Weeks 27 & 28 - The Championships, Wimbledon - women's singles (grass)

Jan · Hall of fame

Weeks 27 & 28 - The Championships, Wimbledon - women's singles (grass)

steven · Tennis legend

goldfish wrote:
Out of interest Steven, my husband watched the end of Jay's match then headed to ct 14. He queued on the same side as you but at the non CC end and was at the top of the steps by the end of the match so it probably didn't make any difference. I doubt he got there as quickly as you though.

I did rush off after Jay's match but your husband probably did get to Court 14 before me. I have to make sure I'm not stationary for too long or my shoulders flare up (*), so knowing that I'd have to queue and then expecting to spend a match and a half on the same court, I went for a walk around the top of Henman Hill and all the way around Court 1 before heading to Court 14.

Anyway, it doesn't sound like there was much difference between the queues at either end of the 'quieter' side. Of course, if you're as tall as Ivo Karlovic, there's no need to try to be clever - you can just go to the busy side and join the back of the throng at the open bit behind the umpire's chair and still manage to see everything! That said, they can keep that bit open, I don't know why they have to have the high walls around the courts that stop you seeing anything until you get very near the front of the queue.

(*) Fortunately, when I got onto Court 14, I managed to nab a seat in the back row, so I was able to stand up and stretch at every changeover (don't know if that side was on TV much or if any of you were actually on the other side of the court, but if so, yes, the weird jack in a box in the crowd was me! LOL)

theemptyvessel · Club Coach

indiana wrote:
Of course as professionals they study aspects in preparation but in general the biggie to me remains Jo's form rather than players having worked out her general play so much that they are neutralising it. Do it as well as before and she would be having a much better year. I guess we will continue to agree to disagree on the main issue.

Have to agree with this. It seems there is a consensus that Jo has been worked out this year but that seems pretty unlikely to me. She made her breakthrough in Australia in 2016 and you could say things peaked with her Wimbledon run in 2017 which is a span of 18 months and so it begs the question of why was she not worked out during that period? If her game is simple with no variation I would imagine she could have been worked out within weeks of that AO run but that did not happen.

The issue is very much that her form has dipped and this has been compounded by a poor coaching setup that is not helping her regain confidence. If you watched her play Osaka in Fed Cup then you know that her game is still effective against the best players it is just that she is not hitting her stride anywhere near as often this year as in the previous two and thanks to the lack of good coaching is constantly trying to hit her way out of trouble when that is only going to increase the accuracy issues she is already dealing with.

I would love to see a new coaching arrangement for Jo. No idea of who is available but if she could find someone as intuitive and invested as Darren Cahill seems to be with Halep then I could still see her returning to the top 10 and being a threat to win a major or two in the next couple of years.

indiana · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
Reigning champion Muguruza falls to Van Uytvanck WR 47, and after 2 rounds just 2 of the top 8 seeds survive, (1) Halep and (7) Ka Pliskova. Gone are (2) Wozniacki, (3) Muguruza, (4) Stephens, (5) Svitolina, (6) Garcia and (8) Kvitova.

Indeed in the latest rankings Kvitova is ahead of Pliskova so 6 of the 7 top ranked are out !

The next 8 are rather better off with all of seeds/ranks 9 to 15 surviving for now.

(8) Ka Pliskova survive the loss of the first set and a second set TB to reach R4. But (9) Venus Williams and (10) Keys are out so just 2 of the top 10 seeds remain.

(25) Serena Williams is the one remaining seed in the bottom quarter, along with Rodina, Giorgi and Makarova. WR 35 Makarova has the highest current ranking in that quarter.

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

indiana wrote:
Of course as professionals they study aspects in preparation but in general the biggie to me remains Jo's form rather than players having worked out her general play so much that they are neutralising it. Do it as well as before and she would be having a much better year. I guess we will continue to agree to disagree on the main issue.

I agree it's her coaching set up and frame of mind that doesn't seem to be right since her mental coach died.

I'm really mad at the headline the beeb has used for the article on her though, and negative language. so uncalled for.

Johanna Konta: What has gone wrong for the British number one?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/44727875

ROSAMUND · Futures level

Unless one is burying ones head in the sands you can't say that Jo's current coaching arrangement has produced any success in the way her 2 previous coaches did. If it doesn't come to an end sooner you feel it will finish at the end of 2018. One feels Jo could do with some calming influence because 2 of her 2018 British tournaments have involved arguments with umpires and an unwise go at journalists at the French championships.

Michael D · All-time great

Jo's adopted a very defensive mentality with the press that is very unwise. I like Kim Clijsters' comments in that BBC article you've posted, Helen, there are several wise statements there that Jo would take well to take heed of.

I listened to the excerpts of her post-match interview that the BBC kept replaying, and of course the start with the questions, 'Do you have any doubts?', and Jo's immediate response, 'No, none at all'. That statement in itself is such a denial of reality, that you just think, oh, here we go again, Jo refusing to face up to the obvious. How much smarter it would have been if Jo's response had been, 'Yes, of course, and I will be going away now to think how to reclaim the game that got me into the top 10 a year ago, because I know it is still there' (which is essentially what Kim said in one comment).

I wish I felt that Jo was getting ANY sound advice right now, but there isn't any evidence. Talking to Kim or Judy Murray would be a good start, they have some wise advice to offer, and Jo needs to listen to some wisdom if she does want to bounce back soon.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I agree. I know what a player portrays to the press is not a true reflection of what they are thinking, and understandably so, but - re having doubts - for Jo to say, testily, 'quite the opposite, I've played some excellent matches this year' - just comes across as daft. The BBC headline seems fair to me - it's only asking 'what has gone wrong'? It's not saying she's useless or anything very negative - just that she was doing very well last year and isn't this year - Jo must know that - it's not rocket science.

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

I see more nonsense talked about Johanna than any other player I can remember.
Commentators with no frame of reference opining their expertise on Jo's game and what has changed.
I wonder how well they remember the fantastic run through Rancho Mirage; the amazing match in Copenhagen qualifying from a set down; the 3½ hour match against Misaki Doi in the $50K Lexington final, and the FH issues there and the incredible fight?
I wonder how fondly they remeber the FQR of the US Open and overcoming Zhang Shuai in another quality match?
I wonder how they felt when Johanna initially broke in to the top 100 at a point in time when she was playing absolutely terribly, by virtue of results much earlier in the year, and her FH again could barely find the court at that point, and she was overhitting the baseline routinely by 6 feet. I wonder how what should of been a great breakthrough and personal triumph seemed soured by that form, and the inevitable subsequent development of falling out of the top 100 again two weeks later as the bad form caught right back up to her and her ranking plummeted outside the top 150 again for 8 long months - a period during which it looked increasingly likely that Johanaa just had got the tennis 'yips'; everything was just 'off' and she could not get the game back in to the groove that seen her make steady progress, and whether they wondered, as did I, whether Jo would ever be able to get it back and ever make the Top 100 again - would those two weeks be it, for such a talented player when she put it all together, would that be her entire tenure in the top echelon - did they mentally rack their brains for alternative coaches, and wonder as to whether Jo's single-minded approach that led her to go to train on clay with unheard of coaches was not just a stubborn step too far, or just the running away from the headlights of a very private person. I wonder how they contrast that period of Johanna's life to what is happening now, and how they draw any distinction.
I wonder how they felt through those long unproductive months, languishing below her talent, and wondering whether in fact, she might just pack it all in because every time we saw her play she looked so dejectedly miserable and completely out of love with tennis.
And then, the click... 2015, Pelham, Jackson, good on grass (a surface she said back in 2013 that she had littel to no experience on, and didn't trust the unpredictability becasue she didn't like randomness; she liked things to be predictable), QF at her beloved Eastbourne (town, not tournament - though the latter has come), Granby, Vancouver - oh boy, as experts on Johanna, we could spend at least a day, surely, talking about that Vancouver run, and how this was definitely a new model Konta, how the FH, so often the bete noire of her game was now tamed, and completely under her control, and she was able to utilise it's fearsome power with confidence...
Yeah, I wonder about these things and all the context of past issues, past problems with the game, past everything when people feign to diagnose what is 'wrong' with Johanna, by reducing it to the few games they've seen during her most succcessful period and presuming that's the way it's always been - that what she ws doing then must have been the correct thnig and not part of some continuum where things shift in and out for her - that becasue she is no longer beating top 10 players and being top 5 herself that she somehow is deserving of ridicule approbation and scorn; personal ad hominem attacks, and a withdrawal of support - if it ever came in the first place - Johanna having had the great misfortune to have been born elsewhere, and spent just a little too long elsewhere for so many peoples tastes, unlike Kyle, who came here quickly enough, or Evans, who deserves a 57th chance because he's a bit of a lad and has had a 'hard life', Johanna had the misfortune to be well brought up and speak slightly poshly, so... fair game, I guess.
I wonder. I wonder why we have continuously so belittled our greatest female player for 40 years, and even now, when she is GB #1 and achieving much more than any other BRit, even in this period where our up-and-coming players are up-and-coming very strongly and encouragingly indeed, still Johanna outstrips them all whilst in her own very low ebb of form; yet still she is at or around the best any other player has managed in those 40 years, better than Anne, or Bally, abou the same as Hev's best, a shade of Laura's very peak - still we see to write her off and denigrate her, and barely even acknowledge when she plays.
Yeah, I wonder alright. Of course, it says precious little to nothing about Johanna. It sure says a hell of a lot about us though.

ROSAMUND · Futures level

Michael D wrote:
Jo's adopted a very defensive mentality with the press that is very unwise. I like Kim Clijsters' comments in that BBC article you've posted, Helen, there are several wise statements there that Jo would take well to take heed of.

I listened to the excerpts of her post-match interview that the BBC kept replaying, and of course the start with the questions, 'Do you have any doubts?', and Jo's immediate response, 'No, none at all'. That statement in itself is such a denial of reality, that you just think, oh, here we go again, Jo refusing to face up to the obvious. How much smarter it would have been if Jo's response had been, 'Yes, of course, and I will be going away now to think how to reclaim the game that got me into the top 10 a year ago, because I know it is still there' (which is essentially what Kim said in one comment).

I wish I felt that Jo was getting ANY sound advice right now, but there isn't any evidence. Talking to Kim or Judy Murray would be a good start, they have some wise advice to offer, and Jo needs to listen to some wisdom if she does want to bounce back soon.

I think this denial of reality has been going on during 2018. On another website she has been described as sounding delusional which sums it up I'm afraid. Also her current coach Michael Joyce was an appointment nobody was keen on and unfortunately 2018 results have born this out.

indiana · Tennis legend

Coup Droit wrote:
I agree. I know what a player portrays to the press is not a true reflection of what they are thinking, and understandably so, but - re having doubts - for Jo to say, testily, 'quite the opposite, I've played some excellent matches this year' - just comes across as daft. The BBC headline seems fair to me - it's only asking 'what has gone wrong'? It's not saying she's useless or anything very negative - just that she was doing very well last year and isn't this year - Jo must know that - it's not rocket science.

I far from always support the BBC. But this - essentially as CD says and what has been discussed a fair bit on the forum regards what has gone wrong, relatively of course but significantly compared to where she was.

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

ROSAMUND wrote:
Michael D wrote:
Jo's adopted a very defensive mentality with the press that is very unwise. I like Kim Clijsters' comments in that BBC article you've posted, Helen, there are several wise statements there that Jo would take well to take heed of.

I listened to the excerpts of her post-match interview that the BBC kept replaying, and of course the start with the questions, 'Do you have any doubts?', and Jo's immediate response, 'No, none at all'. That statement in itself is such a denial of reality, that you just think, oh, here we go again, Jo refusing to face up to the obvious. How much smarter it would have been if Jo's response had been, 'Yes, of course, and I will be going away now to think how to reclaim the game that got me into the top 10 a year ago, because I know it is still there' (which is essentially what Kim said in one comment).

I wish I felt that Jo was getting ANY sound advice right now, but there isn't any evidence. Talking to Kim or Judy Murray would be a good start, they have some wise advice to offer, and Jo needs to listen to some wisdom if she does want to bounce back soon.
I think this denial of reality has been going on during 2018. On another website she has been described as sounding delusional which sums it up I'm afraid. Also her current coach Michael Joyce was an appointment nobody was keen on and unfortunately 2018 results have born this out.

Yeah...Of course... they said the same thing in 2013, and 2015 (if you were following along at those points) about the choices and plans then, and Jo should just do the obvious correcive actions... (see above)

Instead she went to Garcia & Carrill - disaster, who's ever heard of them? Ridiculous!

We often know better than players: circa 2012-16: Wozniacki should get rid of her father as her coach - obviously - or she'll never win a Slam... circa 2014-15: Angie needs to drop Torben Belz - they've done great work together, but they've plateaued, if she wants to win a Slam, she need to get a big name coach... circa Jan 2015: Aga needs a super coach to take her that final little distance to becoming a Slam champion, some one like Martina would be the ideal winning ticket...

None of us know.
I've enjoyed the GB players press conferences becasue suddenly I'm finding out a whole lot of information - straight from the horses mouth - about players, training methods, setups, etc. Come on, who knew Harriet was studying Forensics? We don't know anything except what we see on the very occasional times we see them on stream or during the frantic six weeks of UK grass where we might see them play in person - a period which is singularly unrepresentative of the year in general.

None of us really know. (I'll spare Indiana their usual interjection here, that it's a forum of opinions, and I'm seeming to argue for no opinions to be forthcoming They're right, of course, but at least they don't have to repeat themselves again now. Is opinion, stated as certainty, framed as absolute, still opinion?)

flamingowings · All-time great

I am on my phone which doesn't handle large chunks of text quoting very well.

"I wonder. I wonder why we have continuously so belittled our greatest female player for 40 years, and even now, when she is GB #1 and achieving much more than any other BRit, even in this period"

Its not just women this relates to.
Has Jo won anything this season? We might also be despairing of Heather but she had some success in doubles. And of course we can never know what goes on. I like Jo very much so and think she is generally a very good ambassador for GB tennis.

I really hate it when people say she or Kyle or whoever isn't British and often post a rebuttal comment on forums where it comes up. Not that it does any good!

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

Like Jaggie (!!!) Cibulkova is one of my favourite players. I must admit I felt a bit torn watching the match. I felt Dommie was the better player overall, although Jo did play some good tennis but just a little bit tight (well who wouldn't be when under the spotlight and things not going so well). Cibulkova is a woman on a mission at the moment. She may not have played that well of late but losing her seeding to Serena seems to have fired her up, making her determined to reach R32 at least and thus she is back to her best. IMO, I don't think Serena should have been seeded. Bad luck for those who meet her early but she is in the same position as players who have been out with injury. Deserve an entry into a tournament but without a run of competitive play behind them there are questions over fitness, match sharpness, stamina in playing match after match and the possibility of further small injuries after time off and thus are not offered a seeding. I don't buy the argument that treating time off for maternity leave as an injury is punishing motherhood as all these issues apply to players after time out of the game whatever the reason. I know Serena is a special case in most respects but rules should be made for the majority and not the outliers.

Regarding Jo, I wonder how much the tragic suicide of her mental coach still affects her. When she's trying to deal with difficulties and bolster her positivity using the tools he gave her, she must think of him. This is obviously pure conjecture and clearly not the only reason she is having a bump in the road but players are people too and their life on the court does not exist in a sealed box.

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

Sheddie wrote:
Harriet seems impressively "media-trained".

I have no idea whether she has had media training, but I felt that interview reflected her personality. She is a quiet girl with some good close friends but not one who likes to stand out in the crowd. Keeps herself largely to herself and has never been know to voice opinions on things to the world at large. Quite educated and with well educated parents she is polite, thoughtful but canny enough not to be drawn into controversy. She is also devoted to her tennis in a quiet steely way and I don't think is really that interested in all the 'froth' that goes on around it. I'm sure she'd have given a similar style of interview at age 10 as now.