Get Paid To Promote, Get Paid To Popup, Get Paid Display Banner
Popular Post
Showing posts with label tignor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tignor. Show all posts

AO 2011: fantasty tennis

i'm leaving my original typo in the title, because somehow it fits.

i just signed up for tennis.com's grand slam fantasy tennis event. i believe this makes me a superfan of tennis
and tennis.com.

i've only enlisted in 2 fantasy sports enterprises before today--and both were related to football (soccer), a sport i know next to nothing about. i joined out of "fantasy sports curiosity" but mostly because one of my best friends and her husband were starting a league and the promise of weekly updates -- brit trash talk!--by rich was too fun to pass up. (he's so good, he was able to parlay it into a paying gig,
blogging the world cup for men's health magazine.) i hovered around the basement of the our league's standings, though i eventually pushed myself to a more respectable 3rd or 4th from the bottom. but to be truthful, all the things that real football fans probably geek out about--assembling a "dream team," mulling over "contracts" and managing the injuries and substitutions, week to week--turned out to be way beyond my level of interest.


will my fandom translate into points? meh. i just want to see if they could make a fun fantasy version of a sport i already love. and i need one more tennis distraction during my work day.

here's part of my team:
nadal. jan 15, 2011. photo © mark baker/ap via tennis.com
djokovic on jan 12. photo © ben solomon via australianopen.org
verdasco, with his cool hair. on jan 13. photo © getty images via australian open.org

and don't think i picked them for anything but their potential winning ways.
otherwise i might have picked...
tommy

marcel granollers (l), tommy robredo (r) after winning the heineken open doubles tourney.
in nz. jan 15, 2011. photo © wayne drough (ap/nzpa)


i round out my team with:
murray, because he'll go just far enough (and i won't ever pick federer or soderling. for anything);
almagro and isner, not because i actually like them or their games, but because nadal seems to have trouble against them (like my barometer?)...
i wanted to pick baghdatis, but a groin injury heading into the fortnight is not promising.
so: troicki, who (despite a loss yesterday) has been riding a good, strong wave. also, he makes the most desperate faces:

jan 15 © ap photo/rob griffith
photo © ap/rob griffith
photo © ap photo/rick rycroft


and my wild
wild card? nishikori. 'cause he's with BG now, and i just like that pairing.

***
so that is fantasy.
this is compulsory (real tennis world insight from señor tignor):

and


read up. it's "game on" soon...

squirrel crazy/crazy squirrel



yesterday at work, in the midst of the afternoon lull, i started giggling. i couldn't help it.

my co-workers didn't say anything (this time).

i sort of wish they had because i would have explained that my maximum favorite writer (and i'd probably have to also explain the "maximum" bit) just wrote this really funny story about a squirrel. and i would have let them read it over my shoulder, or i'd have sent it to them.

it's actually not a squirrel "story," it's a lead-in to something about robby ginepri. but i love that he shared the news this way.

and then i thought of all the squirrels that have besieged, annoyed and impressed my friends, like "the scraper" at 147 bleecker. and the squirrel that frequents teresa's neighbor's roof (she flings slices of toast at him. he's clearly never going to leave).

by coincidence, today, at the union square market, the samascott orchards folks were all in a dither about some crazy squirrel that kept stealing their $7/pound italian-american chestnuts.

and then he popped up!


and he zipped and hopped boldly around, probably for the rest of the afternoon. sort of crazy and cute. but not sure how i feel about that garlic after his city squirrel nose and paws got all into it...

dc: back in barcelona...

photo by albert gea/reuters via the nytimes photo replay, december 2, 2009.

i'm going to miss seeing live davis cup finals action today, but you should watch and cheer for team guapo...

photo by josep lago/afp/getty images, via yahoo sports

here's the tv schedule...

and some good reading: bull run.

enjoy!

the O2: a well-lighted place

rafael nadal in his first match of the WTF in london. photographed by julian finney/getty images. via yahoo sports.

this is a fairly common shot, but with uncommon shadowing that sculpts every fold in his shirt, and creates mood and mystery in nadal's profile.
nov 23, 2009. photo by julian finney/getty images. via yahoo sports.


the year-end championships for the atp are underway, or as "mfw" so smartly announced: WTF is happening.

my favorite player is struggling as we speak in his first match against robin soderling, and my enjoyment level ebbs and flows with his fortunes.

but the tournament is being played under bright white and blue lights at the O2 arena in london. everyone in the stands is bathed in blue shadows. and photographers are given instant mood lighting for photographing the on-court action--side shadows sculpt angles, and if a player tilts his face toward the lights, to hit a serve or an overhead, he's got a glow that's near to heavenly. dreamy conditions for photographers, i'm sure! there's rich contrast in almost every photo i've seen so far.

the yahoo sports tennis page hosts one of the best galleries--photos do not go up as fast as on the getty site, but these are un-watermarked, and they were up today within a half hour of the start time. pretty efficient, and great.

enjoy them...and the matches on tennis channel this week, espn this weekend.

court couture...

i picked up the october issue of vogue today, because of the michelle williams cover story and layout. love her style, top to toe. and i love her new 'do.

i was happy to also find a photo spread featuring a favorite tennis player of mine, monfils, photographed by none other than arthur elgort.



i actually don't love this idea--why is monfils wearing tennis garb, when she's in couture? he'd look great in slim-cut frenchy 3-piece. but he photographs nicely.

i like anna wintour about as much as i like roger federer, but i will say that her friendship with federer does have its benefits. the monfils spread represents, i believe, the 4th feature/spread in 5 months to include a top tennis player. starting with rafa in june (photographed by bruce weber)...


a classic bruce weber photo...
this is a little too gatsby for my taste

this too, but i was happy to see both...

and then in august, ana ivanovic! (bonus: article quotes mfw, and his is the big pull quote in the print edition.)
photographed by norman jean roy

and then federer in the hyped september issue, and monfils this month.

tsonga and wozniacki are bound to make it in there soon. here's hoping, anyway.

extra, extra: rafa behind the scenes video

pretty city: the real deal

ted croner's "time square montage," 1947-48 via the nytimes.com ("capturing the city" slideshow). ps. i don't know if the title is really "time square montage" or if that is a ny times typo.

in my last post i talked about one of the highlights of the past weekend being a night at my sister's house, skimming fashion mags and watching tv. i'm a thrill-cat, aren't i?

but i suppose i just needed a night of pure relaxation. this weekend, my plate is three-quarters-full (dancing...filming...birthday-partying) but i'm hoping to steal a little time on the couch, to read and watch "rafaelito" make his real summer debut in montreal.

if i get a little ambitious or antsy, I may make a trip down to the yancey richardson gallery. i read this article in today's times, and was inspired. and i heard from a very reliable source here at the office that the yancey richardson gallery is one of the best in town. if i don't make it to chelsea on sunday, (you and) i have until august 28, to check it out. that's not a lot of time, so we'll have to make time.

ps. the helen levitt show at the laurence miller gallery, further uptown, also sounds great. on view only through aug. 20...

gangbusters!

having a low-key holiday weekend in town, working a bit and prepping for the upcoming trip... but yesterday was blockbuster friday. i met up with friends richard, anthony, teresa and zovig for the 11:30 am showing of PUBLIC ENEMIES...featuring...richard! this is a film that i would have seen--depp, bale, mlle. marion cotillard, period sets and costuming...

via imdb...

all of that is way up my alley. but obviously, the fact of richard being in the film (as agent sam cowley), and having heard about some of the on-set adventures from him and teresa, made this exceptionally thrilling. i love to see friends find success at what they love to do, and are meant to do.

before taking in the film, i did read a couple of reviews (manohla dargis at the nytimes, and david denby at the new yorker) and didn't disagree with their assessments. there's an epically beautiful build to the film, but an ending that's strangely slow-mo and abrupt. and anti-climactic. (i had a "that's it?" moment near the end.) despite mr. mann's attempts to fudge "real" events to clear a stronger dramatic path, in the end, there are no heroes here, just a collection of intriguing personalities, none wholly good or bad. (ok, maybe baby face nelson was an entirely bad apple.) and while that makes it in one sense true to life, it might be why the film falls just short of great?

to me, the hero of the film is cinematographer
dante spinotti (oscar-nominated for his work on the insider and la confidential). public enemies is one beautiful shot after another. close-ups from terrific angles. and look at the light here...how wonderful:

via imdb...

via imdb...

via imdb...

(side note: don't see the film at the e-walk theater on east 42nd, if you can help it. we sat in theater 1, which had a vertical line running the length of the screen, effectively splitting off 1/3 of every one of mr. spinotti's beautiful shots. very distracting.)

***
and on the subject of gangbusters, how about andy roddick?!!

richard and i were both pulling for murray (richard, because he's a brit, me because i figured he had the better shot at beating federer on sunday) and had set our respective dvrs to record the match. we discussed the particular cares we would have to take in order to avoid seeing or hearing about the match before we could watch it all unfold ourselves. this meant no lunching at a pub after the movie, no internet, and definitely no looking up when walking through times square.

i put the match on when i got home--and actually fell asleep between the first and second sets (oops. very tired!) but then caught the rest of it. the result: shocking!

i learned the hard way last summer to not actually bet on murray to win, but i still had a notion that he would win yesterday. even knowing that roddick is in the best shape of his life, i simply never believed he'd be able to mix it up enough, or have the composure under pressure to create winning points against players that have a bit more in their arsenal. and i guess it's been a long time since i could recall him really winning a big match--though yes, he's come very close...

and as i watched murray predictably pop off, i expected roddick to have his turn. but he played it smooth and smart all the way through...

i did notice earlier in the week, that in an interview, he seemed very thoughtful and mature. my sense from what i've read on the blogs is that he's fun to interview--candid, wry, funny...but sometimes (anyone's) smart-assiness wears on me. but there was something so noticeably different in the interview, and for probably the first time in my life, i wanted to really root for the guy.

he was similarly dignified and humble in his victory yesterday. and he said something that reminded me of a post that mfw wrote a few months ago--"not a quitter." roddick said, "throughout my career i have had a lot of shortcomings, but trying hard hasn't been one of them. " i have to admire that.

and cheer.

GO ANDY!

ap photo via yahoo sports

"it really is your birthday..."

for the last couple of years, i have been engaged in a row of sorts with a friend, who is a federer fan. (you know where i stand.) beyond merely being a fan of federer, it's fair to say, he cannot stand nadal, which staggers me. but i suppose, it makes for some good wagering and sparring between us.

a couple of weeks ago, i mentioned that my birthday was coming up on june 21st.

late last week, we were engaged in an im exchange that went something like this:

friend: oh my god

me: what?

friend: it really is your birthday on sunday. wanna know how i know?

me: how?

friend: the new york times is running a cover story on rafa on sunday.

me: yes! fantastic coincidence

friend: that was god

i was amused by the exchange, but in the context of nadal's lame knees and his withdrawal from wimbledon, this is really not the dream birthday cover that it should have been.


photo by ryan pierse/getty, via nytimes.com

under injury-free circumstances, i might have thrown a frame around this nadal cover and hung it up on one of the big, white blank walls in my apartment. or at least pinned it to the grey walls of my cubicle at work. instead, i filed the magazine away, in my "to read someday" pile, in pristine condition. i did not even flip the cover. i had read the first several paragraphs of cynthia gorney's article online earlier in the week, when the times decided to give readers a little "teaser." but that was all i could bear. and that was before he officially bailed on the tournament.

(i did scroll through the accompanying photo gallery. this is one of only 2 original photos related to this cover story:)

nadal, photographed at the grand hotel parco dei principi, by paolo pellegrin/magnum, for the new york times.

***

nadal is the player who brought me back, fully and heartily, into the game a few years ago. i've felt like a kid--unfettered enthusiasm, now powered by the internet. these eyes followed the "smaller" tournaments, not just the slams, tracked news and "pressers" and followed blogs (and happily discovered a world of the most engaging, thoughtful writing). but it got so that i started to wonder if i was really loving tennis, or if i was merely loving it when nadal played.


after nadal's withdrawal on friday, my first feeling was to skip wimbledon this year altogether.


but that same night, my favorite writer posted a preview of the ladies' championship. and i felt a little stirring...

hey ladies!
i had forgotten about the ladies.

my favorite, ivanovic, has been a shadow. but there are others that i will cheer for (caroline wozniacki!). and wow, sharapova is back--i never thought i'd be happy about that, but i find i prefer that merciless competitive glare of hers, to the sight of the other players...whiny and limpy and dragging her body and her racket (read: serena), ever-wincing and ready to burst into tears, even after a win (azarenka).

and if they weren't all so plain loud (ok, nothing plain about larcher de brito's "grunts")...

oh well. i will still have to watch the ladies "on mute," but i will most certainly tune in.

and: the cherry on top? mfw is blogging from wimbledon (terrifically prolifically--twice daily, so far).

i still miss rafa, but it's looking like there will be plenty during this wimbledon fortnight to satisfy this tennis fan.

cheerio!

***
steve tignor @ wimbledon, to date:
ladies' preview: "fortnight forecast"
gentlemen's preview: "fortnight forecast"
a little london color: "calm before storm"
peek at the london rags: "keeping tabs"
nice report on the young ones: "queen bees"


desert dispatches





my favorite writer is blogging from the bnp paribas open in indian wells, california, and his readers/fans are being spoiled by (sometimes twice!) daily dispatches that are so vigorously observant, that to turn on the actual television broadcast and see and hear the commentary on any single match is akin to being stranded in the desert: it's colorless and dry and it saps your energy but quick. you need refreshment. you want life. so you turn away from the tube, and back to his blog, where the real action is.

this is what happened to me on sunday night. "mfw" gave glorious build-up: i could envision the drive from LA to the desert (with no less than a joan didion reference) and the grounds as "the tennis aquarium" (what right-minded tennis fan doesn't wish to be out there after reading that?). and then, this brilliant stuff:

Opposition is tennis' essential quality. Two people face each other with nothing but themselves and a stick. The court's 90-degree grid and pure white lines are set off by the curve of the ball. At the professional level, the grunts of the players and the dry thud of their shots are enclosed in the soft authority of the chair umpire's voice.

All that was true this afternoon when Caroline Wozniacki of Denmark stood across from Kaia Kanepi of Estonia at the BNP Paribas. The match was played on Court 4, where the Tennis Garden meet the desert. Beyond this, there's nothing but sand and scrub grass. Call it another form of opposition.


The stands are low out there. You get a full view of the cavernous sky and its gradations of blue—it seems more prominent here, a bigger deal, than in the East—which is set off by jutting brown hills and rows of stark, white lighting towers that line each side of the courts. From this vantage point, everything is dry and stripped and hard. Wozniacki's and Kanepi's shots cracked through the air, and you could hear each individual scrape—chicka-chicka-chicka—of their shoes as they set up to hit.



and later, this:

The crowd is dozing, the second set is dragging, and the woman across the net isn't giving Dinara Safina anything to work with. Peng Shuai shovels one ball down the middle after another—no angles, no pace. It's time for the top seed to take matters into her own hands. This, of course, means that she must let out an unintelligible, or perhaps Russian, scream that turns into a full sentence—maybe a paragraph—of anger. The sleepy Southern California afternoon is punctured. The audience, collectively stunned out of its torpor, gives the players the biggest cheer they receive all afternoon. Safina wins the next two points, the game, the set, and, eventually, not without more struggle and a few more self-lacerations, the match. After yesterday's upsets, the tournament needs its No. 1 seed. Safina, not at her best, has obliged.


see what i mean?

so, on sunday night, i ran home after a long swim, ready to make a nice pasta dinner, pour a glass of wine, and giddily camp out in front of the tube for my first opportunity to take it all in with mine own eyes. and i saw...well...nothing but a big, buzzless stadium court, with gael monfils swinging wild, like his moods, on his way to yet another disappointing loss (i'm really starting to worry about him), this time to john isner. there was no remarkable commentary to enrapture me. my shoulders slumped. i plopped face down on the couch. drat.

i perked up a little after hearing that rafa was up next, against michael berrer. the players entered the stadium to "where the streets have no name" and that at least got me to turn over and face the television. (i don't care what people think or say about bono, or U2, or their music now--the video and song were fun and "rad" and very LA when it came out in 1987 and i'm still happy to hear it when it comes on.) rafa proceeded to make the night a bit more memorable, wowing the crowd with his usual brio (notably in the 5th game of the first set, with a crazy backhand slice approach off a berrer mis-hit, from a good foot outside the alley, hit extra sharply cross-court; and, immediately following that, with a defense-to-offense morale wrecker: out of position on the forehand side, rafa lobbed one over berrer's head, berrer managed a weak overhead down the middle, and sort of positioned himself right there, mid-court, in nowheresville--the phrase "sitting where he stands" comes to mind--and nadal passed him before he even got his bearings. i mean, rafa executes this kind of shot-making with delightful regularity, but berrer looked about ready to invoke the mercy rule. and the match was only 21 minutes old. poor guy. he didn't even play that badly).

but that's been about it so far. oh, it's not been terrible--i would rather have any live tennis than none at all. but like i said, some of us are getting spoiled...

one pleasant surprise: lindsay davenport has a real talent for commentary. there are times, when to watch her play is to feel yourself age. slowly. bitterly. but i always knew she was bright and well-spoken. she strikes a calm, confident tone in the booth, and she brings a thoughtful, pro's eye view:

on hantuchova: daniela has such a pretty game, her strokes are...textbook perfect, and she's a very... very nice player to watch...i really wish she would have a little bit more patience and go cross-court more. i was always taught that [you] work the points cross-court, and wait til you have the right shot to go up the line...i really feel she goes up the line too soon in rallies...

on the weakness of ivanovic's two-handed backhand: her contact point is a little bit late, most balls go up the middle of the court, or to her opponent's forehand...[she] doesn't use her left wrist all that much and it's very prone to errors, [she] misses a lot of balls late up the line when she is not on...

that's straightforward stuff, but it's more along the lines of what i want to hear and think about.

(unlike her counterpart gimelstob who is so reliant on the superlative as to be unconvincing. he makes me want to excise the words "great," "greatest," "best," and "most" from my vocabulary. i probably use them as unsparingly as he does. lesson learned.)

if you're not able to catch the matches on tv because you're going to join revelers for st. patrick's day (happy, happy, btw) or watch the NIT (meh), or later this week, the NCAA tourney (woo hoo), or you just can't find the broadcast (it's actually on an MSG channel, in nyc), do not fret. just visit the concrete elbow blog for "hi-def" observations and anecdotes from the crowd and the press room, and music and literary references (that you and i can look up later). it's writing that is far and away more compelling than what is on tv, and the next best thing to being there.

read a good poem: "tossing and turning"

untitled, #1447-a, 1996. by todd hido. via the rose gallery, santa monica, ca.

The spirit has infinite facets, but the body

confiningly few sides.

There is the left,

the right, the back, the belly, and tempting

in-betweens, northeasts and northwests,

that tip the heart and soon pinch circulation

in one or another arm.

Yet we turn each time

with fresh hope, believing that sleep

will visit us here, descending like an angel

down the angle our flesh's sextant sets,

tilted toward that unreachable star

hung in the night between our eyebrows, whence

dreams and good luck flow.

Uncross

your ankles. Unclench your philosophy.

This bed was invented by others; know we go

to sleep less to rest than to participate

in the twists of another world.

This churning is our journey.

It ends,

can only end, around a corner

we do not know

we are turning.

"tossing and turning" by john updike, from collected poems 1953-1993.
via the writer's almanac, feb 19, 2009.



i hadn't read any of john updike's work until this poem, today. i had made a plan to, though, after reading this recent tribute by my favorite writer...i'm getting excited all over again.

i love "unclench your philosophy" -- those few words stayed with me all morning.
my co-workers were like, "what's with you, smiley?"
i don't know--that line just woke this little mind up.

"uncross your ankles" is a pretty great line, too.

right after i read the poem, i did a quick search for a photo that might be suitable.
i happened upon todd hido's work--i love the moodiness.
if you're interested, here is a link to more of his photos on the rose gallery site and on the stephen wirtz gallery site.
i also found an interview from 2007, where he discusses his book, between the two. i enjoyed reading his thoughts on portraiture and the book editing process.
here's a taste:

re: his focus, and his portraits of women...

To me it is no mystery that we can only photograph effectively what we are truly interested in or -- maybe more importantly -- are grappling with. This is often an unconscious process. Otherwise the photographs are merely about an idea or a concept; that stuff eventually falls flat for me. There must be something more, some emotional hook for it to really work for me. I tend to photograph things I've had problems with or I have struggled with, stuff that used to keep me up at night. It's the same process with my photographs of houses -- they are about recognizing some mysterious element of my childhood.

I've read that sources of terror in childhood often become sources of attraction in adulthood. I've found that true. It's disturbing to me how many of the models remind me of past women that have been in my life -- not in terms of how they look but in terms of who they seem to be underneath their surfaces. There is a familiarity to them, something that resonates, something kind of troubled about them that is very recognizable to me. It is endlessly fascinating and utterly simple as to why we gravitate to what we do. Of course this is not stuff that I've worked out completely, which is precisely why it's engrossing to me. That is why I do it. That is the focus.

re: editing the book with chris pichler of nazraeli press...

The editing process is part of making the work. I gather up the images I am interested in and then start to lay them out using just a standard book dummy, weaving the images together over a long period of time. With Between the Two, it took about three years of constantly shuffling unpublished work in with new images that I was making on a weekly basis. There was real joy in leaving the darkroom and stopping by the copy shop to make Xeroxes in order to slide them into the dummy, seeing if they fit in someplace. Sometimes the images would work, and sometimes they don't. But almost every image I've made in the last few years was tried out. Some were perfect and added just what I needed and others I've saved for the next project, whatever that may be!

want more? here's a link to the full interview, between hido and ...

making the personal, political



when i picked up the sports page of yesterday's nytimes and saw harvey araton's column, with a photo of shahar peer, and this headline, "a political swing at one player sours a tournament for all" i thought, uh oh. this is big...

and it's getting bigger...

i've been trying to keep up with the news and the blogosphere during the day while formulating my own thoughts. here goes.

the situation room: shahar peer, an israeli player currently ranked 45th on the wta tour, was denied a visa to enter the united arab emirates, to compete in a tournament for which she had qualified (and in the eyes of some, based on her play coming into the event, had a decent opportunity to win). while wta officials long feared she might have trouble securing a visa, it seems they were offered some assurances that it would be granted...at the very last hour her visa was denied. officials have gone on record to say that the denial was due to "safety concerns." the atp and its players will also have to confront this issue as it appears that andy ram, a doubles specialist, may also be denied a visa for the upcoming atp tournament there.

the reaction (as of tuesday, feb 17) : while it considered cancelling the tournament, the women's tennis association, decided to proceed (to the dismay of many), issuing this statement. the tennis channel has dropped televised coverage of the event (earning praise from many). more to come from the atp, i'm sure...possibly (hopefully) the players...

the good word: tennis' top writers have weighed in on this, with tennis mag eic james martin, calling out not only wta chief larry scott, but the wta players for their unwillingness to pay more than lip service to the matter; my favorite writer acing one out wiiiide--noting that the atp players (especially federer, who lives and trains there in the off-season) should make their voices heard on this, too; and tom tebbutt asserting that after this year tennis in dubai is done. and how.

my take: many fans are loathe to mix politics and sports, i don't think the two can ever really be separated. sport is a part of our culture, and it reflects whatever dynamics loom large in the world. sometimes it reveals exquisite acts of sportsmanship, but it also exposes cheating, racism, discrimination, violence... and i think that athletes, especially the most high-profile ones, should take a stand, especially when their own sport is affected.

in the perfect world (inside my head), my favorite player would withdraw, offering some simple, but totally right-on, no-nonsense reason: "if it is not fair for one player the way he is treated, it is not right for everyone. it's simple, no?" and then call on everyone to boycott! but with nadal and federer both suffering from injuries, it's possible that both may escape making some kind of statement on the situation that the wta and atp are facing, at least for now...we'll see how things unfold.

i don't toss out the notion of a boycott easily. i took gymnastics for a spell when i was a kid, and was obsessed with the sport. in 1980, kurt thomas was poised to make history as the first american gymnast to finally break through the death grip that the soviets and eastern bloc nations had on the men's event, and win the gold medal...and then president carter ordered the boycott of the moscow games. dream over. as a fan, i was crushed. i don't know how the athletes managed. but when you're part of a team, especially a national team, you have no choice. and anyway, those were very different times. you couldn't try to escape the link between sport and politics...

these days, most athletes will try to dance around a political question (hell, athletes are so media trained, you're hard pressed to find anyone to answer a question about a game that's not rehearsed and repeated from day to day to day, let alone say something political. jordan, jeter, tiger woods are inoffensive to the point of being...uninspiring).

but in this case, absent a brave decision by the atp or wta, or the player's union, the individual players should have the option to boycott the event, without penalty. i don't need the players to tell me their views on middle east politics if they don't want to, but i would want them to simply think about it on a personal level: if you care (and i think you should) and if these players are your friends (as some say they are) and if you put yourself in his or her place, and then think about what it is you might really be losing by taking a stand--or not taking one...take all other considerations about money and points and ranking out of the mix (and this is where some might need a ruling by the sport's "governing bodies" to help them clear their mind?) and make the personal political, then we might start to see progress toward a solution where they all have a safe place to play--here, there, everywhere, from now on.


eyes wide open

rafael nadal, at 5-4, triple match point, v. fernando verdasco. 2009 australian open semi-final.

i am a morning person.

morning light.
morning coffee.
morning paper.
morning kiss...
all that, very, very good.

i love a day when i can drag my blanket from bed to couch, and watch movies from morning til night.

and i love any morning when i can drink coffee and watch some tennis on tv. throw in a bagel, and it's a party.

there have been quite a few opportunities to watch some great "morning" matches in the last couple of weeks, but work's been encroaching on my fantasy life. the other night, my favorite player started his semi-final match at 3:30am ny time. and for a moment, i considered staying up. but on a "school night," it just wouldn't have been smart. so i set the dvr.

when i got up on friday at 7am, i expected the match would be over. but as most people know by now, the match--the longest in australian open history--was only half in the bag at that point. i was thrilled that i had the opportunity to watch it LIVE, and that was before i realized how thrilling the actual tennis would be. within minutes, i was riled up: OOF! NICE! JE-SUS! DAAAAMN! I even threw in a little tagalog--"PUNETA!" i'm not even sure what that means exactly. but you get the idea.

at a certain point, i just felt bad for both of them. they'd sit at the change overs buried under ice packs, looking more and more disheveled. and yet the quality of the tennis remained stunning. who would crack first? i almost couldn't bear to watch them push themselves and each other, physically and mentally--it was a relief for me to have to get ready for work. when nadal would seem to struggle, and play defensively, or verdasco would crush a winner, i'd start poking around in my closet, distracting myself with decisions like, skirt or jeans? black tights or grey? striped sweater or solid?

but by the middle of the 5th set, i was sitting on the edge of my couch, fully dressed, with my black north face jacket on. zipped. i was already late for work. but i couldn't decide if my heart could handle staying--or if i would kick myself for leaving.

i'm glad i stayed. not just because nadal won, but at triple match point, i saw a look on nadal's face that, to me, told the whole story. exhaustion, desperation, on the verge of tears (and in about 2 seconds, that look was gone). if i were a photographer, that would be the shot i'd want, that i'd use to tell the story. if nadal had won or lost, that look said everything about that 5 hour, 14 minute match. as a photographer, i'm sure it's no easy decision what to focus on, at any one moment. so much of it is luck. and i imagine, you must always feel like you're missing something. and for an editor, the money shot usually reflects the outcome, whether it's expressed in a physical gesture, or a more emotional portrait.

but this is the kind of stuff i get to dream about from my couch. so i dreamed i took "that" shot. and i couldn't shake that image all day long.

my favorite writer offered his impressions of the semifinal match, with particular appreciation for how expressive nadal is (at 4-3 in the fifth, he observed "a trance-like bug-eyed look filled with exhaustion and maximum adrenaline at once" that he'd never seen before from nadal) and he included a fantastic, close-up shot of nadal's face (i love that his hair is all mussed under his bandana).
i don't remember seeing that expression before either, or even on that morning. what can i say, nadal makes you not want to close your eyes.
if your heart can stand it.

nice gallery of the semi-final via the la times here.