From: clin@eng.umd.edu (Charles Lin)
Subject: US Open - early Sunday results (spoilers)
Reply-To: clin@eng.umd.edu (Charles C. Lin)
Organization: College of Engineering, Maryversity of Uniland, College Park
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:04:27 GMT

    Correction: Courier plays McEnroe in the fourth round.

   Let me start with the Saturday night match between Pete
Sampras and Todd Martin.   I first saw Tood Martin about
two weeks ago and he gave Courier a tough time of it.
Courier won in a tight two sets in the semifinals.  At
first, I thought Martin was some sort of college player.
In the US, there are two ways to get to the pros.  Either
you turn pro before college, or you go to college (or
university -- I am using them interchangeably) and play
there for anywhere between 1 to 4 years (depending on
whether you want the degree at the end or not).  Traditionally,
those who have opted for the college route have not been
so successful, at least in recent years.  It's true McEnroe
and Connors went, but only for a year or so before turning
pro.  Nowadays, players like Agassi, Chang, and Sampras
all play well before college age, and with the money available
on the circuit as well as playing better players, skipping
college has seemed the preferred option.  However, some
have done OK going through college, most noticeably Michael
(Mikael?) Pernfors, though he hasn't played at the same
level since the first year or two out.

   Anyway, there seems to be a whole spate of US college players
that may be ready to break out.  Names such as Alex O'Brien,
Jonathan Stark, and Jared Palmer (all of the powerhouse Stanford
tennis team), as well as Shaun Stafford, and Lisa Raymond
were names to look at during this first week at the Open.
Out of that group, Todd Martin has looked pretty good.  Last
night, he and Pete Sampras went five sets, and Martin
had chances to win in the fifth.  Ultimately, good play at
key points by Sampras let him prevail.

   Martin (and I only noticed this after the match when he stood
nearly a head taller than Sampras) is TALL.  Standing 6 foot 6,
you would think he would be a natural serve and volleyer, but
he is more or less a baseliner, much in the mold of Alex O'Brien.
Steady of the ground, can potentially hit good forehands, and
has a decent volley.  Martin and O'Brien seems a little different
in personality.  Whereas I thought O'Brien was more of a fighting
type, I got the impression that Martin was a little more nervous
playing Sampras, and didn't have the attitude of "I can beat
anybody" which was closer to Pernfors attitude when he was asked
if he could beat Lendl.

   The match started off close with Sampras winning the first
set in a tie breaker.  I saw the match from the second set
on.  Martin took the second set 6-2, and was up 5-0, with
2 breaks of serve from Sampras.  Part of Sampras's problem
was that he was not attacking Martin as much, and often
to Martin's backhand, which is his better shot.  They
often traded rallies, but Sampras did not try to go for
any big shots in them, and Martin kept moving Sampras around,
either waiting for a mistake, or coming into net to volley.
Also, Martin's serve was pretty good and that seemed to
hurt Sampras.

    At 5-0, Martin seemed to get nervous and started missing
shots, where Sampras played good points to earn back the
two breaks, and get back to 5-4.  At that point, Sampras
was serving to tie, and Martin should have been quite unhappy
at blowing such a lead, but Martin broke and took the set
6-4.   Sampras then started playing a little better, and
took the fourth set (7-5?).  Again, Martin looked like
he might lose it in five.  However, he went up 2-0 on
a break of Sampras's serve, and an upset looked possible.

   Sampras, who might have folded before, came back with
a break, and then took a break of his own.  Martin was
unable to get the break back in two more attempts, but
was able to keep concentration enough to hold his own.
At 5-4, Sampras served for the set, and went up 40-15,
double match point.   I think Sampras made a mistake
and it was 40-30.  On the second match point,  Martin
approached the net, and put away a tough volley to
tie at deuce.  Sampras served at deuce on what he thought
was a good first serve down the middle, but was called
out.  Sampras complained (and I believe this was the
point that the "net-cam" -- the camera placed at the
net -- showed the serve to be good) but the fault stood.
Sampras put in a second serve, eventually came to net,
where Martin hit a fairly decent passing shot low, and
Sampras half-volleyed a drop shot, which Martin couldn't
run down.  Match point again to Sampras.  Sampras served
(and faulted the first one, I think) and Martin ran 
around the forehand, to hit a two-handed backhand, but
hit the ball wide.

   This had to be one of the better night matches, with
Sampras on the verge of defeat, and playing good tennis
at the end to get himself out of his predicament, but
I have to think that people came away appreciating the
kind of tennis Martin played.  Rather than playing the
kind of slashing tennis we see a lot of, Martin rallies
a bit more, trying to keep the ball deep, and setting
himself up for either a good forehand or backhand,
then coming in to put away a volley.  What was more
surprising was his ability to lob.  Sampras is not
exactly a short guy (at over 6 feet, or roughly 2 m)
yet Martin was able to topspin several lobs on his backhand
side over Sampras head, and some of them Sampras swung at.
Rarely at the pro level, does one swing and completely miss
the ball on the overhead.  Martin played smart tennis.
If he wants to improve, I think he'll need to work
on his mental aspects, trying to clean up some of the
errors that crept into his game when he got ahead.
He needs to learn to close out a match.

   By the way, Martin did go the college route attending
Northwestern where he played number one on their team.
This was his third US Open.  He lost in the first round
to Fleurian in 1990 (I have a US Open book from last
year that had the draw from 1990), but seemed to have
made the third round last year.

  OK, onto today's matches.  Chang played Arnaud Boetsch
of France.  Boetsch seems to have very good groundstrokes.
He can hit with quite a lot of power.  What he can't do
is hit them consistently in, and Chang was again able
to run shots down, and keep himself in points.  Chang
won in straight sets to make it to the fourth round,
yet again.  He has been defeated at the fourth round
some four years in a row.  I'm not sure who he faces
next.  Boetsch might have given Chang a lot more trouble
had he made fewer mistakes.

   Upsets continue (and bad jokes, too).  Patricia Hy
of Canada defeats Helena Sukova.  She had just upset
Capriati.  This has to be surprising since Sukova had
won here previous rounds rather handily.  6-1, 7-6
to Hy.  (pronounced "Hee" by announcers, leading
to jokes on ESPN and CNN like "Capriati, she was defeated
by Hy (he)).  She next faces Monica Seles, and may pose
trouble to here.  Hy has a pretty decent forehand, and a
sliced backhand.  Have only seen a few points here and there.

   Wayne Ferreira wins (over Masur?).  Woodforde loses to
Krajicek in three sets.   Woodforde lost to Chang last year
in the first round.

   Lendl played today against Chuck Adams.  Adams is a fairly
aggressive groundstroker.  This match wasn't too pretty.  
Lendl made lots of errors, errors which you used to never
see from Lendl's racquet.  However, Adams also made plenty
errors of his own (blowing a 40-love lead by losing 5 straight
points).  Adams won the first set 6-2 on two breaks.  Lendl
then took the next three, something like 6-3, 6-4, 6-4.

   Afterwards, Lendl claimed the reason for his poor start
was due to the late night Connors match.  He had gone to
sleep at 3 am, and slept in, but even with the day off,
a fairly early match kept Lendl from starting out in good
form.  My feeling is that Lendl's play (except with Connors)
has been a bit on the sloppy side.  Still, he has managed to
pull out wins.  He will probably face Becker in the next round.

   Becker faced Carl Uwe Steeb (also of Germany), a lefty who
has had some good results in the past.  Becker won the first
6-1.  Steeb won the second 6-4.  I left at that point with
Becker up a break early in the third.  Becker seems to be playing
pretty well.  Perhaps not top form, but much cleaner than I
felt Lendl was playing.  We'll see what happens.  Who knows?
Steeb could pull an upset.  I don't think it's likely as Becker
seems to be hitting decently, but he has had troubles in each
of his previous rounds.

   Sampras, by the way, will face Forget, who beat Wheaton yesterday.
Forget has beaten Sampras before, but I'm a bit worried about
Forget's concentration.  He played a good match with Wheaton,
however.  It will be interesting to see if he can put it
together.  My money (what little I have) is on Sampras, however.

   Tonight promises to be interesting.  MaliVai Washington
faces Henri Leconte.   I think Leconte will determine who wins.
He has the flashy game that can beat top people, and yet
Washington is a very steady, solid player, the kind that
can give Leconte trouble.  Washington's game is very much like
Wilander.  Rally from the baseline, very little emotion, and
pass when necessary.   Washington has had pretty solid summer
results, and made it to the semis against Korda a few weeks
ago.   

    Also, anyone else who has comments, please post.  I hate
to think I am the only one watching the Open.  Also,
if someone could post the current draw in the men's side,
that would be nice.  Shun has already put up the current
women's draw.

    Oh yes, Sabatini wins an easy one over hard hitting
Appelmans (6-1, 6-3).

--
Charles Lin
clin@eng.umd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis