Oz: The Artful Dodger

 

Q.  Was there any time in the match when his body language showed you something that you focused on?

BERNARD TOMIC:  Um, yeah, in the third set.  He thought  I had a feeling he knew I was going to go away.  I eased off, as well, I think on purpose.  I eased off and seemed I didn't care, and I think that's what drawed him a little bit tonight.  He thought he was going to win that third set, and when the right time came, I broke him. 

You know, after that the third set, you know, he started getting a little bit tight and not hitting his shots.

Q.  So you set him up a little bit?

BERNARD TOMIC:  In that third set, yeah.  I knew if I lifted my game early, he would have lifted as well and he wouldn't have let go.  I pretended a little bit in the first few games in that third set to not be there as mentally, but in a way to still be there.  

Ya know, I’m not quite so sure he’s pulled off the confidence trick he thinks he has. 

It doesn’t surprise me to learn that he tried to pull it off (it happens on tour all the time), and not to say that it didn’t influence things, but Dasco, honey, you did this to yourself, all by yourself.

To be fair to Fer, he did mention he was affected by the heat – his undoing was at least as much a function of that as anything else. But, ultimately, the whole rope-a-dope thing (as a form of mental fakeout ) seems to me to be selling Bernard quite short.  If he’s rope-a-doping anyone (and he is) it’s because of his style of play, not because he’s pretending to be on the ropes.

His pre-match smack talk re Dasco’s BH (“can’t really hurt me”) may have been derided as childish – it also happened to be spot on. And, from what I saw of the highlights, going deep to that wing seemed to work a treat.

Reminder: Dolgo/Bernie (R3)…..if ‘kooks’ are your thing.

(Pic: Getty)

Read More...

“Happy dancing Spaniards”

Nothing I can say will do justice to the distilled quanta of awesome that  is this video.

Can we all, instead, simply agree that it “does what it says on the tin”?




(word, big-up, hat-tip and many, many thanks to @andy_murray)

Read More...

Shifting Narratives

Delpo on the brink of making his first final since his injury comeback….Dolgo on the verge of winning his first ATP title….with Sod/Tsonga and Petra/Kim still to look forward to. That’s how I left it on Saturday night.

It’s not often I ask for EVERYTHING. I’m usually open to a watering down of at least some of my dreams – such flexibility is an essential coping mechanism for life itself.

 

But then the stakes aren’t usually this high, are they? 

 

Dolgo has “arrived”, now, I would imagine, by anyone’s reckoning  – a first ATP title would have accorded perfectly with his gung-ho, indie, all-court narrative. (Aside: Truly astonishing anyone thought he’d find the nickname ‘Dog’ either cute, funny or a term of endearment – he doesn’t)

 

And I’m guessing friends, fans, frenemies and foe alike are all united in wishing Delpo the best as he makes his precarious comeback – if only (in the case of the latter) so they may feel free to root against him again.

 

Those particular narratives will have to wait.

 

 

1) Soderling over Tsonga 6-3 3-6 6-3

Perhaps the wrong narrative altogether, because I’m afraid the stakes, in this instance, are no longer very high at all.

 

The most visceral, charged narratives often involve those who stand to lose or gain everything - a remote, anachronistic existence in which ‘anything can happen’ and ‘impossible is nothing’. It seems to me we’ve already had the first act of this with Sod upsetting two of the best players ever.

Always great seeing him come through of course – even a piddly 500 event reminds us why he’s here to stay, and defending a title definitely lends itself to a certain truculence which is, by the way, completely in keeping with his narrative and station.

 

The very last thing I want to see, however, is this coming at the expense of bigger and better things – or worse, seeing him get comfortable as the “Andy Murray” of the 500 or even the Masters-1000 level. As good as it is, a title like this should, now, mean less to him than it does to someone like Jo-Wills (his first final in 16 months).

 

There be bigger fish to fry out there Robin. Classical form would now demand that you go fry them.

 

 

 

2) Petra over Kim 64 63.

Voluntary disclosure of rooting interests for 2011: As many as half of my WTA eggs are in Petra’s basket.

Was Kim not at her best? Perhaps. This certainly wasn’t the officially endorsed narrative for the newly crowned world #1 (Update: Neither is Petra’s 76 76 loss to Morita in Dubai earlier today)

What I do know is that Petra’s serve out wide might just be the best shot in women's tennis right now. Unreadable pace. The worst kind.

Oh sure, ‘one win does not a champ make’ and all that, but it’s not just been about the one win has it? This is her second title in 6 weeks which, taken together with her QF run at Oz and SF at Wimbledon last year, simply demands that we take note. (Two Slam fourth rounds in her late teens isn’t too shoddy either)

 

Perhaps most convincingly of all, it’s the way in which she outplayed rather than outlasted Kim. Ask yourself whether the narrative of the timid counterpuncher is nearly as compelling as that of the audacious upstart.

Timely too – with a whole raft of retirements imminent in 2012, I have an opening in my tennis pool. Maybe even a number of them.

 

Yes I’m on board, but don’t think for a minute that the decision has been taken lightly:

 

-- She’s a lefty. Not the philosophical solution to life it’s sometimes made out to be, but the different look does, nevertheless, throw many players (more than you’d think) out of their rigidly defined comfort zones.

 

-- She’s daring and/or unhinged enough to imagine winners where none exist. True that this can sometimes prove counterproductive (if you saw her match against Woz in Beijing last year you’ll know just how counterproductive) – it’s also a necessary mind-set for anyone with an eye on the big stuff.

Put simply, you have to have it within you to be just a little suicidal against the best players. Both classical form and the big occasion demand it. The timid counterpuncher would never even conceive of blitzing the world #1 and winner of the last two Slams in straights.

-- She has all of the big weapons necessary to pull off an upset at the highest of levels unlike say a MJMS, yet remains far more nuanced than a Rezai – both of whom won Premier events last year. Why should we expect any less of Petra?

 

-- Best of all, the braces are a feint echo of Sveta’s 2004 USO run. Detail like this is at least as important as any of the above if you’re in the business of narrative.

Nothing is certain of course (whole matches can turn, have turned, round very fast when she loses focus the way she did after Wimbledon last year), but consider all of the above points my “due diligence”.

 

 

 

3) Confession: I still haven’t seen Milos play

 

I’m hearing the dubious Pete Sampras comparisons. I’m hearing utterly terrifying ice hockey jokes. I’m even hearing some doubts being expressed over the prevailing (overwhelmingly stark) opinion about the future of non-European tennis.

 

Listen carefully and you might even hear the wind carrying the sound of Dancevic cursing into his glass.

I’m yet to see him hit a ball. Laughable I know. But that’s just the way it panned out with timezones being what they are. All of which means I’m not in a position to weigh up any of the above.

I aim to rectify this before he, you know, wins a Slam or something.

 

From what little I have gathered, he seems (in common with Dolgo) to have the makings of an all-courter and is not afraid to have a crack at the ball – both of which bode well for the future. Being 6’5 can’t hurt very much either.

 

If I had it my way, Delpo would have made the final and Dolgo would have won in Brazil. And yet all this talk of “narrative” and “destiny” is of course all utterly preposterous. Smug, self-satisfied spiritualist nonsense – a little too full of its elemental self.

 

What makes one narrative more compelling than any other lies not always in its strict conformance with classical form. But rather in its audacity.

 

And more often than not, the more audacious narratives are forged through what seem like mere random inflections at the time.

 

Like Hantuchova winning her first title since 2007 for instance.

Ask yourself whether Delpos comeback would be nearly as gripping if he won his 2nd event back.

 

Ask yourself whether Sod winning a Slam (should it happen) would be nearly as compelling if he hadn’t pulled off what he pulled off in 2009.

Nestled deeply somewhere in the swinging, conflicted narratives of Dolgo’s floating hair, Petra’s shining braces and Milos’s scrawny 6’5 frame lies a future threatening to be as uplifting as anything we’ve seen.

Don’t let’s forestall it by being that twat sitting directly in front of you that always gets up and starts clapping before the credits have even started rolling.

Read More...

USO: He-Man

 

 

By the power of Grayskull!

 

 

    

I have the POWER!

 

Verdasco d. Ferrer  5-7 6-7 6-3- 6-3 7-6

 

 

Aus 2009 folks: Let’s will it into existence.

 

 

Minion Gene: Let’s inbreed it out of existence.

Read More...

Ne’er do wells 1, Should’a would’a could’aves 0

 

[13] G Simon (FRA) d [2] A Roddick (USA) 63 63

[3] [WC] F Verdasco (ESP) d [Q] R Sweeting (USA) 64 75

[4] M Cilic (CRO) d [15] M Fish (USA) 64 46 62

X Malisse (BEL) d [5] J Isner (USA) 64 36 76(5)

 

I don’t buy into the US Open Series as a concept – never have, never will. A situation not helped by LA and Washington getting practically zero coverage here.

 

Incentivising players, not likely to bag the USO (and thereby double their earnings), amidst a climate of injury and burn out doesn’t strike me as that plausible nor desirable.

 

getty

 

Not unlike these results, of which, perhaps, only Dasco’s win over Sweeting doesn’t cause mild whiplash. Unlike, say, Izzy’s shirt.

 

There’s also the smallish matter of Squerio, last week’s winner in LA, falling in the first round to Tipsy, leaving, guess what, not a single American left in the draw.

 

Oh, and Roddick falls to #11 next week.

Read More...

Barcelona: “Dasco-Sizzlehands”

This picture’s doing funny things to my eyes. Is that trophy levitating?

Verdasco d. Soderling 6-3, 4-6, 6-3

I’m going to take this one squarely on the chin – I obviously thought he didn’t have it in him. A charge to which I can only plead that he mostly doesn’t have it in him. At least not when it matters most.

I’m not going to argue Soderling wasn’t all there.

There was certainly an uncharacteristically high number of short balls landing in the vicinity of Dasco’s forehand (of all places) and a scandalously high percentage of misdirected overheads that almost suggested a certain squeamishness about finishing off a point.

Though credit where it’s due and all that – a lot of that was simply down to Dasco weathering the storm and converting on the opportunities presented to him – like those five or so forehand zingers he fired off those short balls Soder-Pop kept sending his way, Nadal-like in their curvature.

But then neither am I about to argue in favour of extrapolating all sorts of clay-court jollification for Dasco over the coming weeks.

Dasco’s forehand is truly an awesome feat of engineering. It puts him a cut above the more traditional clay courters (of which I’ve had a lot to say on over the past few days), but perhaps therein also lies the rub.

Most of the time it seems like he can’t make up his mind about what exactly to do with it. Like it shouldn’t even be there. He wants so desperately to be Daveed Ferrer, yet is cursed with a marginally flatter version of Rafa’s forehand – only with more pace.

Like a trigger-happy Gulbis trapped inside a clay courters body, what sets “Dasco-SizzleHands” apart is at once also the source of the angst I suspect must plague him at his most critical moments – hardly surprising things should go to pot, as often as they do.

Such obvious incongruity has it’s benefits of course: it allows you to coax your opponents into a false sense of security before zapping their carefully honed image of the player they think you are with strokes you’re not meant to possess.

It’s the type of thing the arthouse critics tend to love, but remains, unfortunately, the exception to the rule.

Mundane as it might sound, such grotesqueries aren’t the way of the world - a greater degree of coherence is what, I suspect, ultimately fosters the consistency that carries players through many more matches than the relatively few transient higher profile victories they might score on the back of that one party trick.

Not sure where that leaves Dasco-Sizzlehands - doomed just like his namesake?

Certainly hope not.

(Photo: AP)

Read More...

Monte Carlo: As Easy as that, and with not an Elephant in Sight.

When MC was stripped of it’s mandatory status a couple of years ago, I thought it was all but destined to collapse into a Rolex sponsored scenic sideshow. The stuff of $20K cocktails and starchy-white Marquees, where the rich and famous congregate to exhibit their shiny yachts, whilst professing an unbecoming “love for the game” that I suspect has rather more to do with wanting to preserve the event’s veneer of prestige.

More to the point, I rather believed it might turn into a cutesy opportunity for someone not named Nadal (and preferably outside of the top five) to pick up some “cheap” points – my thinking being that the big wigs would pencil in the week for some rest’n rehab ahead of Rome.

That the event should be a vehicle for Rafa’s return to form, shows what a jarring couple of years it’s been and speaks of exactly the sort of romanticism that makes this the sport I love.

You have to go back all the way to 1919 to find the last time we had a final here as one-sided as this, and even then Frenchman Max Décugis managed to get twice as many games from Romanian Nicholas Mishu (Massu’s family tree anyone?) as Dasco did from Rafa today.

Borg only lost around 21 games when he won the title in the early eighties (though remember to contextualise that by noting he took out more top ten players en route, including the world #1) – this year it only took Rafa 14.

The pedantic analyst in me remains keen to draw attention to the fact that Nadal’s first two opponents were, well, Michael Berrer and Thiemo de Bagel – and that his subsequent three were the hardest of hard boiled clay courters – physical agitators for the rest of the tour maybe, but largely benign in their effect on Rafa.

The unthinking fanboy, meanwhile, remains keen to whack the pedantic analyst over the head with a skillet.

We all know playing clay courters is little more than a practice session for Rafa - their shorter, loopier balls sit up nicely into his hitting zone making it likely he’d beat up on them armed with nothing more than that skillet of mine. And as for those practice sessions of his, well, they’re notorious for sometimes actually being more demanding than any three set match he plays.

What’s perhaps more interesting is how those subsequent three matches played out.

I must admit I had it chalked up in exactly the opposite way, with Ferrero possessing the weakest and most dated of clay court styles, and thereby the likeliest customer to take up a “buy-one-get-one-free” offer at the Nadal Bagel Factory.

Ferru, I essentially had down as the three litre engine version of the lower-emission Mosquito.

Dasco meanwhile, with his greater pace and forehand (as well as what he achieved in Oz last year), I had assumed to be the more dangerous of the three.

JCF’s greater experience and, I would say, fitness, as it turned out, trumped the mental fragilities of Dasco and Ferru, who looked beaten minutes after stepping on court – another glowing endorsement of his recently assumed “#3 clay courter” status, despite going out in straights.

Would I be more convinced if Rafa had faced Jo-Willy rather than Mosquito in the quarters and Djoko rather than Dasco in the final?

Probably, though I still think he’d have won the title. Equally noteworthy, however, is how this less gelatinous route through to victory will in all likelihood garner the levels of confidence and momentum necessary to oust a Jo-Willy, a Big Rob or indeed any other flatty come Rome.

Baptisms of fire are overrated.

Sometimes you need your way cushioned back to success.

With that in mind (and Rafaelites will be pleased to hear this), I’ve given the elephant it’s marching orders.

It’s been my muse over the past week charting Rafa’s ups and Muzza’s downs.

With Rafa on the up again, I’m afraid this room simply ain’t big enough for you – never mind the both of us.

Be nice.

*sniff*

***

Other MC musings:

-- If you’re at all unsure of your form on clay, best not to term one good showing your “best <ever> match <of the year>on clay” (delete as appropriate). Both Jo-Willy and Djoko said as much of their respective performances against Almagro and Nalbandian. Both also fell far short of that in their next matches, with Djoko in particular going down in flames.

-- To be fair to Tsonga, I actually thought he played well against Ferrero. That he can play on clay should be resoundingly clear. That he fell short against a guy he should be able to beat 24 hours later is rather telling too.

-- Djoko’s poor semi final showing is in some ways even worse than what happened to Murray, who does at least recognise the need to appear consistently mediocre in his “sticky patch”. That Djoko can go from his “best form of the year” to not far off his worst in the space of 24 hours suggests there’s still work to be done. Parting ways with Todd may only have been half of the story (if that).

-- Learnt to view Dasco in a gentler, more ‘familial’ light. With both his parents in Monte Carlo and his father courtside in almost every match this week, Dasco was able to ‘keep it real’ (I ascribe a new meaning to phrase that each day) if not completely rediscovering something of the form that’s eluded him since early last year. Daddy Dasco's presence seems to me be an assuring, undemanding and wholly worthwhile one - I’ve rather grown to like it.

(Photo by Julian Finney/Getty Images)

Read More...

2Hander's Take: AO Aftermath

I would like to start by reintroducing myself. Why? Well, I have noticed over the past year or so that the readership of this blog has grown (probably no thanks to me and my rants!) and I have been, at best, a passive reader during my absence.


Where do I start? For those who know me, I've been away from posting largely due to my mother being ill in hospital. She had a long history of heart and chest related problems. Judging by my use of the past tense, you'd be right in assuming that she is no longer with us. She sadly passed away a few months ago after quite a long stint in hospital. It's weird, but the rollercoaster that this whole episode was seems like it was ages ago, when it wasn't. At times, it has been hard trying to get (and remain!) focussed. I am OK though. The term moving on for me is more like a helical spring-shaped path as opposed to a simple straight line. Losing a loved one, well, feelings come and go as time goes by. Time does heal a great deal and I am thankful for what and whom I do have.


So, in a way, tennis does help to keep me (somewhat) sane – all the more thanks to you guys.


Now, for those who may be thinking: "Who the hell is this guy?!" and/or "Where the heck did he come from?!", I am an old friend and sometimes tennis partner of our beloved friend Topspin. We have been talking about tennis like quasi-pundits for around 10-12 years, back when we were in our early 20s (Woops! Have I just given away our ages?! HAHA!!). Top gave me the honour of being a guest poster on this fine blog and you will find that I am far more shamelessly opinionated and certain things (like the [crap] state of British tennis) wind me up something chronic. However, I like to think I am a malleable sort of chap who can be persuaded to see and sometimes take on different perspectives to issues around The Beautiful Game – no, not the one where 20-22 people are running around trying to kick an overglorified pig's bladder through a metal rectangle!

(Though I am a football fan as well, just nowhere near as much)


This Aussie Open…I paid more attention to the 'business end', i.e. the second week and it seemed to be lacking a certain something. Yes, it had the crazy epic duels early on in the first week, the odd upset (Delpo's early exit), dark horses (Cilic) and yes, Federer played a very good tournament and all that. However, I can't help but feel that tennis has come full circle since 2007, when Federer dominated like something crazy. I'm sure he is older and wiser, especially being a dad now – his life must have a lot more perspective now and he seems to be playing much more freely. He got the GOAT, as well, although not against Nadal at any point along the way but through no fault of his own. Anyway, he has nothing to prove and I think most people would be inclined to agree. I do think that had he won last year in that 5-set epic with Nadal, it may have been more fulfilling, probably because it would have silenced a lot of critics. I must add that his volleying has lost quite a lot of its edge, especially in the final. I think Tsonga may be the best volleyer around today, as he more willingly comes to the net.


I am also saddened by Nadal's status quo at the mo. All I can say is that I hope he gets back to full fitness soon and we get to see him flourish and achieve even more. He's too nice a guy to not wish him well. Though I am sure he's learnt his lesson and not enter 500 clay court tournaments in any given year!


Djokovic has matured in terms of his attitude off court as well as his game. Just take a look at how awkward he felt when asked to do an impression of Nadal (in front of him as well!) at a presentation ceremony (was it at Rome?). He seems just as lethal off both wings and, oh yeah, he has changed attire from Adidas to Sergio Tacchini (Are they back now? What about Ellesse?).


Murray really looked as though he was ready for his maiden Slam. His game has come on leaps and bounds, although he needs to improve his 1st serve percentage. His second serve is better now than it was at the last Wimby, it has to be said. Like Roger said, his time will surely come soon. And he's also switched clothing from Fred Perry to Adidas…


I still think there is another Slam or so left in A-Rod…though I will not commit to anything by saying when and where it might come.


I reckon Delpo will bounce back from this early setback. Being tall, he can slap any loopy forehands Nadal can throw at him, as he did in Flushing Meadow. He has also exorcised the demon posed by Fed.


Nando Verdasco…I just want to slap him for losing against Davydenko! Not so much for losing against him because Kolya has improved, it's more the manner in which he lost. I still think Davy lacks the flair it takes to win a Slam, maybe he'll prove me wrong. We'll not talk about that set he took of Fed because even I probably could have taken that set off him!


So yeah, things have changed, but maybe we've just been given a brief flashback of how things used to be. You know, Federer just finishing matches at will, even in Slams. In the grand scheme of things, the field has opened up, with at least 4-5 realistic Grand Slam contenders. The next few months will definitely be very interesting…


Read More...

Melbourne: “Mr PlodStation”

Davydenko d. Verdasco 6-2 7-5 4-6 6-7 6-3

A pretty crummy performance from Davy if you ask me.

(Photo: Reuters)

“Mr Playstation” is no more, or has regressed temporarily into a ZX Spectrum.

There was nothing ‘high’ or ‘radiant’ about the highlights reel I saw, with both players struggling to keep the ball in court and Dasco gaffing his way to 81 UFEs.

He raised his game by one barely detectable notch in that final set, but one wonders if Davy would have made the finish line had Dasco displayed just a little more belief.

Loyalties aside, would we really want him to win his first Slam playing like this?

I can only hope this is something of a blip - he’ll be lucky to get a set off Federer playing this way.

Read More...

WTF: On Belief and Cuckoos' Nests

(Glyn Kirk/Getty Images)

del Potro d. Verdasco 6-4, 3-6, 7-6

Ok so I guess we were due for a drop in quality, right about now.

Today’s bash between Delpo and Dasco didn’t stink per say.

It was actually a thoroughly well fought, competitive affair. But it was a match that was allowed to get more competitive than it should have, by virtue of a tendency for both players’ to seize up, just as any window of opportunity to make any kind of lasting impression in the match opened up.

I’d describe it as a poor man’s version of the Djoko/Slick-Nik match up from the day before (that really was a bash in every sense of the word) and not feel as though I’ve been harsh towards anyone.

There was nothing incredibly sophisticated going on: two heavy handed, ultra-aggressive players trying to wrestle control from each other and open up the court.

‘cept Djoko and Nikolay did it so much better.

(Carl De Souza/AFP/Getty Images)

Part of this is down to athleticism. Nando and Delpo are incredible athletes in their own right, but neither are in the same league as Djoko and Nikolay.

Probably more telling though, is the fact that neither one of Dasco or Delpo were on the same performance trajectory as those other two coming into this event.

If anything Dasco, over-performed in both his matches, losing belief as he so often does at those critical junctures; and as for Delpo it was his belief alone that carried him through this match – he’s been something of a facsimile of the guy that stole Fed’s thunder in New York.

That unfortunately, all but spells curtains for Nando as far as this event is concerned; and though Delpo has this win under his belt, you have to rather stretch your levels of belief, or better still, to adopt an altogether more defiant belief system to expect him to follow up against Federer.

Though I sense I’d better cover my a*s by saying that stranger things have happened.

Federer d. Murray 3-6, 6-3, 6-1

(GLYN KIRK/AFP/Getty Images)

Let me start by saying that I was rather dismayed by the indecisive, uncommitted figure that showed up in the guise of Federer for the first set.

After spending the best part of last week fanfaring about how he now knows how to play Murray, and how it’s always the attacking player that holds the key to success, Fed came out and played such a tentative mess of an opener that I was almost glad Murray put him away as soon as he did.

I had no strong loyalties here.

All I really wanted to see was an equally contested three setter that knocked the pants off the Djoko-Nikolay match from the day before; and both these guys, favourites as they were to win this group, seemed best qualified to do that.

(CARL DE SOUZA/AFP/Getty Images)

To say Federer upped his game in the second set would be like saying Nadal hits a good topspin.

Not only did he have a gameplan, but he was out to very publicly validate his claim to mastery over Murray’s game.

I’ve been witness to this brand of snarky, dominating play before. He uses it against players that get under his skin (Murray, Djoko), or against styles of play I believe he has no respect for, and whom he presumably thinks have no business playing tennis. Think Dr Ivo and the Delpo of last year.

If Dasco was hit with shock therapy a couple of days back, then consider this Tennis meets “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”, with Murray the one forcibly restrained and attached to the ECT machine.

I don’t care that he bagged the first set: this is the single most stinging defeat I believe Fed has ever inflicted on Murray– made all the more poignant by how ineffective he made him seem in the second set, and how mentally worn down Murray looked in the decider.

That last set in particular, with Murray unable to buy even a single groundstroke, much less a first serve. was perhaps the worst I’ve ever seen him play.

"I served terribly and that was the main difference in the match.

"In the first set, at least when I was behind in games, I was coming up with big serves, being able to dictate the points. But after that I served pants.

"It was probably the most double faults (eight) I served in a match maybe this year.

"You can't serve at 40% against Roger because you give him so many opportunities to dictate play, but that's what I did.

(Source: BBC)

I must confess I don’t quite understand why this is. It’s not as if he hasn’t been on the losing side before, and the loss he suffered to Fed at Flushing last year would have to be considered more of a heartbreaker.

Maybe it’s an acute awareness that that ‘winning’ record he continues to have over Federer is looking increasingly tenuous and more academic with every passing month. This is the second consecutive caustic dismissal Federer has inflicted on him in a three set match, the last one meted out with equal indifference in the semis back in Cincy

I don’t believe we can, with any seriousness, now doubt Fed’s claim to Mastery over Murray. The gameplan seems clear enough, even if he might encounter the odd hiccup in it’s execution.

Wanna know what I don’t find surprising? That it’s the same bludgeony, in-yer-face, brand of aggression that Cilic, Dasco and Gonzalez put to such good effect against Murray during the Slams this year.

Why should we be surprised that Fed’s interpretation looks more polished?

Read More...

WTF: Nosebleeds and Shock Therapy

(Photo: Julian Finney/Getty Images)

Nice opener.

Murray, as expected, looked the fitter of the two, and caused all sorts of nosebleedy problems for Delpo in the first set, with his somewhat scrambly, defensive play and well-timed winners.

Though I found it difficult not to get behind Delpo for the way he raised his game in the second. Some of those running forehand winners were straight out of Flushing.

(Photo: Julian Finney/Getty Images)

Not that surprised he lost focus in the third, but it’s hardly the end of the world.

On another note, I’ve just realised that Murray has a winning H2H against everyone in his group.

Probably a mistake to read too much into that, his match against Fed -- which you’ll remember, is on Fed’s racquet – could go either way.

The night match – yes the UK does night matches now – involved Fed facing off against Nando.

(Photo: Julian Finney/Getty Images)

I had dark visions about Nando’s fate in this match. But I’ll hazard a guess they weren’t half as dark as the ones Fed Fans were having after the first set, in which Fed’s own shadow, like Nadal’s this past month, would likely take offence at the description “shadow of himself” – eventually losing it 6-3.

Fed upped his game in the second but it was still very far from what you might call “running a tight ship”.

Nando on the other hand played with an altogether different, more assured and quieter brand of sustained intensity, I’m pretty sure I’ve not seen from him before: The Philosopher-Scientist to the Bloodless-Vivisectionist we’re more accustomed to.

Heady stuff. And just like the fragile dream-like state we felt a part of (or in the case of Fed Fans the nightmare they felt they couldn’t escape), the rude awakening came right on cue at 5-5 in the second: Nando’s only poor game since the beginning of the match.

Then the floodgates opened.

At the beginning of the third we got a rare exhibition of the backhand that has largely been missing from Fed's inventory – with precious few exceptions at Wimbledon of course – since 2007.

(Photo: Julian Finney/Getty Images)

Fernando managed to salvage a game, but all at once, and without any warning, the match was over.

I have no idea if Federer intends to continue administering this new found brand of “shock therapy” to his opponents. It’s proved to be a useful stratagem to dig himself out of trouble. Trouble that appears to be following him around in his last few matches.

Rafa v Sod next - the grudge match that makes Armageddon look like a high school punch up.

Read More...

WTF: Eight questions

By now everyone who’s anyone will be aware of Roddick’s decision to forgo the festivities in South East London this year. Step forward Big Rob, name-and-number.

(Julian Finney/Getty Images)

I love the concept of the best eight players of the year pulling out all the stops in an Armageddon like ruckus to cap off perhaps the strangest year of tennis in, well, years.

With the calendar being what it is though, the event seems doomed to being perceived as an anti-climactic exhibition that only approximates ‘the cream of the crop’ in the loosest sense of the phrase - less of a crescendo than a glib winding up of a season that deserved so much more.

Is too much tennis really at the heart of the problem? After all, the event’s nearly 40 years old and I don’t remember injuries and burn out being as big an issue even four years back.

Here’s what I think. Certain players have reached, or are approaching, the limits of what I call ‘tennis viability’ as a result of either how long they’ve been on tour, or of the way they play. Something’s got to give.

8 questions for eight 8 players.

Group A

Will Roger Federer finish the year ranked world #1?

Do I even care after the year he’s had? I know it goes down in the history books, but let’s just say I’m mildly horrified by how much speculation and controversy this question has caused.

For what it’s worth, I think he will. Nadal is as out of sorts as I’ve perhaps ever seen him uninjured. He’ll need to pull off a near miracle to be in with a fighting chance. I know Rafa’s conjured up miracles in the past, but experience suggests the end of the season’s not that best place to begin searching for them.

As for the WTF I expect Federer to give a great account of himself even if he doesn’t go on to win the whole thing. There’s no reason to suppose he’s not capable of playing at least as well as Djoko has been these last two weeks.

Will Andy Murray benefit from the home advantage?

I should bloody well hope so. But after what happened at Wimbledon I’m not nearly as sure as I once was.

Brits are quite a cynical bunch, not given over to displays of emotion at the best of times, and if you know anything about how unglamorous South East London is, or the history of the failed Millenium Dome, now known as the O2 Arena, you’ll understand why one might be forgiven for thinking the portents don’t look particularly good.

My theory about Murray is that he’s near incapable of performing at the height of his powers for two consecutive weeks. After winning Valencia without so much as trickling a sweat bead, he bowed out early in Paris.

Which means he should be good to go, right about now.

He’s had nearly two weeks to recover, and Federer’s set the scene nicely with some wonderfully colourful trash talk.

So WHY TF should he not do well at the WTF?

Can Juan Martin Del Potro follow up on his very flashy Flushing performance?

I’d like to think so but I doubt it will be at London.

I think he’s more or less burnt himself out physically and mentally as is evident by the fact that he’s retired with injury in the last two Masters events. It’ll likely be next year before we see him at his best again.

Why do I get the feeling not being able to give it his all, after a year that saw him defeat Fed in the final of a Grand Slam, won’t bother him in the slightest?

What now for Fernando Verdasco?

Ok NandyMan, so you muscled your way into the top ten on the back of one of the best matches of the year, and after a brief period that remains unaccounted for, were able to play sufficiently well to finish the season amongst the very best.

Now what?

At the beginning of the year Nando didn’t feature very prominently on my confidence radar, in fact he was barely there at all.

Don’t look now, but if he’s not sharp from the get go next year, it might only be a matter of months before he’s reacquainted with the less frilly environment of the top twenty; and it will take more than just a furious forehand to avert that.

As for the WTF, he’s more than earnt his place at the winner’s table – sometimes on the back of matches that were too painful to watch, and that he had trouble finishing; maybe, just maybe, the accolade of qualifying alone might be enough.

Don’t see him feeling the need to fight his way past injury.

Group B

WTF has happened to Rafael Nadal, and are the WTF the best place to understand it?

First things first. Rafa’s not injured. Not as far as I know. He may not be as vibrant as he was at the beginning of the year, but he’s not injured.

He’s not been the same since he was forced to forego Wimbledon, a period in which we now know he was dealing with the fallout from his parents’ divorce, and since then his tennis has been sketchy at best.

Not being able to perform leads to it’s own set of problems of not gaining sufficient invaluable court time opposite the world’s best.

It happens to the best of us (well ok, maybe reaching WTF doesn't happen to the best of us).

I’d like to see him play well, but he’s unfortunately been grouped with a bunch of players particularly adept at taking a piece out of him.

I harped on about how I wanted to see him face off against Big Rob last month, but I don’t now know that there’s any satisfaction to be derived from watching him being butchered, vulnerable as he now seems, ill equipped to fend off Robin’s mighty blows.

Ditto Davydenko.

And Ditto Djoko, who’s not normally the Rafa Bane that Kolya and Big Rob are.

Still, Rafa’s surprised us before and you’d be a fool to write him off, but I’ll be very surprised to see him reach the semis.

Can Novak Djokovic keep it going and cap off one of his best indoor seasons ever?

Do you know, I’m not sure he can.

You already know my thoughts on ‘Born Again Novak’, and I know it seems silly to bet against the best current elite performer on tour.

I do believe he’ll make the semis (though it might not prove as easy as many seem to think).

Let’s just say that three out of three might prove to be a tournie too far and that he might get more than a surprise from Federer and Murray’s direction.

That’s if Kolya doesn’t get there first.

Why has Nikolay Davydenko only made the finals once in four appearances?

Alright, I already know the answer to that question. Federer.

But let’s not forget that Rafa is largely inactive during this part of the year, and that Nik is one of the fittest players on tour, not given over to wildly fluctuating performances. Nice window of opportunity you have there son.

I like that he reached the finals last year. Fed was out with a bad back. Has he missed his best chance?

Where have you been all my life Robin Soderling?

Alright, I realise I’m a minority within a minority here, but I rather like Big Rob.

I like his imposing, antagonistic presence.

I like his big swinging groundies.

I like it, that his double handed backhand is as fiercely struck (if not more so) than his forehand.

I like it, that hitting the lines or near abouts isn’t the exception but the rule.

I like it that he’s a quirky and slightly misunderstood figure.

But most of all, I like it that he’s turned inelegance into an art form.

Oh, there’s also the possibility that *actual* Armageddon might take place when he takes to court opposite Rafa.

All very interesting, ticks all the boxes, dontcha-think?

Well ok, maybe not for everyone, but he does for me. Shoot me down, but I was even rather glad to see him make the cut at the expense of an injured Andy Roddick.

Now I’d like to see him take the next step by improving his record against Federer. Juan-Marteen did it – why shouldn’t he?

I dunno how far he’ll make it at the WTF this time round, given the fact that he’s been battling injury and that very dubious hung over performance he gave in Paris, but let’s just say that I look forward to him being a dependable top ten presence next year.

Read More...

Jubilant Marat and A French Proposition

(FREDERIC BROWN/AFP/Getty Images)

Getty captioned this image “Marat Safin jubilates after beating Fernando Gonzales of Chile…”.

It’s the kind of jubilance I normally express at the thought of paying off my utility bills at the end of the month.

Perhaps the right approach given the circumstances. I actually can’t remember the last time he won back to back matches; certainly not against someone as illustrious as Gonzo. Though it does still feel as if he’s itching to leave the ATP party.

That said, a win over Rafa wouldn’t be the most improbable result in the world right now. Particularly if he is in some sort of groove. Or am I now being too jubilant?

This could also prove to be a very interesting week for Robin Soderling, who has much to gain from winning an event like this.

I know Nando-Djoko is the other big marquee match, but I’m rather liking (and preferring) Big Rob’s chances in this half of the draw, particularly as neither of those other two have been that inspired over the last few months.

I know he’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but I haven’t changed my opinion on his flat groundies. It would be positively spiffing, to see him qualify for London, particularly after what happened in RG.

It wasn’t my intention to follow Tokyo this week, but I’ve just realised that with Delpo’s early exit, the remaining top three seeds are all French. Scratch that. Gilles was ‘upset’ by Mikhail Youzhny. (Nice to see him pocketing a win again)

So here’s the deal.

What we have here is a Fedal-less event, where the top seed -- the US Open Champion -- has gone out in the opening round. Of the remaining contenders, I can only see one Stan Wawrinka causing any vexation.

(Photo: AFP/Getty)

I’m not saying all is forgiven, but a win here for La Monf or Jo-Willy might just lead me to reconsider my troubled relationship with French tennis.

Consider all your French bridges burnt however, if you return with another loss.

Read More...

Janitor Man

(SAEED KHAN/AFP/Getty Images)

Been something of a mixed season for both these gents.

After returning from that foot injury earlier this year, and with this now being his third title of the year, Niki has just about completed reprising his former role of cleaning up in the absence of Rafa and Roger. Very much the janitor of the top ten, just like the good ol’days. Though I miss Davydork already. Brighten up man.

Fernando’s year has been straddling that fine line between disappointment and cautious optimism. More Verdant than Verdasco you might say, and not at all similar to the unassailable figure that opened up his account back in Melbourne with arguably the finest Slam Semi we’ve seen this year, and acquiring virginal top ten standing in the process. Unfamiliar territory, though the future looked so very bright.

If he’d continued in that vein, he would probably have been around #5 in the world by now. That he’s managed to lengthen (and strengthen) his stay there is no less commendable though, and in stark contrast to the way Gael more or less, peek-a-booed his way in and back out once again

You might think that with his hobbling body showing unmistakable signs of end-of-season breakdown, that now would be a good time to pull the plug on a year that hasn’t been half bad.

Except there’s this small matter of the year end championships to consider.

Of the remaining three places up for grabs, one almost certainly belongs to A-Rod who’s nearly 1400 points ahead of Jo-Will, his nearest competition. But aside from that, with two Masters and four 500 events to go, little can really be said; and though Jo-Willy, Niki-Dorko and Nando are within kissing distance of one another, the remaining two positions might well end up being taken by Soderling or this man.

 (PORNCHAI KITTIWONGSAKUL/AFP/Getty Images)

Gilles picked up the title in Bangkok yesterday, and with it brought an end to a drought lasting over a year. I’d be chuffed too.

I’d say woohoo or something equally sanguine, except I don’t deal in French wares any more. And the fact that Troicki bounced out Jo-Will 1-6, 6-2, 6-3 in the semis to make his runners-up appearance here only strengthens my resolve against the dark and somewhat charismatic forces of Style over Substance.

I don’t take too kindly to being hung out to dry over and over again; and dealing with the seemingly implacable disconnect between talent and form, that seems to grow even larger in the presence of charisma. You’ve Marat and Sveta to thank for that.

Read More...

Flushing Meadows: Woz out-grinds Oudin, Djoko grinds out Nando

Wozniacki d. Oudin 6-2, 6-2

No I'm not going to gloat.

I may have found the Henin comparisons tough to swallow, but Melanie deserves unalloyed praise and support for what she's managed to achieve here this year.

Last year she was outside of the top 200. Her resolve here has ensured that next week, she'll be a top 50 player. A quality, in perhaps unsurprisingly scant supply this year. And for that, I applaud her.

(Photo by Jim McIsaac/Getty Images)

Now on to those unflattering match stats. 5 winners from Woz and 43 UFEs from Oudin. That there's the match wrapped and tied up. In all it's grinding glory.

Oudin is definitely a more aggressive player than the Woz, though I hope you'll understand why I think that that's not actually saying very much.

The problem yesterday was that Melanie wasn't half as consistent as she's been in any of her previous matches, where she's worked her way into a point before letting rip a winner the Press have gone so gaga over this last week. Though I wonder, how much of that was to do with how difficult she was finding it to break down the Woz defences.

Absurdly unspectacular, and exactly what was needed. Thank you very much.

Difficult to get inspired by Woz's play, and I do get the feeling she'll need to play a little more outside of her comfort zone against Wickmayer, who looked to me to be swinging very freely.

Federer d. Soderling 6-0, 6-3, 6-7, 7-6

I was looking forward to this one, despite the 11-0 H2H.

The funny thing was that Robin came out of the blocks playing spectacular tennis; the trouble was that so did Federer, who quickly smothered any momentum Robin might have otherwise managed to derive.

Perhaps understandably winded , Robin looked a little lost in set two and let things slip.

It must have been the racquet he broke at the end of that set, but something clicked and for the next two sets we had a match on our hands. And it was more of that 'Lights Out' stuff, providing yet more revision material for Murray's unexpectedly early Autumn break.

(Photo: EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images)

A match that might gone to five had Robin managed to secure more of a foothold earlier on.

Despite some of the reports I've read, I think this was probably Federer's best performance yet, and I still don't see anyone beating him in this form.

Djokovic d. Verdasco 7-6, 1-6, 7-5, 6-2

What a horror of a first set. The even scoreline only reflects the fact that no one was prepared to commit to anything, preferring instead to tentatively poke at each other in hope of a mistake.

Yeah Djoko's a grinder now. And I in turn, intend to continue grinding that point further home.

Grind. Grind. Grind.

Unless he's forced out of his remission, which is what happened in the latter two sets.

Though it wouldn't have made much difference had he continued playing the same way, since Nando's stomach tears, and foot injury ensured a one sided fourth set. Respect for playing through the pain though.
Read More...