Roland Garros Men's Semifinals: Pretenders put to the sword

Hey Y'all. Galileo here.

Of the 128 we started with, just two are left. One was tested in the semifinals while the other made a statement.

Before I review the singles, I will look at what has happened in the doubles: In our first match, Granollers/Lopez -- the eleventh seeded 'favourites' for the title -- played an unseeded but dangerous pairing of Draganja/Mergea. The upset kings had made their way here playing big tennis and beating some excellent teams like the third seeds Nestor/Zimonjic. The Spaniards won the first set by six games to three. The unseeded duo took the next one in just twenty minutes and dropped only a single game.

The match was delicately poised at a set all, with the unseeded pair having the momentum. The eleventh seeds managed to refocus and were too strong in the third, winning it 6-3. They came through in an hour and a half thanks to solid teamwork and consistency. They also managed to win 76 points but lost 70 to their inexperienced opponents. They would have to wait to find out who they were going to face in the final, however.

Twelfth seeds Vasselin/Benneteau were aiming to make it back to back finals for an all-French pairing at the French open since 1938-39, and then 1946 which was the next edition. There was a big war which interrupted and halted play for a while, but it has been some 70 years since back to back finalists in the French Open from a French pairing. Llodra has been a finalist in 2004 with Santoro and then again last year with Mahut. Here's a reminder of what happened last year:



That's what losing 7-6 in the third will do to you.

Anyway, it started off badly for the French pair. Golubev and Groth took the opening set 6-3. They grabbed a break and just held on. The French pair came back in the next set and broke before holding on to close it out 6-3. It was a tense affair in the third, but the experienced pair's superior doubles pedigree gave them the edge. They carried their advantage all the way through that final set and closed it out 6-4. They had victory in an hour and forty-seven minutes. It would be a third attempt in ten years for a French pair. Will they be successful? I think this will be another three set final. Since 2007, it has alternated betwixt three sets and two sets in the final. Despite this, I give the very slight edge to the eleventh seeds. This event has thrown up surprise after surprise after surprise. We do have a seeded final, however, and I think that the claycourters have the upper hand. The Spaniards will win in three, I think but anything could happen.

Right, well I suppose I should talk about what happened in the singles then.


MARQUEE MATCH: NADAL d. MURRAY
...Nadal steamrollered Murray in exactly one hour and forty minutes. He utterly dominated the Scot 6-3/6-2/6-1. He won 83 per cent of serve points, dropping only ten points on his serve. Murray got to 30-all just the once. Nadal did not hit many winners, only 24, but he also missed just 15 times. He used his forehand as a wrecking ball all match. Murray was out of his depth the entire day. He was out-hit, out-thought, out-served and out-classed. Nadal dominated every single second. Murray had no answer to Nadal's sheer brilliance. He just kept trying the same things and got slaughtered. There were ominous signs in the first set but Murray was only broken once. Nadal would end up getting six break point chances and taking every one. Nadal started to increase his level of play until it was beyond Murray's ability to live with the eight-time champion. Not for a long time, perhaps ever, have I seen a two-time slam champion so out-classed in a grand slam semifinal, never mind the current defending Wimbledon champ. After just 49 minutes Nadal led by a set and a break. The look on Murray's face said it all. He had lost. He knew the game was up. He looked defeated. He gave up. Everything he tried wasn't working and he literally just folded like damp paper at the end of the second set. Nadal played so well his opponent effectively gave up. It was a brutal display of power and spin. Nadal was hitting balls that were going above Murray's head. No, Murray did not play poorly but he stopped trying to find a way. He only hit 11 winners. He had to go for his shots and he just does not have an offensive game. He is not equipped with that. Nadal played a game which could not be 'counter-punched' and Murray severely struggled. Nadal won 83 points and Murray just 43. Nadal is the better player. There is not getting around it. In the same way that Djokovic is better than, say, Gasquet or Nadal is better than Berdych, Nadal is simply better at tennis than Andy Murray is. There is a large gulf in class. And that proved to be the difference. If Nadal plays like this on Sunday, Djokovic won't be able to stop him. Not over the course of five sets.
=============================
Un autre match intéressant: DJOKOVIC d. GULBIS
...Djokovic saw off a nervy Gulbis in four sets 6-3/6-3/3-6/6-3, taking two hours and 34 minutes to do so. Gulbis, for once, did not play freely. He was nervous and unsettled. He managed to take the third set when Djokovic went slightly off the boil, but other than that he was not really in the match. He went 40-44 in winners to Djokovic's 30-25. They did combine for 22 aces, however, a high total for this surface. Djokovic mentioned that the sun did slightly throw him off balance. He will be happy the weather is going to be abysmal in Paris over the weekend. Gulbis had seven break chances but could only take two of them. Djokovic managed to take five from ten. Strangely, Gulbis won 102 points, just 12 fewer than Djokovic. Gulbis may not have been at his best, but few ever feel truly comfortable against Djokovic on any court. Gulbis could not mix it up and disrupt Djokovic as he can most opponents. Whilst Gulbis did not play perfectly throughout, Djokovic was just far too strong. He nullified the threat of Gulbis and then moved him round. It was a textbook performance from the Serb. Djokovic and Nadal, both barely tested during their semifinal matches, are 3-3 in grand slam finals. Nadal leads 22-19. I have to pick Nadal. I cannot pick any other way. It is going to be an absolute classic or a four-set match full of the same long predictable rallies which make you never want to play tennis. I watch some of their rallies and get out of breath. And I think how can I match that? How can I go and play when I've just seen that?
=============================

Any other notes?

* - I will go for Nadal beating Djokovic in four. Yes, the weather forecast is dreadful which will help Djokovic, but he cannot take three sets off Nadal. Not here, not in Nadal's backyard.

* - Queens and Halle are up next. Wawrinka has taken a wild card into Queens. I fully expect Nadal to withdraw. If the final is played into next week, a distinct possibility given the forecast, there is no way he can manage. I think we will see Rafa at Wimbledon next.

* - Gulbis is probably getting into the top ten. He has done that before Dimitrov. Who saw that coming?

* - Murray yet again fell in the semifinals of a clay tournament. What is the record for most clay semifinals without a final?

* - Nadal is in French Open final number nine. Nine. Margaret Court winning twelve Australian Opens was madness, but understandable because travel to Australia was so difficult those days. Few players of her calibre played there. But this is the modern day and France. Nine finals. Eight titles. Ironically, Nadal does not even own the most clay titles. Vilas will have 46 to the Spaniard's 45 if Nadal wins here. Imagine if Nadal's knee just snaps. Imagine if he retires one short of the record. Is he still the greatest male clay courter?

* - Federer has 53 titles on hard courts and 13 on grass. I think that with the rate he is adding them, though it's slowed, he will not be matched or overtaken on either of those fronts. Ever.

* - Mayer did better against Nadal than Murray. Who saw that coming? Not just in games but in the actual context of the match, Mayer was a bigger challenge.

* - The seedings for Wimbledon will be all shook up. Does Murray deserve to be seeded top four? Yes, because he is the defending champion. Does Federer deserve to be bumped down? No. Something has got to give. It could be Wawrinka.

* - Are we going to have four different winners of slams this year? The last two times this happened was in 2012 and 2003. It was Agassi, Ferrero, Federer and Roddick in '03. It was Djokovic, Nadal, Federer and Murray in 2012. There's been a Swiss and a Spaniard in both. An omen for the final?

* - I will quote the ATP here:
The extended grass-court swing will be comprised of events in Stuttgart, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, London-Queen’s, Halle, and a new 48-draw event in Nottingham (previously held as a 28-draw in Eastbourne). Newport will continue to be held the week after Wimbledon. In addition, Queen’s and Halle will be re-categorised as ATP World Tour 500 events, bringing the grass-court season additional weight in the 52-week Emirates ATP Rankings with a 75 percent increase in points attributed to the surface.

* - Djokovic & Nadal will face off for a 42nd time and that is the men's record. To overhaul Evert and Navratilova they would have to play 39 more times.

Thanx all and visit WTABACKSPIN please.

Read more!