- The weather this year was subpar, to say the least.  However, while spectators might not have enjoyed some of the cloudiness and drizzle, the result was slower courts than normal, and that probably had something to do with Rafael Nadal’s complete dominance over the entire draw.

- Both female finalists, Ivanovic & Safina, did not play their best tennis in the championship match.  Safina was nervous as it was her first Grand Slam final (also she has some of the same genes as Marat Safin, meaning no one knows that kind of player will show up on any given day), and Ivanovic was clearly a bit put off by finally being a favorite in a Slam final.  Even though the skill wasn’t superb, it was still one of the more compelling women’s matches I’d seen in awhile, as you never really felt sure Ivanovic was going to win until the final point.

- Another note on the slow surface – while Rafa most likely would have won regardless of how fast the clay was, I do not think the same can be said for Men’s Doubles Champions Luis Horna and Pablo Cuevas.  They turned the Men’s Doubles world on its head by playing from the baseline as much as possible and just rocketing forehands at their opponents.  It actually rained the entire third set of their match against the Bryan brothers, and in my opinion on a bright sunny day, I don’t think the eventual champions would have survived that match.

- Unfortunately, I was traveling back to Vermont on the day of the Nadal/Federer thrashing, but if the reports about Federer giving up in the third set are true, then shame on him.  He is the number one player in the world, possibly the best of all time – I don’t care if he is playing against some hybrid of Borg and Nadal, put forth your best effort, if not for yourself, for all the fans around the globe watching. 

- The potential long term ramifications for Federer after getting destroyed by Nadal, in my opinion are next to nothing.  It is my guess that if the two face off again at the end of this year’s Wimbledon (as they have done the past two years), Federer will be the only holding the Champion’s Trophy.

- Gael Monfils is perhaps the most athletically gifted player to set foot on a tennis court, ever.  It was a pleasant surprise to see him pull a “Jo Willie Tsonga” and storm through the Men’s draw before falling to Federer.  Here’s to hoping he can stay injury free over the next few years and continue to be a threat on the ATP Tour.

- I struggle with my thoughts on the Williams Sisters.  They can be so frustrating to watch because everyone knows their potential, and sometimes I wish they would re-commit themselves fully to tennis.  On the other hand, if dedicating themselves wholly to tennis will burn them out and have them completely out of the game sooner rather than later, then maybe pacing themselves is the best for everyone.

‘Lackluster’ is pretty much the word that concerning all three events.  Ana Ivanovic, who I correctly predicted would upset Sharapova in the semis, was clearly in over her head against Henin in the finals, getting destroyed 6-1, 6-2.  As for Roger, he clearly didn’t play his best, and lost in 4 sets.  Nadal wasn’t outstanding either, except on the break points, where he saved 16 of 17.  Think about that for a second, if Federer wins two more of those points at oppurtune times, we could be discussing Roger’s potential Grand Slam for 2007.  In the 6th game of the first set alone, Nadal was serving at 2-3, and held after saving 5 break points.  If Federer wins that game, the whole match might have been different. 

Overall, the tennis was a bit lackluster this year.  No real memorable matches, with a few exceptions like Djokavic’s 5-set victory of Frenchman Oliver Patience.  It’s not that the quality of play was bad, but to have exciting matches you need two players playing at similar levels to keep matches competitive, and it didn’t happen often enough this year.  From the Men’s quarters onward, there were a total of 7 matches, meaning anywhere from 21 to 35 sets could have been played.  Turns out a total of 23 were played, with five straight set matches and two four-setters, not one five setter!  And the later rounds typically include the longest, most dramatic matches.  On the Women’s side, there were six straight set matches, and only one three setter.  Not that I think this is a trend or anything, but my basic point is that the tennis was a bit of a dramatic letdown, much like the end of the Sopranos was a disappointment for most people. 

I say ‘most people’ because I, for one, enjoyed it.  The ending was done in a more artistic way than many fans would have liked, but contrary to popular belief there was little ambiguity in the end.  Many people have their theories that the screen cut quickly to black because Tony was shot at that moment, or some other absurd idea.  The bottom line is the last scene showed that Tony would continue to lead his life having to look over his shoulder at every moment.  Notice I used the word ‘would’ as opposed to ‘will,’ because Tony Soprano will not continue to lead a life because he is a figment of someone’s imagination, and the fact that some people would like to hang David Chase, the show’s primary writer, by a noose because he didn’t end the show the way they wanted is somewhat disturbing.

 Anyway, as I wrote this entry, I have seen that a weary Federer will not try for a 5th victory at Halle.  One more sidenote on Roger.  While I was enduring my usual three hour delay at Newark International Airport, I overheard the following conversation after highlights of the match were shown:

Smart Tennis Fan # 1 – “I still think he (Roger) is the best player of all time.”

Smart Tennis Fan # 2 – “He isn’t as good as Pistol Pete til he wins the French.”

Smart Tennis Fan # 1 – “Yeah, I guess you are right.”

If you don’t get why this conversation is absurd, look up Pete Sampras’ career highlights on the red stuff.

Over on the Men’s side, Federer will take on 4th seeded Davydenko, and Nadal will face Djokavic, who is the 5th seed. So after all my talk about the great depth of Men’s tennis, at the end of the day 4 of the top 5 players in the world are in the Semi’s. Although I still stand by the argument I made in my last post. I think both Federer and Nadal will be challenged a great deal in their matches, but I just can’t see either of them losing, and I think after the clay has settled on Friday evening, we will be awaiting another Federer vs. Nadal final. If I had to pick against one of them in the semi’s, I think Nadal has the tougher matchup, as Djokavic has played as well as anyone else these past 10 days. As for the doubles, I have not been able to watch too much over the past few days, but the top two seeds on both the Men’s and Women’s side have fallen (the Bryan bros and Bjorkman/Miryni for the men; Raymond/Stosur and Black/Huber for the women).

As for citizens of the great United States, we have one lone competitor left. Kellen Damico of Denver, CO, seeded 10th in the Boys upset the # 6 seed today, 7-6, 6-4, as e made his way the quarterfinals. He is also the 2nd seed in the doubles, teaming with Frenchman Jonathon Eysseric, where they are also in the quarters. Hopefully Kellen can bring back some hardware and gain back some pride for our clay starved country. That’s it for today, off to a final Welcome Dinner for our last group of travelers.

In the major leagues, everyone that is reading this should agree with me that I was dead on regarding how good James Blake’s draw was. That being said, it’s too bad he couldn’t take advantage. Instead, the wiley veteran Jonas Bjorkman has made it through to the round of 16 and will take on Carlos Moya tomorrow. For those that took me literally a couple of days ago, I was also wrong about Juan Monaco, who lost badly today to fellow Argentine Guillermo Canas in the round of 16. Canas will take on the winner of the epic battle I am watching from the comfort of my apartment between Davydenko and Nalbandian. Currently they are in a 4th set tiebreaker, with Davydenko up 2 sets to 1. We are just about to reach the 200 minute mark. I’ll keep you updated. In other Men’s action, both Federer and Robredo advanced to the quarterfinals, where they will face each other, defeating Youzhny and Volandri, respectively.

On the Women’s side, the quarterfinals are set, with the following matchups – Henin/Williams, Jankovic/Vaidosova, Ivanovic/Kuznetsova, and Sharapova/Chakvetadze. It should be noted that 7 of the top 8 seeds are in the quarters (Mauresmo being the only one not to advance, but Chakavetadze has taken her place and is the 9th seed). This is great for Roland Garros because it will provide very exciting, dramatic matches for the rest of the tournament, but it also speaks negatively about the depth of women’s tennis. FYI- Davydenko just won in the 4th set breaker, unbelievable match. He will face Canas in the quarters, which could be another marathon.

Personally, I had a great day hitting with the clients at Stade Jean Bouin this morning, followed by heading to Roland Garros to watch Kellen Damico’s match and some Men’s Doubles, Bjorkman and Miryni are very good. In fact, I bet my coworker 1 euro that Bjorkman would win the singles and doubles titles. He didn’t take the bet, I guess he didn’t like the 50,000 to 1 odds I wanted. After that, I headed over to Luxemburg Gardens where I relaxed a bit, listening to music and reading. For anyone in Paris or visiting soon, Luxemburg Gardens is a lovely park with tennis courts, playgrounds, fountains, and many picnic areas that is quite a popular spot for both Parisians and tourists on such a lovely weekend day. Will be heading back out to the tennis tomorrow, as the other side of the Men’s quarters will be decided, and the lone American male (boy) to win a singles match will be competing again.

One last note, congrats to long time Grand Slam Tennis Tours traveler Mia Fabrizio, who won a distinguished award this month.

I was fortunate enough to sit through two of the more painful losses today. First up was the pairing of Michael Russell and Sam Querrey. It was fun watching them play, Querrey the tall powerful one, and Russell more of a grinder. I didn’t expect much from them at the start, as they were taking on the 16th seeded and far more experienced doubles tandem of Sebastien Prieto and Martin Garcia. But the Americans came out on fire, playing some inspired tennis, and took the first 6-4. From there, the Argentines took control and won out 6-3, 6-3. It was pretty good tennis all around, and unfortunately the match really hinged on an untimely double fault late in the third set from Russell, giving up a break at 3 all. However, two talented American doubles players were taking the court next, and I had the highest of hopes for a victory.

To be truthful, Gimelstob and Kendrick played pretty poorly, as their only weapon was their serve, and were not consistent enough to take advantage of their break opportunities. Throughout the match, they were 1 for 10 on break chances. Their opponents, Brazilians Andre Sa and Marcello Mello didn’t get as many break points, but had a much better conversion rate, going 4 for 7. I rooted hard for the Americans, as I have always admired what Gimelstob has done with his career, given the plethora of injuries he has had to endure. Although his attitude once again let him down a bit, as in the third set he was concentrating more on yelling at the umpire because the serves were taking funny bounces. It almost seemed as if he wanted to miss returns, so he could justify his complaints. But I digress, the bottom line is they lost in a tightly contested three setter, that I think on most other days, they would have pulled through.

After I walked off the court, I was greeted by the scoreboard, which seemed like a magnet as immediately I was greeted by the loss of Ginepri and Lipski. After that I went down to the players lounge to have some lunch, where I saw a somewhat sullen Michael Russell. Given that my brother played him a few times in the juniors, I normally would have felt somewhat comfortable greeting him with “tough match” or something along those lines, but it just didn’t feel right at the time.

Tomorrow I’m taking the day off from tennis and walking the streets of Paris, but before I sign off I want to mention real quick a young Argentine named Juan Monaco, who defeated Jurgen Meltzer yesterday 6-2, 6-3, 6-2. Now 27th seeded Meltzer didn’t play his best, but Juan Monaco may be the best player I have ever seen, and may never lose again.

It was certainly worth it, as I was four rows from the court when Monfils and Rochus started came out on the court. As they approached the net for the coin toss, the first thing I thought of was Rocky IV, as the stark contrast in size was bewildering. Rochus was of course playing the part of Rocky, and Monfils Ivan Drago. Besides being two of the most exciting players to watch on tour, these two facing off in Paris is even more intriguing. Monfils is of course from Paris, and the crowd is typically 100% for him. However, Rochus is a French Belgian, and has always been a fan favorite at Roland Garros. Needless to say, I was excited for all aspects of the match.

The match did not disappoint. Neither played their best, but the points were scintillating. The play was somewhat streaky, but Monfils came out in the end- 4-6, 6-4, 6-2, 3-6, 6-1. Rochus simply ran out of steam in the fifth, despite the crowd urging him on. Throughout the match, the crowd seemed to support whichever player was behind, as they simply couldn’t fully commit to root for or against one player. Both players made many more errors than winners, but that had as much to do with their style of play than anything. Both are so fast, its nearly impossible to get the ball by them with a winner, so eventually the point would end in an error. It’s a shame to to see Rochus exit so early, but I was happy for Monfils who has had a tough go of it the last couple of months.

I’ll be back with more tomorrow, in the meantime here are updated results from the other matches.

Since I can’t really write about today’s tennis, and no one wants to hear that the Red Sox currently hold a 11.5 game lead over the Yankees, I’ll make a couple of bold predictions instead. To start, I think Federer will play Nadal in the finals (not so bold), and that Federer will win (a bit bolder). I also think that James Blake will be the first American in who knows how long to make the quarterfinals (extremely bold). He should not lose to Karlovic in the first round, Bjorkman or Luczak in the second, and while 28th seeded Philip Kolschreiber is a very talented player, I believe Blake will take him down as well. It gets a bit tougher in the round of 16, when he matches up against Berdych or Moya. I just think that if Blake makes it through three rounds, he will have the confidence he needs to dispatch either. Then he would play Nadal, and while JB has a good record against Nadal, it is all on hard courts and I just can’t see him grinding it out with Rafa.

On the Women’s side, first seend Justine Henin couldn’t have been too happy with her draw, as she faces a quarterfinal matchup with Serena Williams, which I think Justine would ultimately win, but considering Serena has been the best female player on tour this year, I’m sure there were other players Henin would rather play that early. The most intriguing quarter final matchup is Sharapova against hometown hero Amelie Mauresmo. I hope Mauresemo can overcome the nerves she tends to feel in Paris and make it this far, because I think she would take Sharapova down if they do indeed meet up. I’m going to get a little bit more creative with my Women’s pick that I did with my Men’s, and pick Jankovic to play Kuznetsova in the finals, with Kuznetsova taking the title.

Even with the rain today, our clients seem to be enjoying themselves and are hopefully recovering from any jet lag. We had a terrific welcome dinner last night for our early rounds group at A La Petite Chaise, the oldest restaurant in Paris. The food was amazing, I strongly recommend the French Onion Soup, and our special guests Guillermo Vilas and Francoise Durr happily discussed tennis and answered any questions our clients had. I’ll be back with another update sometime tomorrow, hopefully after I’ve actually watched some tennis.

Since I last wrote, the sports world has been turned upside down.  I’m not referring the Celtics getting the # 5 pick instead of the first or second, although that did affect me in an incredibly profound, negative way, but rather Federer’s win over Nadal in the finals of Hamburg.  After losing the first 6-2 and looking like he would fold the match like he would a 2-7 offsuit, Federer instead turned the tables and destroyed Nadal 6-2, 6-0 to take the title, get his first win over Nadal on clay, and end Nadal’s 81 clay-court match winning streak.  Not to mention ending world wars and hunger forever.

In all seriousness, it’s great that Federer was able to accomplish most of those things, but the question remains – will he win the French?  Notice the question is not ‘can he win the French?’ Because the answer is yes, he most certainly can.  Bottom line is that Nadal is still the odds-on favorite to win, and he is the best player in the world on clay.  Nadal was clearly running on steam after some tough earlier matches in the tournament, and ran out of gas.  That is not to say Federer still wouldn’t have won, because he was playing like a he usually does, a man possessed.  One thing I do not fully buy into is that Nadal’s streak was weighing on him.  The thing about a streak like that is once you break the record, the rest is just gravy.  The homerun Barry Bonds will have to hit to tie Hank Aaron and also the one to break the record will be the two hardest of his career; but no. 758 and onward, there will be no pressure.  Same with Nadal, once he broke Vilas’ record, every match he won from there on was icing on the cake.  He lost to Federer because he was tired, and Federer played an unbelievable match. 

As always, alot will depend on the draw each player receives, and how fresh they are when (and if) they reach the finals.  Once the draw comes out, I’ll write a full preview for both the Men’s and Women’s tournaments, and since I’ll be in Paris I’ll be updating as often as I can.  Until then, here are some entertaining links:

Solid article from Greg Garber at ESPN regarding Fed and the French.

Wimbledon tweaking the challenge system a bit.

Sampras will have a chance for revenge over Federer.

Paris is split into two different “banks,” the left and right, separated by the Seine River.  Both sides have their fair share of tourist attractions (e.g. – the Louvre is on the Right Bank, and the Eiffel Tower is on the left).  In general, the Right Bank is characterized by ritzier stores, compared with the artsy Left Bank.  The famous Champs-Elysees, on the right bank, boasts some of the richest real estate in the world, and is home such stores as Armani and Chanel.  The Left Bank is known more for its sidewalk cafes, where American writers such as Ernest Hemingway would frequent (for shopping on the Left Bank, try Le Bon Marche, Paris’ version of Bloomingdale’s).

As far as sightseeing goes, the highlights are obvious – Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame, The Louvre, and Musee D’orsay to name a few.  One quick tip: if you only have a few hours and have to pick between museums, I would not suggest the Louvre.  There is simply to much to see at the Louvre to make one morning or afternoon visit worthwhile.  Instead, try the D’orsay (a far more manageable size), located in an old railway station in the center of Paris.  Don’t forget to post a comment with your own ideas or questions!