Rookie Takes: Monaco Grand Prix and Roland Garros
First, let's talk about F1.
That Monaco Grand Prix!!!! All kinds of chaos, but also heartbreak. I am so so so sooo happy for Kimi! I know people say he doesn't deserve it "yet" because he's too young, it's his first year of having a competitive car, etc. But that's the thing about this sport, of why we love it and why we lose our heads over it. Not everyone who "deserves" it gets to win. The person who wins may not always be the best; it's also the person who gets better luck and takes advantage of random opportunities. Although I have to say, people questioning Kimi's skill - what are you watching? He is so good, despite his relative inexperience to George. If anything, it's just making George look worse. Sure, he's had some terrible luck lately and these are things beyond his control. Still, when it comes to things he can actually control, he doesn't seem like he can take advantage.
So many penalties; that pitlane fiasco was certainly a first, but some pundits say it had something to do with the pitlane being longer this year given the additional team with 2 garages. Their pitlane "speed" was actually measured as distance/time so their instincts might have kicked in and they floored it where they were used to even though there was still 2 garages?
Don't talk to me about what happened to my beloved Carlos Sainz. I just can't. Loving him is a bloodsport, to quote from Raleigh Richie. (A song that I haven't listened to in a while!) When will this pain end? Let it be soon, heavens.
And now, Roland Garros, aka "Everyone Thinks This Will Be Their Year"
So many plot twists and surprises for this year's French Open. Carlos Alcaraz injured. Jannik Sinner, Coco Gauff, Iga Swiatek, Elina Rybakina, Aryna Sabalenka, and other top players with unexpected exits. Novak Djokovic not able to sustain his momentum. This was undoubtedly a very exciting Roland Garros season because for both the ATP and the WTA, a new champion was going to be crowned.
On the WTA side, I was honestly rooting for Marta Kostyuk and Maja Chwalinska, the wild card that has shocked everyone within her draw. Maybe it's because I've always had a soft spot for rookies, underdogs, and people who aren't supposed to be there. Sports are more fun when something unexpected happens. If all the favorites won exactly when they were supposed to, we'd save ourselves a lot of stress, but, honestly, we'd also lose all the magic.
As for the ATP draw, there were suddenly three Italians in the QF. Sinner may have exited early, but that Italian flag could still be carried all the way to the end. I was gutted that Berrettini had to retire, and that Arnaldi got sick with the flu. Plot twists abound.
I think that's why I've found myself drawn to so many young players, newcomers, and "wild cards" lately. Kimi in F1, Maja and Marta, and the three Italians in tennis. (And Alex Eala, of course.) The qualifiers who suddenly find themselves on the second week of a Grand Slam. The athletes who arrive with little expectation attached to them and somehow force everyone to pay attention. There is something deeply satisfying about watching "potential" become "reality" in real time. Not because it is guaranteed, but because it isn't.
And then there's Zverev. Is he an underdog in this match? I wouldn't say he is a favorite. So many people are rooting against him, and justifiably so, I think. Why do we watch sports? How do we root for these athletes? Do we admire the way they play on the court or on track? Or do we admire them as the human beings they are off of it? That Zverev's narrative is complicated, off court, is an understatement. People are allowed to have complicated feelings about him possibly winning his first Grand Slam. Part of what makes sports compelling is that they do not always give us clean heroes and villains. Sometimes, the athlete playing the best tennis is not the athlete you want to celebrate, even if, on paper, he deserves it. Sometimes, a result can be both impressive and uncomfortable. Zverev's run feels a bit like that to me. But, the truth is, if he wins this Grand Slam, he would have done what it takes, even if people say, the draw opened up and he just got lucky. Yes, he did get lucky. But Grand Slams are not won by accident. Someone still has to walk through that door and take advantage of the opportunity. For all his flaws, if he wins, he has put himself in that position to claim it fair and square based on skill. Based on what has happened on the court.
Same way with Kimi taking advantage of his wins when George is at his weakest or unluckiest. "Deserve" is such a loaded word in sports. I'm not entirely sure if we, the audience, are the rightful arbiters of that. The truth is, we don't know who they are, and we can only judge them by what they show us, whether that's good or bad, whether that's on track or off.
But as the audience, we can decide who to root for. Athletes earn results, but fans can choose their allegiances. Those are two different things. The results will speak for themselves. The trophies will go to whoever earns them. The rest - the baggage, the reputation, the complicated feelings they leave behind - is something history can sort out later.
And I'll just continue cheering for the athletes and the stories that compel and move me. From my own screen, both an invested spectator and a stranger to it all.