Knowing what to say about big 3 players winning slam, and coming up with new ways to say them, has been one of the more challenging parts of tennis writing the last few years. I’ve simply just not done it, tired of the same old tennis narrative and just not that excited or interested in the slam race. But this Rafa Nadal win was something different.
First it was unexpected. Nadal faced the No.2 seed Daniil Medvedev, the game’s best hard courter.
Nadal was also coming back from a six month lay off (foot injury).
Watching the match, I fully expected Medvedev, leading two sets and having three break points early in the third, to run away with the match. I kind of wanted it over, too. Nadal was not playing well and so many of his ground strokes were hitting the net.
Then, it turned. When it did, it of course made sense. Nadal had been playing better since the second set and had his chances to win that one. In the third, Nadal started to find his range and he was the player you were watching as he started to make his ground strokes and hit winners. Medvedev fell away and the match became all about Nadal.
In the women’s, Ash Barty won the title, beating Collins in straight sets. Collins had a 5-1 lead in the second but Barty was too good. The WTA seems to have a player who can win slams and be No.1. Barty, who left the sport, to be a cricketer, is a team player, which is what the WTA needs. The random winners of slams is interesting and fun, but it’s good to have one player who can be top seeded and lift trophies on a fairly consistent basis.
Nadal’s comeback and Barty’s consistency made the end of this tournament an interesting mix. Overall, the tournament was entertaining enough and it certainly had a dramatic prologue. Nadal’s win meant the final chapter was a fitting and worthy climax.
I would grade the tournament a decent B. Worth watching, and some pretty noteworthy highlights.
thetennisreview 
Leave a comment