NO freaking idea what I'm writing. NO help at all in the formulation of my arguments. I am literally pulling all these "arguments" from thin air, with NO articles to support what I'm saying because my research was limited and yielded insignificant results, and thus, my brain is ABSOLUTELY hurting from trying to tweak the facts and the human rights principles or whatever to fit what I'm trying to say - when I don't even know what I'm trying to say.
This sucks so much ass, it's not even funny.
On a lighter note, I'm totally rooting for Ree-shard now (Richard Gasquet). I just adore his brilliant one-handed backhand. It's even more effective than Roger's, but then, Roger's weapon is his forehand. Can't say the same for Gasquet.
Great, Ree-shard broke Verdasco while V was serving for the match, and now Verdasco broke back immediately.
Stupid clay. What's with the break-fests? I'm actually surprised Roger has only got broken once in both of his Rome matches. Even Nadal got broken left and right in his Monte-Carlo matches.
Speaking of Nadal, what the fish*, he just got broken by ROBIN FISHING* SODERLING in his opening service game? You have GOT to be kidding me. Apparently they hate each other due to some drama that happened in their five-day - yes, FIVE DAYS LONG - Wimbledon match a few years ago where Soderling maliciously mocked Nadal's pre-serve antics (pull at shorts, tuck hair behind ears, wipe face, look constipated as he gets ready to serve). Perhaps Soderling is out for blood. I'd watch this, except 1) I have a paper to write; and 2) even if I didn't, I'd much rather sleep because the only clay matches that I'd make a point to watch are Roger's and, to a lesser extent, Djokovic's. I get that Nadal rules on clay, but just because he rules on clay doesn't mean I like his game any more than I do. And it's precisely because he rules on clay that I find clay utterly boring.
Oh sad days, Verdasco has two set points. SADNESS! Saw some highlights of Ree-shard's match with Ernest Gulbis and his shot-making blew my mind. There was still a lot of moonballing going on, even in that highlights package, but Gasquet's backhand was impeccable. Gulbis' drop-shots were hilarious sometimes; he got slaughtered for them more often than he won the point with them, but when he DID win the point, the drop-shot was SUPERB. The commentators like to talk about "soft hands", and yes, indeed, Gulbis' hands are pretty soft.
Except, not really. Once he pushed Gasquet SO far back the baseline, all he needed to do was to coax the ball slightly over the net - but he "dropped" it to the middle of the court, around the service line, giving Gasquet plenty of room to run back and hit a passing winner.
And speaking of passing winners, my jaw dropped like Kara's in reaction to Adam when Gasquet hit that outofthisworld backhand passing shot from WAY behind the baseline. I didn't know people could do that. And so I want Gasquet to win and meet Nadal, but...he just lost the first set.
Sad days indeed. And Nadal is up a break point, of course. It'd take Nadal to amputate a leg and an arm and to tie himself to a chair for Soderling to win. Sorry.
Okay, enough. Back to the torture.
*In support of Kris' run on Idol, I have spontaneously decided - the very second I wrote 'fish', in fact - to not swear completely - or as much as possible - until he reaches the Final 2. Did you know he says "kick awesome" instead of "kick ass"? And that he says "oh my gosh"? I'd think "kick awesome" is totally lame, but because it's Kris, I think it's totally adorable. LOVE HIM TO BITS.
Eh wait what. I saw wrongly. Soderling held, and the advantage to Nadal was on Nadal's serve.
This is not the first time I read the scores wrongly. Something is evidently wrong with me.
Won't even bother hoping for Soderling to break. Even if he does, Nadal will break back at some point. After that, Nadal will just steam roll ahead and leave his opponent behind to bite the dust. Because this is clay. And he is the undisputed Prince of Clay. ("King" belongs to Roger, sorry.)
Sad days, I know.