Claire

People are finding it hard to ignore French teenager Alize Cornet as she storms her way through the rankings. At last year’s US Open, she fought a tough 3 setter 3rd round match against top player Jelena Jankovic, and had the Serb praising the teenager with compliments: “she kept coming up with all these amazing shots and I thought to myself ‘this is impossible, she’s a Junior.’”. Why France’s prodigal child could be just what the tennis world is looking for.
The first time I saw Alize Cornet play was a rainy day in May, when she was up against former world number one Venus Williams. I had heard brief murmurs about Alize Cornet and her performances, but, as is expected from French players at Roland Garros, I knew not to get my hopes up. And yet I was deeply impressed by her attitude. She wasn’t overwhelmed by the occasion and ran down everything Venus Williams came up with. Williams eventually won in two sets, but Cornet didn’t go out without a fight.
Having exited the main draw, Cornet, 17 years old at the time, decided to take part in her last Grand Slam as a Junior. She breezed through the rounds and it was only when she got to the later stages –semi finals and finals- that she was really tested. Playing against 18-year-old Duque Marino, the French prodigal child found herself suddenly trailing by a set on ‘her’ home turf. Determined not to lose in front her crowd, Cornet stepped up a gear  at 2-1 down and showed just why many tip her as a raising star. Having easily held her serve two games before, Marino had no way of knowing it would be the last time she would hold serve for the match. Cornet won the Final 4-6 6-1 6-0 and found her name linked to another former teenage sensation, Martina Hingis (1993), current world number one Justine Henin, and familiar French hero Amelie Mauresmo.
Although Cornet lacks Mauresmo’s somewhat classic touch on the court, she makes up for it by creating her own style. She mixes flair with intensity, and watching her many are reminded of France’s other golden girl, Tatiana Golovin. Cornet is developing the ability to create a shot from a dead ball situation, allowing her to wow the crowds as she comes up with amazing angles. She is also incredibly athletic, thus allowing her to run down balls her opponent might expect her to stop chasing or to be out of reach.
But despite the numerous comparisons with other players, Cornet is still her own person. She has and incredible charisma both on and off the tenniscourts, making her an instant favorite to watch amongst fans and players alike. She is competitive on and off the court but mainly with herself, and fans can expect her to give her best in every match. Even exhausted, she will still try to run down every ball, and will try to fight until the end of the match before giving up.
If Cornet is considered France’s prodigal child, it is not without reason. Mauresmo is nearing retirement and many murmur that this could be her last season. Golovin looks set to take over from Mauresmo as Fed Cup leader, and Marion Bartoli is often surrounded by controversy. Cornet, on her part, remains friendly and approachable, and doesn’t let her talent go to her head. Talented and ambitious without the arrogance one would expect, Cornet provides a friendly face, breaking the tennis world’s stereotype of coldness and distance between fans and players.
Although Cornet hasn’t had the ideal preparation going into the Australian Open, one would be foolish to write her off too soon. She is set to clash with Daniela Hantuchova in the second round. The Slovakian is the favorite to win the match, but as Jankovic learned in the US Open, Cornet will go out to prove she can compete against the world’s elite players.

Tennis sensation Martina Hingis retired at 27 due to injured and allegations of drug abuse. The Swiss Miss tested positive for traces of cocaine after her loss at Wimbledon in June.
Like so many others, I was absolutely shocked when I get the news. Hingis had failed a drug test? Because of cocaine? The whole situation just seemed so absurd. How could no one have known about it? Hingis is one of the most famous players on the tour, and no one, absolutely no one, knew she was taking drugs on the side? The WTA Tour has a reputation for being cold and cutthroat- and still no one even suspected she was doing cocaine? Furthermore the WTA itself only heard about Hingis’ positive results after her press conference. Wimbledon occurred late June. Hingis gave her press conference on November 1st. How could positive results have been kept from the WTA for over four months? Nothing makes sense anymore.
But amid the confusion one harsh fact remains. Hingis has retired, this time for good. This time there will be no amazing comeback. This time the ‘reluctant rebel’ won’t be coming back from the cold to save the sport she once vowed never to return to. This time the cocky smiles and arrogant smirks and quirky comments during press conferences will be said or done by someone else. This time, the famous on-court wizardry which enchanted most of the tennis world will be cast by another player.
This time, Martina Hingis has retired for good.
I still find it difficult to believe. Hingis has always been there, has always been an element of stability in a world which is forever changing. She was there and was the cause of when I first discovered tennis back in 1997, when a young teenager mentioned she was going to save tennis and only later would we realize she actually did. She was there in 2001 and completed what was then deemed as impossible by consecutively defeated the Williams sisters in the Grand Slam of the Australian Open. She was there, too, in 2005, when against the odds and expectations she decided to come back from her 3 year retirement with careless whispers of how she felt incomplete when she wasn’t on a tennis court.
Hingis was just always there, with her cocky smile and charismatic attitude and breath-taking skills. She set the standards so high that now, 10 years later, people are still comparing her to what she once was and, perhaps, what she still is. There is that famous “Hingis touch”, the “Hingis wizardry”, in any case, her style lives on. She stands for what some believe tennis should be- an artistic and mental combination of flair and sophistication, where power should matter little if not at all, because what really counts is the ability to create something from nothing, to perform magic on a whim and make it seem almost random or nonchalant.
She was, of course, anything was predictable, and that’s what I liked so much about Hingis. Truth was you never really knew what to expect, except, maybe, something. She could produce whatever she wanted, whenever she wanted, however she wanted. Presented with a ball down the T and she could pretty much put it wherever, leaving the opponent forever guessing. She could do so much with so little than one began to suspect the only real way to defeat the great Swiss Miss was to overpower her.
Back in 2002 it was the power-hitters who drove her out. Today, it is those allegations, and the latter are perhaps the most dangerous, for they will live lingering scars which won’t necessarily fade with time. Hingis so fiercely denies any wrong-doing that one is tempted to believe she is innocent. In her press conference, she delivered an ambiguous statement which only increased confusion, and yet the manner she delivered in made many suspect she was telling the truth.
After all, if anything Hingis has always been brutally honest, both with herself and with the public. She has never lied to the sport she loves so much, and that, in part, is what makes it so difficult to believe she did do cocaine. I do not know Hingis personally but nor do I claim to, I am merely speaking as an observer- she didn’t seem the type to do drugs. She was above all professional, why then would she take an illegal drug, during a Grand Slam in the middle of the year, knowing that she could very well be tested?
The sad reality is the drug accusation will probably tarnish her legacy. One can only hope, though, that what Hingis has accomplished throughout the years and what she has brought to the sport will not be over-showered by accusations which may later prove to be false. Regardless, the damage has been done, and Hingis has left.
I have many memories of Hingis but there is one in particular I am determined to hold onto. It was during the Acura Classic, in late summer. Hingis was playing against Swiss compatriot Patty Schnyder. Under the hot California sun, they performed an entertaining match that Schnyder would eventually win in 3 sets. But at one moment during the match, Hingis performed a magnificent drop-shot in which the ball simply died once it hit the ground, creating the illusion that having left the Swiss Miss’ racquet life was simply not worth living anymore. The crowd appreciated the artistic skill, and Hingis glanced up at the crowd with a smile brighter than the afternoon California sun.
Life will go on without Hingis, as it almost does. On a professional level I hope that Hingis finds the results and closure she has been seeking since that fateful day in June, for the legacy she leaves behind should not be tainted by allegations of cocaine abuse. And on a personal level I will hold on to that memory of Hingis, of when she was what tennis should be, a combination of flair and intrigue, a mystery which could never be solved.

If I’ve always associated Hingis’ comeback to Train’s ‘Drops of Jupiter’, then I feel that what happens afterwards follows more the script laid out in ‘Away From The Sun’, courtesy of 3 Doors Down: ‘It’s down to this, I’ve got to make this life make sense… The feeling’s gone, there’s nothing left to lift me up’.
Ironic, really, how it takes Martina Hingis withdrawing from the one tournament which got away from to prove that this time, she’s for real. She wants Roland Garros, it’s that tournament, the one which was within her grasp in 1999, but then slipped through her fingers. It was the lingering doubt at the back of her mind during her soul-searching 3 years, when she watched others win it, players she had once beaten.
This year, someone else will win it. Probably Justine Henin, who in all due fairness considers it the tournament as being “hers”, and rightfully so. But this year, much like those missing three years, something will be missing.
This year, Hingis won’t be playing. She gave up the one which got away. And that, more than the number of Grand Slams she won, the WTA titles she has, or the records she’s broken, shows she’s one of the best players of all time. It shows she cares, because if she didn’t, she still would have played. She would have ultimately lost, and it wouldn’t have bothered her.
A week or so ago I accused Hingis of not caring- about her career, her status, her game, her fans. Yet I see now I was wrong. Hingis does care, that’s why she withdrew. I’m sure it must have hurt her, deeply, to make that decision. Roland Garros is part of the reason she came back, so to give it up, even if it is just for this year, took courage most players lack. In her first career she played on injury when she probably shouldn’t have, and those lingering injuries were ultimately what forced her off the court. She shouldn’t have to pay twice for her mistakes.
Missing Roland Garros will have its’ consequences. I wouldn’t put too many expectations on the tournaments of her return. She will come back refreshed, but she will also be feeling lost, and maybe a little bit alone. She is not alone, she has her entourage, her fans, yet she will feel something is missing. Roland Garros is a part of her in the sense it’s the tournament she never won. She gave it up, this year, and every tournament she plays between her return and the end of the year will most likely be compared to it. She will probably be wondering ‘what if’, wondering if maybe she should have taken that chance, wondering if maybe, just maybe…
Those questions will be lingering at the back of her mind in her return, and could ultimately affect her confidence, her game. It is one thing to ‘disappear’ for three years and reach the semi-final of the first tournament in your return, it is quite another to walk away from the reason you came back.
She will probably tell herself there are other tournaments, other Grand Slams. She will probably tell herself that in some ways Wimbledon made her the star she is back in 1997, so perhaps it is more fitting for her to return for that tournament. She will tell herself it is not the end of the world, it just feels like it. She will tell herself she will get past it. She will tell herself there is always next year.
Perhaps it is not her injury but more how she recovers from it which will determine the fate of Hingis’ career. Withdrawing from Roland Garros was a huge decision, one which may cost her the shallow fans. But those who fell in love with her game, with what she represents to the world of tennis, will watch her from a distance, wondering what happened to their reluctant rebel, and hoping that by walking away from the French Open, she isn’t also walking away from her world. Roland Garros was ‘the one which got away’. Let’s hope that same expression won’t also apply to the player who changed the world.

On a rainy day in Paris, American Serena Williams defeated Bulgarian Pironkova 5-7 6-1 6-1 in the first round of the French Open.

Tennis has always been a rather impersonal sport, all things considered. We watch it played from a distance, with players we might admire but never really know. Henin may have the most beautiful backhand in women’s tennis, but you’ll have to wait a long time before she reveals an aspect of her personal life. Mauresmo was once renown for being a lesbian playing tennis more than a tennis player who was a lesbian: she worked so hard to undo that image that now it is the press, rather than her, who tend to bring it up. Even media-friendly Martina Hingis is somewhat reserved: above all, she is a tennis player, and intimate details are still few and far between.
Yet despite all this, we hear tales of glamour, with the pretty players and their pretty styles. Players like Sharapova, Hantuchova, even Ivanovic, to a certain degree, give a personality to an otherwise impersonal and distant sport. They are the faces of the sun, with their pictures in magazines and their faces on billboards. They are the media’s dream, they are the stories tennis fans learn to recite by heart.
We know their stories because they are the ones who have made it. We can recite them because we have heard them so many times, the prodigal ‘reluctant rebel’ from Switzerland who grew up to defy expectations, the Russian export who is neither ‘fully’ American nor ‘fully’ Russian but seduces fans from both countries, the quiet Belgian who questioned life and found the missing answers in tennis. They are all stories we like to hear, if only because they are stories of success. So one has to wonder what happened to the stories the media forgot to tell us. Tales of players, perhaps as talented as the likes of Sharapova or Hingis, but for some reason have been robbed of their talent. Players, future players, or maybe even ex-players, whose careers have ended before they really began. The nameless players, who have seen the dark side of the moon, and who never got the chance to tell their tale. They are like us, now, but we don’t pay attention to them at first. It is only when we begin to listen that we realize who they are.
Her name is Camille, but her friends call her Cam or Cammy. At first glance, she looks like any other 18-year-old student. With her 5”7 build, hazel eyes and dark brown hair, mixed with a charming smile, she appears to be extremely popular, yet she doesn’t claim to be “anything special”. 5 years ago she might have been, but a lot can happen in 5 years, and now she’s flirting with the idea of being a lawyer. She doesn’t want to commit too soon, though, because she knows that fate has a nasty way of interfering with plans.
5 years ago, Camille was training at the same academy as Sharapova and Golovin. Born in Paris, she moved with her parents to Florida when she was 3 years old. She was 4 when she first picked up a racket, 5 when she realized she could hit the ball with her left or right hand, all depending on her mood. At 9, she integrated the Nick Bollettieri academy and spent 3 years “getting beat by Sharapova”. She left the academy in January 2001 following her parents’ divorce- ‘it was too expensive for them, the academy and their divorce’.
She was “destined” to make it. People could see her talent- she was an element of Hingis, a touch of Seles, a little bit of Evert, with hints of Graf.  She was 13 and assumed she’ll have the world forever at her disposal. She was going places, everybody could see that. In April 2001, aged 13, Camille strained a muscle in her right shoulder. She was supposed to enter a tournament for under 14s the following weekend, and so turned to the family doctor for advice. He examined her injury and told her she risked a far greater injury if she played on it.
When she told her temporary coach, he gave her a different story. Camille was equally talented as a left or right handed player, so he suggested using the left shoulder instead, and to take medication to “avoid making it worse”. As a 13-year-old prodigal tennis player, desperate to impress the one who promised her the world, Camille did as he said. She struggled her way into the semi-finals, but lost 6-0 6-0 to a player she had easily beaten on 17 other occasions.
When the doctor examined her, he told her the injury had indeed worsened. Before she had “just” strained a muscle in her shoulder. Playing on injury had caused the damage to intensify: the ligament was torn, the muscle strained, and there was considerable nerve damage. On April 16th, 2001, at 13 years old, Camille was told she could never play competitive tennis again at the level she had been currently playing at.
She had therefore experienced the darkest side of what tennis had to offer. More so than sacrifices, she had been robbed of her talent, her game, her purpose of getting up in the morning. She couldn’t compete anymore, “what reason was there to live now?” She needed answers, but the questions were impossible. Why her? What had she done to deserve it? How come nobody saw the greed in the coach’s eyes, and why didn’t anybody do anything to stop him? She needed to know, she needed those answers because it was the only way for the scars, which ran so deep, to (ever?) heal.
2002 saw Hingis leave the game and Camille fall into a spiral of depression. She had lost her motivation, her love of and for the game. Tennis suddenly wasn’t a game anymore; it was something which had destroyed her. She turned away from it, fell in love with her education, and tried her best to move on from the sport which had caused her so much pain. “I didn’t want anything to do with tennis anymore,” she says. “And school was the ideal escape. I was suddenly just another student instead of a rising tennis player. No one cared about what happened.” The psychological and physical damage started to mend.
Surprisingly, it was Sharapova, who, indirectly, pulled Camille out of her spiral of depression when she won Wimbledon in 2004. “I knew her. I knew the sacrifices she had made and it paid off.” Two years after having vowed to never get involved with the game again, Camille started to become involved with the school’s tennis team, but not as a player: she was a ‘junior assistant coach’. “I could see things about the players,” she says. “I knew how they could improve. And they could relate to me. They liked having that connection.” A connection which would last for another two years.
But it was Hingis’ decision to return to the game which made Camille take a more active role in tennis. “Hingis came back. No one would have blamed if she didn’t and yet she still chose to come back. She did it because she loved the game.” Hingis’ feelings made Camille question her own. She had been destroyed by greed and ambition, yet despite all she had been through, she still felt something for the sport. And so she approached the Geneva tennis club and asked if she could work there during the holidays. Impressed by her CV, she was hired as an ‘assistant recruiter’ for the club. She scouts for up and coming juniors and tries to convince them to play for the club.
She doesn’t know if she’ll find a prodigal tennis player but admits she’ll know immediately if she does. “They’re easy to recognize. They have that look in their eyes. It’s like they know they were born to do it. And they smile when they play. They do it because they love it, their talent hasn’t been corrupted.”
She longs for the world of competitive tennis but is forced to be content with “just hitting a ball back and forth”. She stills feels bitter about what happened, but has learnt to put it behind her. In a few weeks she’s off to college, but in the mean time she has the recruiting job and wants to make the most of it. “Some of the worst memories I have are associated with tennis,” she says, “but some of the best ones are of tennis as well.”
The sun breaks out from the clouds. As if on cue, the bell rings. Camille gives a radiant smile and walks off to class. She’s back to being “just another student.” This is her reality now, and she’s doing just fine.

‘And now she’s back in the atmosphere, with drops of Jupiter in her hair…’  (Train- Drops of Jupiter).
The song was made long before Hingis’ comeback, but I’ve always thought it describes her comeback rather accurately. It’s the story of a girl who comes back from a ‘soul vacation’, and the guy realizes she’s changed. She’s not the same one as before, and he wonders if she found herself during that time apart, and if she misses him in the mean time. It’s a pretty song, like I said, and it does fit what Hingis did during those 3 years.
People have been questioning Hingis’ performance in recent months. Two consecutive losses to Daniela Hantuchova, a 3rd round exist to a relative unknown player in Miami, people were left wondering what exactly happened to the ‘reluctant rebel’ who, in part, made tennis what it is today. They were questioning her and more importantly they were doubting her. For good cause, because as many pointed out, it is not normal for a player of that caliber to exit in the 3rd round.
I remember when she lost in Miami. I was angry and I lashed out at a friend- ‘whatever problems Hingis is having, she should sort them out. If it’s physical or mental, I really don’t care, but that kind of performance is unacceptable’. Again, it was said in a moment of anger. As fans, we do have expectations which, in a way, Hingis is obliged to meet. We are demanding, especially when it comes to players who were or are number 1 world wide, players who once captured our hearts and imaginations and have had us under their spell ever since.
Hingis is, in a way, the prime example of a fan’s selfishness. We love her unconditionally, just as long as she is winning. The moment her winning form falters, we are the first ones to question her comeback, to murmur that her time is up and to whisper “enough is enough”. After her 3rd round loss in Miami, how many people believed that she should just give up her comeback? It would later become obvious that Serena Williams wasn’t just going to fade away, maybe she should just ‘save herself the embarrassment’ and quit now before it gets too much for us to bear.
That makes fans out to be selfish, and to a degree we are. We choose our loyalties when it suits us, only a fraction of us support Hingis unconditionally. I am not one of them and I doubt I could ever be. Not because I don’t love Hingis, because I do, but it is more because I have “other loves” and I could never commit myself to one player unconditionally. But I still feel it is unfair, to other fans and to Hingis herself, to just support her when she is winning and to turn our backs on her when she is not. She is bound to have ‘off’ days, why should we criticize her for that? Why do we look at her as if she committed a crime when she isn’t flawless?
And why, when she withdraws for a tournament, do we automatically assume that it is because she is “afraid” of a certain player? When I first read it, I honestly thought I misread it. Hingis is not afraid of Serena Williams. Why should she be? Because she won the Australian Open? Surely not. Serena Williams is not a player to fear, Justine Henin proved so during the final in Miami. Yes, Williams ultimately won it, but the first set was won 6-0, and it wasn’t to Williams.
It is not in Hingis’ nature to be afraid of a player, especially one like Williams. Hingis is far too arrogant for that. She knows she’s talented, she knows she’s smarter than Williams. She knows that. She isn’t afraid of anyone, except maybe herself. She has the biggest expectations of what she is capable of. She knows what she can do, she knows she can beat Williams if she puts her mind to it. She has done it on other occasions in the past. Why should today be any different? Because Serena Williams is winning again? What does that change?
People were criticizing Hingis when she wasn’t playing her best. She withdraws from a tournament, because of injury, and people attack for that. What more does she have to do? She wasn’t playing her best tennis, she recognizes that. She is taking her time to come back to her best form, and so she withdraws from Charleston. And people want her to play anyway? Hingis is brilliant when she is healthy, when she is fit. She loves pleasing the crowd; she does it when she’s 100%.
She lives for that kind of rush, when the crowd is silent for a beat as they process that shot, as they ask themselves how she could have made it from that angle. And then they realize it is Hingis on the court, and there’s a roar of approval. And there’s a flicker of pride in Hingis’ eyes. Yet that look dies when she doesn’t make that shot. And there is no roar of approval, and the crowd is silent because they’re asking themselves what really happened to their ‘reluctant rebel’.
Fans have a right to be selfish, it is, to a certain extent, what makes them fans. They live for the rush of players competing, of never quite knowing what to expect when any player, Hingis or otherwise, steps onto the court. It is part of the game. But part of being a fan is also accepting that your favorite player will not always play at their absolute best. There will be days when they will lose to players they probably shouldn’t, there will be days when they will withdraw from tournaments they would probably win. Reluctantly, it is something we must learn to accept. I can’t speak for others, but I’d rather Hingis left me speechless because she is playing well than at lost for words because she is losing to a relative unknown player.

Unconditional: not subjects to conditions or limitations. Absolute.
You could almost have portrayed the Miami 2007 Final as a Greek tragedy. It had all the necessary elements: two characters (Justine Henin and Serena Williams), with opposing philosophies on life, caught up in a controversial feud, both with their own ‘fatal flaws’. Pathos towards the two; one because she wasn’t meant to get this far, not in this tournament, not after what she’s been through in recent times, the other for constantly having to prove her place, to win over the doubts who still murmur after her win in the Australian Open that it’s all a fluke, that she should just give up now. Beating Sharapova, twice, didn’t prove anything except that maybe Hingis isn’t the only haunted player by her own ghosts.
Logic said that Serena Williams should have won the Final. To go along with the metaphor of the Greek tragedy, it was written in the stars. It had to happen: Justine is not a power player, she cannot overpower a player like Serena (and yet, pray, do tell- who can?). Justine is haunted by ghosts, still. Her performance is recent weeks does not prove they no longer exist, just that she is no longer afraid of them. But they are still there, lingering at the back of her mind. Serena had that over her: with all the tragedies Serena Williams has gone through, she has not lost her mother during the month of March. Whatever demons haunting Serena, if they are any, can ‘casually’ be pushed aside during the tournament. Justine’s could not.
And that was why I was routing for Justine Henin during the match. Yes, I will be the first to admit there were other reasons behind it- for starters, a sincere dislike of Serena Williams and her style of play, the fact that Justine, for all her flaws, does play “pretty” tennis, and, because I’m actually incredibly superficial, Justine speaks French fluently. Say what you want, at the end of the day you tend to side with your own. But there was something else. As I said before, Justine Henin does not like Miami. “Too many bad memories,” she confessed at her press conference after her second round win. Her mother died when Justine was 12, during the month of March, because of that you can’t really blame her for never having gotten past the ¼ Final. Bad memories indeed.
So when she walked onto that court what I felt first and foremost was an element of pride. Of deep, sincere pride. I was honestly proud of her, proud that she didn’t let those ghosts bother her, that she did it as much for herself as she did for her mother. It was in a previous round that she glanced up to the sky after she won. She didn’t say anything but the message was clear to all who were watching: she was winning for her mother. With that in mind, I wanted her to win. Justine Henin may have been prone to selfish actions in the past; the Final was not one of them. The player who was once so fragile during the tournament was still vulnerable, of that there was no doubt. But at least now she wasn’t so afraid of those ghosts.
But since I’ve brought up Justine’s past I feel I ought to talk about Serena, now, too. As stated before, I was always going to be for Justine. But I still acknowledge that Serena Williams has, at the very least, accomplished something. Her comeback may not have the magical element that Hingis’ did, and maybe that why I, along with so many others, fail to be won over by her. Not because she’s not convincing, because she is, but because I’m not convinced. Hingis rose from nothing, Hingis came back from the cold. Serena may not have been amongst the elites in the past few years but at least she was there. She was still playing. Not as well, and it’s only in recent months she’s found her form again, but she was still playing, still competing.
If in theory I should support Williams, that I don’t is merely down to something called ‘wengerism’ (perfect shot from the perfect angle with the perfect player and the perfect weather conditions and perfect line calling). I’m the daughter of a UN interpreter, which basically means I’m used to arrogance being associated with education and talent. Serena Williams have an education, is arrogant because she’s extremely talented. But that is the problem. She’s talented at hitting the ball- hard. Accurate it may be, but she still is undeniably a baseline hitter. Justine Henin, whilst she may lack arrogance (in comparison with other players, she’s even remotely modest) and education, “got skillz”. Serve and volley, drop shots, one-handed backhands across court, the girl can do them. More importantly she can handle them well. Serena Williams offers entertainment; Justine Henin offers intrigue, that ‘je ne sais quoi’ element that draws you in.
The entire match was that of contrasts. From the moment they stepped onto court you could see the difference between the two. Serena Williams strutted onto the court, completely confident to the point of being arrogant. Why Martina Hingis’ arrogance is charming and Serena Williams’ is irritating is beyond me, but then again there are something you learn not to question. But arrogance it was. She even had huge earrings with her name in them. I’m all for showing the world you like yourself, but come on girl, that really was taking things too far.
Justine Henin, by contrast, is far more discreet. She rarely brims with confidence; it is an aspect I like about her. She’s extremely talented, she knows it, but unlike most of that caliber (and even those beneath her), she doesn’t flaunt it. Save for the exceptional “allez!” you don’t actually hear her that much on the court. Serena Williams, amongst others, seems to be intent on making her presence known.
Yet in the first set it was Justine Henin who made herself known. That being said, I doubt even the diehard Justine fans really expected her to win 6-0. That she did shows two things. First of all, she’s a way smarter player- Serena Williams may hit the ball extremely accurately, but she also hits it hard. Justine played tennis. Drops shots, volleys, aces. She did it. She did it with such skill, such intuition. There are few players who can match her back-hand (Mauresmo being the main contender), and I have to say- wow. Just, wow. She was absolutely amazing during that first set, taking it 6-0.
There are a few things to point out during that first match, and it has a lot to do with their attitudes to tennis. Justine loves tennis. She loves playing tennis. Serena Williams may love the sport, what she loves first and foremost is winning, and the fame which comes along with it. Also, Justine Henin is incredibly fit (Mauresmo being fitter?). Serena Williams tried hitting the balls, Henin countered with that shot from that angle. So she used angles, making her run after the balls. You realize fully Henin’s fitness when she’s running them down: it honestly doesn’t bother it.
As Justine Henin got further and further into the lead, Serena got more and more frustrated. And making more and more mistakes. You could see in the stats at the end: Justine Henin had something along the lines of 5 unforced errors. I failed to note down Serena Williams, so do forgive me. Also, when Justine raised her hand during the first set when Williams was about to serve, did anyone else expect Serena to bluntly ignore her and serve anyway? Not that it mattered, because Henin still won. 6-0.
I missed the exact moment Serena Williams broke her racquet.
Second set, Serena Williams realized losing a set 6-0 “kinda hurts”, upped her game. For most of that set, it was played like an actual final. Justine had match points, lost them. And the following event changed the match completely: Justine slipped, injured her knee. She lost her confidence, and the ghosts of March came roaring back. That injury, for me, disrupted an otherwise reasonable balance.
Because after that Justine lost her rhythm. It was an open game until then. But suddenly the points became shorter, the rallies less intriguing, her moves more… jerky, almost. And Serena Williams took advantage, winning the second set 7-5 and racing to a 3-0 lead in the third.
I thought it was over then. I honestly believed, when Justine was lying on the floor having fallen again on her bad knee, that it was over. Serena Williams was going to win 6-0. But then something happened. Justine fought back. She dug deep and she found something to hold onto, something to fight for. And slowly but surely Justine came back, to 3-3. Yet by then, the damage had already been done, and she just couldn’t fight anymore, not like that, not against a player as physical as Serena Williams. Appropriately Serena Williams won the final set 6-3.
But a few things which are semi-related to the match:
1. Justine Henin’s injury raised some interesting questions, at least for me. I am not convinced that Serena Williams still would have won that second set if Justine hadn’t fallen, if she hadn’t been so shaken up afterwards. For the simple reason Serena Williams wasn’t outplaying Justine as much as she was outhitting her. Could Serena have still won if Justine was moving as effortlessly as she was in the first set? If Serena Williams had been playing the better tennis, I’d be the first one saying ‘Serena was the better player’. Overpowering someone does not mean you have more skill, just that you have more power. In other words, the ever so popular ‘brains vs brawns’ debate.
2. The final was as much about the comeback of Serena Williams as it was about Justine Henin’s personal battle with “the month of March”. One won the title, the other made the first steps in laying those ghosts to rest. Serena Williams may have won, but for me Justine Henin was the real winner that night, if only because in theory she wasn’t expected to make it that far.
3. Finally, and I would have said this even if Justine Henin had won: if Serena Williams wants to convince the doubters, i.e. people like me, that her tennis comeback isn’t a joke, she should try actually acting like a tennis player. And that means playing tournaments she doesn’t want to. Serena Williams has played, unless I’m mistaken: the Gold Coast, the Australian Open, and Miami. That means she hasn’t played competitive tennis since January. Granted, there was the excuse she was “injured”. Directly after the Australian Open, I would have believed her. But between the AO and Miami there were plenty of other tournaments. Selfishly, it’s not fair on the other players who do put up with the demanding schedule. Why should Serena Williams be allowed to boycott tournaments because she’s so-called “injured”? All players have tournaments they would rather not play. Mauresmo didn’t want to go to Dubaï and still did. Justine Henin, for obvious reasons, would like to avoid Miami. Martina Hingis and Roland Garros is a long and complicated love affair. Those players, at least, try to keep up with the schedule. They take injuries and exhaustion and jet-lag as part of the game. Serena Williams instead decided to pick the tournaments she’s the favorite at. If it’s isn’t illegal, it’s certainly immoral.
This is my conclusion of the match: congratulations for the win, Serena Williams, yet I am still not convinced your comeback is for real. If she really wants to be taken seriously as a tennis player, she can’t just pick the tournaments she wants to play. She has to play others. And congratulations for Justine, who finally is starting to move on from the “Month of March” syndrome. And who proved that maybe Serena Williams isn’t quite as unbeatable as she would like to believe she is.

I’m writing this immediately after her loss to Radwanska, who I will affectionally label “Rad”, if only because it’s so long to write. And I’m feeling a mixture of emotions. I feel angry that she lost, even though I immediately recognize that’s irrational on my part- even Hingis can’t win every match. I feel annoyed, because in theory she should have beaten “Rad” easily and didn’t- today she didn’t because of factors no one really understands. And I feel nostalgic. Because, on a very purely selfish level, I want the ‘old’ Martina Hingis back.
There were reasons for her poor performance. She was visibly sick. She had played a singles and a doubles match the previous day. She was battling with the wind. The planets weren’t properly aliened. The reasons are numerous and they are valid. To hurl abuse at her for losing, whilst it is understandable, is also unreasonable. It’s too easy to forget Hingis isn’t the same player as before. She’s changed.
She’s changed, but she’s stayed the same as well. There are still flashes of brilliance and intuition, moments of flair which characterized her days as the “Swiss Miss” so well. Do you remember the days when the “Swiss Miss” would deliver drop shots for fun? Granted, in recent weeks those days have become somewhat more rare, but oh, when she does have those moments- it’s absolutely breath-taking. She shows tennis for what it should be. She comes up with that shot from that angle, and you can’t help but fall in love with her style. And when you think she can’t come up with something better she does. And you fall in love all over again.
But she’s changed. The “Swiss Miss” was brilliant, was extremely talented and more importantly, acutely aware of that. She was arrogant. She was cocky and she was arrogant, and I loved her for it. She wasn’t afraid of losing because she knew she’d win. And you can ponder the reasons for such confidence. She was above the rest. No one had her flair. Her mother was watching. Reasons, so many reasons. Then things started to change, power hitters started to dominate the tour, Hingis started suffered from injury, you all know how the tale ends: she retires. The one who once murmured “I am the savior of tennis” turned and walked away.
In a Freud sort of way, she needed those 3 years off the court. She needed to see what life was like away from tennis to know she couldn’t live without it. She needed to see the other players continue their careers for her to realize she still might have something to prove. And she needed to watch them win from the sidelines because it was from a distance she said to herself “I beat those players”.
And one day she announced she was coming back. The savior of tennis was coming back from the cold. I will be the first to admit I had my doubts. She had lost so much confidence in the months preceding her retirement, were we really supposed to believe she had gotten in back during those 3 years? A comeback was impossible. She couldn’t do it. It wouldn’t last. She was doing because she was bored. She was doing it for the publicity.
Then came the Gold Coast. 2-0 down in the first set. And all the doubts and insecurities she had came roaring back, and she started questioning herself. But whatever questions she was asking herself were the right ones, because she found the answers she so desperately needed and in that moment she became the “Swiss Miss” again. The player who once seemingly won tournaments for fun. And I loved her for that. I loved how she defied expectations, I love how she later made it to the ¼ Final in the AO only to be beaten in 3 sets by Clijsters.
It wasn’t supposed to be like that. A player who has been away for 3 years doesn’t suddenly come back to the ¼ of a Grand Slam. It just doesn’t happen. But she isn’t just any other player; she’s “the Swiss Miss”. And if anyone can pull a comeback like that, it’s her.
But it’s easy to forget that Hingis is still doing her comeback. She did so well in her comeback year that it’s tempting to overlook the 3 years she spent off the court. And when she loses, people question her, doubt her.
Surely, surely, we have no right to say “enough is enough”. To question her commitment, to ponder her motivation. She lost. As a fan, I’m annoyed. I have certain expectations towards her. Expectations which ultimately do involve her getting past the 3rd round. That being said, I have another expectation beyond that of winning. I expect her to give it her best. And she can’t do that when she’s as sick as she was against “Rad”. No one, absolutely no one, can deny that she was missing shots she would normally make with her eyes closed. No one can deny that she was under-performing.
No one can deny she was definitely sick. Surely you cannot blame her, attack her in any sense of the term, when she’s so sick that she’s “going to throw up”? Surely…
Yet sickness aside, there are other aspects I noticed when she was playing. Her somewhat reluctance to end the game. The “Swiss Miss” was positively ruthless in the sense she toyed with her opponent just enough to give them hope; half a breath later the ball was out of their reach and she was standing there with her trademark arrogant smirk (how I’ve come to miss it…). Things have changed, with Hingis. It’s almost like she lost confidence, but to a degree which remains unknown. Could it really be that a player as talented, as experienced, as Martina is more afraid of winning than she is of actually losing? Is that why she can’t win?
You can debate the reasons why. She’s made her point: power hitters may still be her resident “bête noir”, but it’s not a coincidence that she defied all expectations and ended the year #7. She doesn’t have anything left to prove. And is she right? She has made her point. No one is ever going to look at her in the eye and tell her “You don’t deserve it”. She did, she rebuilt her career, she started from scratch. And look at her now. Breathing down the necks of the top 5. Eyeing that top 3 spot.
I’m going to go out on a limb here. Most will disagree with me here. But bring back her mother. I say this for two reasons. First of all, as a competitor, you naturally up your game when there’s someone you care about watching you. You want to show off, you want to make them proud, you want to show them what you’ve become. And two, because she expected Martina to win. And so Martina did. Out of obligation, you can argue, but she did.
But that’s the problem- she did it out of obligation. Now she’s finally playing tennis for fun. Yeah, ok. She’s been below par. She’s had controversial losses. She seems so afraid of letting people down that she almost has a mental block to winning. So, yeah. “Rad” won, fair game to her.
But I’ll take the “Swiss Miss” any day. If she wins or loses, she still manages to do that shot, from that angle. Partly out of loyalty. And partly because a long time ago a cocky young teenager strutted onto center court at Wimbledon and won the final. And said, “I will change tennis.”
She did.