Next week in Montreal and the week after in New Haven, where the WTA is experimenting with on court coaching, Dementieva can call her mother to the court and they can talk about what?

I’m happy to report that CBC Distribution and Marketing won it’s legal case against against Major League Advanced Media, the internet arm of Major League Baseball. Major League Baseball tried to prevent CBC from operating baseball fantasy leagues on its website without paying a huge licensing fee. Sites like Yahoo and CBS Sportsline pay millions of dollars in licensing fees to use players names and images. and Major League Baseball tried to prevent smaller websites from running fantasy leagues to protect those licenses.

A player’s name is information, if a company can charge millions of dollars to allow you to use information, much of the internet would shut down and even more power would lie in the hands of large corporations. Major League Baseball, of course, will file an appeal.

I mention this because the organizers of the JP Morgan Chase Open, this week’s WTA event in Carson, California, refused to give me press credentials. Never mind that I received credentials for the WTA Championships and Indian Wells, much larger events than the JP Morgan Chase. I never use the word blog because of the bias it attracts but my editor evidently used it when applying for the credentials. He might also have mentioned that Peter Bodo, the premier tennis writer, writes a blog and ESPN is also beginning to see the light. Stewart Mandel, who covers college football for ESPN, now writes the College Football Blog.

I don’t foresee JP Morgan Chase turning away an ESPN reporter for using the blog format any time soon, do you? I know, I’m ranting, but it pisses me off. Not enough to boycott the tournament of course. I was hoping to see Serena Williams play but it was Maria Sharapova and Elena Dementieva this afternoon in the latest day of the ridiculous southern California heat wave.

Maybe the Heat affected Sharapova. She lost her first three service games. That looks like a typo given Dementieva’s truly awful serve, but it’s not. Sure enough, Dementieva started to falter on her serve and Sharapova started spinning her first serve in and won four straight games to pull even at 5-5. This set up a bizarre scene. Dementieva’s first serve was now faster than Sharapova’s and Sharapova ended up with more double faults than Dementieva.

Dementieva’s play in the 5-5 game tells you why she seems content to be ranked between six and eight, as she has for the last three years, and not higher. Late in the game she retrieved a Sharapova rocket shot and got a short shot in return. But she didn’t do anything with it and Sharapova fought off a break point to win the game. Dementieva is a very consistent hitter and a good defensive player but she’s not aggressive enough to go higher in the rankings.

Serving is part of offense and, well, enough said about Dementieva’s serve. I try not to watch it else it could contaminate my already shaky service motion. But there’s another way in which she’s not aggressive. She doesn’t have a coach. If you want to improve your ranking you have to improve your game, and for most players this means working with a coach. She worked with Olga Morozova and Richard Krajicek in the past but her mother Vera, who is not a tennis player, is her current traveling companion.

Next week in Montreal and the week after in New Haven, where the WTA is experimenting with on court coaching, Dementieva can call her mother to the court and they can talk about what? Which curtains would looks best in Elena’s Moscow apartment or where they might find some borscht in New Haven?

Dementieva isn’t worrying about that at the moment because she managed to hold on in the first set to go up 6-5 then break Sharapova to win the set 7-5. In the second set, it’s Sharapova who hit double faults and goes down two breaks. Serving at 2-5, Sharapova put up a big fight holding off six match points before finally succumbing with another error. The constant fight to get back in the match had taken its toll.

Dementieva is into the finals with a 7-5, 6-2 win.

I am so glad to see Serena back on the tour and so is the media. ESPN is televising Serena’s match tonight instead of Sharapova in the afternoon, the usual ESPN slot for the WTA. And Serena has been entertaining. She won two straight three set matches to get to the semis.

I thought maybe Serena had mellowed a bit after her layoff. She gave Megan Shaughnessy a pat on the back as they left the court yesterday and praised her game in the television interview. Today, tennis-x.com reported that Daniela Hantuchova accused Serena of bumping into her on purpose during their Thursday night match and a courtside photographer heard Serena swear at Hantuchova. No matter. We love Serena.

You can read a previous column about adventures with Elena Dementieva here.

If you’re not Roger Federer, and even if you are, how does one beat Rafael Nadal?

I had James Blake over Rafael Nadal at this week’s tournament in Toronto. Didn’t happen. Blake lost to Richard Gasquet. Nadal is out and but it was Tomas Berdych instead of Blake who was responsible. He beat Nadal in the third round today, 6-1, 3-6, 6-2.

If you’re not Roger Federer, and even if you are, how does one beat Rafael Nadal?

1. Be tall. Tomas Berdych is six foot five inches tall so Nadal’s huge topspin doesn’t bother him as much as it does the shorter players. Nadal puts wicked topspin on the ball and it bounces up and over the right shoulder of Federer when he hits a backhand. This cannot be overemphasized, Nadal’s lefty forehand goes right into the weakest part of most players’ games. There’s another reason this is important and that brings us to number 2.

2. Stay up on the baseline. The further Nadal can push you back, the harder it is for you to hit winners and the more likely you are to get into a rally with him. No one in the game can rally with Nadal. Federer tried it by staying back at this year’s French Open final and look where it got him. In the second set, Berdych had to play further behind the baseline because Nadal ran him around and that gave Nadal the set. Of course, you don’t have to stay at the baseline which brings us to number 3.

3. Attack, attack, attack. If you don’t, Nadal will get you into a rally, he’ll find his rhythm, and it will be all over. Berdych doesn’t have Federer’s net game but he hit enough approaches (mostly to Nadal’s backhand) and volleyed well enough to keep the pressure on today. It also helps that Berdych hit his ground strokes very hard which kept Nadal from controlling the point.

4. Have a good head-to-head record. Berdych won their only previous match on hard court. He knocked Nadal out of the first round of the Cincinnati Masters event last year. They also played each other as juniors. It’s a big deal because Nadal and Federer rule professional tennis, they’ve won all of the slams and all but one of the Masters Series events this year. If you go in thinking you’ll lose, that’s more than enough edge to give the match to either of them.

5. Play the big points well. Berdych converted four of his six break points, an excellent percentage.

6. Serve big. This is a good way to keep Nadal from getting into a rally. Berdych won 15/16 of his first serve points in the first set.

7. Attack Nadal’s second serve. That is, if you see any, because Nadal sometimes has a ridiculously high first serve percentage. Which brings us to number 8.

8. Be lucky. Being lucky means catching Nadal on a day when his first serve is off. Nadal’s first serve was ineffective in the first set – he won only 50% of his first serve points. In the third set, Nadal only got half his first serves in. Altogether, a very lucky day for Berdych.

9. Keep your cool. If you win the first set and then lose the second, don’t get down on yourself and start thinking negatively because Nadal has the toughest mind in the game and he’ll immediately take advantage. He doesn’t need much to get him started and once he gets going, he’s hard to stop. Berdych has not shown similar mental toughness. Instead, he’s one of those dreaded “promising players with a lot of talent.” That means he plays exceptionally well now and then – he won last year’s Masters Series event in Paris – but not consistently. Berdych lost the second set but kept his cool long enough to take advantage of Nadal’s third set serving problems.

All in all, you have to be lucky and be good. Berdych was both today.

You can read an earlier column about Berdych here. You can read about the Federer – Nadal final at the French Open here.

The hard court season revs up big time this week in Toronto, with what some fans are calling the return of Big Boy tennis. The “boys” in question of course being Federer and Nadal, both appearing in the draw this week in Canada. Neither guy has played since Wimbledon. Although we’ve enjoyed some enlightened men’s matches in their absence, it’s good to have the premier pairing in men’s tennis back in action and hopefully headed into yet another classic final.

I don’t know about you guys, but I managed to make a passable meal in the meantime of Haas vs. Tursunov in the L.A. final, and of course Arnaud Clement over Andy Murray Sunday in Washington. A Mutt and Jeff occasion if ever there was one. Even Philippoussis over Gimelstob in Newport’s final was rather entertaining. But let’s get back into Valhalla, and bring on the gods, baby.

Sigh. The bad news is I can’t pick either Nadal or Federer in this week’s Fantasy Tennis team. I’ve used Nadal four times already. He was just so much fun to bet on that I really didn’t notice the clock all that much. I get one more fling with Rafa, and it’s got to be the Open. I get two picks still with Roger, so you can bet I am hoarding him like he’s the last brick lying in Fort Knox. He goes right into the slot at Cincinnati next week and then the Open. Then I guess we put him out to stud. Or something.

Even if I could pick the pair this week, I would be hesitant. A month long lay-off without match play seems a good stretch. I would not want to presume that both guys will come flying out of the gate. I would hate to ever have to not pick them, but if I have to do that, this might be the best week. If they do great, great. But I am not expecting genius to flow really until next week’s event in Cincinnati, which both guys will be attending also.

Roddick was going to be a pick of mine this week, until I heard during the Legg-Mason event that his back was still problematic and he had pulled out of Toronto. I inserted James Blake in his place, then realized he needs to be saved for one last pick at the Open. So I went with Robby Ginepri.

Necessity makes it easy for you in the picks. More sighs. So I have chosen Ginepri, Berdych, Stepanek and Nalbandian on one side of the draw, Gonzalez, Baghdatis, Haas and Hewitt on the other.

Everyone is here who matters in the men’s game, except Mario Ancic out with injury, then Roddick’s withdrawal. So we can expect a tournament with great matches from the get-go. Safin faces Robredo in the opening round. I would have given Safin a shot here, but unfortunately I saw his semi-final match on Saturday against Arnaud Clement. It is not an edifying spectacle when a much bigger guy loses to, well, basically a midget. Not a pretty match, and it was painful to see Safin, yet again, doing battle with his Lower Self almost, rather than the man across the net. So the nod to Robredo here. (Note: It turned out to be a fairly close three setter, until Robredo came on strong in the third for the win).

– – – – –

Other interesting first-rounders include Malisse vs. Davydenko, Ljubicic vs. Almagro, Moya vs. Gaudio and Murray vs. Ferrer.

Could Malisse get by Davydenko, who won the Sopot final last week but had quite a struggle doing it? Yes, he can, provided the “good” Malisse shows up. For some reason, the opaqueness of Davydenko keeps me from putting him on my Guys I Can Trust list. (Note: The good Malisse indeed showed up today, Tuesday, and ousted Davydenko in straight sets).

Almagro is a clay court guy, but like Gonzo I think he has higher ambitions for his game. He most certainly would like to make a statement in his opener against Ljubicic, whom I expect to be a bit rusty. This could be interesting. (Note: Almagro made it interesting only in the first set, losing in a close 5-7, but then tanking the second 1-6).

Moya and Gaudio can both play on the hard surface, and I am inclined to give the nod here to Carlos. Provided his big first serve can work well and he can dictate from that. (Gaudio was practically a no-show).

Murray and Ferrer face each other in their opener. Ferrer has proven to be one of the most consistent guys out there, while Murray proved to be something of a head case Sunday in the final against Clement. But the kid has Brad Gilbert, so let’s toss a coin on this one. (Close in the first set, but Murray handled him in two). This is a good win for the Scot in what I thought was a really tough opener for him. Ferrer is another man from clay country who wants to make his mark on other surfaces. He’ll be back.

– – – – –

Fantasy players should take note that with the withdrawal of Roddick the draw has changed a bit in that corner. Ginepri would have had to face Nalbandian in his opener; now he faces the American qualifier Kevin Kim. I would think Ginepri likes that change. (Nalbandian went out yesterday in the first big shocker of the event, due to illness).

Now as of late Tuesday afternoon, Ginepri could not take advantage of the change in his portion of the draw against Kim, who beat him in three sets. One of my other picks, Radek Stepanek, had to retire with a back injury. And last night Marcos Baghdatis squeaked out the first set against France’s Julien Benneteau, but lost the following two sets rather handily. The ESPN2 coverage was scheduled for only about twenty minutes of that match, not even to the tiebreak. But it seemed to me both guys were alternately struggling, then making good shots and good efforts. It could almost have gone either way. But Marcos lost, so half of my team is dead and gone already.

– – – – –

Rafael Nadal took on Nicolas Massu in the Tuesday morning match. Did anyone tell these guys this was a hard court event? Because they came out and played as if they were still on clay, which both would probably prefer anyway. Big loopy shots, lots of side to side and corner to corner. It was frankly a little annoying to watch, because we are done with clay. Let’s pick it up, guys. The first set alone was a good hour long.

Massu needed to attack Nadal and serve well, and he could do that only sporadically. Nadal had to wade through the rustiness that comes from a month away, but he had enough chances to do that in the long opening games of the first set when he finally got himself on track. Then the unforced errors went away and the winners came on board. Ginepri and Kim started their match at the same time and wrapped up their three-setter by the time Nadal and Massu were early into their second set. That’s why it felt like a clay court match.

As I sit here and watch the amazing body of Rafael Nadal flying through space once again, I can’t help thinking how true it is, that he is remarkably well developed for his age. Whereas someone like Andy Murray is so different physically. He could use some of that mass of Nadal’s. We could argue that because he doesn’t have that, he has evolved an entirely different style, more toward Federer-like than not, but without the swiftness and that kind of laser like power in some of the Fed’s shots. I have a feeling Brad is really going to try and rectify that as soon as possible.

If ever a body called out for some weight training, it is Murray’s. He’s like something out of a Bill Gregory film, one of those quaint Ichabod Crane-like characters. A walking clothesline almost. Gilbert would probably like to turn him into Terminator 2.

Tommy Haas, one of my picks, held sway yet again over Max Mirnyi. Eight of nine meetings he’s won so far. Now he gets to face Dmitry Tursunov in the next round, a reprise of their interesting final in Los Angeles a few weeks ago. I would expect Tursunov to make some adjustments this time, this could nearly be a toss-up. But Haas has the experience and he is feeding off the confidence that comes from winning matches on hard courts. Lately he has been a good boy about not imploding on court.

Another pick of mine, Fernando Gonzalez, needed three sets to outdo Sweden’s Robin Soderling. He faces, and should beat, Juan Carlos Ferrero next.

– – – – –

Well, this is later Tuesday, and Roger Federer played his first match tonight against France’s Paul-Henri Mathieu. Lucky Mathieu. The Frenchman lost in straight sets, but you could see him working the experience, the way he did when he pressed Nadal at the French this year. Clearly his game has benefited and he should continue to improve. That’s what he can take away from this.

Roger was not perfect, but very capable. The first serve was off somewhat in the first part of the match, but then he seemed to gather strength as they moved along. Most of the guys out there would love to play this for an opener.

Am I just noticing this now or do some of Federer’s shots have a lot more junk on them? Particularly that second serve, with the big kick on it, yet he places the toss directly overhead, rather than slightly back, as you would for a kick serve. So, it is very well concealed, and the thing comes at you as if it were a fastball, then suddenly it’s kicking up and to the side. Clearly it gave the Frenchman trouble tonight.

Happy Birthday, Roger. Number 25. We won’t give you a cow, we’ll give you a cake.

– – – – – –

What makes the Connors-Roddick matchup fascinating is the question of whether Connors can pass any of his die-hard attitude on to Roddick.

In case you were wondering if Jimmy Connors had any plans to turn into a mellower version of his former self, don’t worry, he plans to pass his fierce me-against-the-world attitude on to his new pupil, Andy Roddick. In an interview on Jim Rome’s radio show Friday morning, Connors wasted no time going to battle for Roddick. He complained about people bashing Roddick because he hasn’t been winning tournaments lately.

I’m tired of seeing him get hit with a heavy sledgehammer all the time.

This is 100% Jimmy Connors. When Roddick was asked about the criticism last week in Los Angeles, he said that he didn’t think personal comments about him were fair but if people criticized him for playing badly and his numbers weren’t good, he had no problem with it. You do not hear Andy Roddick complaining about sledgehammers.

A few minutes later, Connors complained that people build you up as you rise to the top but once you get there, they’re just as quick to tear you down.

I’m looking forward to getting his [Roddick’s] game up to where he’s back where he wants to be and winning so that revenge can be part of his vocabulary too.

So far we’ve had Roddick getting hit by a sledgehammer and now we’ll see him celebrating his revenge. Classic Jimmy Connors but hardly Roddick’s m.o. Roddick is more likely to laugh wryly at himself than promise a revenge sandwich the next time he wins the US Open. He’s not likely to talk about the next time he wins the US Open at all.

What makes the Connors-Roddick matchup fascinating is the question of whether Connors can pass any of his die-hard attitude on to Roddick. It’s that nature versus nurture debate. You can teach a talented athlete how to hit harder and run faster, but can you teach them to be mentally tougher? Malcolm Gladwell pointed out in his excellent book, The Tipping Point, that a study of children known as the Colorado Adoption Project showed that adopted children are no more likely to resemble their parents personality traits than two random people on the street.

If a personality trait doesn’t rub off in sixteen or seventeen years, how is a coach going to make a difference? Brad Gilbert got Roddick to dump the visor and replace it with a cap – I suppose it was an issue of manliness – and he didn’t like Roddick’s habit of applauding his opponent’s good shots, but that’s baby stuff compared to what Connors is looking for.

That kill-or-be-killed attitude …was something that I took onto the court with me and I left the court with that too. …Once you get on there, friendship ceases and, really, afterwards it’s the same. It’s tough just to throw that away and say, o.k., everything’s fine now.

How will that go over in a world where Federer prides himself on getting along with all of the guys in the locker room and Federer and Nadal exchange a low-five handshake as they round the Wimbledon court with their respective trophies? This is not Jimmy Connors vs. John McEnroe or Dale Earnhardt against every other NASCAR driver. This is the era where women’s tennis went prime time with matches between Serena and Venus and they love each other.

This is also the corporate world of sports where top players make as much money from endorsements as they do prize money. Football player Reggie Bush already had deals with Pepsi, Reebok, Subway and Hummer when he finally signed a contract with the NFL’s New Orleans Saints. Maria Sharapova is fourth on the income list for athletes – she earned $25 million dollars last year – and she’s won exactly the same number of slams as Roddick: one. If, as reported in US magazine, Roddick really is dating Sharapova, why should he worry, he’s got the girl and the endorsements.

Money has partially replaced the importance of winning because you can be paid handsomely without winning handsomely.

So Connors has a few things working against him. But there is hope. We know that Roddick feels some desperation else he would not have reached out to Connors, an untested coach. People in dire straits are open to change because what they’ve been doing hasn’t worked. It’s not like Roddick needs a personality transplant or a tennis overhaul. He’s a fiery, passionate player with the best serve in the game and one of the best forehands. If Connors can change his mentality enough to make him more aggressive on the court