A rather painful episode of déjà vu occurred today for the star-crossed Richard Gasquet, who watched a two-set-and-break lead evaporate against Murray for the second time. Probably better suited for the compressed best-of-three format, the Frenchman’s electrifying shotmaking fails to compensate for his lack of physical (and mental) fitness at majors. With relatively little at stake, Murray deserves credit for staying focused until Gasquet faded once again; this instinctive will to compete comprises an essential trait of a champion. Elsewhere, Taylor Dent cracked the fastest serve in Roland Garros history…and actually won the match. (We know that Andy will be eyeing the radar tomorrow in an effort to eclipse that 149-mph bomb, but wet conditions won’t aid his cause.) In previous French Opens, serving records generally have not produced positive outcomes; Venus broke the WTA Slam speed record in a 2007 loss to Jankovic, while Karlovic broke the single-match Slam ace record in a defeat to Hewitt last year. Finally, Ivanovic delivered a characteristically candid post-match interview that was much more intriguing than her opening victory. Documenting the Serb’s mental oscillations between confidence and uncertainty, it’s worth a read for Ana fans (go to the Roland Garros site, click on News and Photos, then Interviews). As she tries to “move on and get better” from match to match, we move on to Day 3.
Pironkova vs. Henin (22) (Chatrier, 1st match): Perhaps a shade more familiar than the typical 22nd seed, Henin will be sure to reawaken blissful memories in the multitudes of quasi-compatriots eager to celebrate her return to Roland Garros. The four-time defending champion ignites what will be an extremely demanding fortnight (judging from her draw) against a player whom she once considered a future contender. Her tennis tomorrow will need to be more impressive than her prognosticating skills then, for Pironkova hasn’t accomplished anything remarkable at significant events; nevertheless, she did defeat a sub-par Dementieva in Warsaw last week. A quintessential pusher, the Bulgarian projects almost no power at all behind her serves and groundstrokes, relying on movement and consistency to prolong points until her opponent commits errors. Although Henin’s heightened aggression has produced recurrent flurries of miscues, she should find her range sooner or later. Pironkova’s pacelessness should allow the Belgian to measure her groundstrokes on the clay, providing her with a useful reference point for tenser encounters in the imminent future.
Hewitt (28) vs. Chardy (Chatrier, 4th match): While neither player especially enjoys this surface, the match offers an intriguing contrast between a wily, tenacious veteran and a flamboyant, temperamental star of the future. Or at least the French hope that Chardy delivers upon his promise, since recent evidence has not been impressive. Can Hewitt’s grittier mentality enable him to outlast the younger player just as another Anglophone competitor survived a Frenchman on Day 2? Or will Chardy’s more forceful serve-forehand combinations penetrate the court too effectively, miring the Australian deep behind the baseline? Note the duration of the rallies, which will favor Chardy if relatively short and Hewitt if they extend longer. Also observe the impact of the Paris crowd on yet another of les bleues, some of whom (Gasquet, Mauresmo) have appeared burdened by expectations and others of whom (Tsonga, Monfils) have relished the adulation. On the other hand, something more than fanatical Frenchies is required to rattle Hewitt.
Safina (9) vs. Date Krumm (Lenglen, 2nd match): The Russian seeks her third consecutive finals appearance at Roland Garros after finishing runner-up to Ivanovic and Safina, but it’s unrealistic to expect the realization of that goal in the aftermath of her back surgery. Winning just one total match at Stuttgart, Rome, and Madrid, Safina could fall well outside the top 10 and possibly outside the top 20 if she falters here. Opposite her stands the artful, seemingly ageless Date, whose enduring affection for the game inspired her improbable return. Unsurprisingly, she hasn’t toppled many high-profile foes in the comeback, yet she did win the Seoul title and has taken sets from elite players such as Wozniacki. The match rests in Safina’s control, which is not necessarily good news for her; in a similar situation against the pedestrian Zakopalova in Madrid, she coughed up leads in both sets before crumbling under pressure in two tiebreaks. Should she establish an early lead, she might cruise. If she doesn’t, we could witness a lively rollercoaster that would compensate for mediocre tennis with high-quality drama.
Cornet vs. Pavlyuchenkova (29) (Court 1, 1st match): Long considered future superstars by their respective nations, these expectation-laden phenoms have not quite delivered on their promise—the French much more notably than the Russian. One can trace Cornet’s implosion to the two match points that she squandered against Safina in the fourth round of last year’s Australian Open. Had she converted one of those opportunities, she would have reached a first Slam quarterfinal and possibly sparked a breakthrough season; instead, her understandable deflation combined with a shoulder injury to completely reverse her momentum. Although Pavlyuchenkova hasn’t endured a similarly spectacular collapse, the Russian has wavered after what seemed a career-changing surge into last year’s Indian Wells semifinals. She has struggled notably on the largest stages over the past year and has been hobbled by a foot injury in recent weeks. It’ll be intriguing to observe whether Pavlyuchenkova can recapture the form that brought her to the second week here in 2009, or whether Cornet can muster momentum from encouraging performances in Fez and Estoril. The French crowd will be firmly on her side, but she might be better off if they weren’t.
Ferrero (16) vs. Cuevas (Court 1, 3rd match): Our last sight of the polished, gracefully aging Ferrero was his ignominious opening defeat in Rome at the unexpected hands of Santiago Giraldo. (The Colombian displayed a crisp game that day, but a former French Open champion needs to win more than three games from an unseeded challenger.) Shortly afterwards, a knee injury compelled Juan Carlos to withdraw from his home even in Madrid, a pity considering his near-total dominance of the South American clay courts in February. It’ll be intriguing to observe what attitude the former French Open champion brings to his clash with the Uruguayan clay-court doubles specialist Pablo Cuevas. Gifted with an elegant backhand, Cuevas has overcome adversaries as accomplished as Almagro on this surface, so he could penalize an unconvincing Ferrero. Above all, though, this duo should deliver a classic exhibit of clay-court tennis rather than awkwardly adapting hard-court styles to the dirt as is so often the case in the contemporary game. Watching players like these, one learns to relish the variety among tennis surfaces and regret the current trend towards uniform surface speed.
Ginepri vs. Querrey (18) (Court 2, 2nd match): We’ll admit immediately that these two Americans are no clay experts and in fact are occasionally embarrassed by the vagaries of the surface. This clash caught our attention not from the brilliant technique that they’ll display but from its psychological component. Losing their previous meeting in the Indianapolis final despite a far more imposing serve, Querrey brings that mental baggage to the court as well as the baggage of never having won a match at Roland Garros. It’s not surprising that his strategically limited game hasn’t succeeded here in the past, yet the sometimes complacent American has typically underwhelmed at Slams in general, not a positive sign for his future. He can’t keep writing off early, disappointing losses as learning experiences forever, nor can he continue losing lackadaisically on important occasions to respectable but unintimidating players like Ginepri. There’s a fine line between relaxed and lackadaisical that the loose-limbed Californian needs to find soon.
Peer (18) vs. Llagostera Vives (Q) (Court 6, 1st match): Generally not renowned for her clay-court skills, the Israeli smoothly navigated a pair of formidable draws to reach the semifinals in Stuttgart and Madrid. In that infamous top quarter of the WTA draw, Peer’s days are certainly numbered, for she could face Serena in the round of 16. Nevertheless, this tournament represents an opportunity to extend the momentum from the Premier events into Wimbledon and the summer hard courts, where she has prospered more often. Toting a name as long as she is short, Llagostera Vives has achieved resounding success in doubles with Martinez Sanchez but can be crafty in singles as well. Peer will be cast in the role of the aggressor, an unaccustomed and perhaps uncomfortable position for her. We should see a match defined by intelligent point construction and mental tenacity much more than baseline bullets. Neither of these players can survive with the top-tier sluggers, but they’re an engaging diversion from the power-soaked games of the WTA elite.
Briefly noted: After Ginepri vs. Querrey on Court 2, Serena and Venuscontinue their pursuit of a doubles calendar Slam. Absent for most of the clay season in which she thrives, Marbella finalist Suarez Navarro targets Ponte Vedra Beach finalist Govortsova, a Belarussian who has enjoyed surprising success on this surface over the past several weeks. One match to not watch is the clash between Gabashvili and Daniel Koellerer. The senselessly pugnacious Austrian has earned the contempt of fellow players, commentators, and spectators alike for his repulsive, relentless displays of gamesmanship inappropriate to this dignified sport. Far more elegant is the meeting between Hantuchova and Tamarine Tanasugarn, both of whom must be looking forward to the grass season; nevertheless, we’re curious to see who more successfully adapts their fast-court style to the clay. While the willowy Slovak attempts to solve that riddle, Russian qualifier Ksenia Pervak ventures into the den of a familiar lioness:
How do you solve a problem like Maria? We hope that Pervak has no answer.