Nobody has a more highly refined flair for an occasion than Serena Williams; she showed it again in her semifinal clash with Maria Sharapova, which Williams won (8-6 in the third) after Sharapova served for the match twice and held three match points. And nobody can yield to foul moods, torpor, and general lassitude as swooningly as Lindsay Davenport, yet still come back swinging from the heels; she did it again as she subdued surprise semifinalist Nathalie Dechy, who led by a set and 4-1 in a tiebreaker before losing her resolve and capitulating.
You could say this was a great day for women's tennis, but the plot line was riddled with inconsistencies and credibility-straining moments that demonstrated how agonizingly close high drama can come to collapsing into low comedy.
Here's the thing with Serena: The more inconsistent she is, the more accomplished she gets at brinksmanship; nobody has ever played typical points more poorly and big points more spectacularly than Serena did this afternoon. But the Hall-of-Famers will tell you that the Great Ones are not high-wire artists. When you allow yourself to get into a position where your very survival depends on hitting big winners—stupid big winners—you're in trouble. It's like basing your long-term investment strategy on buying lottery tickets. It catches up with you.
Serena's supporters, of course, can claim this as a courageous performance, proving their heroine's mettle and talent. Maybe. But for long periods in the match, Serena didn't show nimble footwork or the smooth, easy technique of days gone by. She often hit off her back foot, seemed a tad late getting to the ball, and finished points winded. That is, she played the entire match on the verge of losing it—against a 17-year-old challenger.
There was some consolation, though, beyond the earned W. The match may have rekindled Serena's relationship with the game. When she was asked why being involved in matches like this one still mattered, after all the titles and money she'd won, she replied:
“Because this is what I love to do. I love nothing more than walking out there, hearing my name being announced,” she said, “and the crowd goes wild. I love that feeling. I love being able to perform and being able to play a sport that's so fun (and) you can travel the world. It's just—I think it's a great, great thing for me. I wouldn't give it up right now for anything.”
Good things happen when Serena gets away from Hollywood, it seems. Let's hope that Saturday's final proves to be a career-reviving homecoming.
Lindsay is not as complicated as Serena, and her flawed performance wasn't as supercharged with significance. Still, Saturday's match isn't just about the 2005 Australian championship, either. Lindsay needs to bag this major to put the stamp of legitimacy on her position as the 2004 year-end No. 1. She needs to quash the whispers the she was merely the default value in the WTA computer.
A postscript on Sharapova: Serena certainly lifted her game for the key points, but one of the trademarks of a great player is the ability to finish; to find a way to keep an opponent from doing what Serena did last night. Think of a young Martina Hingis, Steffi Graf, Monica Seles, Chris Evert--think of a young Serena Williams. Once certified as Grand Slam champions, those simply did not lose matches like this one—not unless it was to a great rival, or as a signal that their powers were in decline. Despite her big wins at Wimbledon and the WTA Championships last year, Sharapova has not entered the game's VIP room yet. But she's standing right up against the velvet ropes.