Lleyton Hewitt, the benchmark of Australian tennis for the last 14 years, moved into the second round at Wimbledon overnight in his 16th appearance.
The little Aussie battler, with a heart bigger than Phar Lap, wore down Poland’s Michal Przysiezny 6-2 6-7 6-1 6-4 in a tick over three hours.
Now 33, and in the twilight of his outstanding career, the 2002 Wimbledon champion was overpowered by the Pole, but his renowned tenacity did the trick.
Hewitt’s serve has long been his Achilles heel, and that was again the case last night.
Przysiezny served at 119mph compared to Hewitt’s 102, and the Pole had every shot in the book on both wings, ranging from powerhouse to soft hands.
Yet Hewitt won 148 points to 119, and made only 20 unforced errors to 65. Przysiezny cracked 54 winners to 37.
The other stat that could have been damaging was Hewitt’s inability to convert 11 of his 19 break points. Against better players than would be lethal.
Next up for Hewitt another Pole – 15th seed Jerzy Janowicz – who was a losing semi-finalist in 2013.
Hewitt was one of seven Australians who won their first rounds, the best start at Wimbledon for 15 years.
The other six – Marinko Matosevic, Bernard Tomic, Luke Saville, and Nick Kyrgios in the men’s, and Jarmila Gajosova, and Casey Dellacqua in the women’s.
Kyrgios’ serving was his winning weapon with 29 aces, third only in the first round to Ivo Karlovic’s 32, and Milos Raonic’s 30.
How Lleyton Hewitt would dearly love a stat like that, instead of his eight.
But special mention must be made of 22-year-old Australian James Duckworth in his Wimbledon debut. He took 13th seed Richard Gasquet, the very talented Frenchman, to five sets.
Of the others, world number one Rafael Nadal took four sets to beat Martin Klizan from Slovakia, seeded 51 in the world. Nadal’s 25 unforced errors had a fair bit to do with his battle.
Not so with Roger Federer and Serena Williams, by far the most successful at Wimbledon among the current players.
Federer’s won seven. and his effortless 6-1 6-1 6-3 win last night was his 69th in his 17th appearance, compared to just eight losses.
Williams has won five Wimbledons. and last night cruised home 6-1 6-2 for her 71st win in 17 appearances, compared to only nine losses.
But the player I suggest Roarers watch from here on in is Bulgaria’s Grigor Dimitrov.
This 23-year-old has every shot in the book, a strong serve, and is equally at home on the baseline, or at the net.
Last week he won Queens in the lead-up to Wimbledon, and beat the very promising American Ryan Harrison in straight sets last Monday in Round 1.
This bloke can play.
And for good measure he happens to be Maria Sharapova’s boyfriend.
mushi
Guest
Agree sitting here and telling someone that they should quit what they love just because they aren’t good enough to get my juices flowing (even though they are good enough to win a grand slam which probably surpasses even the wildest dreams of success for the majority of people on the planet) is the conceited, narcissistic and boorish. It’s their life, their legacy and their decision. They should quit when going out there no longer gives them any fulfillment as a person not when they stop fulfilling the need of some success free hack to live vicariously though their achievements. I actually think it is refreshing to see people continue on despite knowing it means the memory of their star will fade. If people need you to quit in order to properly remember your prime then their fleeting adulation is a hollow prize.
Johnno
Guest
Exactly mangoboy. Pat Cash,Rafter,Phillipousous,Hewitt, all in there prime a 4th round was seen as a pass mark, anything less was a fail, but really for all those players we expected them to make the quarter finals each grand slam on there preferred surfaces (Grass,Hardcourt).
Ken
Guest
I see the argument for retiring on top, protecting your legacy and all that. But there's also something nice about a player just playing because he loves the competition and the game. It's easy to assume that is the case for Hewitt, money wouldn't be an issue (he's surely got decades of endorsements and other roles waiting for him in retirement) and even he must know that another GS would require a ridiculous run of form and luck. This isn't a sport like boxing where an old warrior threatens their health by going on too long, nor a team sport where a faded champ stalls a team by not contributing or allowing new blood in. If he's good enough to get a start, and people want to cheer him on, what's the problem?
mangoboy
Guest
Interesting how Australia now celebrates when Aussie tennis players win one round. Previously we started to get excited when players reached the quarters or semis. To proclaim ''Australia Day'' at Wimbledon when a few players reach the second round says a lot about Oz tennis. Nevertheless, Tennis Australia will assure us all CPIs are heading north and all is well.
Johnno
Guest
Botticelli how romantic is your name, the feel of the mediterranean and love of Europe flows through me, and Opera. But hopeless romantics aside, answer this. I acknowledged his grand slam wins and former no 1 status. You obviously like to see fading or past champions a shadow of there former self, I don't. He get's cheered if he past the 1st round and that's seen as a pass mark. that's how far our standards have slipped with Hewitt. 10 years ago, a 4th round in a grand slam was the pass mark, and anything less was seen as a failure. He's the same age as Fed, Fed as well is becoming sad to watch as he ages and his grand slam record goes down. Hewitt won 2 grand slams he hasn''t won a grand slam in more than 10 years, 12 years ago in 2002. Fed's grand slam record the last 4 years hasn't been as strong, for such a great player. He's won 2 grand slams in 4 years, hasn't made many GS finals either. But Hewitt's decline is worse. It's not the same cheering for a faded champ, i reckon a champ should retire rather than go on as not the same player, so much for wanting to keep your legacy, watching a past champ struggle to get past 1st rounds if that's your idea of entertainment well it's not mine. I suppose you find watching players like Tendulkar hobble to aged 40 or Ponting play on till aged 38 with there career averages well below there past deeds. Not my idea of fun, I say retire at the top in your prime or if youv'e faded just a bit, not when you have to be carried or sympathy cheers from the fans.
Botticelli
Guest
Johnno, I find your post is disturbing. It seems disrespectful to a person that has had an illustrious career. I saw a Picture the other day of the Wimbledon honour board. Hewitt is on it. It made me feel proud to be an Australian. To win Wimbledon is like winning the masters in golf - the ultimate on the sport. Hewitt must now be playing for love. What's wrong with that!
Johnno
Guest
How sad Hewitt's career has come and how the mighty have fallen. This is a former world no 1 were talking about, 2 time grand slam winner. Now if the 33yr old Hewitt makes the 2nd round of grand slam or powers through to a Q/F like he did at last years US open it's hailed as a victory. The pass mark now for Lleyton is to make the 2nd round, and we cheer in the bogan suburbs our Lleyton.
ak
Roar Guru
Lleyton Hewitt and Maria Sharapova have a chance to create history here by winning the Wimbledon. To win the same slam after 12 and 10 years respectively would be a record. Golden opportunity for both.