!95904554 by Pete Bodo
Mornin' everyone. Time to shake out the cobwebs and get ready for another day of tennis. So let's take a look at some of today's marquee match-ups on both sides of the draw.
Andy Roddick (7) vs. Feliciano Lopez(Roddick leads the H2H, 5-0):
I don't know if it's the continued effect of Larry Stefanki's coaching or Andy's bromance with T.O. (NFL wide receiver Terrell Owens, who hopped a plane for Melbourne in order to get some hang time with Roddick), but Andy has looked really good in his first two matches in Oz. The increasing texture and variety in his game is really impressive, and while he's not currently a Top 5 player, he certainly carries himself like one. I especially like the way he's kept his serving percentage up around that wishful-thinking 70 percent mark, and not because he happens to have a good rhythm going. He's been using a lot more spin (at the expense of naked power and pace) to maximize his efficiency, set up command of the ensuing rally, and keep opponents off balance.
It's funny, though, when I watch Andy I'm always puzzled (although I shouldn't be) by the way he fails to really follow up so many of those big, forcing forehands with an attacking game. I know he's not the best volleyer, he's not exactly nimble out there, yadda, yadda, yadda. It's just kind of weird to see him blast some of those balls and then fail to do what naturally comes next (attack). He literally leaves me hanging: Is that it? Isn't there an Act II? Watcha doin', waiting for the bus?
Roddick is no stripling, and it would be unrealistic to expect him to morph into a Lopez-like attacker. Still, the guy has really fleshed out his meat and potatoes game, and I don't think it's pie-in-the-sky to speculate that he might gradually begin to follow up more of those deadly, forcing shots with ventures to the net. Anyone who's watched Andy improve over the last few years has really witnessed a tutorial in high-level game development. That's a pleasure unto itself.
Lopez played (and lost) just one match prior to the start of this event, but he's looked pretty good here so far. This match-up will give us a window on something Roddick doesn't often have to demonstrate -- his defensive skills (passing shots, lobs, and precise service returns against a lefty who likes attacking the net). But his basic game plan -- to take care of his serve and then make the most of the inevitable opportunities to put together a break (with a little help from an opponent who knows he'll probably have scant few comparable chances of his own) -- ought to tide him through.
I like this one as a connoisseurs match, despite Roddick's H2H lead.
Jelena Jankovic (8) vs. Alona Bondarenko (Jankovic, 9-0):
Okay, that H2H is downright ugly, but did you notice that Bonadrenko won the only tournament she's played this year (Hobart)? Jankovic is determined to "start fast and finish strong" -- or that's what she told me she was going to do, with an impish, self-deprecating grin, down at Nick Bollettieri's about a month ago). She can't afford to dig herself into an early-season hole, like she did last year. I see this as a bellwether match for Jelena.
I like to see Jelena in the mix at the top, although that coy streak, while charming, seems somewhat responsible for the way she runs off the rails now and then. No matter how you cut it, the prospect of meeting Dinara Safina (instead of Kim Clijsters, either Williams sister, or Justine Henin) in a quarterfinal has to make the women in this quarter of the draw salivate. That implies pressure, of course, which is another reason this match is a good test for Jankovic. The pressure of expectations outweighs the pressure of opportunity (for Bondarenko) any day.
Justine Henin vs. Alisa Kleybanova (Henin, 1-0):
On paper, you have to give Kleybanova little chance. She was a first-round loser in her two previous tournament matches this year, but each of them was a three-setter, and the second was a 7-5-in-the-third "quality loss" to Svetlana Kuznetsova. But here in Melbourne, Kleybanova toughed out local favorite Jelena Dokic and handled Sorana Cirstea with relative ease. This is no gimme for the Sister of No Mercy, especially when you factor in the letdown potential in play after Henin's excellent win over Elena Dementieva -- and, as she anticipates potential back-to-back matches with bragging rights to Belgium (okay, it's a small nation, but that only makes it more critical) at stake (against Yanina Wickmayer and Kim Clijsters, if those ladies do their jobs).
Henin is enough of a pro not to get blind-sided by a letdown, but to some degree that's never entirely in a player's hands (much of it is in the heart and mind). At 5-11, Kleybanova has a good six inches of height on Henin, and at some point size and the associated power and stamina do matter. Tread carefully, Justine.
John Isner vs. Gael Monfils (Isner, 2-1):
Okay, admit it - that H2H is a surprise. Monfils is often described and/or thought of as a superior athlete who plays tennis; Isner is often described and/or thought of as a big galoot who can barely get out of his own way, but has the gift of thunder in his right arm. The surprising H2H is a testament to the power of power.
Every one of the matches between these guys has been on hard courts (and Isner better stay as far away from clay as he can when Monfils is doing his contortionist impersonations), and five of the nine sets they've played have been decided by a tiebreaker (Isner won three).
Isner has played well this year; he won his first ATP title at the only event he entered, Auckland. But Monfils, a semifinalist at Brisbane, is also looking pretty strong. Monfils hasn't lost a set in Melbourne, while Isner barely survived a five-set first-round war with Andreas Seppi. When you're breaking a bronc, it's important to keep the hoss' head down, close to his chest. The technique also works on some players who like to buck and kick up their heels, and Monfils is one of them. Contain Monfils' athleticism and you can make inroads on his psyche -- especially if you can back it up with a flurry of aces in a tiebreaker.
Marin Cilic vs. Stanislas Wawrinka (Wawrinka, 4-1):
Are we done crowning Cilic The Next Great Player yet? Well, if there are any doubts, this is just the kind of match Cilic needs to win to convert non-believers. Wawrinka hasn't lost a set in Melbourne yet, while Cilic had a real struggle the other night with Aussie hope Bernard Tomic. That Cilic beat Wawrinka in two tiebreakers to win Chennai only makes the plotline here that much juicier. Let's turn it over to Lleyton Hewitt, that little guy who's married to the famous poet, who was refreshingly honest when he was asked about Cilic the other day:
"Cilic is, yeah, a very good player. I think a little bit when he's expected to win he doesn't quite play as well as,you know...when he had to play a guy like Murray and that at the U.S. Open, Murray and Del Potro, he had very little pressure on him."
I don't want to make trouble here, Hewitt added, "Cilic is a quality player. Absolutely." But Lleyton made his point. Put it this way: Wawrinka is the kind of guy Cilic has to beat on a regular basis to get at those Del Potros and Murrays, and despite the wonders and beauties of Chennai, it's not Melbourne. Let's see how Cilic does at the high stakes table against a guy who's been a handful for him in the past, but whom nobody has accused of being the next great anything.
Enjoy the tennis, everyone!