McNally and Kung: confirmation and surprise
I didn’t have a chance to see a single shot during these two weeks, because of work peaks typical of my job during July and because I do not have Sky and a couple of Wimbledon’s matches (which I would anyway struggle to follow due to work constraints) are not a good enough reason to subscribe to it. All this to say I am so sorry that I have completely disappeared, but that’s how it is: this is the downside of helping to manage a non-professional blog.
Focusing now on the main topics of this article, one of the reasons of the long heading is due to the fact that I am not surprised at all by most of the results in Roehampton and Wimbledon and even less by winners of the two tournaments. But let’s go in order. Roehampton was won by Cori Gauff, who claimed her second title in a row after having won few weeks earlier the French Open. It’s not surprising that Gauff excels both on clay and grass, in light of her powerful tennis; what instead surprised me more was the description of her game by a very good journalist who writes on the most famous tennis magazine in Italy, which is Ubitennis. This guy (actually referring to the match Gauff played in Wimbledon against Carle) referred that Gauff charged the net more than 60 times and that she played a lot of sliced backhands: the above does not match at all with the description I gave of Gauff’s style in the occasions I saw her playing: it thus seems that the girl is able to materially change her style, adapting it to the surface on which she plays. A further positive feature to add to all those she already owns.
In my last article I was wondering if Katy McNally would have been able to confirm her Paris exploits in the near future: well indeed, she managed to. In Roehampton she grabbed the final, having beaten in the process heavy weights as Wang and Osuigwe and having as such demonstrated that she has became one of the strongest juniors currently competing on the junior tour. The final against Gauff seemed not to have been a match as tight as the Paris’ one was, as the younger American allowed only a few games to McNally this time; anyhow, I guess that Katy is very happy of this further result and I’m very happy too for her, as in Paris I learned to love her style. Most of the other strong players performed well in Roehampton, starting from the second seed and semi-finalist Liang, who was eventually dismissed by Gauff, having given anyway a good fight before surrending; also the first seed Whitney Osuigwe, who played in Roehampton her first junior event since 2017 reached a good semi-final, being stopped by her usual doubles’ partner McNally (paired with whom she won the doubles’ event and reached the semi-final in Wimbledon). Quarter finals were reached by Yuki Naito, who confirmed once more to be a player not easy to beat and consistent in her performances; Camila Osorio Serrano and Alexa Noel: the latter played a great match against Swiatek in Paris which made partially change my opinion on her and, shortly after, won a grade 1 in Belgium. The only two disappointing/unexpected results or upsets occurred during the tournament were the harsh loss of Cocciaretto against Gauff in the third round (not that Cocciaretto was supposed to win that match, but maybe she was expected to offer a bit more resilience than what the score of 6-4 6-0 shows) and the loss of Clara Tauson in the first round in three sets against Topalova.
BerghemIga
Turning the attention to the more important event, i.e. Wimbledon, for sure Swiatek’s win was not unexpected: by contrast, the Polish, as in every junior event she competed or she may compete in, was the hot favourite for the final win. Iga dropped only 1 set during the tournament and it happened in the first round against Osuigwe. The latter was a further unlucky victim of the ITF rules that I have already criticised: notwithstanding being the first seed, Whitney met immediately the strongest player in the board: the same destiny as Noel suffered of just a few weeks ago in Paris. Thus, Whitney’s tournament cannot really be judged. The only other difficult match that Swiatek had to face was the semi-final against Xin Yu Wang: I was expecting the Chinese to be a tough opponent for Swiatek, as Wang serves very well and hits extremely flat, two features that can cause a lot of troubles on grass courts. The final result was 7-5 7-6 in favour of the Polish. In all other matches Swiatek didn’t experience any real troubles (with the exception of the second set in the match against Waltert, in which she was forced to the tiebreak).
The true surprise of this Wimbledon edition was, instead, Leonie Kung: Leonie has a quite noticeable ranking in the pro tour, being close to 400th spot; though in the first part of the season she didn’t achieve any outstanding results on the junior tour, if not a final in Milan’s doubles event, paired with McNally. This final may be a turning point for her, as she has beaten many very good players, starting from Curmi in the first round of qualifications, and once qualified, Osorio Serrano, juki Naito and Xi Yu Wang. The question I have posed myself with respect to McNally applies now to Kung: will Leonie be able in the near future to confirm this outstanding result, whether on the junior or the pro tour?
Other quarter finalists in Wimbledon were Katy McNally, who was beaten in three set by the above-mentioned Kung, demonstrating once more consistency; Cori Gauff, who from time to time loses a match (this time happened after something like 14 or 15 wins in a raw, all in majors or in a really competitive tournament as Roehampton, which in real terms worths as a major): Cori was defeated by Xiyu Wang. Emma Raducanu was a further surprise of this event: she has won matches in which she was clearly the underdog, such as those against Fernandez and Garland. The last quarter finalist was the Ukrainian Dema, who is no longer a surprise as the girl during this year has achieved many good results, as a quarter final in the Italian Open and a final in the Astrid Bowl, which was a fairly strong Grade 1.
Disappointing performances have been offered by Molinaro, who lost 6-0 6-0 against Garland in the second round – but I think a role in this double bagel might have been played by the fact that possibly the Luxemburgish is not used to grass – or maybe Elè just had a terrible day or didn’t feel well; it happens -. More disappointing is a further bad tournament of Clara Tauson, who lost in the second round against Lea Ma, a player I do not find extremely dangerous. After the Italian Open, the Danish girl has passed a bad period of form; though, more than the results, what really counts at Junior level is the talent of a player: and I am sure Clara owns a awful lot of that.
Finally, I want to mention Maria Lourdes Carle: she has been through a tough period during this year as her results were not satisfactory both at junior and at pro level. This Wimbledon was a positive tournament for Maria, who lost in the third round by Gauff, being able to steal a set from the (very) strong American.
A few lines on my friend BerghemIga: I assume this has been her last tournament on the Junior Tour. Up to a week ago, Iga’s junior career didn’t award her with all the satisfactions one would expect in light of her immense talent, as she only won a Grade 1 in Australia (beside the junior Fed cup): sometimes this (relative) lack of results was also due to her fault, and especially to limits in managing stress or to a general lack of consistency throughout her matches, as it was shown, for instance, in the final she lost in the Grade A in Milan. After a Rolang Garros during which she played really well, being beaten by a super McNally (and honestly, in my view, in that match Iga didn’t show any mental fragility, all the credits must go to Katy for her win) and in which she won the doubles event, Iga eventually reached the result she deserves, as she must be considered one of the best juniors borne during the period from 2000 to 2003 together – in my view -with Kostuk, Anisimova ad maybe Andreescu).
So, this I guess is a goodbye to Iga; this article should thus fall within the “goodbye” category: and indeed no goodbye could be sweeter.
