-Ginepri in the first-round of doubles. Tursunov nearly brained someone while waving a racquet to get their attention. And that was just on the way to the court.
Wish I hadn't been there
Behind the woman who jumped on my foot while leaping up and down in excitement when Knowles and Nestor won the second-set tiebreak in the semifinals. But anyone who's that into the doubles is forgiven.
Personal highlight
Getting a parking pass. Hey, sometimes it really is all about me, myself and I.
Thanks for the invitation to post this week, Steve. What's cooking in Cincy?
Kamakshi