Skip to main content

Angelique Kerber of Germany returns a ball to Jelena Ostapenko of Latvia during their women’s semi-final match at Wimbledon on July 12, 2018.

Neil Hall/The Associated Press

Germany’s Angelique Kerber proved too steady for error-strewn Latvian Jelena Ostapenko as she reached her second Wimbledon final with a comfortable 6-3 6-3 victory on Thursday.

A first-ever duel between the two Grand Slam champions with diametrically opposed playing styles ultimately boiled down to a simple mathematical formula.

Young firebrand Ostapenko’s 30 winners far outweighed the 10 struck by the wily Kerber but the 36 unforced errors she committed on Centre Court made for an ugly balance sheet.

Story continues below advertisement

The 30-year-old Kerber, who offered up only a miserly seven free points, really just had to stay calm and wait for her opponent to self-destruct and Ostapenko fell into the trap.

“I was expecting that she is playing like she played from the beginning: really hard, pushing me back,” Kerber said.

“I was trying to stay focused and play every single point because she started really well. Then I was just trying to find my rhythm and take my chances when I had them.”

Former world number one Kerber needed only 68 minutes to reach her fourth Grand Slam final in which she will face seven-times champion Serena Williams, who beat her in the 2016 final.

Williams dispatched Kerber’s compatriot Julia Georges in straight sets with another show of force.

Kerber can expect less charity in Saturday’s showpiece.

The first game on Friday, served by Ostapenko, was a snapshot of what was to come and illustrated just why the 21-year-old has become such a “must see” player on the WTA Tour and why watching American great Billie Jean King describes the Latvian’s all-or-nothing style as “so much fun”.

Story continues below advertisement

CRAZY SEQUENCE

The old adage of feel your way in to a match and start solidly does not appear to apply to Ostapenko who put together a crazy sequence to start her first Wimbledon semi-final.

Double fault, forehand winner, backhand error, forehand winner, forehand error, backhand winner, backhand winner, ace.

Kerber was under pressure straight away on her own serve and the match might have taken a different course if Ostapenko had not blazed a forehand long at 30-30 with the court gaping.

The left-hander had to save a break point, too, at 2-3 -- conjuring an ace. But the match turned a game later.

Consecutive Ostapenko backhand errors handed 10th seed Kerber the first break and she proceeded to win seven of the next eight games basically by defending well and serving solidly to move into a 5-1 lead in the second set.

Such is the damage Ostapenko can do when her game clicks that even the biggest leads look fragile and, when she suddenly landed some telling blows to claw back two games, a turnaround did not seem out of the question.

Story continues below advertisement

Kerber looked worried and Ostapenko had a point to close to within a game but she dumped a backhand return into net and then coughed up two more errors to hand Kerber victory.

“I know she played a lot of good matches where she came back from a score like that, when she has nothing to lose,” Kerber said. “You never know what happen if it went to 5-4.”

Kerber is now back in a Grand Slam title match for the first time since beating Karolina Pliskova in the 2016 U.S. Open final -- having begun that year by stunning Serena Williams in the final of the Australian Open.

After suffering a drastic loss of form in 2017, ending the year ranked outside the top 20, a rejuvenated Kerber is back where she feels she clearly belongs.

Report an error
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

If your comment doesn't appear immediately it has been sent to a member of our moderation team for review

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.