Five Tales from Week One

The first week of a Grand Slam is typically where tennis stories go to die. In the age of 32 seeds, when the top players are sheltered from danger until the middle weekend, stunning upsets are a rare commodity. And the controversies that do arise tend to be long forgotten by the end of the fortnight. So before we all get collective amnesia, here’s a look at five things that held our attention over the first seven days at Roland Garros.

Another Isnepic

We’ve had Isnut (Isner d. Mahut, 70-68 in the fifth) and Ismat (Mathieu d. Isner, 18-16 in the fifth). Today we watched—and watched, and watched—Tommy-John: Tommy Haas beat John Isner 10-8 in the fifth to advance to the fourth round. Scorewise, that may not sound all that impressive by comparison, but Isner did come up with another number for the ages: 12. That’s how many match points he saved in the fourth set.

I still can’t decide whether I enjoy the Isnepics. They get people watching and talking about tennis, and they bring everyone together on Twitter—they're memorable. Yet as they’re happening, they can look more like a two-man death march than a classic tennis match. I think mostly they point up the need for a fifth-set tiebreaker at all the Grand Slams, as much for the fans' health as for the players'. Matches tend not to get more dramatic after they 6-all in the final set; that was true today as well. Better to cap them off at 6-6 with a tiebreaker, which really can add drama.

Haas vs. Isner reached its peak in the fourth set, and you have to hand it to both guys—Isner for saving all of those match points, and Haas for not taking a flying leap into the Seine after he lost the set.

Claymerica

On Tuesday I wondered, with some skepticism, if the early U.S. success at Roland Garros would last into the second week. That skepticism was unfounded, at least on the women’s side. While the U.S. men, after some strong and surprising efforts, have gone extinct in Paris, four American women have managed to survive week one: today Bethanie Mattek-Sands, Sloane Stephens, and Jamie Hampton all joined Serena Williams in the round of 16. And they’ve done it the hard way—Mattek-Sands upset Li Na and Hampton did the same to Petra Kvitova.

On the surface, it’s a surprise to see all of these women, Serena excepted, in the fourth round. But Mattek-Sands has been surging, we know what Sloane can do at Grand Slams, and Hampton took a set from Victoria Azarenka at the Australian Open. The success of young U.S. women hasn’t made the mainstream radar screen yet, but it’s not a mirage, either. There are 12 women from the States in the Top 100 right now.

As much as I like the Mattek-Sands' and Stephens’ stories, I enjoyed Hampton the most today. She has an appealingly no-nonsense manner—she's a fast walker, a fast talker, and a fast swinger. But she's not an ice queen, either. It's easy to see when she’s fighting hard to keep her nerves at bay—her face goes into a permanent wince. In the past, Hampton has struggled to overcome those nerves, but today things were different. After squandering match points against Kvitova, she came back to win a second-set tiebreaker.

Hampton calls herself “totally boring,” and it does sound like this jocky girl eats, sleeps, and drinks tennis. She doesn’t have Sloane’s personality off court, but Hampton, when she’s playing well, brings her own very watchable energy on it.

It’s Ernests’ World, We’re Just Playing in It

You have to hand it to Ernests Gulbis: Traditionally, men ranked No. 40 or lower don’t get to set the terms of debate about the state of the ATP tour. But he pulled it off this week with his comments about the “boring” Big 4. The topic was picked up by the U.S. national media, which sounds to me like a case of baby boomer confirmation bias. The wider world never seems to tire of hearing about what a drag today’s tennis players are compared to the angry gods that roamed the courts in the 1970s.

I wrote about the pros and cons of Gulbis’s comments a few days ago, and I’ll only add that Andy Murray has since echoed what I said: He’s boring for a reason. Controversial quotes are a distraction, as even Gulbis might realize by now.

It’s something of a surprise that Ernie’s comments made so much news; he’s been saying this kind of thing for years. Ironically, he may end up helping out one of the allegedly boring Big 4, Rafael Nadal. In the past, when Rafa has complained about something, he’s been accused of whining. Yesterday, when he took issue with the French Open’s scheduling, he was held up in various places as an example of a star who's willing to speak his mind, and isn't boring—take that, Ernie. As we know in tennis, one fan’s whine is another’s strong stand.

Phoning It In

It seems like there have been more disputed line calls at this year’s French Open so far. But that may just be because the method of disputing them has become more theatrical. First Sergiy Stakhovsky took out his phone and snapped a pic of a mark. Then the Bryan brothers, apparently not concerned that Stakhovsky had been fined $2,000 for his cheekiness, did the same. The fine was merited; this was Stakhovsky’s second offense, and it’s not something that should become a regular practice —Viktor Troicki’s “you can see it from space” film session in Rome was funny once. Not twice.

Still, it feels like we’re getting close to having a real debate about whether to use Hawk-Eye on clay. As I wrote last week, I’m not sure what the answer is, but the more I see umpires trying to decipher marks, while I get to watch a replay tell me where the ball landed at home, the more the current clay system begins to look obstinately primitive.

Today the problem was human influence. Maria Sharapova hit a second serve that landed close to the service line and was called out. Zheng Jie pointed to a mark behind the line. The umpire agreed and confirmed the out call, but he and Zheng had it wrong. Replay on TV showed that the serve had been in.

Told later that her serve was good, Sharapova first laughed and said she was going to “go get” the umpire. Then she brought up a more interesting point: She said that if it happened again, she would ask for the line judge to come out and verify where the ball had landed. This used to be the standard procedure; two decades ago, it was rare for the umpire to come down from the chair. Either way, it beats a phone.

Young(er) Tommy

I felt bad for Gael Monfils yesterday, but I can’t say that he blew his match against Tommy Robredo. Like that other aging Tommy, Haas, the 31-year-old Spaniard used all of his experience and professionalism to defy Monfils and the Lenglen crowd. Down match points in the fourth set, Robredo played some of the best tennis I’ve seen from anyone in the tournament. He sliced back defensive forehands from his shoetops, hit high-kicking topspin forehands near the baseline to back Monfils up, and finished the rallies with winners in the corners. Robredo also came up with an original celebration—he just laid down on the court, face forward, and didn’t get up.

It was nice to see Robredo’s ultra-smooth ground strokes again. He swings in what look like perfect circles. And he played it smart with the French crowd. After winning the fourth set, Robredo might have felt like throwing his fist in the air. Instead, he put his head down, got his towel, and walked as quickly and inconspicuously to his chair as possible. That's what's known as a veteran move.