AN American pro-Trump and a professor-looking South Korean are storming the year’s first Bastille of tennis: the Australian Open in Melbourne’s iconic Melbourne Park.
Up until Monday, Tennys Sandgren and Hyeon Chung could be easily counted as just mere faces among the massive crowd lining up for choice seats at the Rod Laver Arena.
Not anymore.
The two unknowns did not only muscle their way into the world’s tennis consciousness but they rewrote history as well in entering the quarterfinals of the first of four Grand Slams of 2018.
And, hey, these party gate-crashers did it in style.
They accomplished their stunning feats against marquee players that no one—save for their mothers, of course—ever believed they could do.
Sandgren of Tennessee, who denies being a “far-right” even as he professes to be a Trump fan, did it first, beating Austria’s Dominique Thiem, 6-2, 4-6, 7-6 (4), 6-7 (7), 6-3.
It was Sandgren’s second win over a top-10 player, Thiem being ranked No. 5.
Before Thiem, the 26-year-old American also defeated No. 9 Stan Wawrinka to become the first man to reach the quarterfinals in his debut since Frenchman Nicolas Escude did it in the 1998 Australian Open.
Sandgren, ranked a mere 97th, had never won a Grand Slam main draw match. USA Today said he was a wild-card entry in the 2017 French Open and a direct entry at the 2017 US Open.
Before this magnificent winning streak, Sandgren never failed to qualify in 13 past Grand Slams, five of which came in Australia.
“This is a pinch-me moment,” said Sandgren, whose name “Tennys” came “from my grandpa.”
In toppling the 14th-seeded Novak Djokovic in straight sets, the 56th-ranked Chung became the first South Korean—man or woman—to reach a Grand Slam quarterfinal.
It was both incredible and unbelievable, Chung beating a legend that had won six Australian Opens and 12 Grand Slams overall—in straight sets at that.
At the end of a nerve-wracking match lasting three hours and 21 minutes, Chung almost couldn’t believe he walked away the winner 7-6 (4), 7-5, 7-6 (3) in a near-epic fourth round.
“Dreams came true tonight,” said the bespectacled Chung, admitting Djokovic is his idol and “I was merely trying to play” like the man he just conquered.
It was also some sort of sweet revenge as Chung, called “The Scientist” back home, avenged his loss to Djokovic in the 2016 Australian Open’s first round, 6-3, 6-2, 6-4.
“Amazing performance,” said Djokovic of Chung. “He deserved to win. Whenever he was in trouble, he came up with some unbelievable shots.”
But Djokovic wasn’t in tip-top shape, his right elbow that had sidelined him the last six months still obviously bothered him, as evidenced by his 47 unforced errors against Chung’s 27.
Usually deadly with his service, Djokovic had but only one ace—coming only after two hours and 41 minutes of the Serbian’s 950th career tour-level match in his first tournament since 2017 Wimbledon.
“By the end of the first set,” said Djokovic, “it started to bother me. I had to deal with it till the end of the match.”
But Chung, 21, appeared unaffected, vowing to “play harder after I get some sleep and more rest.”
Before meeting Djokovic, Chung, whose previous best was a third-round appearance in the 2017 French Open, nimbled past No. 4 Alexander Zverev of Germany in five grueling sets.
Interestingly, Chung will face Sandgren in today’s quarterfinals—a match that will surely draw the crowds if only because of its historic significance of producing more lofty lore in tennis.
And, if only for a bit of morale-booster, Chung had beaten Sandgren only two weeks ago in nearby Auckland, New Zealand, 6-3, 5-7, 6-3.
But Sandgren said that loss inspired him.
“I feel like I had to raise my game to even compete with him on the court,” Sandgren said. “I think that helped me a lot going into this week, seeing I could play a good level.”
Too bad I have two meetings today. Pass. Grrr!
THAT’S IT Is there a need for a court to order the holding of new elections for chairman and president, respectively, of the Philippine Olympic Committee (POC)? Isn’t a Pasig City court’s ruling declaring last year’s POC elections as null and void enough for the POC to abide by it, in the process heeding a provision in the court’s decision setting for a new election on February 23? Abangan!