Oh well - Schwartzman's form has dipped, and Nadal is now going to win this pretty easily in four sets. He really has his own system of gravity.
He lost a set - in the quarterfinals of a Grand Slam, at the age of the 35 - and it's major tennis news.There’s really nothing like Rafa at Roland Garros. It’s truly incredible.
They are showing it now, bummer that Gauff was up 5-3, 40-30 and couldn't finish her service game. Ah well, onward and upward, good tournament for her anyway.The first set was very tense and even, although it wasn't particularly well played. And then Gauff just lost her composure, like a teenager is perfectly entitled to do. Nice rally from her toward the end, but we now have three very weird semifinalists on the women's side. (And the favorite to win the tournament will surely be the winner of the fourth quarterfinal now on court - probably Swiatek, but maybe Sakkari.)
He was up 5-4 and serving in the third set tiebreak and made two awful errors, which ended up costing him the set one point later. Agreed that this extra time is making an impossible job next round even more impossible.Berrettini just took the 3rd from Djoker after losing the first two 3&2. Match is now 2.5 hours old...I find it very hard to believe Djoker loses this, but by staying out there longer he is really going to make it (even more) difficult for himself against Rafa next round.
Appreciate you filling in the gaps. I have no watch options unless it goes five...He was up 5-4 and serving in the third set tiebreak and made two awful errors, which ended up costing him the set one point later. Agreed that this extra time is making an impossible job next round even more impossible.
He did it two points before also after losing a long potential match point, not sure I've ever seen someone scream themselves to a win quite like that before.Djokovic's reaction after winning match point has to be seen - and heard - to be believed. (It also makes me think somehow that he has no chance vs. Nadal, although those could be famous last words.)
I was there for this. It was an incredibly surreal experience. I think like much of the crowd, I wanted Rafa to win...but at the same time as it looked like soderling might pull it off you couldn’t help but want to witness history as well.Robin Soderling in 09. Lost to Fed in the Finals.
It was ridiculous at the time given it was Nadal’s first loss there. And then it wasn’t too ridiculous for a few years when Soderling backed it up with the string plan you mentioned. But I think it’s gone back to being so, so ridiculous given what Nadal has done at Roland Garros since. He’s got two losses there - one to the eventual (ugh) GOAT. And the other to Robin Soderling.The Soderling thing wasn't so so ridiculous, he was only seeded 23rd but he was quickly ranked 4th after that (not just because of that) and was seeded #4 and #5 in a bunch of majors over the next year or two. Then he got hurt and got mono and never recovered, but he was like Stan Wawrinka-level good for a year or two.
I'm watching the third set in my hotel room now, and Sakkari has gotten very edgy. Didn't convert her match point with Krejcikova serving at 3-5 30-40, and then she got broken back - 5-5 now in the third. Looks to me like she's having one of her "off" days...understandably so, and she probably still has enough game to win, but can she hold/recover her nerve?Anyone have eyes on Krejcikova vs. Sakkari? Looks compelling based on scoreboard watching...
Tsitsipas won; now time for Djokovic v. Nadal. Where are these matches televised?Whoo hoo, schedule has changed and I can see tomorrow's semis live. Go Djokovic and Tsitsipas!
Regular NBC.Tsitsipas won; now time for Djokovic v. Nadal. Where are these matches televised?
Thanks; my local listings showed that "Days of Our Lives" was going to be showing. But, once I tuned it, there it is!Regular NBC.
Ugh. I wish my NBC affiliate wasn't time-delaying this match. I know that each player has won a set 6-3, but my NBC affiliate just concluded the first set.Great match so far. Can't wait to see what happens when the curfew has to be enforced.
"Reasons" = Djokovic and Nadal playing a match for the ages. Makes sense to me.Curfew extended because reasons.
So when faced with a screaming demanding mob, the French surrendered?They decide to let the fans stay and not stick to the curfew, which is the right move, in my opinion. They have been there, what is another two sets of tennis going to change?
The reasons are literally on the court.Curfew extended because reasons.
Both of these guys have played and won long matches. They'll live.This third set alone has turned into a Russian novel. Hard to believe they have to play more after this.
The fans were threatening to storm the Bastille.So when faced with a screaming demanding mob, the French surrendered?
Doesn't it immediately invalidate the need for the curfew if they can change their mind due to the fact that there's a good tennis match taking place?The reasons are literally on the court.
I suspect it's a lot easier to relax the restrictions on the final night when any restrictions can possibly be required at all. There's literally zero chance of running into the curfew tomorrow or Sunday, so there's no precedent being set here to worry the authorities.Doesn't it immediately invalidate the need for the curfew if they can change their mind due to the fact that there's a good tennis match taking place?