Nicole Vaidisova advanced to the Wimbledon quarterfinals for the first time in her career with a fantastic 7-6(6), 4-6, 6-1 victory over the defending champion Amelie Mauresmo.

Mauresmo had defeated Vaidisova twice in their previous four meetings, but note that every time their matches reach three sets Vaidisova has been the one to win.

Fourth seed Mauresmo had been exhibiting the form that led her to title last season, but today’s match against the Czech fourteenth seed was a completely different story – the French made fourteen double faults and over half of her fifty net approaches were unsuccessful.

Nicole Vaidisova will next face sixth seed Ana Ivanovic, the last month’s Roland Garros finalist, who has just defeated eleventh seed Nadia Petrova 6-1 2-6 6-4. (via On the Baseline)

Justine Henin BEL (1) vs. Serena Williams USA (8)

According to many people, these two players are most likely to win the 2007 French Open. Henin already possesses three titles from Paris (winning it in 2003, 2005, and 2006), while her opponent in the final 16 has one, from 2002.

In their flourishing careers, they’ve met nine times, and Serena leads 6-3. But maybe it’s more important to point out that the one more successful on clay was Justine. She defeated the American three times (in the finals of Berlin and Charleston, and in the semifinal of Roland Garros). Serena beat Henin on clay only once, in the final of Rome.

Jelena Jankovic SRB (4) vs. Nicole Vaidisova CZE (6)

Vaidisova leads 1-0 on clay. She defeated Jankovic in 2006, in the semifinal of Strasbourg. If we include their matches on other surfaces too, Vaidisova is also better, leading 4-2. However, we mustn’t forget Jelena’s fantastic results this season. In 2007 she’s already won three trophies: in Auckland, Charleston, and Rome.

Ana Ivanovic SRB (7) vs. Svetlana Kuznetsova RUS (3)

Considering the matches they've played so far, Ana has better results, leading 2-1. On clay they played once, and Ana defeated Kuznetsova. That was in the last month’s final of Berlin.

Anna Chakvetadze RUS (9) vs. Maria Sharapova (2)

In this case, situation is clear – they played against each other three times and Chakvetadze has never beat Sharapova. Out of these three matches, they had only one on clay; in the last 32 of the 2005 Roland Garros when Sharapova defeated the compatriot in straight sets.

Internazionali BNL d'Italia is the most prestigious clay-court tournament after Roland Garros. It is a Tier I event with the prize money of $1,340,000.

Amelie Mauresmo of France is seeded at the top. She is the 2004 and 2005 winner, and in 2000, 2001 and 2003 she was in the final. Although world No. 4 has only recently returned to tennis, after a break caused by her appendix operation, she is still one of the favorites to take the trophy.

Second seed Svetlana Kuznetsova hasn't had a very satisfying year — she was a runner-up three times (in Doha, Indian Wells, and last week in Berlin). Still, without doubt, she has a potential to make Rome her first title of 2007.

World No. 5 Jelena Jankovic is definitely in good form. The Serbian has already collected two titles in 2007– Auckland and Charleston. We can expect a lot from her.

Although Serena Williams hasn't played since the Fed Cup first round in April, the 2002 champion, this year seeded 8th, is certainly someone we can't discount. She has been superb this season winning the Australian Open and Sony Ericsson Open. What more can you ask for?

Nadia Petrova of Russia is seeded fifth. She won three consecutive titles on clay last year. Her compatriot Dinara Safina, seeded sixth, reached the final on clay in Charleston, as well as last year in Rome when she was defeated by Martina Hingis.

Other players making up the top 8 seeds are Nicole Vaidisova and Anna Chakvetadze. We expect some good action from them as well.

We should also mention No. 12th seed Ana Ivanovic of Serbia who won a tournament in Berlin a few days ago and entered the top 10 for the first time in her career. In Rome's quarterfinals we might have a chance to watch a re-run of Berlin's final with Kuznetsova.

Maria Sharapova and Martina Hingis won't play this year because of injuries, while world No.1 Justine Henin didn't enter. (via Sony Ericsson WTA Tour)

How often do injured players retire when closer to victory, and how often when they are losing? Which players are more likely to retire, and which stay in match even though they are losing?

Tennis Magazine, who did this research, took into account the top 20 players and calculated the proportion of times they retired when close to losing a match. The aim of their work was to determine which players retire when they see that defeat is near, which, as they believe, tells a lot about a person's attitude. So, matches where a player retired before the completion of the opening set, as well as those when a player withdrew while less than two games behind, were not included.

Some players are more prone to injuries, but you can see that some of them withdraw when they see that they can't win. It's evident that player's retirement affects the opponent as well as spectators. The opponent can't enjoy the victory as much, because things were left unfinished.

One of favorite WTA players, Kim Clijsters, had lots of injuries in her career, but retired while losing only once. Ana Ivanovic, Shahar Peer, Nicole Vaidisova and Martina Hingis have never left the match when behind.

On the other hand, an unbelieveable 11.4 % of Jelena Jankovic's defeats are retirements while losing, which is more than one in every nine losses. Players following Jankovic are Serena Williams and Anna Chakvetadze.

A spokesperson for the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour, who saw the results of the research, said: "There is no evidence that WTA Tour players do anything other than compete their very best." However, John Lloyd, British Davis Cup captain and former Australian Open finalist, claims that "really good champions don't feel they're going to lose until the last point, so they never throw in the towel."

I don't really agree with the view that players who are prone to retiring while losing are players with worse attitude and not real champions. It shows a certain part of their character, but it doesn't make them worse people, or worse players. They are simply like that (it's normal to lose interest when you see you have no chance to win), and after all, it's not forbidden to withdraw while behind.

(more at Tennis Magazine website)