Do any other tennis courts fit into a TV screen as well as the show courts at Wimbledon? You get almost nothing but the green of the playing surface, with only a few traces of fans at the edges. It gives the matches and players a larger-than-life appearance, like there’s nothing in the world outside of this court. If you've ever been to the All England Club, you know it's also what makes your first visit there a little startling—the main arena is small, too small to be the same center-of-the-tennis-universe you’ve been seeing on TV all these years.
I’ve often thought this TV-friendly quality was one of the great appeals of the event to people who don’t follow tennis otherwise. There’s something soothing about that color and that all-natural court, especially when you can see it first thing in the morning with your coffee. It’s enough to make you late for work. One of my great Wimbledon memories actually came in Brooklyn a few years ago. I was walking in the Park Slope neighborhood, where apartment windows are often at street level. I passed a darkened living room that seemed fabulously calm and cool compared to the blistering summer weather outside. The only glow in the room was the green of Wimbledon on the TV near the window. I can remember thinking: If only I was in there watching, everything would be perfect forever.
So, yeah, it’s good to have the Big W to kick around again for a couple weeks. Like you, if you have a job, I’ve catching bits here and there. Here are a few thoughts after five days of scattershot viewing.
Commentary: This morning I found myself enjoying the ESPN trio of Fowler, Carillo, and Cahill. Fowler is an eager beaver and surprisingly knowledgeable for a non-expert, and he has learned over the years to defer more to the ex-players in the booth. Carillo is better when she’s part of a three-person team. She can inject her thoughts, which are usually insightful (particularly when it comes to the women), without talking too much. Carillo speaks like a writer (she’s a good one) and is always searching for the clever phrase or surprising word, which can be tiring on the ears when she’s the only color commentator. She can also be funny, but she tends to laugh at her own comments in an odd and forced way. Cahill is the best of them, understated, unpretentious, but always there with a concise coach’s perspective.
Yesterday was closer to ridiculous than sublime when ESPN sent Dick Enberg and Cliff Drysdale into the booth together. After a garbled conversation about who was cooking for whom in their Wimbledon village apartment, Cliff came up with this insight after a set point: “OOOHHHHH!!! This is . . . good grass-court tennis.” Enberg was there with the right line before they went to a commercial: “Cliff Drysdale, what an analyst!” Nice save. Still, whatever his weaknesses, Cliff's voice sounds at home in the All England Club.
Federer clothing: I actually think he looks pretty good in the white-on-white-on-white, though I wonder what he’s going to do next year, go out in a white overcoat on top of the jacket on top of the sweater on top of the shirt? It’s half cool throwback, half pointless contrivance. The problem I have is that, when the world’s best player comes out in look-at-me get-up, there's an element of preening to it.
Janko Tipsarevic: I like this guy’s compact game. Everything in its place, every ball nicely struck.
Lucie Safarova: Her strokes are fiercer than Jankovic’s, who she lost to today, but she’s inconsistent and not all that mobile. How good can the 20-year-old get with those particular assets and liabilities? Where’s her ceiling? I’m not sure right now.
James Blake: More disappointment for his fans. He was jumping at his returns, and you could see his lack of comfort at the net on a crucial sitter volley that he missed in the fourth-set tiebreaker. As it floated toward him, Blake looked indecisive about how much angle to go for and ended up pushing it into the net. The best volleyers are never indecisive and never let the ball come to them, the way Blake did on that point.
Juan Carlos Ferrero: I started out watching Blake but was surprisingly impressed by Ferrero. As with Tipsarevic, a compact, clean-hitting game is something worth watching in itself, regardless of the ranking of the player. Now the two play—tell me how it goes, since there’s a snowball’s chance in hell I’ll see it here.
Richard Gasquet: He hasn’t dropped a set, but I haven’t seen him play a point. Does he have a shot of going deep? His matchup with countryman Jo-Wilfred Tsonga is an aficionado's delight—tell me how it goes, since…ditto above.
Other matchups to watch:
Federer-Haas; I think the German will take a set, but Fed is still so tough on his serve on grass that I can’t imagine anyone taking more than that from him.
Mauresmo-Santangelo: The Italian took a set from her at the U.S. Open last year.
Monfils-Davydenko: Man I would love to see this one. Monfils could be a grass-court monster someday.
Roddick-Mathieu: Beware the Frenchman; he’s beaten Roddick before. But I feel like Andy thinks of Wimbledon as his turf (Fed aside, of course) and will come out with a chip on his shoulder, ready to take Mathieu’s head off. Roddick then would player the winner of Gasquet-Tsonga. Either is intriguing.
Finally, Hingis.
Granville? 4 and 2? What happened? I thought some of you said she was going to win the tournament!