The French Open 2021

RG starts tomorrow (Sun May 30) and such is the long list of women's champs that two GS winners - Azarenka and Kuznetsova - will meet on the first day.

Thiem, Zverev, Tsitsipas and Osaka are all in action on the opening day. We won't be hearing about the Osaka match, at least not from her as she's shunning the Press. It's a decision that has NOT had the backing of the other players.

To me, Rafa is favourite as he is every year at RG. He managed to win last year having hardly played on clay. The draw means there cannot be a repeat of a Djoko-Rafa final. Federer returns to GS action but he's not expecting, or expected, to get far.

So who will Rafa meet in the final assuming he can get past Djoko? Normally you'd fancy Thiem but he's been a bit out of sorts of late. Of course, this could work in his favour as he'll be fresher than some of the others.

As for the women, who will be minus Halep, it's anyone's guess. You could probably make a case out for any of around a dozen of them having a good chance and then even then the title could go to someone outside that list.

They're away at RG with Naomi I'mnottalkingtothePress Osaka already an early break up.

Osaka fined $15,000 for media boycott. She facing ban for all the majors if she carries on with her antics.

Pablo Andujar beats Dominic Thiem 4-6 5-7 6-3 6-4 6-4. A bitter blow to the Austrian and his free fall continues

Saw quite a lot of the Thiem match. The Austrian came into the tournament somewhat overcooked but let's not take anything away from Andujar who played a great match.

From their statement about Osaka, the GS organisers have clearly put their foot down. They've also made it clear that they did try to reach out to the player before the tournament but no response was forthcoming.

If Osaka thinks she's bigger than the sport then she's wrong.

Dan Evans got off to a great start in his match before it all went wrong and he lost in four. Dimi, alas, for him, had to retire in the fourth having won the first two sets.

Jeff Navarro wrote:Osaka fined $15,000 for media boycott. She facing ban for all the majors if she carries on with her antics.

It's nothing more than attention seeking, they should just default her now.

Thiem's loss was a surprise. Evans will be distraught to lose so tamely after the way he won the first set.

I have a good deal of sympathy for Osaka. No-one knows what mental health issues other people are going through. I very much doubt she thinks she is bigger than the sport, nor do I think they are 'antics' - I think that is very harsh and judgemental.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:Osaka fined $15,000 for media boycott. She facing ban for all the majors if she carries on with her antics.

It's nothing more than attention seeking, they should just default her now.

It's more likely the opposite - she is not at all comfortable with the attention she gets.

She's in the wrong profession then.

Facing the Press after being bitterly disappointed at a loss is nobody's idea of fun.

But let's face it. Osaka is world famous, fabulously rich and doing a job she loves. If the worst that ever happens to her is having to explain, for a few minutes, a defeat in a tennis match then she's got off lightly.

Back to the tennis and Zverev is.....two sets DOWN to a qualifier.

Why do people who are well off, have a wife and kids they love and who love them, and have pretty much everything a normal person could ask for, kill themselves? I mean, what is the worst thing that happens to them, a bad day at the office?

Soul Requiem wrote:She's in the wrong profession then.

Certainly players in the past have left a sporting profession (or acting, singing etc.) because, even though they love the game, they can't deal with, or be bothered with, all the BS that comes with it. Fans and the media, at their worst, treat players as commodities, not as human beings, which is a reflection on the fans and media, not on the players.

JuliusHM - It's not the Press treating Osaka as a commodity. She IS a commodity. Her list of endorsements is endless - and extremely lucrative.

It seems famous and rich people want everything on their own terms and nothing can be allowed to cloud their bright-sunshine world.

Of course, the ATP and the WTA are guilty of this themselves. Everything must be spotless in the sparkling world of international tennis.

So you can see why the authorities don't want Osaka rocking the boat. Still think her stance is wrong, though.

To be honest, sfp, from what you've said, I think you have a poor understanding of mental health, and if Osaka's stance brings about at least some more understanding in some people, then she will deserve credit for it.

Haven't followed all the ins and outs of the Osaka situation but defaulting her out of the tournament seems a bit OTT.

Have only just caught up with the Osaka story. She's saying that she dislikes press conferences because she is subject to the scrutiny of 'people that doubt me', and that a person doing a press conference after they've lost is 'kicking a person when they're down'.

Whilst I can somewhat agree with the second of those points, though it's hardly the worst thing in the world to endure, I think the first point is nonsense and dealing with the scrutiny of 'people that doubt me' is part and parcel of being an elite-level athlete. If she is genuinely struggling with this scrutiny then she probably needs to rethink her career.

Osaka also appears to have gone about this very poorly. It appears she didn't communicate with any of the tennis organisations to see if a compromise could be struck - she went straight to the nuclear option which has led to this situation.

The rules appear to be perfectly clear that Osaka should be fined (as she has been) and if she continues in this manner then she can expect expulsion and suspension. It's good to see the organisers sticking to the rules, so far, and not bending them for the benefit of one of the world's best.

Oh and Thiem lost in the 1st round? Should be a cakewalk for Nadal then.

Duty281 wrote:Have only just caught up with the Osaka story. She's saying that she dislikes press conferences because she is subject to the scrutiny of 'people that doubt me', and that a person doing a press conference after they've lost is 'kicking a person when they're down'.

Whilst I can somewhat agree with the second of those points, though it's hardly the worst thing in the world to endure, I think the first point is nonsense and dealing with the scrutiny of 'people that doubt me' is part and parcel of being an elite-level athlete. If she is genuinely struggling with this scrutiny then she probably needs to rethink her career.

Osaka also appears to have gone about this very poorly. It appears she didn't communicate with any of the tennis organisations to see if a compromise could be struck - she went straight to the nuclear option which has led to this situation.

The rules appear to be perfectly clear that Osaka should be fined (as she has been) and if she continues in this manner then she can expect expulsion and suspension. It's good to see the organisers sticking to the rules, so far, and not bending them for the benefit of one of the world's best.

Why do people always assume what other people can and can't endure, or what they should or shouldn't be able to endure? Who knows, perhaps she will quit tennis - is that good for the sport? I.e. that ruling bodies are so inflexible in the off-court demands of players, that they are willing to neglect the mental health of players to the extent of driving them from the game?

As for the rules - they are constantly bent for the benefit of the best i.e. box office, players. Easy example - did anyone ever dare default Rafa for constantly breaking the 20 second serve rule?

As an aside - the statement from the Grand Slams states "As a sport there is nothing more important than ensuring no player has an unfair advantage over another" - do they intend to provide all players with personal nutritionists, physiotherapists etc. to travel with them, that currently only the richest can afford?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Have only just caught up with the Osaka story. She's saying that she dislikes press conferences because she is subject to the scrutiny of 'people that doubt me', and that a person doing a press conference after they've lost is 'kicking a person when they're down'.

Whilst I can somewhat agree with the second of those points, though it's hardly the worst thing in the world to endure, I think the first point is nonsense and dealing with the scrutiny of 'people that doubt me' is part and parcel of being an elite-level athlete. If she is genuinely struggling with this scrutiny then she probably needs to rethink her career.

Osaka also appears to have gone about this very poorly. It appears she didn't communicate with any of the tennis organisations to see if a compromise could be struck - she went straight to the nuclear option which has led to this situation.

The rules appear to be perfectly clear that Osaka should be fined (as she has been) and if she continues in this manner then she can expect expulsion and suspension. It's good to see the organisers sticking to the rules, so far, and not bending them for the benefit of one of the world's best.

Why do people always assume what other people can and can't endure, or what they should or shouldn't be able to endure? Who knows, perhaps she will quit tennis - is that good for the sport? I.e. that ruling bodies are so inflexible in the off-court demands of players, that they are willing to neglect the mental health of players to the extent of driving them from the game?

As for the rules - they are constantly bent for the benefit of the best i.e. box office, players. Easy example - did anyone ever dare default Rafa for constantly breaking the 20 second serve rule?

As an aside - the statement from the Grand Slams states "As a sport there is nothing more important than ensuring no player has an unfair advantage over another" - do they intend to provide all players with personal nutritionists, physiotherapists etc. to travel with them, that currently only the richest can afford?

Two-fold mainly on the first paragraph:

I think actually losing a match is worse than having to talk about losing said match - if someone's struggling with the latter, it's unlikely they will deal well with the former.

In terms of 'should or shouldn't be able to endure' - a career in elite-level sport, a popular one, carries with it a high level of scrutiny from a global audience. If a person is struggling with that scrutiny, then such a career isn't for them, not without some level of therapeutic assistance.

I'm also not sure that the ruling bodies are neglecting the mental health of their players.

On your second paragraph, I agree, and that's what I was getting at. Ruling bodies, not just in tennis, continually make allowances for the higher-ranked players that they wouldn't for the lower-ranked ones, so it's good in this instance that they are sticking to the agreed rules.

Part of the criteria for competing in and getting paid to compete in tournaments is to carry out press conferences, it is therefore a requirement of the job. There are parts of my job I'd rather not do but in order to get paid I must, Osaka is no different.

Or she can just take the fine. Surely that's her choice?

I really don't think people on here understand mental health - it's not about things you'd rather not do, it's about things you simply cannot bring yourself to do - things that other people do easily. A few years ago I couldn't play tennis for 6 months, and after that had to ease back into it very gently - because I was being treated for anxiety and depression at the time. I literally could not go on court for a gentle social tennis match with friends - I'd have a panic attack.

I agree that Osaka should get counselling - but for all we know she already has/does.

Duty, have you ever lost a big match and then been publicly grilled about it? If not, how would you know which was worse? Even if you have how do you know which is worse for Osaka?
If, every time you had a bad day at work, you had to answer questions about it on the local news, would you find that stressful?

Also, where in the rulebook does it say that repeatedly not carrying out press conferences leads to disqualification - is that actually in the agreed rules, or are the GS's merely reacting to what is happening now?

No people understand mental health perfectly well and know it's not an excuse to just throw about when you don't want to do something. She's not special because she's a tennis player nor should allowances be made that others are not afforded.

The standard you don't understand mental health rubbish, classic.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Or she can just take the fine. Surely that's her choice?

I really don't think people on here understand mental health - it's not about things you'd rather not do, it's about things you simply cannot bring yourself to do - things that other people do easily. A few years ago I couldn't play tennis for 6 months, and after that had to ease back into it very gently - because I was being treated for anxiety and depression at the time. I literally could not go on court for a gentle social tennis match with friends - I'd have a panic attack.

I agree that Osaka should get counselling - but for all we know she already has/does.

Duty, have you ever lost a big match and then been publicly grilled about it? If not, how would you know which was worse? Even if you have how do you know which is worse for Osaka?
If, every time you had a bad day at work, you had to answer questions about it on the local news, would you find that stressful?

Also, where in the rulebook does it say that repeatedly not carrying out press conferences leads to disqualification - is that actually in the agreed rules, or are the GS's merely reacting to what is happening now?

Not sure if that particular comment was aimed at me or not, but I do understand mental health perfectly well, as I've suffered depression in my life, and I used to have social anxiety when I was 11/12. I've also had numerous friends, mainly from the LGBT community, who have struggled with their own mental health demons.

No I've never lost a big match and then being publicly grilled about it, hence why I said 'I think' as opposed to 'I know'. I'm making an assumption that actually losing a match (the bit where dreams live and die; the bit where the actual pressure exists; and where titles are decided) is worse than talking about it. I also think 'publicly grilled' is stretching it a little. They're not being interrogated by the FBI, they're being asked the same cliched questions over and over and responding with the same cliched answers over and over.

I might find the scenario you propose stressful but, again, the career of an elite-level sportsperson is supposed to be stressful. To perform at your best against other elite-level athletes with millions watching, knowing the tiniest error could cost you immensely, is stressful. Such a career isn't supposed to be a picnic and a leisurely stroll.

And I believe the code of conduct (which all players sign up for) says repeat violations can lead to a default from the tournament which could lead to greater fines and suspensions from future Grand Slam tournaments.

Soul Requiem wrote:No people understand mental health perfectly well and know it's not an excuse to just throw about when you don't want to do something. She's not special because she's a tennis player nor should allowances be made that others are not afforded.

The standard you don't understand mental health rubbish, classic.

It's a shame for society that such ignorance still exists in this day and age.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:Or she can just take the fine. Surely that's her choice?

I really don't think people on here understand mental health - it's not about things you'd rather not do, it's about things you simply cannot bring yourself to do - things that other people do easily. A few years ago I couldn't play tennis for 6 months, and after that had to ease back into it very gently - because I was being treated for anxiety and depression at the time. I literally could not go on court for a gentle social tennis match with friends - I'd have a panic attack.

I agree that Osaka should get counselling - but for all we know she already has/does.

Duty, have you ever lost a big match and then been publicly grilled about it? If not, how would you know which was worse? Even if you have how do you know which is worse for Osaka?
If, every time you had a bad day at work, you had to answer questions about it on the local news, would you find that stressful?

Also, where in the rulebook does it say that repeatedly not carrying out press conferences leads to disqualification - is that actually in the agreed rules, or are the GS's merely reacting to what is happening now?

Not sure if that particular comment was aimed at me or not, but I do understand mental health perfectly well, as I've suffered depression in my life, and I used to have social anxiety when I was 11/12. I've also had numerous friends, mainly from the LGBT community, who have struggled with their own mental health demons.

No I've never lost a big match and then being publicly grilled about it, hence why I said 'I think' as opposed to 'I know'. I'm making an assumption that actually losing a match (the bit where dreams live and die; the bit where the actual pressure exists; and where titles are decided) is worse than talking about it. I also think 'publicly grilled' is stretching it a little. They're not being interrogated by the FBI, they're being asked the same cliched questions over and over and responding with the same cliched answers over and over.

I might find the scenario you propose stressful but, again, the career of an elite-level sportsperson is supposed to be stressful. To perform at your best against other elite-level athletes with millions watching, knowing the tiniest error could cost you immensely, is stressful. Such a career isn't supposed to be a picnic and a leisurely stroll.

And I believe the code of conduct (which all players sign up for) says repeat violations can lead to a default from the tournament which could lead to greater fines and suspensions from future Grand Slam tournaments.

If those are the rules and she does get defaulted, then I have no issue with that. But perhaps she would rather be defaulted than endure something that, to her, causes massive distress. Certainly it seems, to her, to be a lot worse than actually playing, or losing, and who are we to judge that as being 'wrong'?
As I said previously, many people, and I'm not necessarily addressing this to you, are ignorant and judgemental about mental health, and if Osaka taking a stand improves that situation, then I applaud her for it.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:Or she can just take the fine. Surely that's her choice?

I really don't think people on here understand mental health - it's not about things you'd rather not do, it's about things you simply cannot bring yourself to do - things that other people do easily. A few years ago I couldn't play tennis for 6 months, and after that had to ease back into it very gently - because I was being treated for anxiety and depression at the time. I literally could not go on court for a gentle social tennis match with friends - I'd have a panic attack.

I agree that Osaka should get counselling - but for all we know she already has/does.

Duty, have you ever lost a big match and then been publicly grilled about it? If not, how would you know which was worse? Even if you have how do you know which is worse for Osaka?
If, every time you had a bad day at work, you had to answer questions about it on the local news, would you find that stressful?

Also, where in the rulebook does it say that repeatedly not carrying out press conferences leads to disqualification - is that actually in the agreed rules, or are the GS's merely reacting to what is happening now?

Not sure if that particular comment was aimed at me or not, but I do understand mental health perfectly well, as I've suffered depression in my life, and I used to have social anxiety when I was 11/12. I've also had numerous friends, mainly from the LGBT community, who have struggled with their own mental health demons.

No I've never lost a big match and then being publicly grilled about it, hence why I said 'I think' as opposed to 'I know'. I'm making an assumption that actually losing a match (the bit where dreams live and die; the bit where the actual pressure exists; and where titles are decided) is worse than talking about it. I also think 'publicly grilled' is stretching it a little. They're not being interrogated by the FBI, they're being asked the same cliched questions over and over and responding with the same cliched answers over and over.

I might find the scenario you propose stressful but, again, the career of an elite-level sportsperson is supposed to be stressful. To perform at your best against other elite-level athletes with millions watching, knowing the tiniest error could cost you immensely, is stressful. Such a career isn't supposed to be a picnic and a leisurely stroll.

And I believe the code of conduct (which all players sign up for) says repeat violations can lead to a default from the tournament which could lead to greater fines and suspensions from future Grand Slam tournaments.

If those are the rules and she does get defaulted, then I have no issue with that. But perhaps she would rather be defaulted than endure something that, to her, causes massive distress. Certainly it seems, to her, to be a lot worse than actually playing, or losing, and who are we to judge that as being 'wrong'?
As I said previously, many people, and I'm not necessarily addressing this to you, are ignorant and judgemental about mental health, and if Osaka taking a stand improves that situation, then I applaud her for it.

Perhaps she would, but I believe she was operating under the impression (at least initially, judging by her statement) that her actions would only be met by a fine, not by being defaulted. Regardless, if she would rather end or suspend her tennis career than put up with the scrutiny of elite-level sport, that's entirely her choice to make, and goes back to what I said originally.

I doubt that her 'stand' will result in an improvement around mental health. Her actions so far have been petulant and childish, regardless of what her grievances are. She has refused to communicate with the tennis authorities, when given ample opportunity to do so, and it's noticeable the lack of support she has received from fellow players.

Let's hope that Osaka doesn't back herself into a corner where she's left feeling too embarrassed to back down. She's not going to win this argument.

The BBC have in the recent past presented Osaka as a martyr for the Black Lives Matter movement and support her activism in calling out racism and injustice within society.

The BBC report Osaka making the statement "anger is a lack of understanding. change makes people uncomfortable." In the BBC article the BBC take a neutral stance probably because Osaka is attacking the media which I suppose includes them.

JuliusHM - I'm very sorry to hear about your mental health problems and my criticism of Osaka was not aimed at belittling the overall subject of mental health.

Surely, though, Naomi should have found a better way of campaigning for better understanding of mental health than refusing to attend press conferences. Of course, you could argue that her stance has brought the whole mental health subject centre stage.

Clearly, though, the authorities do not want a high-profile player to use the sport to promote a non-tennis agenda.

Back to the tennis defending champion Iga Swiatek beat Kaja Juvan 6-0 7-5. Impressive start for the young Pole.

Heather Watson lost in straight sets after being 4-2 up in each set. Sadly, this was a typical Watson performance of late.

Swiatek, playing against a close friend, was made to really work in that second set and was probably mighty relieved the match didn't go to a third set.

Cameron Norrie is a set up in his match, while Medvedev is 6-3, 4-0 up against Bublik.

I would have thought the mental tension within a tennis match was more critical than the mental tension associated with the after match media interview.  I seem to recall both Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic being called out for gamemanship during a match.  We could also consider the mental tension brought on by a partisan crowd - should players be allowed to demand a crowd to leave because of the mental pressure they create for the player?

However, that Osaka is refusing to speak to the press despite her demolishing opponents suggests something a bit more than the personal.  That said the media deserve a lot more scrutiny than they have been getting.

Great match between Sinner and Herbert, perfectly illustrating the ebb-and-flow of five-set tennis. Sinner had to save a match point en route to victory.

Cameron Norrie has just won in straight sets. He's really having a good season.

GS champion Andreescu is in a great struggle and is into a final set.
Medvedev now serving for the match, with Federer next on that court.

Federer looked pretty good there, plenty of variety as you'd expect and no sign of knee trouble. Having said that Istomin was poor and we'll learn more about Fed when he's put under more pressure

theslosty wrote:Federer looked pretty good there, plenty of variety as you'd expect and no sign of knee trouble. Having said that Istomin was poor and we'll learn more about Fed when he's put under more pressure

Agree. Istomin just does not have a big enough game to worry Federer. This was an ideal opening match for Rog who looked in good order and served well. Sterner tests to come, no doubt.

Pretty much everywhere you look in the women's draw there is a GS winner. Today Ostapenko and Andreescu went out, with Osta losing to yet another GS titlist, Kenin.

Bit surprised to see Korda go out in straight sets. He's been doing well. Another who's had a good season so far, Ruud, is thru despite losing the first set.

Is it me or are the courts a bit quicker this year? Seem to be a lot of winners and aces. Of course, last year the tournament was played in the autumn and it was cold enough for Azarenka to walk off because of the chill. (Tip for Victoria: Wear more layers).

Naomi Osaka withdraws.

Duty281 wrote:Great match between Sinner and Herbert, perfectly illustrating the ebb-and-flow of five-set tennis. Sinner had to save a match point en route to victory.

Very good for Sinner against a player who’s a bit of an enigma in Herbert.

I'm glad Osaka's apologised, and I hope she gets the right help for her issues with depression and social anxiety.

I'm glad she's putting her mental health ahead of tennis, which is just a sport. And at the same time, having realised how the story was overshadowing the tournament - something she had not anticipated - she has graciously let the tournament proceed without that distraction.

I wonder if the WTA knew of her depression? Maybe she hid it from them, or maybe they knew, but cared more about the money than any individual's mental health, to do anything about it.

Lorenzo Musetti beats David Goffin 6-0 7-5 7-6 in a quite brilliant win for the 19 year old. Along with Sinner, Musetti is gonna be a mainstay of Italian tennis for many years.

So what now for Osaka and Wimbledon? She seems to be in quite a dark place and I guess her participation at SW19 must be in doubt.

Jeff N - You're absolutely right about Italian tennis. They've got a lot of good young players.

Can't say I'm particularly enamoured with the idea of having a night match at the French. I see Djoko is the one with the late show tomorrow.

The lack of crowd makes the night matches pretty dull imo. And the courts seem a lot more slippery as well at night.

We can get on with the actual tennis now.

Soul Requiem wrote:We can get on with the actual tennis now.

They've already been getting on with it for the last 2 days - did you miss it somehow?

Interestingly, the GS statement admits that having to do press conferences take away from the players' performances (hence the argument that not doing them gives someone an unfair advantage on the court). The logical extension of that is that press conferences deprive fans of the best possible tennis by making players play at a lower level.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2021/may/31/were-not-the-good-guys-osaka-shows-up-problems-of-press-conferences

Usual muck-stirring garbage from Jonathan Liew, I see. Always amazed a 'journalist' of his low calibre isn't scraping away at some fourth-rate tabloid.

If Liew had actually followed Osaka's story, he would see she has left the tournament due to her issues with social anxiety and depression, not due to tennis journalism, so his final two sentences in that diatribe are redundant. Osaka herself has said 'the tennis press has always been kind to me'.

I have no idea who Jonathan Liew is - other than writing that article. I do agree with his notion of many journalists being holier-than-thou judgmentalists, when a lot of them are guilty of a multitude of sins. I also agree that the tennis press conference is, at best, a fairly pointless exercise in this day and age.