Where Verdasco goes from here, Nadal's strength and Serena's mind

Fernando Verdasco caught the world's attention with his epic against Rafael Nadal. Bob Martin / SI

Where does Fernando Verdasco go from here. He just lost a classic semifinal to Rafael Nadal. Does he turn into a pumpkin? Or do you see him challenging for Slams?
-- Marty, New York

• For those who missed it -- and sadly, there are probably many, given the time zones -- Nadal just beat Verdasco another Spanish lefty in an insta-classic semifinal, the longest match in Australian Open history. Verdasco was, unquestionably, the breakout star here. He not only beat Andy Murray, the hottest player going in, but then outlasted Tsonga and pushed Nadal to five sets. Known as something of a bon vivant, content to reside in the top 20 and enjoy the good life, Verdasco, 25, is taking his career more seriously. Challenging for Slams might still be a stretch given the players in front of him. But injuries notwithstanding, there's no reason he's not making the year-end Masters Cup, i.e. finishing in the top eight. One suspects that he leaves Melbourne with a bundle of confidence and motivation after coming within a few loose points of playing in the final.

The more immediate question: what does Nadal have left for Sunday's final against Federer? In a vacuum, he is severely disadvantaged, finishing a grueling five-setter in the wee hours of Saturday morning, while Federer has had nearly 72 hours to prepare. But this is Nadal we're talking about.

Say what you will about the fairness of the retractable roof, I grudgingly give props to Serena for her mental toughness. I've never been a fan of her lack of class in some losses, but time and again she has stepped up when it looks like she is set to lose and battles to victory. As a fan of sports, I'd love to see more athletes persevere under adversity like she does. While she seems to be improving, please tell her to spend a day with Monica Seles to learn true sportsmanship and class.
-- Neil Grammer, Toronto

• I'm of mixed minds here. On the one hand, I'm over criticizing Serena for a lack of grace in defeat. Serena might be the most mentally capable athlete -- not just tennis player -- I've ever seen. I put her right up there with Nadal. And if I had her self-belief and the results to back it up, maybe I'd be mad as a rattlesnake when I lost too.

Yet on the other hand... Serena's superior tennis makes some of her lapses in decorum all the more maddening. There's so much to like and admire about her game and character on the court. Why does she sometimes undercut herself -- and turn off so many of you guys -- with the unforced errors in the sportsmanship department?

Let's get a few things straight. Real men don't own, listen to or reference Alanis Morrissette albums, lyric, etc. Additionally, there is nothing ironic about rain on one's wedding day. If you live in Seattle, and your wedding is planned for December, there is a good chance it will rain. However, should you plan a destination wedding in Phoenix, and then it rains, while it just happens to be sunny in Seattle on that very same day, THAT would be ironic. Now, aren't you ashamed of yourself?
-- Jay Zavislak, Phoenix, Ariz.

• Mortified.

Same way Kafelnikov went from tennis to professional poker, I think Safin will find another sport. I say wife-carrying. Either that, or he'll be the next Palmolive pitchman: "It Safins hands while you do dishes!"
-- Doyle Srader, Eugene, Ore.

• And here's our first winner.

Are you serious? "Quite apart from the event coming so early in the season (and conflicting with the Super Bowl)"? The Super Bowl? You always write to a broad audience but to be this America focused -- for shame!
-- GiGi, Australia

• Let's be realistic. The Super Bowl, while an American event, could attract one billion viewers worldwide. Federer could win Sunday's final 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 and it would be relegated to the margins in the U.S. It's just one country, you say? Fair enough. But it's the country with the biggest TV impact and commercial significance.

How about more recognition of the fact that the Williams sisters are keeping American tennis from oblivion. Give them credit for their accomplishments and smarts in being able to keep playing when the 'No. 1s' come and go.
-- Nick Pawley, Goodyear, Ariz.

• Amen to that. American women's tennis without the Williams sisters is like a hamburger minus the bun and beef patty. And this is as good a time as any to note that Serena just became the top money-winner in the history of women's sports this week.

I would like to congratulate you on, without question, having the most diverse mailbag participants: Stephen Males, Devonshire, Bermuda; Chris Au, Hong Kong, China; Steve Philips, Brussels, Belgium; plus all the questions from the U.S.! Is tennis that global or do you do it to show how popular you are around the world?
-- Mark, St. Louis

• Thanks. Honestly, unless the questioner is from somewhere really exotic -- like Katmandu or Barberton, Ohio -- I often don't even notice location. This is not testament to my popularity so much as it's testament to tennis's biggest asset and biggest challenge. That is, how do you capitalize on such a wildly far-flung fan base?

This is the first time I've ever posted because I usually agree with what you say. But I did have an issue with your recent criticism over Venus Williams's political views (or her "non-opinions") and ducking out of questions regarding Barack Obama's election. You said "...when asked a perfectly reasonable (and predictable) question in a press-conference setting about Obama's inauguration, Venus says breezily she knows 'zero' about politics and would prefer to talk about tennis?" You said that you thought her response was 'profoundly disappointing' considering her willingness to participate in the politics of women's tennis and equal prize money. To me (also a Jehovah's Witness) it should have been equally predictable that she would want to avoid answering a political question. We don't participate in worldly politics and the 'politics' of sports is hardly comparable to governmental politics which is issue that we remain neutral about. If anything I thought it was a bit harsh and somewhat disrespectful to Jehovah's Witnesses in general to expect something that is against one of our fundamental beliefs. In my humble opinion, Venus was very diplomatic and clever in her answer (going much further than I would have). It was an uncomfortable question about something that was contradictory to her beliefs and unrelated to tennis. She had every right to duck that question!
-- Bryce, Lancaster, Calif.

• Lots of opinions on this topic, pro and con, keep coming in. Of course, Venus had every right to punt on the Obama question -- particularly since responding might have been at odds with her religious beliefs. Dave of Minneapolis chastised me: "If Obama's victory tells us anything, it's that our country has room for everyone, including those who avoid voting and politics for religious reasons." I certainly apologize for any perceived disrespect to you, Bryce, and other Jehovah's Witnesses. I would contend that Venus does have a track record, even on political issues that transcend tennis. Here's a recent press release. But given her religious underpinnings, I agree this was a bad example.

My larger frustration: If athletes can use their platform to endorse products (say, Oreos; or in the case of Federer, watches that cost more than some houses) perhaps they could also use their platform to endorse more substantive issues.