Roland Garros 2018

There was an exciting line-up for the French Open this year. As usual the main topic of conversation was who would win the trophies at the end of the 2 weeks.

On the men's side it was more of a debate as to who would derail Rafa's attempt for an 11th title at RG. Names were put forward but Rafa remained supreme and came through the competition to win. This is not to say that it was plain sailing for him as he himself points out. He has to put in the hard work and can't just rely on talent and his record on clay. However, the questions remain: What does Rafa do, especially on clay, to stay ahead of the competition? Is it in his preparation? Is it his match play style? Does the clay play to his strengths? Or are the other men in awe of him? Has Rafa managed to plug his weaknesses on clay better than other surfaces? After all, when he improved his return of serve on hard courts, he won the US Open 2017. Not that it matters, we all love watching Rafa play and would be bitterly disappointed if he wasn't in the final.

On the women's side we were excited that Azarenka and Serena were back playing on tour in a Grand Slam. The field was strong and all eyes were on them and Sharapova who played well in the run-up tournaments. Kvitova was in the mix too having won Prague and Madrid back-to-back. Many predicted the overall winner in Halep but there were many potential winners, such as, Wozniacki, Venus, Muguruza, indeed any of the women in the top 12. And, of course, Ostapenko was the defending champion. What an amazing performance she gave last year! There were shock early defeats but we were all eagerly anticipating the clash between Serena and Sharapova at the beginning of the second week. Disappointingly, it didn't happen because Serena suffered an injury and was unable to serve so had to withdraw. Here again, we can see that by not allowing Serena her proper seeding of joint No 1 (Halep would have been fine with this), us, the spectators and TV viewers, are deprived of seeing her throughout the duration of the tournament. The argument generally has often been that it's all about who the crowd want to see and TV ratings yet, despite the fact that we all want to see Serena, this doesn't seem to play a part in the rules and decision making about the seedings.

Halep went on to win the title which was well deserved having been number 1 for many weeks and playing consistent tennis throughout the year. This brings up an important point, that I think is overlooked at best, and that is the number 1 spot. Whereas those who win a Grand Slam have certain privileges, those who reach number 1 don't enjoy the same. In fact, if the number 1 reaches the spot without a Grand Slam win they are under intense pressure to win one. It's an incredible achievement to reach the number one ranking, not many achieve it. So, I think, they should enjoy the same privileges and status as the Grand Slam winners because they have proved they are of the same high standard. Without a Grand Slam to their name the player has to play incredibly well all year, not just at one tournament, to amass enough points to reach number 1 and stay there. And we can see how hard it is for come-back players such as Azarenka and Serena, both former number 1's, to get back to the same ranking and stay healthy enough to play week-in, week-out. Sharapova is another case in point. Leaving aside the reason for her absence she is, nevertheless, an amazing player who we all love to watch. I think she played superbly at RG. She was fast around the court and had that racquet head speed through the ball, Ostapenko-style. Sharapova worked hard coming into RG, as do all players, and had an improved game together with her trade mark in-the-zone concentration yet is still finding it frustratingly difficult to climb up the rankings fast enough. Depth in the women's game? Yes, that is a major factor but it still shows how hard it is to be a top athlete.  

The grass season has started as we all look forward to the Wimbledon Championships as well as the run-up tournaments!