Following a semi-final against Maria Sharapova, where it looked as though Amilie Mauresmo’s semi-final jinx might return to haunt her once more, she beat Justine Henin-Hardenne in the tense final of Wimbledon.
This is not the first time Ms Mauresmo has beaten Ms Henin-Hardenne in the finals of a major grand slam; She won the Australian Open when her opponent retired with the score at 6-1 2-0 to Mauresmo.
This time the player were able to complete their match, though the Belgian player never really hit her stride, and Ms Mauresmo herself seemed a little out of sorts. Nevertheless, she went on to a well deserved victory, punching her hand into the air in triumph and beaming at the packed Centre Court.
The women’s section of the tournament will perhaps be remembered more for off court discussion than for on court brilliance, with the subject of equal prize money chestnut being hotly and passionately debated. Venus Williams brought the issue into the spotlight in the first week, arguing that if women get paid less because their matches are shorter, that she would be prepared to play longer 5 set matches.
As the fortnight went on and commentators and players alike added their voices to the criticising of this perceived inequality, Wimbledon’s objections began to sound increasingly hysterical and impractical.
But this is not to take away from Ms Mauresmo’s fantastic and career defining victory over her long-time opponent. As she clutched the engraved silver plate, petty prize money squabbles were surely the last thing on her mind.