Monte Carlo: Quantum Fluctuations

7 consecutive MC titles. Takeout: Rafa wins on clay even when he sucks. But you already knew that.




Except it shouldn’t have been that way – not this year.

Whilst its always good to see Rafa “come home” and begin winning again on a surface as organic to him as sunlight is to photosynthesis, I started off the week guessing that he’ll be upset at least once this clay court season. Nothing I saw in MC changed my mind.

Without wishing to get too specific he hasn’t “looked right” since the year began – those who’ve observed him closely (or who’ve heard/read me bleating endlessly about it) know exactly what I mean.

The only reason I keep bringing it up is because it doesn’t seem like its down to any specific technical failing and/or injury. Which, in my mind, makes it worse.

Some of his shot (mis)selection has been straight out of a comic book. The UFEs, meanwhile, have had all of the uncertainty and spontaneity of quantum fluctuations.

We saw it in both the IW/Miami finals, we saw it in the Miami QF vs Berd, we saw it against Murray in the SFs, and we saw it again in the final.

Does it surprise me that Rafa, being Rafa, found a way through on clay – something not possible, just last month, on a hard court vs. Nole? Not in the slightest. But let us please not pretend Daveed didn’t entirely blow his chances (of which there were many).


To put it bluntly, this is about as ineffectual as Rafa gets on a clay court.  A better player (like say Nole or Fed) would almost certainly have called him on it.  A “lesser”but nevertheless solid player like Daveed might be expected to too, but should, in any case, have forced a third set.

And yet, the vast body of reflection and analysis following the final will inevitably be of the “night follows day”, “sun rises in the east”, “Rafa wins on clay” variety.

I’m afraid I simply don’t see it that way. Not quite.

Foolish to argue against a 230-16 [93%] win/loss record on clay forged mostly without resistance over 7 years – as we saw, even playing as badly as he was, Rafa can be relied on to find options on clay which simply don’t  appear to exist anywhere else.

All the same, things don’t appear to me to be as certain this year as they plainly have been in years gone by. And I don’t think I’m alone.


***



One last word on Murray. Well two actually:

1) The SF wasn’t simply the best performance I’ve seen from Murray since before his slump began (things could hardly have gotten any worse). It might even have been the best I’ve seen him play on clay.

Why is this SUCH a big deal?

A Masters-1000 semi final on his “worst” surface (more on that later) and his first ever set off Rafa on clay, all after his poorest spell of tennis since he entered the top ten.

Only, you wouldn’t know just how well Murray played if you read the match reports, all of which were at pains to point out (correctly) that Rafa played like horsesh*t,  particularly in the 2nd set. He did, no point in disputing that – its what I’ve been saying all season.  But not crediting Murray would be like claiming Rafa only won the last set because Murrays elbow began to play up as the cortizone injection wore off.

Strange how some are only willing to recognise Rafa’s poor play when it’s consistent with their attempts to undercut Murray. Else its all “Night follows Day”, “The Sun rises in the East”, “Rafa wins on clay”…

2) I’ve never really understood why clay should be Murrays “worst” surface.

I get why he might prefer hard or even grass, but “worst” seems to carry an additional level of stigma that I don’t feel is warranted for a player as skilled as Murray.

Fed and Nole have the results they do on clay not because of any particular adeptness on the surface – but because of their adeptness at TENNIS.

The same can almost be said to apply to Murray. By the same token, if he loses on clay, it will be for all the same reasons he sometimes loses on hard courts. Namely passivity and a questionable temperament. Yep, those two cretins again. Feel free to rip on him for that (I know I do), but lets stop pretending clay is his “worst” surface.

Read More...

Quote of the Day

 

"I will try my best. The last two matches I have won against him," he said. "In Paris last year I killed him on clay and hopefully that result is still in the back of his mind.

"After beating Roger Federer there is nothing I can't do."

-- Jurgen Melzer on David Ferrer, whom he plays in the semis

Read More...

Monte Carlo: Noticeboard

It somehow chimes with the decadence of a place, where real estate costs an average of $47650 per sq metre, for it to be one of the most profitable events in terms of ranking points (and hard cash), yet not require it to be mandatory.




Kind of like saying, “To hell with you and your ATP stewardship – mandatory or not, we’ll still get all the best players – hell, they’ll come to us!”

Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Rafa	Muzz	Ferru	Yoyo

LEGEND
Top Guns
Hot Stuff
Sympathy Vote

Mock me all you want, but I STILL say Rafa’s ripe for an upset this clay court season.

Read More...

Barca Roundup and Something Inspiring

-- I’m not inclined to apologise for the lack of Barcelona coverage.

The truth is, I’ve hardly been following Barca – my default position being that, with Rafa out, this should be Robin’s for the taking.

With nothing more than Dasco and (until this morning) lil’ol Thiemo de Bakker standing between Robin and the title, victory here would not so much serve as a signature-win, as losing would be a telling loss.

It’s not that Dasco can’t hurt Soderling, more that he’d need him to have a bad day. And right now I’d say he’s having rather more of those than Robin.

-- Sod’s learnt to slide on clay.

I kid ye not.

As little as I’ve seen of Barca, I did manage to catch parts of his match against Thiemo de Bakker today. And sure enough, there it was. Clear as day.

It was one of those moments of discovery when time itself appears to stand still - with Strauss’s “Sunrise” score playing in the background.

Trouble is, it currently looks about as natural (and as much of a stunt) as this.

Still, I can’t but help admire that he thinks it important to try.

-- My (very public) reservations about French tennis aside, Tsonga almost had me convinced these past two weeks that he’d “discovered himself” on clay.

His statements to that effect, his last two matches in Monte and second consecutive win over Angsty-Almagro in Barca this week, were almost too good to be true.

Which means, of course, that I suspect they were too good to be true.

I didn’t thankfully, get to see him fold against de Bakker yesterday, but from the reports I’ve read it was a torrid, sorry affair.

I’ve no doubt that he should be able to play on clay – it sits well with my view that clay court tennis has been rebranded over the past few years as a somewhat flatter, more aggressive affair, a not so distant cousin of hard (or indeed grass) court tennis.

In fact so sure am I of Tsonga’s ability on any surface, that I believe he’ll make the migration wholesale - foibles, warts and all.

***

So the Rome draws out. First impressions – Rafa and Roger in the same half, with a semi final face off in the works. That’s not exactly news of course, except no one seems to remember the last time this happened.

Scratch a little deeper, however, and you’ll quickly see that that’s only the (uninteresting) half of it. For this appears to me to be the most lopsided, systematically skewed draw since Daveed and Goliath squared off against one another in the “Valley of Elah Open” as the top two seeds.

In the blue corner:

• Fed to face Gulbis/Baggy in his opening match. Really? Really.
• Rafa most likely set to face Kohlschreiber in his. Yeah, His Right-Honourable Seed-Slayin’ self.
• Hell, let’s throw Sod and Big Berd in there too. I mean they can always be relied upon to capitulate, right?
• And just to prove to you we really are intent on painting every last bit of that town red, we’ll also throw in the Croatian Duo of the slightly improbable winner of IW and this year’s Delpo in for good measure too?

Meanwhile, over in the dead red corner we have:

• Djoko (who must be thanking his lucky stars),
• Tsonga/Dasco (not the toughest of tough cookies – at least not with the dough the French Tennis Federation use),
• Ferrero/Ferrer (clay courters have a place in tennis I believe, though I’m no longer convinced it’s in the clay court season),
• Muzza (in a self-proclaimed existential crisis)
• and..er...Janko Tipsarevic. Whom I only mentioned once in the past week because he can’t be a*sed to twitter.

(Photo: AFP)

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...

Monte Carlo: Elephants on clay?

Nadal d. Ferrero 6-4 6-2

He lost only two games in reaching the quarters – and only a further six in putting paid to the Mosquito.

Is there still an elephant in the room?

If there is, I should imagine it’s fearing extinction.

That said, I’m still happy to err on the side of caution.

I don’t think we can dismiss what happened in the second half of that match in Miami as an irrelevance.

I’ve no doubt that Rafa will rebound on his favourite surface – I only expect the journey to be a little bumpier this time round.

The upshot of course, is I won’t be catastrophising in the way I expect much of the media too if, God forbid, he somehow doesn’t win all three of Monte/Barca/Rome – which probably ought to be collapsed into a single title anyway, with Rafa getting a bye to the final each year.

Djokovic d. Nalbandian 6-2, 6-3

Tis a shame.

Not the cheesepuff victory pose (though that too is, in it’s own way, quite damning).

This should have been match of the day, but Daveed never really got going and truth be told wasn’t really allowed to (No matter Daveed – you still win the ‘hippest’ hip surgery award).

Not that I’m complaining - Nole was arguably the second best clay courter out there last year – if he’s begun finding his feet on clay (rather than his feet of clay) it exponentially increases our chances of a Rafa/Nole final.

I hear they hit a good ball on dirt.

(Photos by Julian Finney/Getty Images)

Read More...

Monte Carlo: Muzz’s Sticky Patch.

The Big Guns were finally out today – though not all entirely in full force.

"I wasn't very good today," said Murray, whose first-serve percentage fell as low as 32% during the second set.

"It was the first time in a few years that the court felt so small. I just could not find the court. When it's like that, it's difficult to play.

…

"I tried different things. I tried serve and volleying a couple of times. I tried hitting some high balls. It did not really make a whole lot of difference."

-- BBC Tennis

It’s official. Muzz is going through what in polite circles is delicately referred to as "a sticky patch”.

Kohlschreiber d. Murray 6-2, 6-1

He’d murmured something about not having “a clear head” and being "subconsciously annoyed" since that loss in the final of Oz – to which I’d, accordingly, only paid the most subconscious of attention.

Quite how out of sorts however, became excruciatingly apparent today.

First things first. Kohlschreiber in your first match of the clay court season!?? Really!?

Particularly telling however, was the lack of any apparent emotion at being bundled out of that first set 6-2 –no gnashing of teeth, none of the familiar agonised thrashing or writhing around he’s been so heavily criticised for and which has arguably dug him out of similar situations in the past.

We all saw what happened to Djokovic after he elected to tone things down – Murray’s not half as brash at the worst of times.

Gnash away I say. Anything but this nightmarish, nugatory no-show.

Nadal d. de Bakker 6-1, 6-0

Seemingly a rebuff to the concerns I raised in my last post.

I’m not intent on raining on anyone’s parade – but please it’s Thiemo de Bakker people, not Novak Djokovic.

Djokovic d. Serra 6-2 6-3

Not the easy win the score line would suggest.

Unlike Murray, Djoko did elect to berate himself out of the stupor that had threatened to settle in during the early parts of the second set – sometimes quite vociferously.

I always look to clay for an upturn in Djoko’s fortunes – especially after the spell he had last year – the only time during the entire season he actually looked the part of a top five player.

But for now, he’s still serving like this.

We’ve Todd Martin to thank for that.

Nalbandian d. Youzhny 4-6 6-3 7-6

"This is maybe the start of another career for me", he said at the start of Miami.

Nalbie continues to defy medical science with what I've now no qualms in thinking of as the best return I've ever seen from hip surgery.

Youznhy and Daveed salvaged what I was otherwise set to write off as an unimpressive days tennis.

***

This is Jo-Willy after putting out an embittered Nicolas Almagro in a riveting two set corker yesterday.

MUHAHAHAAHA…my thoughts exactly.

What’s probably more significant is he termed the win his “best match on clay”.

I dunno much about Jo’s own estimation of his prowess on dirt – he strikes me as an all-courter that can do damage on any surface - but it had to have been good for him to say something like that. It was.

It’s unlikely to be any more competitive than in Miami (I should say it’s far likelier to be significantly less so), but he’s in Rafa’s quarter.

Duly noted I hope.

MUHAHAHAAHA.

(Photos: Getty)

Read More...

Creative Differences.

"Todd is a fantastic person," said Djokovic. "He has so much experience and was willing to share everything with me. There are no hard feelings but we just decided it was not working. It was probably a question of understanding what kind of person I am."

…

"At the ATP Finals in London my shoulder was tired and the body automatically started to make adjustments because of that," Djokovic explained. "Then we tried a slightly different action and it all got very complicated. So now I am just going back to my original action."

-- Fox News

I’m sure Todd is a very nice person too. But that’s a very telling comment on understanding the kind of person Djoko is.

So what was it? Tactical disputes? Personality issues? A culture clash? Too many cooks? Creative Differences even?

The culture clash theory is the one that’s been most widely pored over, with suggestions of Todd’s somewhat milder temperament being at odds with Djoko’s “outwardly cocky and self-confident” personality.

That’s hardly news, is it? Even less impressed with the reductive image of the “emotional European” – especially as Marion Vajda (who I’m rather a fan of) strikes me as one of the most composed coaches on tour.

It is, however, of some relief to know that that horrendous javelin-throwing service action wasn’t simply a figment of my imagination – can’t say I’m sorry to see it go.

The most obvious questions on the appointment of the relatively unknown Leon Smith as Davis Cup Captain revolve on the extraordinary lengths the LTA seem to have gone in order to placate Andy Murray.

Andy and Greg, you’ll remember, are not the best of friends.

"When Roger Draper came into the LTA it was all about a world-class leadership team, world-class people and this is it; four years down the track we are putting someone in charge of the men's game and the Davis Cup who has none of these qualities," he [Mark Petchey] told Sky Sports.

"So are we saying the strategy before was wrong and now we're on the right one, or are we actually saying we don't have a clue and are sticking somebody in the job who we think might persuade Andy Murray to play Davis Cup?

"Andy will make his own decision and I know Andy, he was happy to go with the majority view of what the players wanted in terms of a Davis Cup captain - and the majority of those players wanted Greg Rusedski."

-- Sky Sports

Were the presence of Andy Murray not absolutely essential to Team GB’s future success, you could almost argue that this reeks of a mild strain of nepotism.

Why should national strategy be predicated on the say-so of any one player (however celebrated)?

Why should he be able naysay the appointment of someone the rest of the players have approved and seem to respect?

Not that that’s remotely close to what I think is happening here.

Call me naive, but haven’t people always had to knuckle down alongside those they wouldn’t normally share a drink with, not just in tennis but in almost all professional walks of life?

However much he may dislike Rusedksi, Murray’s objections to Davis Cup seem to me to have rather more to do with with wanting to focus on winning Slams.

What if despite these attempts at appeasement (if that’s what they are), he still doesn’t turn up to play?

"Leon's my friend, but I need to still do what's right for me," said Murray.

"If I want to play, I'm playing for the team, it's not that I'm playing because Leon's the captain.

"I hope that was not the reason why he became captain. I don't think that's the way to make a decision on something as big as this.”

-- BBC Tennis

Oops.

***

There’s an elephant in the room.

The media have been astonishingly muted about it, but let that not deceive us.

With what we know of Rafa’s form (and knee), the usual tally of clay court titles remains an uncertainty. And that spells trouble.

It’s not that an early loss at any of the upcoming events would be entirely catastrophic – for all we know it might be exactly what he needs – more that it would alter the landscape in a way that might not be reversible.

Still not completely sure what I mean by that, so I’ll say no more.

Never has the clay season been more or less about Rafa.

Read More...

What sort of Tennis Tournaments do you Rejoice in where YOU come from?

"I don't rejoice in tennis tournaments at all", Alice said, "some of their names I rather dislike - especially the ATP 250's".

"Of course they have geo-sensitive names", the Gnat remarked carelessly.

"I never knew them to."

"What's the use of their having names the Gnat said, "if you can't tell where they're held?"

"No use to them,' said Alice; "but it's useful to the Sponsors who name them, I suppose. If not, why do events have names at all?"

-- 'Alison Lang through the Looking Glass'

***

And just like that, the world's blue again.

Well tennis courts are anyway. Is anybody else struck by just how bloody quickly it's happened?

It seems just yesterday that a teary eyed Federer gave us that runners-up acceptance speech in Melbourne, we witnessed that seismic Rafa upset in Paris, and that Federer was finally and rightfully crowned GOAT after serving 50 aces past A-Rod. Oh wait, that last one was just yesterday, almost.

Three staggering images for three different surfaces.




Those first two might have touched a nerve. I know they both did for me.

Time for some band aid with what I consider to be perhaps the two most wonderfully iconic moments of 2009.






I feel better all ready :)


And yet, apart from a few pockets of descent, where clay court tennis will obstinately continue to be played out like a peculiar experiment in denial over the next month, the rest of the year will be blue, momentum-conserving and feature elastically perfect bounces.

If, like me, you find post-Wimby July to be by far the most boring tennis month of the year, and if like me you also rejoice in the power of oxymoronic totalities, you too will be spectacularly apathetic towards the tennis on offer in July.

Even more so than official downtime in December where, despite the absence of tennis, there is at least the sense that the lull in sumptuosities may be necessary to fully savour (and recover from) the decadence you've been party to. And have partied to.

I think what makes it so difficult for me is that it sits there quite unsure of it's mission in life, sandwiched between that period consisting of arguably the two most important months in the tennis calendar, but not quite yet at the stage where the action has cranked up in earnest in the build up to the US Open.

And what do they do, but fill this interval act up with tier 3 clay court tennis. What an unimaginatively tragic knee-jerk reaction that is. Wasn't the clay court season meant to have ended in the first week of June? You can hardly describe it as a 'season' if you choose to have another three week stretch a couple of months later.

And yet Gstaad might have what it takes to challenge Monte Carlo's standing as the world's most scenic clay court event.

I want to live, work, and play there...
(Photo: ATP)

Clay or no clay, surroundings like that I do rejoice in.

Whatever your thoughts on clay court tennis in mid-July (and Michael Stich overseeing one of it's more important events), I've yet to hear a convincing argument as to why we can't use this stretch to accomodate a slightly lengthier grass court season.

Newport shows us it can be done. Collective rejoicing for Rhode Island! Huzzah for Rajeev Ram! (Who also picked up the doubles title there with Jordan Kerr)

And as to the rest of the month, I'll probably only be tuning into the less swanky version of Hamburg, that will be featuring eight of the worlds top twenty.

That's pretty much what all the top players will be doing I imagine. All except Nikolay that is, who'll proudly be doing his annual bit for the "Society for the Revival of Tennis Played on Surfaces Incongruous with their Position in the Tennis Calendar" and cementing his claim to being the ATP's contribution to the 'Consistency over Quality' debate. He got started this week in Stuttgart.

I also find it difficult to get overly-roused up by the happenings at Washington (Legg Mason Classic), LA (presented by Farmers Insurance), and Stanford (Bank of the West Classic). That's nobody's fault but my own. It's why I missed out on the first act of del Potro's meteoric rise up the rankings last year.

These events (and the Premier/Masters 1000s that follow them) form part of the US Open Series, the eventual winner of which will see their earnings double at the US Open. After winning the US Open in 2005, Clisjters was on the receiving end of a $2.2M payout that to this day stands as the largest ever payday in women's sports. (Of course Swiss Big-Cheese topped that in 2007 by earning $2.4M, the largest ever payout in US Open history. He does things like that).

But very little of those earlier events are televised here, and the fact that their titles read like the front page of the FT serves as an immediate turn off.

Though it is refreshing to see that the LA Women's Tennis Championships (is being) presented by Herbalife, and not some Insurance Conglomerate headquartered in the Cayman Islands.

But I'm not sure I rejoice in it.


Read More...

The Full Monte Pt 4...

Well you didn't seriously think that would end in any other way did you? Did you? Because I must confess for a few brief moments during the opening three games of the final set -- all forty minutes of them -- I thought we might have a an upset on our hands. With all the rewriting of history (and my clay court guide) that implies.

(Photo Credit: AP)

Yes, I'm afraid I went a little soft in the head during those pivotal moments. But can you blame me? Apart from a small timeout for some minor treatment to his back there were no signs of the fitness problems we normally question Novak for. But what really stood out for me in Novak's return to form (coz that's what it is), was the variety and cunning he displayed from all over the court.

Here was a man who clearly recognised that while he's capable of (and will need to play) what Pete Fleming calls 'lights out tennis' from the back of the court, that that alone woudn't be enough to win him this match (never mind the unsustainability of it all), and if he is to pull off the impossible will need to bring something a little more 'Abagnalian' in nature to to keep Rafa guessing.

So that's exactly how he played it, pushing extremely hard (and risking fatigue) with his natural prowess from the back of the court when the situation demanded it, but then suddenly shortening the points with well crafted drop shots and some net play that at times seemed to have it all. His half volley cross court winner would have been my shot of the day had Rafa not been Rafa and made that amazing get (a cross court winner as it turned out) of what should have been a point ending drop volley. If you don't know the one I mean, it's the winner that left Djoko spending what seemed like a minute semi-prostrate on court.

As for Rafa, well yes he was expected to win, but this win is more noteworthy I believe, not because he's the first man in the Open Era to win here five times in a row, nor that he's now level with Federer at 14 Masters Titles apiece (Agassi tops the list at 17). As far as I'm concerned Rafa's going to be posting more 'Borgian' stats over the next few year. What makes this one a little special is that Rafa was significantly below his best for large parts of the match. Don't pretend you Rafanatics didn't notice how wayward and erratic Rafa's (normally dependable) inside out forehand was, or how poorly he served in the second set. But like a true tennis great, still managed a (relatively) comfortable win over the #3 player in the world playing the match of his life. That really is as good as it sounds.

***

Parting Thoughts.

-- There'll be no more talk here of whether or not Djoko is 'back'. He's not back. If this performance is anything to go by, I'd argue he's moved forward - for all the reasons I've already mentioned.

-- Similarly all references to the change of racquet being an issue are henceforth off limits. If it ever was a problem (I'd argue his difficulties began long before the change), he's learnt to wield it quite masterfully now.

-- Djoko knew he wasn't going to win this match from the back of the court and came with a bag of tricks more bulging than usual. He's added a new shot to his armoury. Quite possible he nicked this one from Murray. Its the high bouncing moonball he uses to gain some extra time and get back into a point when stretched out wide. You've gotta be careful though - if it lands too short, the points over, but he used it more than once and played it deep enough to keep Rafa pinned back.

-- The drop shot made a reappearance. Quite a few times in fact. Not as an act of desperation but as a well calculated shortening of the point.

-- 9/9 net points won by Djoko in the second set. Anyone else want to argue against the value of coming in against Rafa on clay? My stat of the day.

-- The first three games of the final set took 40 mins to complete. My second stat of the day.

-- Stanislas is not a choker. He's a double choker.

-- Andy Murray is a good clay courter but needs to work on his movement. He also needs to play more aggressively throughout a clay court match. Particularly in three setters.

--Another guy that's 'back' this week: Nikolay Davydenko. His wins over Karlovic and Nalbandian erased any thoughts I might have had of a slow, unsteady return to tour. I'd go as far as to suggest he was the better player in the match against Murray, only brought down by his inability to keep a ball in court during the last 20 mins of play.

-- Nikolay and Djoko are amongst the best 3 or 4 clay courters in the world.

-- Too early to say whether either of them have overtaken Federer on this surface. Rome will answer some tough questions for him.

-- Let me just say this now as it probably won't ring so true ever again: Roger? Honeymoon's over.

-- I'm still undecided whether Flavio Fognini most resembles Ken (from Barbie and Ken) in tenniswear, or a cheesey Pilates instructor - you know those self styled Adonis types that seem to feature so much in those workout videos. That 'redder than red' look he was sporting against Cilic was also screaming 80s superhero to me.

-- It is possible to beat Rafa on clay. You can take a set from him. If you play out of your skin. But unless you can back that game up with David Ferrer like fitness and intensity, will most likely age nearly 20 years in the process and play the remaining set like a senior member of the seniors tour.

-- Corollary: If David Ferrer had the groundstrokes of Novak Djokovic we may have had the closest you can get to a contender against Rafa on clay.

-- Fernando Verdasco was not at his best at this event despite his quarter final showing and 6-2,6-1 cutdown of Ferrer. But his peformance was still several levels above Ferrer's which in turn was slightly better than Maran Cilic's poor showing.

-- Fashion faux pas of the event? Well there were quite a few candidates ranging from Djoko's blue not-so-suede shoes, Oscar Hernandez's black socks on white shoes, but nothing quite so foul as Flavio Cipolla's black leathery shorts. I'm pretty sure these are the ones but am almost glad I can't find a decent pic.

***

This weeks Rousing Rhetoric:

Novak Djokovic - As above.

Andy Murray - Keeping in mind his self professed difficulties adjusting to the surface, a semi final loss to Rafa is not bad for your first clay court outing of the year.

Ivan Ljubicic - Another great week for the Gentle Giant, including a win over Del-Potro.

Andreas Beck - First Masters quarter final for a guy more familiar with the Futures circuit, and for looking remarkably similar to someone I went to school with.

This week's Idle Gossip:

David Ferrer - I know he went out to Ferdasco, but there's something quite disgraceful about a 6-2,6-1 scoreline from a top tier clay courter.

Ernests Gulbis - Beginning to lose faith in young Ernie - nothing wrong with a first round loss to someone as experienced as Kohlschreiber but there's been too many similar losses these months gone by.

Tommy Robredo - I don't normally come down so heavily on anyone possessing a single handed backhand, but I'm beginning to think his best is far behind him. Read More...

The Full Monte Pt 3...

I sometimes resist the urge to post too soon after a match as it usually means you haven't had sufficient downtime to form a considered opinion.

Not today. Today it was dead simple. Rafa and his side of the court was as impregnable as you might expect. But if Murray had started off playing with the aggression he displayed from 2-5 down in the second set, we may have had a three setter. That Rafa would still have won.

Instead he broke the second law of playing Rafael Nadal on clay (the one that comes right after "Don't play Rafael Nadal on clay"): "Never try to take on Rafa from the back of the court". I say 'take on', but I think we all know that's very quickly reduced to 'struggling to stay in the rally' as you're forcibly manhandled on to the 'Rafael Nadal Treadmill'. Federer knows a thing or two about that.

But what got me was that it almost looked a conscious decision on the part of Corretja and the rest of Team Murray to open proceedings in this laid back way. A kind of reverse psychology ploy maybe: Goodness knows, no one else DARES to play that way against Nadal, so what better way to keep him confused and 2nd guessing what you're really up to?

It's got to be hasn't it? Murray's surely smart enough to know that that kind of passive play is not sustainable for even a couple of games.

Whatever crafty games they may have been up to, Murray overplayed his hand. To be fair, he did look to be trying to crank things up earlier on, but his efforts were thwarted by not being able to put enough first serves in and perhaps more shockingly his trademark cross court double hander deserting him.

And then it happened. In a puff of smoke the terrier emerged and started serving bombs, running down balls and finding the lines in rallies he had no right to even be part of. It was all rather reminiscent of that US Open semi last year.

Of course it's completely ridiculous to suggest that anyone play that way for 2 or 3 sets. For one thing Nadal probably won't let you. And if you do manage to find some rhythm, he raises his game in that frustratingly effective way. Like he did in that 2nd set tie break.

***

Had Wawrinka made the final, there's no question he'd be part of this week's winners list. He'd built up some great momentum this week, even if you chose to ignore that win over Mirka's husband; and he almost had me convinced.

But then it happened. Losing his way completely in the 2nd set and then handing back a break in the final set. Novak may still be finding his way back to that unfathomable curiosity we call 'his best', but he's playing too well to let a double-choke-on-the-rocks like this slip by.

Singles - Semi-finals
[1] R Nadal (ESP) d [4] A Murray (GBR) 62 76(4)
[3] N Djokovic (SRB) d [13] S Wawrinka (SUI) 46 61 63 Read More...

The Full Monte Pt 2...

Quarter Finals Day.

I knew I was going to have a hard time of it with the Murray Nikolay match; on the one hand I've been wanting to see Murray do well on clay ever since he turned into a pit bull terrier some time around the Gasquet match at Wimbledon last year. His game I thought, if you set aside for the moment the question of dodgy fitness, was particularly well suited to dirt.

But I was also strongly backing 'He whose name shall not be sung', who had returned from injury with convincing wins over Karlovic, Del Potro and Nalbandian.

Surely not a problem that Nikolay had already played Daveed early on today?

First set not at all, in fact I thought Nikolay had the upper hand as he yanked Andy this way and that with his relentless array of trusty drives, some drop shots and a particularly well executed backhand volley. The timing of the man, and how early he takes the ball never ceases to amaze me. Murray somehow stuck it out to force a tie break in which Nikolay capitulated. Rust maybe or the result of playing too much in one day?

That's it I thought, Murray's invested too much of himself in that set - he's not going to be able to see this through; and sure enough Nikolay was quickly 4-1 up. But then something funny happened. Murray -- between his usual verbose episodes of self chastisement -- started picking at his hand and occasionally gesturing to his box. Something was clearly not right as he was struggling to keep the ball in court. He's gonna get the trainer on I thought. Nope.

As we were to find out later it was in fact blisters - but what was interesting was the effect this all had on Nikolay who from that point on was no longer himself. I'm pretty sure around 2/3 of his total UFEs materialised after that point. Murray on the other hand, apparently picking up on this, went into grinders overdrive. Nothing wrong with that of course, in fact his defence was some of the best I've seen this year. But I can't help feeling that he would have had the trainer on (and perhaps wouldn't have settled into that defensive rhythm so quickly), had Nikolay kept up the quality of his onslaught.

But it's all good see. Nikolays back with a vengeance. I don't think the loss bothered him that much - getting to quarter final of a Masters event after a lay off from injury (and beating some big, bad bigwigs along the way) is more than he probably expected. And I don't think there's any question of gamesmanship from Murray, and even if there was a little, it was well within what is normally deemed acceptable. Besides it brought about the best exhibition of 'attack v defense' we've probably had this year.

I suppose I ought to mention something about the Djoko-Nando match. Didn't live up to it's billing I'm afraid. Exceptional start from Djoko, although with a helping hand from Nando who didn't really arrive until late in the first set. It then turned into a low-quality test of fortitude. And Djoko looks like he's growing on that front daily. I keep talking about whether or not I think he's 'back' after every performance. Now I'm not even sure what that means.

He's clearly on the up, but I think his return to form seems to be taking the rather more continuous trajectory of a series of performances where he doesn't do more than exactly what is needed. He's also answered some justified questions about his fitness. That was only a three setter, but a pretty tough one. The only difference was that it wasn't hot. The obvious inference I'm drawing is that his fitness problems are rather more to do with heat and the breathing problems he's had nasal surgery for, than more general issues with endurance. If he loses tomorrow he'll have defended his points from last year. And that ain't half bad.

Bit disappointed with Nando. I really thought the clay court season would serve as a homecoming. And with the form he's been in, I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking he'd flourish. Hasn't happened yet, though it's still early days.

But it's all good as I say from Murray and Djoko, who both came through drawn out tests of physical and mental strength in their very different ways.

Singles - Quarter-finals / Simples - Quarts de Finale
[1] R Nadal (ESP) d [WC] I Ljubicic (CRO) 63 63
[3] N Djokovic (SRB) d [7] F Verdasco (ESP) 62 46 63
[4] A Murray (GBR) d [8] N Davydenko (RUS) 76(1) 64
[13] S Wawrinka (SUI) d [Q] A Beck (GER) 62 64

(Murray Image: Reuters)
Read More...

The Full Monte Pt 1...

[1] R Nadal (ESP) d J Chela (ARG) 62 63
Rafa not yet hitting quite at his best - as if that mattered.

[2] [WC] R Federer (SUI) d A Seppi (ITA) 64 64
Look at you! Sliding and everything. I don' t know how much practice Roger got on the red stuff, what with all that snuggly domesticity going on, and deciding to enter the event quite late in the day, but apart from a couple of unsettled games early on he looked liked he was continuing from where he left off last year. Prior to last years RG final that is (No that wouldn't have been very encouraging at all).

[WC] I Ljubicic (CRO) d [5] J Del Potro (ARG) 46 61 64
I had no idea how well Juan could play on clay as he was ranked around #75 this time last year. I still don't know how well he can play as I didn't see this match. But I don't think simply being South American is any indication to dirt balling adeptness, in the same way as being Spanish very much is (F-Lo not withstanding). Judging by the way he plays, I'd say he should struggle, but it still doesn't excuse him going out this early.
Continuing to love the whole Gentle Giant revival though.

[7] F Verdasco (ESP) d P Kohlschreiber (GER) 63 64
Missed this too, and the result doesn't surprise me one bit, but I'm more keen on his next match...

[10] D Ferrer (ESP) d M Gicquel (FRA) 61 60
That's right, Nando plays Ferrer next, and judging by this scoreline Daveed's looking very much like he's in a good mind to put right his sub par clay court season last year.

[8] N Davydenko (RUS) d I Karlovic (CRO) 64 63
THAT'S what I'm taking about! Taking out Ivo in your first match back from injury. In straight sets. On Clay. And no blinkin' tie breaks. Brilliant. More Nikolay clinics please. In fact I'm going to go as far as inducting myself as an honorary member of Nikolay's fan club for the duration of this event. So he's not a rock star and has about as much charisma as a pencil sharpener. Underrated and unsung.

[12] D Nalbandian (ARG) d M Granollers (ESP) 46 63 61
No need to play this many three setters this early on Daveed.

[Q] F Fognini (ITA) d [14] M Cilic (CRO) 62 60
Losing to a qualifier's bad enough but only winning two games in the process? Sheer bedlam. It suggests you didn't have a gameplan, were of your depth or physically ill. Or all of the above. Someone tell me what happened here please.

S Bolelli (ITA) d J Tipsarevic (SRB) 75 63
I love Simone's backhand and he's been playing some strong tennis recently. Janko on the other hand, hasn't. In fact his tennis has been more than a little tipsy (sorry) for about a year now. Back then, I thought he was due for some kind of a breakthrough as he'd cast himself in the role of a Giant Killer of sorts.

[Q] N Lapentti (ECU) d M Safin (RUS) 76(6) 26 76(6) - Saved 3 M.P.
Anyone who saw this will know how you can't do justice to the drama that transpired on court in a blog summary. What scares me is it's a repeat of what we saw against Monfils two weeks ago. Surely not again I thought , when Safin was 5-2 up in the final set. It wasn't all about Safin though, you have to credit Lapentti for playing some solid, unspectacular (nothing wrong with that - unspectacular's good) tennis to stay in and eventually come back saving three match points in the process. Can't say it will do much for Safin's self-belief though, he played some exceptional tennis before that third set mayhem.

[3] N Djokovic (SRB) d [Q] O Hernandez (ESP) 61 62
Oscar was completely out of his depth and has what I'm quite sure is the highest pitched grunt on tour. He also topped the amount of time Gasquet spends behind the baseline giving Novak ample room and opportunity to do his thang.

[4] A Murray (GBR) d V Hanescu (ROU) 63 62
Good all round performance from Andy but I'm beginning to understand what he meant when he said he's not yet fully comfortable on clay. Forget sliding, his movement looked unsteady, laboured even, and was caught out of position on one too many occasion. Bottom line is he found a (pretty comfortable) way through.

[Q] A Beck (GER) d [6] G Simon (FRA) 75 61
This would have been his third consecutive showing on Tennis is Served's loser's list and Gilles is only rescued from Room 101 (the fate of anyone with three consecutive showings) by him having a pretty nasty case of the sniffles. But I'll be watchin' Gilles.

J Monaco (ARG) d [11] T Robredo (ESP) 62 64
Hard to believe Tommy won Hamburg a few years back. Ok Roger and Rafa weren't there. Hard to believe he was #5 in the world. Our ends never know our beginnings.

It's too early to announce the winners and losers list but I just wanted to give an honorary mention to Lleyton Hewitt for playing his opening match against Safin within only three hours of getting off a plane (a delayed 17 hour trip back from Texas).

A less honorary mention to Gael Monfils. I didn't see his loss to Tipsy and though I'm predictably annoyed at how early it came, I found it more interesting that some people were suggesting he tanked the match.

Now, I've seen Monfils when he's all at sea, not having the faintest idea what to do out there and it looks horrible. It's so bad in fact, that some might construe it as tanking. So I think its appropriate to give him the benefit of the doubt as he seems otherwise, a pretty decent enough chap not adverse to the odd episode of larking about. But I've said it before, Gael needs to conduct himself differently on court. Much as I disagree with the accusation you can understand why reasonable people might feel this way.
Read More...