Posted on Mon, Sep. 01, 2003
This wide-open Open not too hot without Williams Sisters
BY FILIP BONDY
New York Daily News
DEAR VENUS AND SERENA:
I know you have many things on your minds right now, like healing those tendons and designing those dresses and performing in those cameo roles. I know that tennis is not the most important thing in your life, because you've told us that many, many times.
I wish I didn't have to interrupt your well-earned rehab, but there's a real problem out here at the U.S. Open. It's the elephant in the room, the big, wrinkled gray one the networks are trying to ignore. Basically, the women's draw without you has been - how do I put this diplomatically? - abysmal.
A few of us thought it might be refreshing to stage a Grand Slam tournament without the Williams sisters, because you win too often, too easily. Well, we were wrong. Those among us who welcomed the wide-open Open were just plain stupid.
The women's matches have been lifeless, hopeless, uninspired. Forehand. Backhand. Unforced error. Real shotmaking is nearly nonexistent. Nobody builds points. Nobody uses the whole court. No one lifts the sport to another level with power and passion. Only Tracy Austin seems to be enthralled by it all.
You know how we always complained about the Grand Slam finals you two played against each other? How uncomfortable we felt watching you, as if we were intruders? Well, there was more drama and tennis geometry in your Wimbledon meeting than anything that has passed for a women's match here in Flushing Meadows.
I would love to report that Lindsay Davenport, Jennifer Capriati and the two Belgians have carried the day without you, but that would be a lie. It is not entirely their fault. The depth of the field is pathetic. The more the TV announcers hype the Russians, the more they roll over and disappear.
Maybe things will improve in the quarterfinals. But on Monday again, Capriati (who won one match in 35 minutes) crushed Elena Dementieva between the raindrops. If you blinked, you missed another game. For reasons hard to comprehend, the women seem quite satisfied to exit the place once they've played to their ranking. With a few notable exceptions, they accept their slots in life, providing little argument and demonstrating no great aspirations.
It turns out, your presence wasn't the only thing that discouraged the women. They are cowered also by the mere sight of Kim Clijsters, who hasn't lost a set while dropping only 19 games in four matches. Frankly, she isn't even playing that well.
We are still waiting for a breakout moment, for a woman to knock a serve down the middle on a big point and follow it without hesitation, forward to the net.
Meanwhile, the men have produced brilliant, memorable matches with full plot twists and lip snarls. Andy Roddick survived the defiant Croatian Ivan Ljubicic. Younes el-Aynaoui defeated Jiri Novak in a fifth-set tiebreaker, a wonderful tactical battle between players who both really believed they might win.
Late Sunday night, we caught a glimpse of why Roger Federer is the best player of all. He is Liquid Tennis, a fluid wave that covers the entire court. The great thing about the men's draw is that we never know for sure what happens next. Federer must play David Nalbandian, who owns an eerie 4-0 record against the young Wimbledon champ.
Everytime we ask the women here about their ordinary matches, they claim we are imagining things. Clijsters says the matches are one-sided only because she respects her opponents so much, she is well prepared for them. We are not making this up. The tennis has been a lousy argument for that $1 million winner's paycheck.
And in part, the problem is you two, Venus and Serena. The past three or four years, you have spoiled us. We've grown accustomed to the 120-mph serves, the groundstrokes that daub the lines. We revel in the little controversies and resentments that swirl about you - the way Irina Spirlea might bump into you on the changeover, or Justine Henin-Hardenne might disrupt your concentration.
We thought New York could handle your absence, if it were just for one tournament. We were dead wrong. We already are without that mischievous artist, Martina Hingis, and the old masters, Steffi Graf and Monica Seles.
Now, you've forsaken us as well. We've spent more than a week yawning, bored stiff.
Please come back next summer. Bring your parents. We need the headlines. More than that, we need the tennis. - SINCERELY, SPORTS COLUMNIST
This wide-open Open not too hot without Williams Sisters
BY FILIP BONDY
New York Daily News
DEAR VENUS AND SERENA:
I know you have many things on your minds right now, like healing those tendons and designing those dresses and performing in those cameo roles. I know that tennis is not the most important thing in your life, because you've told us that many, many times.
I wish I didn't have to interrupt your well-earned rehab, but there's a real problem out here at the U.S. Open. It's the elephant in the room, the big, wrinkled gray one the networks are trying to ignore. Basically, the women's draw without you has been - how do I put this diplomatically? - abysmal.
A few of us thought it might be refreshing to stage a Grand Slam tournament without the Williams sisters, because you win too often, too easily. Well, we were wrong. Those among us who welcomed the wide-open Open were just plain stupid.
The women's matches have been lifeless, hopeless, uninspired. Forehand. Backhand. Unforced error. Real shotmaking is nearly nonexistent. Nobody builds points. Nobody uses the whole court. No one lifts the sport to another level with power and passion. Only Tracy Austin seems to be enthralled by it all.
You know how we always complained about the Grand Slam finals you two played against each other? How uncomfortable we felt watching you, as if we were intruders? Well, there was more drama and tennis geometry in your Wimbledon meeting than anything that has passed for a women's match here in Flushing Meadows.
I would love to report that Lindsay Davenport, Jennifer Capriati and the two Belgians have carried the day without you, but that would be a lie. It is not entirely their fault. The depth of the field is pathetic. The more the TV announcers hype the Russians, the more they roll over and disappear.
Maybe things will improve in the quarterfinals. But on Monday again, Capriati (who won one match in 35 minutes) crushed Elena Dementieva between the raindrops. If you blinked, you missed another game. For reasons hard to comprehend, the women seem quite satisfied to exit the place once they've played to their ranking. With a few notable exceptions, they accept their slots in life, providing little argument and demonstrating no great aspirations.
It turns out, your presence wasn't the only thing that discouraged the women. They are cowered also by the mere sight of Kim Clijsters, who hasn't lost a set while dropping only 19 games in four matches. Frankly, she isn't even playing that well.
We are still waiting for a breakout moment, for a woman to knock a serve down the middle on a big point and follow it without hesitation, forward to the net.
Meanwhile, the men have produced brilliant, memorable matches with full plot twists and lip snarls. Andy Roddick survived the defiant Croatian Ivan Ljubicic. Younes el-Aynaoui defeated Jiri Novak in a fifth-set tiebreaker, a wonderful tactical battle between players who both really believed they might win.
Late Sunday night, we caught a glimpse of why Roger Federer is the best player of all. He is Liquid Tennis, a fluid wave that covers the entire court. The great thing about the men's draw is that we never know for sure what happens next. Federer must play David Nalbandian, who owns an eerie 4-0 record against the young Wimbledon champ.
Everytime we ask the women here about their ordinary matches, they claim we are imagining things. Clijsters says the matches are one-sided only because she respects her opponents so much, she is well prepared for them. We are not making this up. The tennis has been a lousy argument for that $1 million winner's paycheck.
And in part, the problem is you two, Venus and Serena. The past three or four years, you have spoiled us. We've grown accustomed to the 120-mph serves, the groundstrokes that daub the lines. We revel in the little controversies and resentments that swirl about you - the way Irina Spirlea might bump into you on the changeover, or Justine Henin-Hardenne might disrupt your concentration.
We thought New York could handle your absence, if it were just for one tournament. We were dead wrong. We already are without that mischievous artist, Martina Hingis, and the old masters, Steffi Graf and Monica Seles.
Now, you've forsaken us as well. We've spent more than a week yawning, bored stiff.
Please come back next summer. Bring your parents. We need the headlines. More than that, we need the tennis. - SINCERELY, SPORTS COLUMNIST
