Latest news with #USOpen
New Straits Times
an hour ago
- Sport
- New Straits Times
Letshanaa bows out in US Open quarter-finals
KUALA LUMPUR: Shuttler K. Letshanaa's gallant run in the US Open came to an end at the quarter-finals in Iowa on Friday. The world No. 50 could not raise her game against India's world No. 66 Tanvi Shah and lost 21-13, 21-16 in 33 minutes. Letshanaa had earlier scalped Japan's 2017 world champion Nozomi Okuhara and India's world No. 49 Aakarshi Kashyap en route to the last four. National singles coach K. Yogendran said Letshanaa needs to be more consistent. This is her second quarter-final exit this year following the Taiwan Open last month. "Overall, she deserves credit for beating higher ranked players but she must be more confident after this to improve in her next tournament (Canada Open)." The 16-year-old Tanvi had beaten second seed Nguyen Thuy Lin of Vietnam and Taiwan Open runner-up Pitchamon Opatniputh of Thailand before stopping Letshanaa in Iowa. Meanwhile, Yogendran is confident world No. 43 Justin Hoh will bounce back in the Canada Open in Markham, Ontario next week, after falling in the second round to Taiwan's world No. 76 Liao Jhuo Fu in the US Open. "Justin is facing new challenges in every tournament. It is a stepping stone and I expect him to bounce back stronger in Canada," added Yogendran. "He is slowly coping to face different obstacles against opponents he has never played before." Men's singles world No. 99 Eogene Ewe lost in the US Open qualifying rounds and women's singles world No. 96 Wong Ling Ching was shown the exit in the second round.
The Star
an hour ago
- Sport
- The Star
Letshanaa's US Open run ends in quarter-finals
PETALING JAYA: Women's singles shuttler K. Letshanaa's fine run in the US Open came to an end in the quarter-finals after she was beaten by India's Tanvi Sharma on Friday (June 27). Letshanaa, who was aiming to reach her first-ever Super 300 semi-final, saw her hopes dashed despite facing an opponent ranked only No. 66 in the world. The 21-year-old went down 13-21, 16-21 in 33 minutes, marking the end of Malaysia's campaign in the tournament. Earlier, Letshanaa had impressed with a sensational upset over former world champion Nozomi Okuhara in the first round, followed by a second-round win over India's Aakarshi Kashyap. Letshanaa will now shift her focus to the Canadian Open in Markham next week. Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel for breaking news alerts and key updates!
Mint
2 hours ago
- Sport
- Mint
How Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner leapfrogged the generation after Federer, Nadal and Djokovic to conquer tennis
When Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner slugged it out for hours at the Roland Garros final in Paris last month, aside from the quality of play, the intensity of shot-making deep into the fifth set and sheer unpredictability, another aspect became strikingly clear. Sinner-Alcaraz have lapped an entire generation of tennis players, leaving them squished between two eras of dominance. In the first Grand Slam final between two men born in the 2000s, Alcaraz, 22, saved three match points to beat 23-year-old Sinner 4-6, 6-7 (4), 6-4, 7-6 (3), 7-6 (10-2) at the French Open, two weeks ago. The quality of the match was such that player-turned-analyst John McEnroe told TNT Sports: 'I'm saying Sinner and Alcaraz against (Rafael) Nadal on clay—you would make a serious argument with both guys that they would be favoured to beat Nadal at his best." It was expected that when the greatest generation of male tennis players, including Roger Federer, Nadal and Novak Djokovic, leave the sport, the next gen to take over would be the one immediately after. Mathematically, it meant players born in the 1990s, after the Big Three, who are all children of the 1980s. Federer quit the sport in 2022, Nadal last year. Djokovic is battling it out a little longer, while chasing his 25th Grand Slam singles title. But his fiercest challengers are 15 years or more younger, while it looks increasingly likely that the 1990s generation would simply miss the boat or—to use a tennis analogy—miss their shot at it. Also Read Why Rafael Nadal will forever remain the greatest star of French Open Daniil Medvedev, Alexander Zverev, Stefanos Tsitsipas—and to a lesser extent Andrey Rublev, Taylor Fritz and Casper Ruud—waited in vain for too long, and seem to have been simply left behind. Only Medvedev, 29, has won a Grand Slam, the US Open in 2021 when he denied Djokovic a calendar Grand Slam. Another player, Dominic Thiem, won in New York too in 2020 amid pandemic absentees. But he retired last year, at age 30, having been defeated by injuries and exhaustion from trying to beat the Big Three over the years. The Big Three—Federer, Nadal, Djokovic—won 66 Grand Slams in the space of about two decades in an astonishing domination of the men's game. Peers Andy Murray and Stan Wawrinka got a few in between. World numbers one and two, Sinner and Alcaraz, have equally shared the last six Grand Slam titles, looking good enough to continue with the trend, except for Djokovic who still hunts for that elusive Slam which will put him clear of any male or female player ever to get to that number. Even as the products of the 2000s race ahead, the men of the 1990s find it harder and harder to catch up, such has been the evolution in skill, speed and fitness over just a few years. Also Read The Rugby Premier League bets big on speed, power and spectacle For instance, No.11 ranked Medvedev, 29, has a 2-6 win-loss record against Alcaraz and has not beaten him in their last four matches since 2023. He is a more respectable 7-8 against Sinner but has lost the last three times they played. Tsitsipas, down in rankings to 25, has never beaten Alcaraz in six attempts, but is up 6-3 against Sinner. He has been in two Grand Slam finals, 2021 Roland Garros—losing to Djokovic in five sets—and 2023 Australian Open—losing to Djokovic in three. 'I feel like the line-up right now is much more difficult than it was back then (in 2021, when he lost in the French final)," Tsitsipas said in a news conference at this year's Roland Garros. 'Players are so much more mature. Shots have changed. Players have second forehands in this very moment. They are playing with two forehands almost. I have to adapt my game." 'It's growing a lot in intensity and physically it has never been in a position the way it is now. I see constant evolution and constant growth in terms of the sport how players are evolving." 'Tennis was different before Jannik and Carlos came around the corner," he added. Also Read The reason why athletics records are tumbling around the world Zverev has a 4-3 win-loss against Sinner but has lost the two times they have played in the last two years. He is 6-5 against Alcaraz, giving him the best resume against the (new) Big Two. None of these matches have been on grass, and Zverev's numbers on the surface are not his best. For instance, he has never been past the fourth round of Wimbledon, which begins this year on 30 June. He has been in two Grand Slam finals as well, losing to Sinner in straight sets at this year's Australian Open and to Alcaraz at last year's Roland Garros. Ranked third in the world, Zverev is probably best placed to get a major title, though it may not happen next month. 'I wish I didn't have the three greatest players of all time for the first 10 years of my career because I think I would have won one or two Slam by now, but at the same time it was a privilege playing them…" Zverev said in a press conference at this year's French Open. 'Breaking into the top 5, 10 was more difficult back then because (the top) four spots were taken at all time. I don't see that now. Jannik is very dominant, Carlos is very dominant." If Thiem, Medvedev and the others waited for the Big Three to move on before they could have a legitimate chance at winning major titles, they were following a precedent. Ivan Lendl, who was the next-in-waiting to John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors and Bjorn Borg in the early 1980s, lost half-a-dozen times in majors to one of these players till 1985, when the three finished playing. Lendl took five of the next nine Grand Slams. In 2020 itself, Tim Henman, a commentator on BBC, had said that the younger players (referring to the 1990s born) would have to be patient, but 'wary of the younger players coming up behind them," words that have turned out to be prophetic. After losing to Nadal in the 2021 Italian Open, Djokovic had said—perhaps in jest, perhaps scathingly, 'The Next Gen young people? Me, Rafa (Nadal) and Roger (Federer) are reinventing the Next Gen. We are the Next Gen." He may have been partly right, in that their era blurred the lines between generations. Arun Janardhan is a Mumbai-based journalist who covers sports, business leaders and lifestyle. Also Read Reliving India's historic 1975 Hockey World Cup win
The Star
5 hours ago
- Sport
- The Star
Ewe Hock says Justin must be quick to address his flaws
PETALING JAYA: National men's singles shuttler Justin Hoh's (pic) early exit from the US Open has raised concerns, especially after undergoing four weeks of intensive training leading up to the tournament. Before making the long journey to Iowa, the 21-year-old had put in serious preparations with hopes of delivering a breakthrough result, particularly after the Badminton Association of Malaysia (BAM) made the costly decision to fund his participation in the event. However, Justin failed to live up to expectations after falling to Taiwan's world No. 76 Liao Jhuo-fu in the second round. Ranked 43rd in the world, Justin was tipped to progress further but went down 15-21, 21-9, 17-21 in a 59-minute battle. The defeat dashed his hopes of replicating the strong run he enjoyed at the Taiwan Open earlier this month, where he reached the quarter-finals in another Super 300-level tournament. He had started his US Open campaign confidently, cruising past Belgium's Julien Carraggi 21-10, 21-10 in the first round. Former national shuttler Ong Ewe Hock believes Justin must urgently address his shortcomings if he wants to make the leap to the top level. Ewe Hock said the youngster needs to prove his worth quickly to be considered among the world's best. 'For me, it's unhealthy when you perform well while leading, but once your opponent takes the lead, you start feeling less confident. This is a weakness that he needs to address,' said Ewe Hock. 'This issue must be tackled in training sessions, and most importantly, the feeling of wanting to give up must be avoided. 'I believe Justin and his coach are aware of this, and they will work together to resolve it.' Justin will compete at next week's Canadian Open in Markham, where he is set to face Wang Po-wei of Taiwan in the opening round. Meanwhile, women's singles shuttler Wong Ling Ching failed to progress further after losing to Bulgaria's Kaloyana Nalbantova 20-22, 12-21 in the second round in the US meet. Fortunately, K. Letshanaa kept Malaysia's campaign alive by reaching the quarter-finals. She battled past India's Aakarshi Kashyap 21-17, 20-22, 21-13 and will next face another Indian opponent, Tanvi Sharma.
New York Post
6 hours ago
- Entertainment
- New York Post
Anna Wintour ruined her Vogue legacy in one crucial way
The glossy page is being turned — sort of. Anna Wintour, the supreme leader of Vogue, is stepping down after 37 years at the fashion bible. Long dubbed 'nuclear Wintour' for her icy nature, the 75-year-old is leaving her role as editor-in-chief, but still retaining her cold death grip on it from above as the global chief content officer at publisher Condé Nast. Plus, she'll still lord over the Met Gala — ensuring celebrities will continue to bow to her in a bid to score invites. Advertisement Part of me is sad to see Wintour go, albeit out of pure nostalgia. Her departure signals an official end to the golden age of glossies, when magazine editors ruled the New York City media landscape with impossibly glamorous designer wardrobes and their noses in the air. 6 After 37 years at the Vogue helm, Anna Wintour is stepping down. Dylan Travis/AbacaPress / She represents a bygone era of black cars, expense accounts, standing lunch reservations at Michael's and sanctioned imperious behavior in the corner offices. Advertisement Before the digital revolution and social media influencers upended traditional gatekeepers, magazine editors were rock stars with a near monopoly on cultural influence. And bold characters with the strongest points of view — and, sometimes, unsparing management styles — were usually rewarded with top jobs. Wintour not only epitomized this, she was the complicated empress of it in the '90s and aughts. 6 Anna Wintour is the reigning queen of the fashion world and palled around top designers like the late Karl Lagerfeld. Stephen Lovekin Advertisement Stories abound about her alleged treatment of peasant underlings. Eye contact with her was reportedly forbidden, as was hopping into the elevator with her. A creature of continuity, she hasn't changed her signature bob, her dark sunglasses or, reportedly, her lunch order of rare steaks in decades. Her legacy was mythologized in 'The Devil Wears Prada,' a roman à clef written by a former Wintour assistant, as well as its 2006 movie. They don't make those creative bullies like they used to. Now, executives have to sanitize their behavior through HR compliance and lead with kindness and compassion. It's good for office morale, but not for media gossip pages. How boring. Imagine a 'The Devil Wears Prada' reboot where everyone is sitting around completing anti-harassment training videos and pitching SEO-driven stories about TikTok fashion trends. No cerulean blue monologue. No speech like, 'I said to myself, go ahead. Take a chance. Hire the smart, fat girl.' Advertisement 6 Anna Wintour, who regularly attends the US Open, is a tennis fanatic and champion of some of the sport's top stars. Annie Wermiel/NY Post Where have all the characters gone? Things changed at Vogue in 2020 when Wintour had to shake the lily-white elitism from her ranks. 'I want to start by acknowledging your feelings and expressing my empathy towards what so many of you are going through: sadness, hurt, and anger too,' she wrote in a note to staff, participating in the mass white atonement of the moment. 'It can't be easy to be a Black employee at Vogue, and there are too few of you. I know that it is not enough to say we will do better, but we will … ' 6 Anna Wintour's stewardship of the Met Gala has turned it into a star-studded event. FilmMagic Absolutely, hiring a more diverse staff was probably a good thing. But the arbiter of privilege turned her fashion bible and its digital site into a place for progressive politics, identitarianism and intersectionality. It became laughably woke. Vogue also became increasingly partisan — a tool of the resistance. Advertisement While Republican first ladies Laura Bush, Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan weren't given covers like their Dem counterparts, they were at least given the scraps of an inside spread. Then came Trump — and all that stopped. After dishing out tongue baths and multiple covers to Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton and Jill Biden (including last summer while her husband's campaign imploded), Vogue not only snubbed Melania — who was good enough for a cover in 2005. Earlier this year, a story ripped her official portrait, comparing her to a 'freelance magician.' 6 In the 2006 movie 'The Devil Wears Prada,' Meryl Streep (right, with Anne Hathaway) played Miranda Priestly, a character based on Anna Wintour. Wintour, long a champion of Dem politicians, has channeled her snobbery against the right and anyone who wasn't a card-carrying Dem. She fully turned her magazine into an arm of the DNC. Advertisement It became obvious that Vogue was not about American fashion, celebrity or culture — only left-wing figures. People like Stacey Abrams, a two-time loser for the Georgia governor's mansion, and Sarah McBride, the first trans member of Congress, along with Kamala Harris. 6 Anna Wintour attended the 2025 Tony Awards in her trademark sunglasses. Getty Images for Tony Awards Productions Funnily enough, Second Lady Usha Vance — a first-generation American and accomplished attorney — is someone Vogue would bend over backward to shoot … if only she was married to a Dem. Advertisement So the time is right for Wintour to go. Her magazine could use a makeover to shake off the ingrained partisanship of the last 15 years. But since Wintour is still hanging on to some power, I'm guessing we'll just see last season's collection again.
