Clichéd idea

Sir — The Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur proposes to launch the ‘Campus Mothers’ initiative and appoint female mentors from among the women residing on campus, both faculty and non-faculty, to provide informal emotional support to students. While emotional support for students is important, so is avoiding clichés about who provides it. Women on campus are not — and should not be — bottomless wells of comfort just because they allegedly have a maternal gene. While many women are not remotely maternal, plenty of men are perfectly capable of offering warmth, patience, and perspective without needing a frilly title. It is shocking to think that this idea came from an institution responsible for shaping some of India’s most gifted individuals.

Ireima Imsong,
Jiribam, Manipur

Class apart

Sir — The 6-0, 6-0 demolition of Amanda Anisimova by Iga Swiatek at the women’s singles final of Wimbledon was historic (“Iga ends title drought with ruthlessness”, July 13). Her criticism of the Polish press and request that good players must be left to breathe are as important as her victory. Media scrutiny has its place, but expecting constant dominance from players is absurd. Swiatek’s rise from a contaminated-drug-ban scandal to lifting the Venus Rosewater Dish should have silenced doubters. Instead, some recalled her clay-court losses. This is absolutely ridiculous.

Fakhrul Alam,
Calcutta

Sir — Iga Swiatek’s Wimbledon triumph was not only a tennis lesson but also a character study. Her post-match honesty impressed as much as her shot-making. She reminded the world that even serial winners are not machines. Doubt, criticism, and media pressure clearly weighed heavily on her and she addressed them with sharp precision. Swiatek’s call for space is well-earned. She has risen, stumbled, and resurrected herself, once again, in public view. That she now owns titles on all three surfaces makes it hard to deny that she is the most complete player in the game.

Brij B. Goyal,
Ludhiana

Sir — A Wimbledon final that lasts under an hour should feel underwhelming. But this was not the case for the women’s singles final. Iga Swiatek’s performance was so precise and unrelenting that even the silence between points felt electric. Her dismantling of Amanda Anisimova was conclusive. Swiatek’s timing, rhythm, decision-making, and mental strength make her an undisputed tennis great. Swiatek has shed her tag of being a ‘clay-court specialist’ with the subtlety of a player who knows her numbers will speak louder than any analyst ever could. She now stands alone — the best of her generation.

Manzar Imam,
Purnea, Bihar

Sir — Amanda Anisimova’s first Grand Slam final turned out to be disastrous for her. Iga Swiatek won the Wimbledon final with a dominance that is unprecedented in recent memory, even by the Williams sisters. Yet she was graceful in victory, pausing to console her opponent.

Prabin Kanti Roy,
Calcutta

Sir — Iga Swiatek’s Grand Slam resume now includes a double bagel Wimbledon final. That alone guarantees her a place in tennis folklore. But the real story is her refusal to be defined by setbacks. Her doping ban — unfair as it was — could have undone a lesser athlete. She used it as fuel. Her losses on clay and her struggles with a new coach fed into this blistering form. This was not a comeback; it was an assertion that she had not gone anywhere.

Dimple Wadhawan,
Kanpur

Sir — Most players would have been weighed down by the heartbreak of losing the Roland Garros last month. But Jannik Sinner turned that loss into stimulus (“Sinner bosses grass to stop Alcaraz run”, July 14). He kept Carol Alcaraz at bay with controlled shots. He chose precision over flair, resilience over revenge. He turned his second serve, once a liability, into a weapon. There will be more chapters in this epic rivalry but this edition of the Wimbledon ended with Sinner lifting the trophy and reminding tennis fans that revenge is a dish best served with discipline and a deadly forehand.

Annesha Ghosh,
Calcutta

Sir — The Wimbledon men’s singles final was akin to a chess match on grass and Carlos Alcaraz blinked first. His drop shots fell limp, his variety deserted him, and the rhythm he usually dictates was firmly in Jannik Sinner’s hands. Sinner was patient and kept his calm and this paid off. His win means he holds three out of the four majors. While the Spaniard still has more majors — five to Sinner’s four — if the Italian defends his US Open title in September, he will level the score, and he will have won five of the past eight majors.

Arunava Sen Gupta,
Calcutta

Sir — Tennis fans have become used to loud, flashy players like Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and even Carlos Alcaraz. But Jannik Sinner is a reminder that ice-cold focus wins Grand Slams too. No screams, no chest-beating, just ruthless execution. The final was tight and Sinner clearly dominated, especially in the last three sets which he won by 6-4. Sinner’s on-court demeanour was reminiscent of Roger Federer’s panache and mental fortitude.

Deba Prasad Bhattacharya,
Calcutta

Sir — Carlos Alcaraz will win more Wimbledons. That is almost certain. But this time his touch abandoned him, his shots lost their swagger, and he appeared unsure whether to slice, drop, or blast. Jannik Sinner, on the other hand, showed what champions are made of. Saving break points after a failed first serve, holding steady while the crowd sang his rival’s name. Sinner outshone Alcaraz with his footwork and calculated shotmaking.

Asim Boral,
Calcutta

Sir — Iga Swiatek and Jannik Sinner handled Wimbledon with calm clarity. Swiatek adapted to grass with quiet efficiency, putting to rest talk of surfaces and slumps. Sinner was steady against a familiar rival, closing out tough sets without fuss. Both faced scrutiny this year; both responded through results rather than reaction. There was no drama in their matches, only discipline.

Ritam Ghosh,
Calcutta