Looking For Love In All The Wrong Places

London's The Sunday Times writer Lynn Barber is most famous for being played by Carey Mulligan in the 2009 movie, "An Education", for which Mulligan received an Oscar nomination, but that's not what got Barber death threats last week. No, Barber's famous tales of sleeping with lots and lots of men didn't raise the world's ire, but her recent interview with Rafael Nadal did. The most controversial item in the interview was Barber's hint that Nadal might be gay, but the main jist of the piece was that Nadal is "over-handled" and is leading a bizarro, strangled life of all work and no play. And by no "play", Barber is talking about a sex life. Barber pondered many times in the article how a young, vital 25 year-old can survive without sex, but of course, Barber is only speculating that Nadal is nookie-free. Nadal supposedly has a girlfriend, but no one outside of his very tight inner-circle knows the truth. Anyway, the world-wide fans of Nadal, who just won his sixth French Open title, went beserk, threatening Barber's life and coming to a quick and spirited defense of their idol.

It's funny that Barber's article was published when it was, because after watching Nadal's French Open win last week, we caught ourselves thinking, "Why can't we get more excited about this guy?". We're certainly not about to go down the ill-advised path that Sports Illustrated Magazine trod back in the 1980's with its famous piece on Ivan Lendl, (click here), but we can't help but see the similarities between Nadal and Lendl. Back in the 1980's, the Connors/McEnroe tennis era, which electrified American sports fans and helped to make tennis incredibly popular in the U.S., was coming to an end, and in its place came a new champion, Czechoslovakian Ivan Lendl. Lendl was a great champion, but to say that he played with no emotion and no fireworks is an understatement. He was the embodiment of the stereotype of the robotic Soviet-bloc athlete who wins his games, but in the process wins no fans. To Americans, who like their sports heroes to wear their hearts on their sleeves, Lendl was the anti-Christ.

And now comes Nadal, who plays with a similar machine-like attitude with little emotion. Yes, he jumps in the air and pumps his fists, but other than that, he has absolutely no personality. Unlike other sports stars like Roger Federer and Tiger Woods, Nadal appears in no American t.v. commercials, and he barely speaks to the press. Part of the reason for Nadal's silence is the fact that he struggles to speak English, but even when he does, he has very little of interest to say. Now we're not about to say that only bright, shiny objects catch our attention; we don't need our sports stars to rant and rave, ala John McEnroe, for us to love them. We were big fans of Ivan Lendl back in the day, and he barely even smiled. But an athlete has to do something to endear himself to us, and so we're sorry to say this, but for all of Nadal's success, he just bores us. In fact, there are times when we don't even like him.

Maybe Nadal's lack of popularity in America has something to do with the era in which he's playing. When Lendl played, he proved to be the perfect antithesis for the much fierier McEnroe; in other words, for all those people who wanted to see the spoiled-brat McEnroe get his come-uppance, Lendl was our savior. But when Nadal wins, he more often than not ruins the storyline that most people want to see. Among the top four men in tennis, everyone wants to see Federer win to see how many more Grand Slams he can win; they want to see Andy Murray win to become Great Britain's first tennis champion in eighty years, and they want to see Novak Djokovic win because he's just so darn funny and likable. So when Nadal defeats these guys, instead of receiving the love, he instead earns scorn for ruining the storybook ending we would rather have seen.



It's a shame, because Nadal himself is very likable. He might be a little OCD, and the butt-picking is more than we can take, but the way that he shows concern for his opponents right after he crushes their dreams is genuinely touching. And the fact that he modestly refuses to believe that he is better than Roger Federer, even though he routinely beats him, is a sign of inspiring maturity. But for some reason, it just doesn't work. We just can't work ourselves up to love Nadal, or to cheer for him to win. Maybe one day it will all change; maybe the storyline will shift, and Nadal will become the underdog for whom we'll cheer. But it's going to take a lot for that to happen, and at this point, we wouldn't count on it.

Same Story, Different Day

Well, we thought we were going to see something different at this year's French Open. Novak Djokovic was having the tennis year of his life, even beating Rafael Nadal twice in the finals of clay court tournaments, Nadal was a little shaky on clay for the first time in his career, and Federer was safely out of play in the rare, (for him), #3 position. So the dream story was being written; everyone was hoping for a Djokovic/Nadal French Open final where Djokovic might just do the unthinkable: beat Nadal in the finals.

But it was not to be, and in the end, we reverted back to the same old script of the past few years, with unfortunately, the same sad, disappointing result. Federer defeated Djokovic in the semi-finals, and then met Nadal in the finals today where Federer did what he always does, he just folded under the pressure and just went away. Federer started off the first set like a man possessed, totally controlling the match, racing out to a 5-2 lead. But then, as he always does against Nadal on clay, he just disappeared before our very eyes. Fucker! Nadal won the next eight games in a row, and went on to win the match in four sets. With his victory, Nadal won his sixth French Open, tying the great Bjorn Borg with the most all-time wins at Roland Garros.

We'll never understand how the greatest player in the sport, Federer, can just completely fold against only one player, Nadal, on only one surface, clay. And Federer disappointed us twice this week, first by interrupting the better story which would have been a Djokovic/Nadal final, and then, second, by losing so quickly, once again, in the final. But now that we've gotten our anger out at Roger, we can give him a little credit. He has made the finals of the French Open four times, which would arguably make him currently the second best player on clay, and certainly in the top ten of all time, and he's not the only great player in the sport to have an career achilles heel. McEnroe, Connors and Sampras never won the French, Borg never won the U.S. Open, and Lendl never won Wimbledon. Federer did win the French in 2009, just not against Nadal in the final. So even though Roger definitely disappointed us in the past couple of days, he's still probably the greatest player of all time, and nothing will ever take that away from him. Okay, now, everyone feel better? Right, now, on to Wimbledon!

Only Three Wins Away

It looks like tennis history is about to be made. All eyes were on the Novak Djokovic/Juan Martin del Potro match yesterday, (and today), at the French Open. Why was their match so hyped? Because since 2005, only two players other than Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal have won Grand Slam tournaments, those two players being Djokovic and del Potro. Djokovic won this year's Australian Open, as well as the one in 2008, and del Potro won last year's U.S. Open. So if anybody had a chance to end Djokovic's unbeaten season, everyone guessed it might be the Argentine star. But it was not to be. Djokovic is playing like a man obsessed, and he took out del Potrol in four sets. Djokovic is now at 40-0 for the year, only three wins away from breaking John McEnroe's 1984 record.

John McEnroe stated last week that he thought Djokovic's win streak was already better than his in 1984 because the depth of competition in tennis is so much greater now. McEnroe also said today, while commenting on the tennis match on NBC, that he wasn't even aware that he held the all-time record for best starts to a year, but in vintage McEnroe style, he stated he was happy for the publicity.

Next up for Djokovic is the French player, Richard Gasquet, who is enjoying a career resurgence after being banned from the sport for two years for cocaine use. But as good as Gasquet is, (he has one of the most beautiful backhands in tennis), we don't think he'll beat Djokovic. We'll soon see, they play tomorrow.

Going For The Record

We're nearing the end of the Italian Open Tennis Championship, and Novak Djokovic is, as we write this, in the quarterfinals, and his win streak for the year now stands at 34-0. Djokovic now trails only John McEnroe for having the best all-time start to a tennis year; McEnroe started the 1984 year with a 42-0 record. To overtake McEnroe's record, Djokovic will have to win this week's Italian Open, which probably means he'll have to play Nadal in the finals, and he'll have to make it to the quarterfinals of next week's biggie, The French Open. We're rooting for the very likable Djokovic; he spent all those years in the shadows of Federer and Nadal, so it's satisfying to see him finally break through and take the spotlight for himself, not to mention a possible #1 world ranking.





There's a little jinx danger, though, in comparing Djokovic to McEnroe's fabled year of 1984 and his run of 42 straight matches, primarily because of what happened in McEnroe's 43rd match of that year. McEnroe had never won the French Open, and in his 43rd match of the year, he found himself in the finals of the Grand Slam tournament, with a 2-0 sets lead over Ivan Lendl, who had yet to win his first Grand Slam tournament. It looked like a done deal, McEnroe would win the French, and combined with his later wins that year at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open, would have given McEnroe one of the greatest years of all time in tennis. (He wouldn't have won the Grand Slam because he didn't compete that year in the Australian Open). But suddenly the wheels came off. Lendl came back from two sets down to steal the championship match away from McEnroe, dashing McEnroe's dreams of a French Open title, which no American man had won since 1955, and ended his win streak that year at 42 straight matches. After that French loss, McEnroe won his next 21 matches, which coupled with a win at the French, would have given him a stunning win streak of 64 matches, a record which probably never would have been broken.

UPDATE: Make that 35-0. Djokovic won his match today against Robin Soderling. Djokovic is now only seven matches away from tying McEnroe's record.