I don't know exactly when it happened, but at some point over the last 18 months or so, a decision was made not to post players' post match pressers on-line on the day they made them. I assume it's so that tennis journalists - and Mr Harmans - can then write their articles making us believe that they've had unprecedented interview rights as they piece together a player's answers to the questions to make an article (of entirely their slant) before we can read what the player actually said.
So I've kind of got out of the habit of reading pressers - even Rafa's - because when you do catch up with it, it's a bit like old news. But as I've been recovering from the sadness of Rafa's Wimbledon exit and trying to piece together why it is - once again - that [insert player name here] can - once again - have "the match of his life!!" I came across Rafa's. It did me good to read it, because I can't tell you how much it irked me that Nick Kyrgios wimped out against Raonic. I didn't get why he could serve 37 aces against Rafa, and yet only 15 against Raonic. Why his attitude was all out cockiness against Rafa, yet more subdued against Raonic. Anyhow, Rafa helped me to understand the answers ...
"... In the tiebreak he was able to serve better than me. So that’s an advantage. I could serve better on the tiebreaks. But 5‑All in the second set in the tiebreak, second serve, net, inside for him, second serve big. Then he repeat the second serve with 140 miles the second serve.
You know, that’s happens when you have nothing to lose. You can play that way. Players who really play for being in the last rounds, think about win the titles, it’s not easy to create the second serve 114 5‑All in the tiebreak, but that’s what happened today ..."
Yes ... Kyrgios had a second serve in the shoot out that is a tie-breaker, and yet he bombed it down at 140 miles an hour ... even though a double fault would have handed a set point to Rafa. He didn't care ... he hit it ... because he had nothing to lose. Whereas those players who are playing for the title don't do that, they don't take a massive risk on a point like that ... it's enough to serve at 114 ... Numbers. 140 vs 114. Rafa couldn't get a read on a 140 mph serve and that tie-breaker knocked the stuffing out of him.
"Normally on grass the thing is first week when you compete against some players, the things are not very logical. The surface creates the opportunity to that players that they can play very aggressive and they can see a real chance to win playing that style, no, something on the other surfaces you cannot play that crazy, way, no?
When you arrive to quarterfinals, semifinals, and you play against the best players, the things become again logical, no? At the end, the top players want to play with control. The top players want to play normal way. They don’t want to play crazy aggressive. They play normal."
Not logical ... crazy aggressive ... the surfrace. Of all the Slams, the surface of grass favours the fast serve and so-called aggressive play. You know, serving bombs, the much lauded serve/volley game and the 3 stroke rallies that apparently, are the Holy Grail of tennis [yawn] ... this is the surface for that. So a player - with absolutely nothing to lose and a massive bomb of a serve and who is prepared to hit as hard as he can - will pump himself up against Rafael Nadal and play that crazy way ... because he's nothing to lose. And grass helps to do that where the other surfaces don't. And that's what Rafa faced in the first week. And that's what Rafa faces in the early rounds of Masters too, if truth be told, but he can handle it better because it's not grass.
But I would also add - and this is my addition to Rafa's words - that there is something about Rafa that makes other men want to get one over on him. These crazy players could also do the same thing to the other tops guys during the first week ... but they don't. There is the thing about Rafa's style that he is not aggressive off his returns and he does stand back, and he does struggle with flat shots, blah, blah, blah. But I feel there's something about Rafa's masculinity and physicality and the fact that he's the ultimate warrior that makes them want to get one over him too.
And so back to the logic that Rafa was talking about. When you get through those crazy early rounds you then start to face the better players, the players that want to win. So it's not about trying to make endless winners and serving at 140 mph on a second serve at 5-5 in a tie-breaker; it's about players playing with control ... "normal". And playing "normal" is when Rafa comes into his own ...
Kyrgios probably faced Raonic and thought that he might actually have a chance to win. And he didn't play like he had nothing to lose ... and he cut down on the crazy and took 15% off his serve ... cos he wanted to try to win. So he lost.
Crazy players ...
The Prince of Darkness faced what you could describe as difficult players ... but not crazy. And Smugly most certainly didn't face a crazy player at all. He did last year and look what happened. Pity the draw didn't throw one up for him this time. Sorry Tommy Robredo, I like you and everything but purleeeease! And Stanford. It's hard trying to play a 5 set match when you feel like shit, isn't it? Worse still when you're trying to play it out knowing full well that you're probably going to lose.
And would you believe it, but of all the players that entered Wimbledon this year, the two I loathe the most are in the final. Smugly vs. the Prince of Darkness. God ... shoot me now.
I want them both to lose. And I've read many things about what will be the worse of two evils. And opinion is divided. Nothing is right or wrong about this, everybody has their own take on it, but I thought I'd throw in mine here.
Numbers ... if the PoD wins he's back to Number #1. And I think big whoop. Don't get me wrong, I actually think being Number 1 does actually mean something to Rafa. But for me as a fan, I don't get that worked up about it any more, because Rafa's done it. He's been No.#1 on three separate occasions and therefore Year End #No 1 three times. But in spite of his stellar 2013 and the fact that he re-gained that accolade, there's so many times this year that Djokovic has been called it within the media. And indeed the ITF saw fit to award their No. #1 for 2013 to the PoD, in spite of the fact that Rafa won 2 of their Slams. But then the PoD won 1, and their round robin exho WTF at the end of the year, and the team that the PoD played in got to the final of the Davis Cup ... hhmmmm. And there is the thought that a Wimbledon win would give him total confidence and motivation entering into the hardcourt season where he's good anyway. But that's the thing ... regardless of what happens tomorrow, he's good on hardcourts anyway. I loathe the idea that a win would mean he has as many Wimbers titles as Rafa from only 3 final appearances and when Rafa was so well, low, and poor in that match in 2011. But may God strike me down ... rather him than Smugly.
Oh God ... Smugly. When will this torture ever end!!!!!!! But it's as a friend said to me last tonight ... this circus can only happen on grass, and that Sampras did it too on his last legs. And considering how the draw fell so kindly for him and when a set down, his only challenger got sick ... God, he has to be the luckiest player alive. And of course with Rafa being out of the way, that automatically gave him another little spring in his goaty step. He's not been talking about time between points for a few days has he? Funny that.
But it's this interminable Slam count thing that drives me mad the most. The numbers game. Firstly, I got sick to death back in the day when Smugly was utterly desperate to (a) both equal and then (b) beat Sampras's record. Until injury and misfortune took Rafa out of the way and Smugly finally did it in the summer of 2009, Rafa was never able to properly celebrate the success he had ... because it took something away from Smugly. There's a train of thought that Smugly getting one more will make it just that step harder for Rafa to catch him. Personally, I don't think he will anyway, and personally ... I'm not bothered. Because like the ITF giving their No #1 to the PoD for 2013 when 2 defeats in finals, defeat in the final of a team competition and success in a round robin event against 7 other players (plus 1 Slam win) equals better success than a clay court and hardcourt Slam, a greater Slam count than Smugly would also not equal being the greatest player - in nearly everyone else's eyes bar us Rafa fans. Remember folks ... a record of reaching 17,641 consecutive 2nd rounds in Slams is what makes you truly great. *winks*
I don't want Smugly to get one more because he moves away from Rafa again; I don't want him to get one more because I simply cannot stand him. Worse still, the sycophancy and drooling and salivating will rise to ever greater heights again. Centre Court will have no need of watering. And may the Saints preserve us, the debate of him reaching 20 will rear it's ugly head again. 20 Slams ... the mere thought will have Sue Barker going out and buying extra duty Super+ Tena Lady especially.
God ... it really comes to something when you'd rather the PoD wins. But then for all the drooling and fawning there's one number that even Smugly can't erase from the history books ... the number of times he's lost to his greatest rival.
I said goodbye to Wimbledon days ago ... and this is my final farewell. To numbers and crazy players; logic and 140 mph second serves. The red clay of Spring and the green grass of Summer are now over. Rafa is oiling down his jetski and squeezing into his wetsuit. See you in Canada Rafa ... and thank you. Cos sod the serving trees of Wimbledon ... we'll always have Paris ...
VAMOS!!
