The draw for the Wimbledon semi-finals was finalized yesterday. Roger Federer defeated 6’10’’ Ivo Karlovic in straight sets, as he continues his quest to win a record 15th Grand Slam title. He will face the surprise of the tournament, 31-year old Tommy Haas, who is playing the best tennis of his career. On the other side of the draw, fan-favorite Andy Murray swatted away “The Mosquito”, Juan Carlos Ferrero, giving hope to a crowd that hasn’t seen a British champion in 73 years. In the last Quarter-Final, it took Andy Roddick four hours and 5-sets to overcome a typical fighting performance from the Aussie, Lleyton Hewitt.
The crowd would no doubt love nothing more than to see a Federer V. Murray final, as they are easily the most popular players at SW19. But do Haas and Roddick have enough left in the tank to spoil a dream final?
Federer celebrating his 14th grand slam singles title
With his 6-1, 7-6, 6-4 victory today in the French Open final, Roger Federer won his 14th grand slam title, tying Pete Sampras for the all time record. For a while I have been debating his place in tennis history, but with his victory today I can finally say I believe he is the best player of all time. While his career is not over and he may finish with several more titles, he has not only tied the all time record but has also won the personal grand slam (all 4 different grand slam tournaments), something which is very difficult to do.
Robin Soderling’s stunning upset of Rafael Nadal at the French Open left many critics puzzled (“Wait, wait, wait. Who’s Robin Soderling?”). Nobody had ever seen Nadal (previously undefeated at the French Open) pushed around on clay with such consistency before. Experts struggled to come up with valid reasons explaining how this ever could have occurred. What did Soderling do so differently from everybody else? Soderling, didn’t do anything different. Nadal on the other hand changed a lot… And he’s not the only one.
Read on to see what other athletes made the mistake of wearing pink and thinking they could get away with it.
Ivanovic just realized the men's trophy is bigger...
So I just watched the French Open Women’s Final (weird, I know). The commentator mentioned that both the men and women champions would be receiving equal prize money. In fact all Grand Slams have now made pay for men and women equal. I was watching the match with a 60+ year old dutch man (also, weird) and he pointed out that the men have to play longer than the women, therefore justifying a higher paycheck. For those that don’t know, a women’s match is best out of 3 sets, while men play best of 5 in Grand Slam tournaments. He argued that equal pay was unfair because the men had to play more than the women. Over the week, those extra sets add up. In addition men consistently attract bigger crowds and TV viewers. Is he right? Does this justify a higher prize?