Friday, June 19, 2020

More Transmissions from a Tennis Bunker

Creeeeakkk...






Did someone knock...?


An anticipated, the USTA dropped its U.S. Open decision on the tennis world this week, and it set off a chain reaction of differing responses.




Set to begin on August 31, the fan-less U.S. Open is part of a subsequently released restart schedule that kicks off (for the WTA, two weeks ahead of the ATP) the week of August 3, with the postponed Roland Garros scheduled to be held in Paris beginning September 27. If both slams are indeed held, it would avert the possibility of fewer then three majors being held in calendar year for the first time since World War II (the last time there were *just* three was 1986, when the AO shifted from December '86 to January '87).

Of course, whether or not the Open *should* be held at all is another discussion, with the coronavirus pandemic still chugging along in the U.S. (though other sports *are* picking back up) with nearly 120K dead and counting, no matter if (and largely because) the current presidential administration refuses to acknowledge that reality and/or promote the practices necessary to possibly prevent such an ongoing occurrence into the foreseeable future. But with the longer term landscape perhaps as questionable as the short, passing over the opportunity to hold the event even after the state of New York gave the "okay" could ultimately be viewed just as derisively as some viewed the decision that the tournament *would* be held this year.

While some called the decision "selfish" or a "money-grab," others had issues with the necessary protocols and/or the act of eliminating the majority of the competitions (no qualifying rounds, juniors, wheelchair or mixed doubles, and with just half a doubles draw, with no singles players allowed to enter) in order, apparently, to have as few a number of people involved in the event as possible.

No decision was ever going to be met with 100% agreement, as the non-top tier players who would have been robbed of the chance to make *any* money in the event would have snarled just as loudly as those who didn't agree with the choice to go forward with the tournament. While original plans had seemed to call for players being able to bring along just *one* additional person was met with anger by top players with large teams, the final decision to allow a few more (3 in all) has caused the players whose events were dropped to argue that those additional "bring-alongs" could have been replaced by players in the axed or slashed draws.



While some argue that the protocols (1-2 tests a weeks, daily temperature checks, masks on-site when not playing or training) don't make things safe enough, others have argued that they are too stringent (including Novak Djokovic, who last week acted as if the inconvenience of being unable to go into Manhattan for two weeks was akin to cruel and unusual punishment, even as many around the world have spent weeks and months locked down in their own homes... then last week he played an exhibition with big crowds while flouting the *lack* of any protocols or social distancing at all because those were "the rules" in Serbia).



As it is, the USTA relented to some calls by allowing players to book *two* hotel rooms to contain no more than two people each (or take the option of renting a home outside Manhattan), as well as increased the number of services provided at the hotel, while also deciding to not use line judges or ballpersons anywhere outside the show courts.

But who will or won't play?


View this post on Instagram

The US Open will always hold a very special place in my heart. Arthur Ashe is where I won my first grand slam title and I treasure so many unforgettable moments at the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center. Since then, we’ve seen sports, and the world as we know it, come to a halt due to the spread of COVID-19. I can’t stress enough that the health and safety of, not only the players, but of all those involved in making tennis happen again this season is, and has always been, of the utmost importance. I have no doubt that the USTA has come up with the best plan to insure our safety as we look to the return of tennis in 2020. The decision, I know was not made lightly and I completely support and understand every players personal opinions on the matter and their comfort level traveling near and far to compete on the world’s biggest stage. Returning to life as we once knew it is no longer an option but, I plan to make the most of the opportunity to get back on the court, re-connect with players and friends and hopefully bring tennis back to the millions of fans across the globe safely.

A post shared by Bianca Vanessa?? (@biancaandreescu_) on



Well, Serena Williams (one major away from 24, and surely knowing she can't throw away any chances at nearly age 39) quickly committed to playing, while defending champ Bianca Andreescu professed trust in the tournament's plans (though she'd be wise to watch her own back and never assume anything... it's the one thing she can learn from her countrywoman Genie). The status of Ash Barty (as well as Rafa Nadal, as of now, and even Djokovic) are still to be determined, while Simona Halep (who'd already expressed reservations, and didn't play the '16 Olympics because of the threat of Zika in Rio) announced she wouldn't be making the trip from Europe (though she left the door open a *teeny-tiny* crack).



Some others just got mouthy...



While others presented legitimate, reasoned -- and numbered -- points of disagreement...



The argument that the plan the USTA came up with actively disregards the needs of the sort of players -- qualifiers and doubles specialists -- who truly *needed* the Open and the opportunity for season-making prize money it would have provided is probably the most effective one of them all.



Naturally, the attempt to add an "asterisk" to this Open, with potentially many top names skipping out, has already begun. Which is fine, but it could also turn out to be an interesting experiment. Not just when it comes to which players will seize the moment, but also to see just how long the asterisk discussion lasts when put up against the prospect of Serena hanging around deep into the draw.

One suspects that if Williams *does* get #24 in Flushing Meadows, the '20 U.S. Open will go from "having an asterisk" to becoming the site of her "toughest (and maybe best)" major title run ever -- under adverse and unusual conditions -- so quickly that we'll all get whiplash.

Thing is, both opinions might end up being correct.

Either way, the "U.S. Open: Thunderdome Edition" has the makings of an unforgettable, hopefully-only-figurative battle for survival between the lines.
===============================================
Maybe the most disappointing aspect of the U.S. Open schedule cut, aside from the lost opportunity for so many in-need players to maybe make up for their "lost" season with a qualifying run, is that the wheelchair event was dropped for this year.

Now, first off, while many have complained about this occurrence many are overlooking that there actually wasn't *supposed* to be a WC competition at the '20 Open to begin with, because the Paralympics were scheduled to take the competition's summer position, as always happens. Of course, with the Tokyo Games being cancelled, it opened up the possibility for a nice course correction.

But that didn't happen, and many players were *not* pleased. Largely, I suspect, because there was zero communication about it beforehand (although, frankly, they probably should have seen this coming, as most pre-announcement models fully expected the WC event to be cut along with the other cancellations that were included in the USTA's press release).




Unlike some, I wouldn't term this an act of active "discrimination" against WC players, essentially because it was clear that the USTA was interested in chopping the event down to just what was considered to be the "money" events: men's and women's tour singles. If the organization had its druthers, it likely would have cut *everything* but those singles competitions because *in its mind* that's the only thing that's "important" and the only thing anyone really comes out to see, or their broadcast partners want to air.

They could never have gotten away with cancelling *all* doubles, so they gutted much of what they *did* include in order to throw doubles a small bone and quell *some* of the surely expected anger. I doubt that holding the juniors and wheelchair competitions was ever seriously considered as an option.

British player Jordanne Whiley concurs with not calling it "discrimination," as she notes at the start of her IG comments on the matter (below), and I agree wholeheartedly with her on what *is* a very problematic, disappointing and discouraging decision by the USTA. While wheelchair tennis has made great inroads of late, it still gets the door slammed shut in its face at nearly every turn (even more than doubles).

Remember, aside from the horrible scheduling of the sport's -- especially U.S. -- slam finals (the women's Open championship is often played on an outside court *during* the regular men's final, with zero attention and few fans... when it *should* be given a *bigger* stage on Ashe as a *lead-in* to the tournament's concluding match), the Hall of Fame even recently made it more difficult -- with a longer wait -- for WC greats to be inducted into Newport.

Esther Vergeer, perhaps the most dominant athlete in *any* discipline of tennis since Suzanne Lenglen, is still on the outside looking in despite having retired in early 2013. Her next eligible year for induction was *going* to be 2023, but with this year's HoF ceremony being postponed until '21 it's possible that there won't be any additional inductees announced next year (the '20 class includes Conchita Martinez and Goran Ivanisevic), which might push the next "WC-eligible" year to '24.

Here's what Whiley said:



Thus, Whiley seems to continue to be snakebit when it comes to "defending" her lone slam singles crown. In 2015, she won the U.S. Open singles title at Flushing Meadows. But she hasn't been able to play the event since. What had already been a combination of time out due to her pregnancy (2017-18), the Paralympics (2016), and last year not making the field because a wild card was given to U.S. player Dana Mathewson, knocking Whiley out of the eight-player singles draw after she'd made a great comeback and climbed back into the Top 8.

Now, the WC event has been cancelled for '20, and won't be held in '21 either since the Tokyo Paralympics will again (at least supposedly) take the U.S. Open spot in the summer schedule next year.

Of course, Whiley *does* still have her ten slam doubles wins (including the '20 AO), two Paralympic Bronze medals in WD (2012/16), as well as a pair of WC Doubles Masters titles (2013/14).

Meanwhile, Marjolein Buis is at least looking on the bright side...



Also, I missed this in May, but Buis posted this on her IG at the end of what was Ehlers-Danlos syndrome awareness month. Of course, Buis suffers from EDS, and 2020 was intended to be her (forced) final season as a WC pro after the ITF (to line up with the new eligibility guidelines for the Paralympics starting after Tokyo) altered the rules of the WC tour in a way that prevents athletes with EDS from playing on tour after '20 because, apparently, they aren't deemed to be impaired *enough* to qualify.



With the Tokyo Paralympics being pushed back to 2021, Buis is now set to play in the Games next year (assuming they aren't cancelled again). I haven't seen her make reference to her status for the "regular" WC tour next year, but hopefully something will be done to delay the change of eligibility rules since most of this season was wiped out due to the pandemic.
===============================================
Regarding Halep's decision to skip the Open (well, barring a change of heart due to circumstances when the entrance deadline comes next month... which we know *isn't* going to happen), as well as possibly the Asian circuit...

Well, her lack of "chill" under the circumstances might work out quite well for her.

Her U.S. results have been spotty, at best, including a 2nd Rd. exit last year. Unlike in past years, her post-Wimbledon title summer didn't add much to her column, nor did the post-Open Asian swing, other than her round robin appearance in the WTAF (which she'd skip in '20 if she does play only in Europe, as it's in Shenzhen).

Meanwhile, she'll be able to play the short clay court lead-up schedule (Madrid and/or Rome) to Paris, and would probably be the favorite to win her second Roland Garros title.


===============================================
So at least there's this...


===============================================
Meanwhile...



Hmmm...


===============================================
Finally, she stirs...


===============================================
If tennis actually does come back soon, at the very least it should prevent Genie Bouchard from agreeing to go on a date with *all* her fans.
===============================================
I like the idea of these Nike outfits with images on them...



But there needs to be a series of different ones. *This* one seems to be everywhere, in the current exhibitions, as well as in players' practice photos.


View this post on Instagram

??? ?? ????? ??????????????

A post shared by Aryna Sabalenka ?? (@sabalenka_aryna) on


===============================================
So, multiple Czechs have won recent exhibition "titles," and this week there's an all-Czech team event that doesn't include many of the players who *could* participate without anyone raising an eyebrow.




Hmmm, I guess the Maiden depth is *still* strong.

via GIPHY

===============================================
Have no fear...


===============================================
Just because it'll probably still *eventually* become a story.

Yes, Sue Barker really did say that Coco Gauff could win 24 majors...


===============================================
How has Jennifer Brady handled the lockdown?



In case you forgot, Brady was ranked #48 when the rankings were frozen, having reached her career high (#45) in February. After opening her season with a qualifier-to-quarterfinalist run in Brisbane (def. Sharapova, after the Russian had posted the final victorious set of her career, and Barty), as well as reaching the Dubai semis (after wins over Svitolina, Vondrousova and Muguruza).
===============================================
After nearly 60 years...







===============================================
Wait, the Belmont is *this* weekend?

via GIPHY

===============================================


futuristic-fonts


kosova-font

*RECENT WOMEN'S SLAM WINNERS*
2018 AO: Caroline Wozniacki, DEN
2018 RG: Simona Halep, ROU
2018 WI: Angelique Kerber, GER
2018 US: Naomi Osaka, JPN
2019 AO: Naomi Osaka, JPN [2]
2019 RG: Ash Barty, AUS
2019 WI: Simona Halep, ROU [2]
2019 US: Bianca Andreescu, CAN
2020 AO: Sofia Kenin, USA

*RECENT WOMEN'S U.S. OPEN CHAMPIONS*
2010 Kim Clijsters, BEL
2011 Samantha Stosur, AUS
2012 Serena Williams, USA
2013 Serena Williams, USA
2014 Serena Williams, USA
2015 Flavia Pennetta, ITA
2016 Angelique Kerber, GER
2017 Sloane Stephens, USA
2018 Naomi Osaka, JPN
2019 Bianca Andreescu, CAN
[U.S. Open titles - all-time]
8 - Molla Bjurstedt Mallory
7 - Helen Wills Moody
6 - Serena Williams*
6 - Chris Evert
5 - Margaret Smith-Court
5 - Steffi Graf
4 - Pauline Betz
4 - Maria Bueno
4 - Helen Jacobs
4 - Billie Jean King
4 - Alice Marble
4 - Elisabeth Moore
4 - Martina Navratilova
4 - Hazel Hotchkiss Wightman


futuristic-fonts













futuristic-fonts


kosova-font











































futuristic-fonts


kosova-font






kosova-font







kosova-font





kosova-font





kosova-font




kosova-font




kosova-font




kosova-font




kosova-font




kosova-font




kosova-font




kosova-font





kosova-font




kosova-font





Be safe.
All for now.

posted by Todd.Spiker @ 2:00 AM 

14 Comments:

Blogger colt13 said...

When is Radwanska due?

No clip of Putintseva packing?

Trumpspeak left out "Nobody knows more about (insert topic) than me."

Initially, I didn't expect wheelchair to be included, since the budget is being cut, and they weren't in it for 2020. Seems that wheelchair is less than a million total, and it would have been nice to get them in, since I don't expect then next year either.

Q being cut is short sighted, my thoughts below.

The irony of Dabrowski being the loudest voice for doubles, is there is an outside chance she plays singles. Sounds crazy? It is, but I might well put this on paper, should the scenario unfold.

The tour starts back with Palermo. Assume that it is a heavy Euro based field. I kid, but Bertens is probably a lock to play. If the TBD event is in Europe, another chunk of players stays over there.

Then comes Cinci/USO. If the rules from earlier in the year still stand, USO entry list comes out 6 weeks early, while Cinci will be 4, meaning that USO comes out the week before Cinci. Because slams are where you are automatically entered by rank, than withdraw, while Cinci is the opposite, we will get more of a reading on who is coming to America from Cincinnati's cutoff.

Last year's Cinci cutoff was 47, though those numbers are skewed by 4 LL making the field. Blame Bianca for winning Canada. If the number is above 67, since there should be another non US event before this, that is probably a red flag. Q cutoff was 90 for 32 player Q. Expanded to 48 this year, expect 130-140.

I expect players to stay in the USO field, until they watch Cincinnati, and see that things won't be as bad as feared, barring other pandemic real life problems.

Other things to note, Cincinnati is normally the last event to affect USO seeding. Too late this year, so the TBD event would be the last one.

Normally, the Open has 100 + 4 SR + 8 WC + 16 Q. They have said they will do 120 + 8 WC, which really means 116 + 4 SR, though I haven't heard if they are being extended the 5 months they are off. That leaves Dodin last in now, and Fernandez 2 out.

Obviously unexpected back in March, but Clijsters isn't in the draw, so I assume the multiple time winner is in line for one. Others that I think have an outside shot:

171-Mayar Sherif- Egypt. Would have been in Q, played at Pepperdine, supposedly currently in USA.
189-Renata Zarazua- Mexico. Would have been in Q, based in Florida.
205-Maria Camila Osirio Serrano-Colombia. last year's junior winner doesn't have qualifying to play in, so why not?
249-Ulrikke Eikeri-Norway. No real shot, just want Norway represented.
326-Mari Osaka-Japan. Connections? US based, plus has a higher ranking than Bouchard.

So with all of these choices, why do I think Dabrowski has a chance at singles? Well, the fact that there isn't qualifying means that I assume that if the withdrawal in singles comes too late, they will have to to this like the Olympics, and pull an alternate from doubles.

Ballparking the Top 64 in doubles, 22 should be directly in the singles draw, and 23 won't have a singles ranking. That leaves 21 players that potentially sign up as alternates. Dabrowski's ranking is 472, but has a chance as I would not expect those 1 or 2 out to travel to NYC just in case.


Fri Jun 19, 04:59:00 AM EDT  
Blogger colt13 said...

Stat of the Week- 2- Number of slams won by Fiorella Bonicelli.

Bonicelli is the only woman from Uruguay to have won a slam. One in mixed-1975, and doubles-1976, both at the French Open.

Looking at the restart after the pandemic, it seems that large groups have an advantage. Czech Republic women see to be ahead of the curve, with America close behind. So what about those from non traditional tennis countries?

Bonicelli would have been at a disadvantage. The only Top 200 player from Uruguay, she is their most accomplished WTA player, though others topped her in Fed Cup. This would not have been the case if she represented her birth country of Peru, as Laura Arraya has a higher ranking.

She holds a unique place in tennis history, as her career took place while the sport was changing.

Her first slam was the 1967 Australian Open, which was the only time she played there. Her second was the infamous 1968 French Open, where she lost due to walkover.

Her slam results were not as good as expected, though in 11 of her 25 career slams, she lost to a past or future slam finalist. 10 of her 25 slams were at the French, and with the US Open being on clay for a short time, over half of her slams were on clay.

Between all three types, 14 of her 15 career finals were on clay. So there were expectations. Not like Lisicki at Wimbledon, but the next group below.

Having played every French Open between 1970-78 except 1, when would she have her run? In doubles, that was in 1976 with France's Gail Lovera. Lovera won 4 slams, all at the French, but may have slipped under the radar as the previous version of Jarmila Wolfe.

Like Bonicelli, Lovera was born elsewhere, but unlike her, won a slam for her birth country. Born as Gail Sheriff, she won her first slam back in 1967 representing Australia. Then married a French player and won 2 under Chanfreau, then married another player, and on the last as Lovera.

Also managed to play Fed Cup for both.

Bonicelli was still looking for her breakout singles run. And the seeds for that were set in 1974, the one Bonicelli missed. She was banned by Phillipe Chatrier, for signing for the first season of World Team Tennis. So were all of the others that did, Jimmy Connors being the most controversial.

The ban only lasted one year, but a boycott by some players and WTT starting their season in May, led to the mess that was the 1978 French Open aka the one that got away.

Bonicelli needed the perfect storm, and almost got it. Being ranked in the first computer rankings back in 1975 at 54, she then improved to 43 in 1976, and a career high of 35 in 1977. For those who want to put as asterisk next to the 2020 US Open, remember this. Bonicelli was only ranked 35th, yet was the 13th seed in 1978.

How was that possible? Well, this was the era in which seeds were adjusted by surface, so she got a little bit of a bump. Plus #5 King was out due to WTT. So was everybody else in the Top 10.

Your #1 seed was #19 Jausovec, the reigning champ. #2 was 12 Ruzici. Former champ Nancy Richey was 4, former finalist Florenta Mihai was 10, and Jeanne Evert was 11.

Ruzici defeated Bonicelli in the QF, 6-7, 6-4, 8-6. She went on to win the title, eventually reaching another final, 1 SF, and 3 QF at the French. For Bonicelli to have come that close, against someone who played so well there, was her missed opportunity. Especially with the unseeded Brigitte Simon up next, followed by Jausovec, with the pressure to repeat.

1978 was effectively the end of Bonicelli's career, though she got a wild card in 1984 after marrying French Fed Cup captain Phillipe Duxin.

Duxin won a round.

Fri Jun 19, 05:35:00 AM EDT  
Blogger colt13 said...

Quiz Time!

Chris Evert won the French Open 7 times. With a record of 72-6, she wasn't tested often. Against whom did she play the most 3 set matches?

A.Margaret Court
B.Carling Bassett
C.Hana Mandlikova
D.Martina Navratilova



Interlude- Bonicelli's partner Gail Lovera, with a guest.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2725687700796992


Answer!

Had Evert showed up, she could have won 10. And most of those years she missed, the won the US Open on clay.

(A)Court is clearly wrong, but deserves mention because she beat Evert, making it the only time she lost a 3 set match there, going 13-1.

(C)Mandlikova is wrong, though one fun fact is that when she made it as a qualifier in 1978, she lost to Bonicelli. Mandlikova lost 2 3 setters, but got her revenge in a 2 set match, being one of 5 players to beat her in France.

(B)Bassett is wrong, but the fact that she is even on this list shows you what could have been. She took a set off of her twice, the 84 and 86 QF.

Just for the sheer amount of times they played, (D)Navratilova would have been a good guess. The only woman to have taken her to 3 sets 3 times, she didn't win any of those, but did beat her twice, making her the only woman to do so.

The only other losses? Sanchez Vicario and Jaeger.

Fri Jun 19, 05:49:00 AM EDT  
Blogger colt13 said...

What will Babos do? Since this year is either/or at the USO, will there be any players that withdraw for singles to play doubles. Looking at the pay, you would have to make the QF of doubles for this to pan out. With Babos 4 in doubles, but 100 in singles, she seems like the most likely candidate.

She did this at New Haven a couple of years back, so there is a precedent.

Fri Jun 19, 06:35:00 AM EDT  
Blogger Diane said...

Todd, thanks for the double shout-out!

colt, very interesting about Bonicelli. I didn’t remember her.

Fri Jun 19, 10:26:00 AM EDT  
Blogger Todd.Spiker said...

C-

Not sure when there'll be a little Aga (or Agi?)... but it sure looks like it's soon. But I said that about a month or two ago, as well. Could it be twins? Eek! ;)

I was going to use Putintseva, but I wanted to embed the actual TikTok video and couldn't find her profile. I don't know if there's some different spelling or what it is. :/

Apparently, the ITF is saying it's looking into way to maybe still hold the WC event, even if it's offsite. Hopefully something can be worked out, but I'm skeptical.

Yeah, there's a chance that the US and RG become almost de facto near-"regional slams" in '20.

Agree that how things go with the pre-Open schedule might alleviate *some* worries for many players and cause them to decide to go to NY.

I was just thinking, while it'll be "different" to see matches on Ashe during the day w/o fans, it would be even more odd in a night match that went late. I sort of wonder if they really even *need* to have a dedicated night session schedule (just the runover of day matches), other than for ESPN, as the session's sole purpose would seem to be to get a *second* ticket group onto the grounds, and that won't be happening this year.

Whew, I can't imagine how Lovera's career path would have been mangled by some commentators due to all the name changes. I still remember a couple of years ago on TC, Brett Haber mentioning how Abigail Spears had just won a WD title with Raquel Atawo and noted that she'd won most of her titles with Raquel Kops-Jones, not realizing it was the same person. :)

As fun as it'd be for a true *shocker* to emerge as a champion at the Open (I'll say, hmm, world #92, not knowing who that is... I just checked and it's Ana Bogdan!), but I wonder if that would be *good* for the sport/event or *bad*.

Quiz: hmm, Bassett seemed like a baited trap, so I went with Hana. Overthought it. ;)

You almost forget that Evert's career overlapped with ASV's.

Video: a preview of Venus & Serena in 2050, perhaps? But Serena will need to get married a couple more times, though. ;)

Wouldn't it be interesting if Mladenovic chose WD over WS? About a 0.00001% chance of that, though, right? Though it'd probably be a smart move on her part, esp. if Babos joined her.


D-

A two-fer! ;)

Fri Jun 19, 03:02:00 PM EDT  
Blogger Todd.Spiker said...

And Dimitrov tests positive and the Adria Series finale is cancelled.

(clear throats loudly, then feigns "shock")

Sun Jun 21, 04:47:00 PM EDT  
Blogger Todd.Spiker said...

...and Djokovic, and wife, and fitness coach. :/

Of course, now stories will go with the "should the U.S. Open be held in light of..." angle, when the organization and safety measures of the two events (and others) couldn't be any more different. Is there risk? Of course. But the Adria Series was like running head-first into traffic. Naked.

Based on how ESPN's SportsCenter opened its show this morning, many people are only going to hear "#1 player in tennis tests positive" when it should be "Serbian man, who stupidly and recklessly flaunted realities of a pandemic for two weeks, tests positive."

This guy says it all very well.

Tue Jun 23, 09:09:00 AM EDT  
Blogger colt13 said...

It does mean that Diane may have the best story this week. Charleston is going to be put under a microscope, because of the disaster that was the Adria Tour.

The keyboards are coming for Djokovic.

To balance out that mess, Krejcikova is another that has the singles or doubles quandary. She has lost in qualifying at the Open 5 times, but would make it for the first time at #115. Is this a bucket list thing for her, or does she choose the one where she has a chance to win the title?

Tue Jun 23, 09:32:00 AM EDT  
Blogger Diane said...

And, as someone on Twitter pointed out last night, Azarenka and Puig violated the distance rules while they were on the court. I assume that, by now, they have been confronted. Bob and Eleanor don’t do things half-assed, and the players really, really need to pull their part of the load.

Tue Jun 23, 03:38:00 PM EDT  
Blogger Todd.Spiker said...

And some players might come after his seat as the head of the Players Council (I mean, when Nick K. can call you "boneheaded" and everyone shakes their head in agreement...).

Phony science, self-centeredness (not that that one sets apart from the norm) and reckless stupidity does not look good in a "leader."

I'm talking about Novak there, by the way. ;)

So many of the Czechs might be in the same WS/WD boat (Strycova, and maybe even Vondrousova, in her heart of hearts).

Doubles is going to be *really* difficult to social distance in. That might be an under-the-radar reason for not allowing singles players in the US doubles draw... a single positive test only throws a monkey wrench into *one* draw.

Tue Jun 23, 05:38:00 PM EDT  
Blogger Diane said...

I respect almost everyone's process of spiritual seeking, only sometimes those processes are lacking. I figured Djokovic's was phony when I realized how sexist he was. Now it's pretty clear how phony it is. My one shred of sympathy, however, is the one I've always felt for him--that he was raised by those two horrible people.

2020 just keeps getting worse.

Wed Jun 24, 11:49:00 AM EDT  
Blogger Hoergren said...

How can US Open claim it's a grand slam when most European players stay away - USA is a dangerous place right now, and I think that with only two tournaments in USA and a lot in Europe and Asia - well ? To me they should cancel USO or at least downsize it to a premier 5.

Wed Jun 24, 02:51:00 PM EDT  
Blogger Todd.Spiker said...

D-

Djokovic's career/legacy has always been a "complicated" one to untangle. Now even more so.


H-

Hmmm, the Open could be *different*, but the Australian Open was still a "major" for quite a long time even when hardly anyone but Aussies played it in the 1970s/early '80s. I don't think the US field (or RG's) will be quite *that* extreme. But both might have the most "regional" feel they've had for a few decades. :/

We'll see how things go when events (maybe?) kick off in Europe in August. As the Adria Series proved, unless safety protocols (which Djokovic didn't like when the U.S. Open's guidelines were being leaked) are followed, Europe isn't necessarily an easy place to hold an event, either.

New York is seemingly much better now that a few months ago. But it's only late June, so who knows what things might be like in two months.

I'm still not *sure* it's going to be held. MLB, NBA and NHL are scheduled to begin about a month before play in Flushing Meadows. If any or all of those implode, the chances for cancellation likely grows exponentially.

Wed Jun 24, 04:55:00 PM EDT  

Post a Comment

<< Home