A Matter of Due Diligence
She'll be 31 years old soon, and it's not like she's been on fire on the tour in the past few months. She's emotional, "instinctive" (her word), and something of a connoisseur—a tennis aesthete—in a milieu dominated increasingly by the rational and tight-lipped, by players who eschew creativity and impulsiveness in favor of the rote and regimented.
She plays the backhand with just one fist on the racket, and hits with communicable relish, while her rivals diligently, implacably drill with two-handers employed like tunnel-borers. She's the defending champion at Roland Garros, but even when she's been cited as a contender again, it's often been with something like reluctance. A sense of obligation. A matter of due diligence: How can you leave the defending champion out of your calculations and previews? **
Then there's defending champion Francesca Schiavone. . .If the 30-year old Italian who surprised everyone last year can withstand the pressure. . .yadda, yadda, yadda. Full disclosure: I'm as guilty on that count as any other ink-stained wretch.
But we've come to that point in the 2011 French Open when we have to ask ourselves: Can Schiavone really win this thing?
You bet.
Schiavone advanced to the fourth round today, bumping off China's Peng Shuai, 6-3, 1-2 (retired), and gave her opponent a big hug of commiseration. The biggest obstacle in her way to the semifinals appears to be a very soft No. 3 seed, Vera Zvonareva. She's never really loved the clay, and hasn't been to the quarterfinals in Paris since 2003. On current form, I'd pick Schiavone of that match were played today.
It isn't just that Schiavone has won, it's how she's won. She crushed Melanie Oudin in her opener, 6-2, 6-0, then allowed Vesna Dolonts just one additional game in round two. She was denied the chance to post another straight-sets rub-out today, but it was only because Shuai had to quit. So far at Roland Garros, Schiavone has made slightly more errors than her opponents (50-43), which isn't unusual for a player who plays with considerable risk, but she's clubbed over twice as many winners (57-25).
And Schiavone is not only playing well, she's feeling well. And that's a tremendous boon, given that no less a personage than Pete Sampras has said that the only thing tougher than winning a Grand Slam title is defending it successfully.
It probably helps Schiavone that, given her status, she's flying under the radar. She was requested by the English-speaking press just once so far, and that was for her obligatory, how-does-it-feel-to-be-defending-champ interview after she beat Oudin—it's the kind of interview that's often a fishing expedition for drama and/or self-doubt. In that presser, Schiavone described her level of comfort with these words:
"I'm still shaking a little bit. My rush for everything. A lot of adrenaline. I felt really happy to be there. That court (the Philipp Chatrier stadium) is fantastic, because is compact. The court is perfect. Everything is going around you and is like. . . you know when you go home and your mom do everything for you and you feel comfortable? Yeah, I felt like this, but really with a lot of adrenaline."
Was she nervous, someone asked?
"Yes, but with good feeling," she replied. "So mix between nervous and really the chance to be good and to play tennis that I love."
This, and some of her other thoughts, ought to go into the WTA and ATP training manuals as an outstanding example of how to handle the pressure of a Grand Slam (or any other kind of) title defense. Schiavone has embraced this moment, rather than fleeing from it. That same Pete Sampras I paraphrased above was also famous—and much criticized—for admitting, after Jim Courier took his 1990 U.S. Open title away, that he felt like an enormous burden had been lifted off his shoulders. But then Sampras was barely 20 years old at the time, and it's in that regard that Schiavone's age, along with her high degree of general awareness, are advantages rather than liabilities.
"I think I am more cautioned (did she mean "conscious"?) over who I am and what I want," she told reporters in Paris. "I think a lot of experience can became true in everything that I am doing. Not just tennis, but life. Everything that I do, it's in one way, and now I know. . . Before it was a little bit yeah, but no, but yes. A lot of that. Now much better."
I take all that to mean that that Schiavone believes she knows who she is and what she wants, I have to believe she also understands that not getting it isn't the end of the world. So she can relax, play her game, see where the day takes her and, above all, enjoy the process. Since Andre Agassi retired, nobody seems to have enjoyed the process to the same degree as Schiavone. That's something else that I hope she can leave to those who will walk in her footsteps.
We don't know if Schiavone will win the tournament again, but we do know that she won't leave Paris in June of 2011 leaving a trail of whispered doubts or criticisms. Nobody is going to shrug and say, Well, that sure was a fluke that Schiavone won last year—did you see how badly she played today? Or, *Poor girl, she just couldn't handle the pressure.
*
The biggest challenge for Schiavone, a week ago, was handling her situation. That she's already done.
So what chance does she have to repeat as champ?
Historically, the answer is, not much. I would never label Schiavone a "One-Slam Wonder." That term describes the true flukes, who are few and far between. Schiavone has been too reliable to be lumped together with the Eva Majolis and Gaston Gaudios of this world. But even among good players who managed to win one major relatively late in their careers (Andres Gomez comes to mind), the incidence of a successful defense is almost non-existent. Juan Carlos Ferrero, Andy Roddick, Goran Ivanisevic, Thomas Muster, Yannick Noah, Richard Krajicek, Pat Cash and Carlos Moya all have one thing in common: They each won one major, and failed to defend it. In fact, the only players I can think of who successfully defended the only Grand Slam titles they won were Sergi Burguera (he won at Roland Garros in 1993 and '94) and Pat Rafter (U.S. Open in 1997 and '98). I'm not sure that any woman ever won a brace of Grand Slam titles in consecutive years—and no other majors.
Rafter was a relatively old 24 for a first-time Grand Slam champ when he won his first U.S. Open title, and that's considerably different from 30. But then Schiavone doesn't have the WTA equivalents of Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi bocking her path. This is a particularly good year for someone with Schiavone's maturity and sophistication, given the extent to which her main rivals are either inexperienced at the ultimate level or of questionable competitive character. Schiavone's age might turn out to be a weapon rather than a liability.
The other day Schiavone was asked to comment on the way she's reversed the chronology of the typical "flash in the pan" tale. Did she wish she knew then what she knows now, or regret that she hit her stride so late in her career? After all, she's made the fourth round in six of her last seven majors, after barely equaling that number in the entire first decade of her career. Is all this coming too late?
"No," she replied. "I'm a little bit late, but late, I mean late for you, not for me."
I don't know what further impediments Schiavone will face in her attempt to mount a successful defense in Paris, but I'm pretty sure age isn't one of them.