Tennis Frontier

Category: News

General Tennis News from the Tennis Frontier

2015 World Tour Finals: Semifinals Preview

First Semi-final: Djokovic vs. Nadal

Nadal has been the standout player of not only his group, but perhaps the tournament. He dealt with Wawrinka and Murray pretty tamely, dispatching both in straight sets, whilst surviving a tenacious challenge from compatriot Ferrer to come back and win the final two sets on Friday. This is a timely bit of form for Nadal, beating three quality opponents on his least favourite surface in his poorest season in a decade.

Djokovic has equally surprised. He destroyed Nishikori in straight sets, but wasn’t at his sharpest against an inspired Federer on Tuesday, falling in straight sets. This was not a great surprise, Federer perhaps being the greatest indoor player in history, as well as Novak’s only regular challenger this season. Nevertheless, the manner in which he fell away in the second set against the Swiss is cause for minor concern. He restored order to his world mind on Thursday, taking down Berdych, who offered some resistance, in two sets.

I think Ferrer is akin to Djokovic, but without the weapons. He was able to push Rafa with defence and speed. Novak possesses these attributes, but in greater abundance. Furthermore, he has a strong serve, the best backhand in the game, and the ability to dictate and finish points quickly. I think therefore, despite his loss to Federer, form and the recent history of their rivalry shall see the Serb prevail. He has Nadal’s number now, likes the rhythm of their rallies and enjoys the edge in physicality. Nadal has been showing glimpses of brilliance this week, but it would take his sustaining of that level in combination with Djokovic turning up sluggish and error prone to cause the upset.

Second Semi-Final: Federer vs. Wawrinka

It had to happen again, didn’t it? Last year the Swiss pair met in the semi-finals and delivered a pulsating contest that was far and away the match of the tournament. It was also a heated contest. Tensions were high throughout, Wawrinka exchanging words with Mrs. Federer. Roger saved five match points before staggering over the line. The match, which was a highly physical and emotional affair, left Federer in such poor shape he was unable to contest the final.

Federer has enjoyed a great tournament so far. He made short work of Berdych in his first round match, before dispatching Novak in straight sets in his second with an awesome display offence and variety. He had his struggles in his last match against Nishikori, producing multiple errors and breaks, and also looked tired out in stretches of the match before attacking decisively to win whilst Kei served to stay in the match. I suppose having already won the group, the last match was as good a one as any to have a sluggish performance and set off the alarm bells for coach Edberg for what needs to be worked on for the weekend.

Wawrinka has had to work harder than his countryman to reach this stage. Wawrinka was a shadow of himself in his opening match against Nadal, falling meekly in a match I thought would be an epic contest. This was seemingly a blip though, as he turned things around from thereon in to beat Ferrer and Murray in straight sets.

I think Roger has the edge in this encounter. If physicality is not an issue, I believe variety and a generally good run of recent indoor form will see him through Wawrinka. Federer leads their head-to-head 17-3, and has only ever lost to Stan on clay surfaces. Wawrinka likes the high ball, and Federer has of late used his slice and court craft to offer opponents low bouncing, off pace balls. This could be decisive against Stan, a player who benefits much with time to set up his strokes. Further, Stan is a good rather than great mover, and I think Federer will do everything he can to get his man chasing awkward shots. I expect a tight affair and a shot making exhibition. I think if the Federer which beat Djokovic and Berdych turns up, as opposed to the one who edged Nishikori, we will see him contest tomorrow’s final.

Author’s Blog: World Tour Finals: Semifinal Preview

[divider]

Cover Photos (Creative Commons License): By Marianne Bevis.
Followed by the name, such as Marianne Bevis

November 21, 2015
2015 ATP World Tour Finals Preview

‘The end is here’ ‘The Final showdown’ ‘The Stage Is Set’ ‘Insert overdramatic cliché’. Yes, ATP overkill at its finest. But cynicism aside, I am of course looking forward to the season ending shindig in London. It is a pleasure to see the best players in the world battle it out for a colossal sum of money and ranking points. Not bad for a week’s work, that’s for sure.

There is little change in the line-up since last year’s event, with Nadal and Ferrer replacing Milos Raonic and Marin Cilic in the eight man field, although Ferrer was an alternate last year. The event is a great yardstick of both season long consistency, but even more so of longevity. This shall be Berdych’s sixth straight year of qualification, Ferrer’s fifth, Djokovic’s ninth and one Mr Roger Federer’s fifteenth. The other four meanwhile have all made multiple appearances, again a testament to the depth and quality atop the men’s game.

On the subject of depth and quality, Novak Djokovic stands a head higher than even his closest competitors at the event, and as I breakdown the draws and offer my thoughts, it becomes clear: All roads pass through Novak in the quest to haul in the trophy a week from Sunday.

Group A

This group, consisting of Djokovic, Federer, Berdych and Nishikori, is for me the more likely of the two to see the big names advancing.

Novak leads Berdych a lopsided 20-2 in their head to head, never having lost to the Czech on a hard court. Berdych has enjoyed some form this autumn, but even his biggest shots seem to make little indentations in the Serb’s defences. Nishikori has enjoyed a bit more success against Djokovic, winning two of their six matches, including at the US Open last year. In addition, Nishikori pushed Novak at the World Tour Finals last year in one of the few matches that weren’t duds. With Kei’s lack of matches lately though, and Djokovic’s imperious form, I suspect Djokovic to come through these two hassle free.

Federer, although not as dominant over the afore mentioned pair as Djokovic, still enjoys healthy head to heads against both. Against Berdych the Swiss leads 14-6. Berdych does not seem to have as big a block against Roger compared to the more defensive members of the ‘big four’, his big game when clicking can overcome him, including twice in Slams. Federer has not lost to Tomas though since an injury plagued 2013, winning the last three matches. I think Berdych could trouble the Swiss, especially when one looks at his recent loss to the big hitting Isner in Paris, but the court in London has in recent years yielded a slower bounce, which should aid Federer in nullifying Berdych’s power.

What of the marquee matchup between the two most successful players of the season? It seems strange for Novak and Roger to meet in the round robin stage of the tournament, but that is the nature of rolling rankings and contributes towards the excitement of this unique event. There is little to choose between the pair going into the tournament, Federer triumphing in Basel, Djokovic a week later in Paris. Both are in fine fettle, and play some of their best indoors. Based on his sheer dominance in the last few months, Novak for me edges their encounter.

Group Winner: Djokovic

Group Runner Up: Federer

Group B

The other group, consisting of Murray, Wawrinka, Nadal and Ferrer, offers more in the way of unpredictability and intrigue than the first.

Murray is in a rich vein of form, reaching the Paris Masters final before falling tamely to Djokovic. He will benefit from home crowd support, and is a fine indoor player. Although trailing Nadal 6-15 in their head to head, this is not the same Nadal of late, Murray beating him on the home clay of Madrid in their last meeting this year. Murray has had a better season, and I think in terms of speed, fitness and form the Scot starts out as favourite against Rafa. In his last meeting with Ferrer, recently in Paris, he overcame him in two straight forward sets, and leads their series 11-5, as well as having won their last three indoor meetings. Ferrer has enjoyed a successful autumn, but Murray would start as a clear favourite. Murray’s match with Wawrinka should prove to be the hardest. While he leads the Swiss 8-4, Stan won their last two encounters in 2013, and they have not met since in a period where he became a two time slam winner. I would not be surprised to see Wawrinka power through the Scot, as he did last time they met.

Stan Wawrinka comes to London having enjoyed the best year of his career. Nadal was long a nemesis for him, leading their head to head 13-3. Stan has put things to rights in recent years however, winning three of their last four meetings, including on Nadal’s beloved clay earlier this year, and then in two pulsating sets in Paris in similar conditions to London last week. If Wawrinka hits his offensive stride, I see him edging the Spaniard. Against Ferrer meanwhile, Stan, whilst trailing 6-7, he has won their last three meetings. Ferrer can certainly hang in there with the more powerful Swiss, still prone to bouts of inconsistency, but Stan remains the favourite.

Nadal has done well in making the finals in London, having a rather modest year by his lofty standards, winning just three minor titles. He has qualified the hard way, but qualified all the same. He has shown some good form in the indoor season, stretching Federer, perhaps the greatest indoor player in history, to three sets in the Basel Final, before falling in a tight quarterfinal last week in Paris. I have already above given two opponents an edge over Nadal in his group, and I struggle to see him making the semi-finals this year. All the same, it would be a great end to the year for Nadal to score a win against his friend and rival, the dogged David Ferrer. Rafa enjoys a 23-6 lead in their matches, and won their sole meeting this year in Monte Carlo. Ferrer is nevertheless an effective indoor player, coming into London with two trophies at indoor events. Furthermore, four of his six wins against his compatriot were on hard courts, two of them indoors. This match represents both men’s best chances of a win in London, and the accompanying $167,000 and 200 ranking points. Expect an entertaining slugfest in their final encounter of the year.

Group Winner: Murray

Group Runner Up: Wawrinka

Semi-Finals

Federer Defeats Murray

Djokovic Defeats Wawrinka

Final

Djokovic Defeats Federer

[divider]

Link to author Daniel Edwards’ blog

Cover Photo (Creative Commons License): Marianne Bevis

November 13, 2015
Open Era Generations, Part Five: Gen 3 (1944-48) – Newcombe and the Class of ’46
A Transitional Generation
The generation born between 1944 and 1948 began establishing itself in the mid-60s but was in peak form during the early years of the Open Era. This was the last generation that saw some players with a significant portion of their careers before the Open Era began, although it is also the first generation that saw the majority of its players peak in the Open Era.

Best Players by Birth Year
1944: John Newcombe (AUS, 7), Tom Okker (NED), Alex Metreveli (USSR)
1945: Tony Roche (AUS, 1)
1946: Jan Kodes (CZE, 3), Ilie Nastase (ROM, 2), Stan Smith (USA, 2), Cliff Richey (USA)
1947: Bob Lutz (USA), Zeljko Franulovic (CRO), Gerald Battrick (UK)
1948: Brian Fairlie (NZ), John Bartlett (AUS), Vladimir Korotkov (USSR)

Discussion
There are several players in this generation that have a lasting heritage. John Newcombe, as will be discussed, is a bit of an underrated great, standing in the shadow of his greater predecessors, Ken Rosewall and Rod Laver. But he was the best player of this generation, and tied with Jimmy Connors for second most Slam titles in the 1970s (5) after Bjorn Borg (8).

After Newcombe, the class of 1946 presents a strong year of tennis births, with multi-Slam winners Nastase, Kodes, and Smith, who split seven Slams among them.

Nastase is a player whose Slam count doesn’t adequately reflect how good he was. He is perhaps best known for being the first ATP ranked year-end No. 1 player in 1973. He was a Top 10 player for most of the 70s and won a huge total of 58 titles overall, or by some accounts as many as 87—one less than Roger Federer—due to the fact that records were not fully accurate before the ATP in 1973.

Underachievers and Forgotten Players
The first player I’d like to mention is this generation’s greatest player, John Newcombe. While Newcombe, with seven Slams, cannot be considered an underachiever, he is a bit forgotten, for a couple reasons. One, he wasn’t as great as his Australian predecessors in Rosewall and Laver. Secondly, he didn’t quite have the cachet and sex appeal of later tennis superstars Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, and John McEnroe. Yet Newcombe was a great player; while he won three Australian Opens during an era when the field was still weaker than the other Grand Slams, he also won Wimbledon and the US Open twice each, defeating champions as diverse in range as Ken Rosewall (b. 1938) in the 1970 Wimbledon, to Jimmy Connors (b. 1952) in the 1975 Australian Open. Furthermore, Newcombe was one of the few top players of the amateur era whose success translated to the Open Era. With apologies to Patrick Rafter and Lleyton Hewitt, Newcombe is the last truly great Australian male tennis player.

I wouldn’t call Tom Okker an underachiever as much as a nearly-great player that never won a Slam. In a way he was his generation’s version of David Ferrer – a player always in the mix, with great results and many titles, but no majors. In fact, as discussed in one Tennis Frontier discussion thread, Okker is a good candidate for the best Slam-less player of the Open Era.

Finally, we have Stan Smith, who is probably the best suited to the title of underachiever, or at least a peak that didn’t match his total career. First of all he was a relatively late bloomer, although less so by his era’s standards. He didn’t reach his first Slam QF until 1970 when he was 23 years old, and won his first of two Slams a year later at 24. For a few years—the first half of the 70s—he was a Top 10 player, and for a couple years—1971-72—he was either No. 1 or co-No. 1. But after 1974 his performance dropped substantially. Throughout the late 70s and into the 80s he was a borderline Top 20 player, but no longer a star. Smith was one of the greatest Davis Cup players, being part of seven US titles. In my National Tennis Careers blog series, I ranked him as the 8th greatest American male tennis player of the Open Era right between No. 7, Andy Roddick, and No. 9, Michael Chang.

Did You Know?
1946 saw three multi-Slam winners born. While many years since then have had two multi-Slam winners born, or multiple Slam winners born, you have to go all the way back to 1921 to find another year that had three multi-Slam winners: Jack Kramer (5, 3 Grand, and 2 Pro), Pancho Segura (4 Pro Slams), and Jaroslav Drobny (3 Grand Slams).

Top Ten Players of the Generation
1. John Newcombe
2. Ilie Nastase
3. Stan Smith
4. Jan Kodes
5. Tony Roche
6. Tom Okker
7. Cliff Richey
8. Alex Metreveli
9. Zeljko Franulovic
10. Onny Parun
Honorable Mentions: Bob Lutz, Brian Fairlie, Vladimir Korotkov, John Bartlett, Gerald Battrick.

The first two spots are easy. Newcombe has a record head and shoulders above the rest, his seven Slams — as much as Kodes, Nastase, and Smith combined. Nastase is a clear No. 2. He had one less Slam than Kodes, but his career was much better. Not only was he the first year-end No. 1 of the ATP era but he won an impressive 58 titles (or 87 by some accounts). Smith also was a stronger peak player than Kodes, although had a weak second half of his career, as mentioned. I was tempted to put Roche above Kodes as he probably had a better overall career, with 26 titles versus Kodes’ 11; but it is hard to argue with Kodes’ three Slams to Roche’s one, even if one of Kodes’ was the 1973 Wimbledon which the majority of top players boycotted due to the banning of Nikola Pilic. But Roche’s lone Slam was during the pre-Open Era in a relatively weak field, defeating Alexander Metreveli, Francois Jauffret, and Istvan Gulyas in the last three matches on the way to the title (who? That’s the point!). Roche also had a Murray-esque 1-5 record in Slam finals.

After the top five, Tom Okker is an easy pick; I was even tempted to edge him over Roche but controlled myself. Cliff Richey is also a relatively easy next pick, but after that the rankings and talent gets murky. But the gap between the top five and Okker is far slimmer than Okker and the rest of the generation, which is pretty weak from that point on and difficult to rank.
November 11, 2015
Tennis Frontier Weekly Update: November 9, 2015

Djokovic Wins 6th Masters and 10th Title of 2015

Venus Climbs Back into the Top Ten after a Four-Year Absence

Historical Smash Shots 1: Generational Diversity in the 1974-75 Rankings

2015 ATP World Tour Finals

2015: Review

November 10, 2015
2015 Paris Masters Final Preview

Novak Djokovic increasingly looks as if he has this rivalry with Andy Murray by the scruff of the neck. The Serb leads their head to head series 20-9, and has won nine of their last ten matches since Murray triumphed over him at Wimbledon in 2013. It was looking increasingly like one way traffic until the Scot stopped the rot with a win last August in the title match of the Rogers Cup. Make no mistake though; Djokovic seemingly has Andy’s number nowadays.

I think when these two contest best of three matches; they are as a rule higher quality affairs compared to their best of five encounters. Both men play pretty similar games, predicated on defence, drawing the error and creating openings for more aggressive plays. I have noticed that in some of their Slam encounters, in Australia or at Flushing Meadows in particular, the buffer created by a finish line that is farther away can lull both into a defensive complacency, leading neither in the early stages to take charge and resulting instead in rallying affairs. In contrast, the three set matches seem to inject in both men a sense of urgency, and thus willingness to be the aggressor and forced the issue. Two of the best matches the pair have contested were contested in the three set format, their 2012 encounters at The Olympics and Shanghai were high octane matches where both players came out guns blazing, eager to put away each other.

It remains to be seen whether today’s clash in the final of the Paris Masters shall deliver the same quality. In their last meeting, the semi-finals of Shanghai, Murray surrendered rather tamely to Djokovic in two lopsided sets. In addition, Novak likes these courts, medium paced for an indoor event; he is the two time defending champion. I will always give Novak an edge on a medium to slow hard court against Murray, especially in controlled indoor conditions. One wonders as well what motivation Murray will have to go all out, what with the World Tour Finals looming, not to mention the Davis Cup final, an event he is prioritising.

I believe two key shots of Murray’s will lead to a Djokovic victory this afternoon. The Scot’s forehand is liable to landing in the middle of the court, and I think Novak will waste little time in taking charge of the rally when this inevitably happens. In addition, whilst Murray possesses a good first serve, it is not a high percentage shot, thus he will have to hit a fair number of second serves. This shot is arguably the Scots weakest, often only hit at around 80 miles per hour. Against the greatest returner in the world, and perhaps in the history of the sport, he is more often than not punished when attempting the second delivery. All is not lost for the second seed though. He won his semi-final against Ferrer in routine fashion, earlier in the day than when Novak beat Wawrinka in three sets. He should be fresh for this encounter. Nevertheless, I expect Novak to continue in his rich vein of form and make it three Paris titles in a row.

Djokovic to win in straight sets.

[divider]

Cover Photo (Creative Commons License): Marianne Bevis

November 8, 2015
Hot on the Frontier: When will Djokovic lose the #1 ranking (and can he surpass Federer’s 302 weeks at #1)?

This Week’s “Hot on the Frontier” topic is “When will Novak lose the #1 ranking (and can he surpass Roger’s 302 weeks at #1)?” This topic was started by Tennis Frontier member El Dude. It certainly got a lot of fans thinking about how long Novak Djokovic would hang on to the No. 1 ranking and if were possible for him to break Roger Federer’s record. Come on in and take a look to see what the Frontier crowd had to say about Djokovic’s stay at No. 1! And thanks to El Dude for starting a great topic!

El Dude
Tennis Frontier Member since: April 2013

Some questions for El Dude:

1. Who is your all-time favorite tennis player?
Answer: Roger Federer. Has there ever been a player who played with such grace, elegance and beauty?

2. What is your biggest tennis pet-peeve?
Answer: I dislike the homogenization of courts, namely the slowing down of courts. I’d like to see a greater diversity of court types, which would in turn broaden the spectrum of players. I’m kind of tired of the dominance of “war of attrition tennis.”

3. If you could go watch any Grand Slam tournament, which one would you like to go to?
Answer: Wimbledon, of course! The US Open is closer and would be easier, but Wimbledon is–and likely always will be–the premier tennis tournament.

4. If you could slip back in time and see one match in tennis’ history, which match would it be?
Answer: Two things come to mind. First of all, one of the great Borg-McEnroe matches – maybe 1981 Wimbledon. Secondly, I would have loved to see a classic matchup of Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall, or maybe Pancho Gonzales and Rosewall.

5. Which two players would you like to see playing doubles together?
Answer: Rafa and Roger! Can you imagine that?!

6. Describe your affection for tennis in one word.
Answer: Impossible to do that. But a few words come to mind: elegance, brilliance, skill.

7. Your opponent bounces the ball 20+ times before serving. You would:
Answer: I would yell, “Vamos, Rafa!”

A message for everyone on Tennis Frontier (if you have one):
This is a great little community that is open to a diverse number of viewpoints. It has its share of generally minor squabbles, but there’s an underlying sense of camaraderie and community that makes it worth coming back to, again and again. Its like a parlor in which friends come and go and return again, and the conversation keeps going. Thank you all for making Tennis Frontier such a great place to hang out and talk tennis!

Thanks to everyone who always contributes to Tennis Frontier! Keep the topics coming and hopefully you’ll put the hottest topic on the Frontier out!

[divider]

Cover Photo (Creative Commons License): Marianne Bevis.

November 1, 2015
Hot on the Frontier: Is This the Beginning of the Incline?

Our hottest new topic in our discussion forum this week: “Is This the Beginning of The Incline?“

Nobody can dispute the fact that Rafael has had, by his own lofty standards, a rough year. He lost his French Open crown, lost several times to lower ranked players, saw his 10-year streak of at least one Grand Slam title end, and saw his ranking slip down to No. 8. Many were predicting that Nadal was finished, that he would soon retire, or at least get a new coach. So far none of that has happened. And during the Asian Tour, we saw Nadal get to the finals in Beijing and the semifinals in Shanghai. From these results, many fans think he is on the rise and will take his place back in the Top Three of Four soon. Our member GameSetAndMath started this week’s Hot Topic that got everyone debating over Nadal’s future. Congratulations to GameSetAndMath for starting this week’s Hot Topic on the Frontier, “Is This the Beginning of the Incline?” Come check it out!

GameSetAndMath
Tennis Frontier Member since: July 2013

Some questions for GameSetAndMath!

1. Who is your all-time favorite tennis player?

Answer: Roger Federer

2. If you could attend any Grand Slam tournament, which one would you like to go to?

Answer: Wimbledon

3. If you could slip back in time and see one match, which would it be?

Answer: Bjorn Borg vs. John McEnroe 1980 Wimbledon final

4. Which two players would you like to see playing doubles together?

Answer: Fedal

Check back for next week’s Hot Topic on the Frontier!

[divider]

Cover Photo (Creative Commons License): Marianne Bevis

October 25, 2015
Tennis Quiz: WTA Finals Champions

The WTA Finals are set to played in Singapore from October 25th to November 1st. The tournament has gone through many different names, formats and venues, but it has consistently crowned a year-end champion every year since 1972 (twice in 1986!). While most of the winners are the well-known greats, there have been some surprises here and there. See how many of the 44 champions you can name in five minutes!

WTA FINALS WINNERS (1972-2014)

[divider]

Cover Photo (Creative Commons License): VOXSPORTS VOXER

October 23, 2015
Hot on the Frontier: Is This the Beginning of The Decline?
Our hottest new topic in our discussion forum: “This Is the Beginning of The Decline“

Roger Federer, the Shanghai Masters defending champion, suffered a shocking second-round upset at the hands of Spain’s Albert Ramos-Vinolas. One of our members, Luxilon Borg, started this week’s hot topic about the status of Roger Federer, and the question as to whether or not he is nearing the end of his career. It started an interesting debate on one of the greatest players of all-time. Come check it out!

[divider]

Luxilon Borg
Tennis Frontier Member since: July 2013

Some questions for Luxilon Borg!
1. Who is your all-time favorite tennis player?
  Bjorn Borg, followed by Jimmy Connors.
2. If you could have one professional tennis player’s ability or stroke, what would it be?
  The ability of Roger Federer to stay amazingly calm. Stress is a killer.
3. What is your favorite food to eat while watching a tennis match?
  Tacos or Burritos.
4. Which tennis player do you think you could really get along with if you could hang out with him/her?
  Novak Djokovic. Great sense of humor.
5. What is your biggest tennis pet-peeve?
  Too much toweling off.
6. If you could attend any Grand Slam tournament, which one would you like to go to?
  Roland Garros for sure. Clay is real tennis.
7. If you could slip back in time and see one match, which would it be?
  Easy. Battle of the 18-16 Tie Break, Borg vs McEnroe, Wimbledon Final, 1980.
8. Which two players would you like to see playing doubles together?
  Fedal.
9. Describe your affection for tennis in one word.
  Life.
10. Your opponent bounces the ball 20+ times before serving. You would:
  1. Wait patiently (To a point)
  2. Curse under your breath
  3. Complain to the umpire
  4. Tell the player to shove the ball up where the sun doesn’t shine.
A message for everyone on Tennis Frontier (if you have one):

This is amazing forum filled with very passionate followers. Tennis is like no other sport. It requires skill sets, both mental and physical, far beyond any other. The level of intelligence and character required eliminates a good part of the population from being involved. We should be proud that we are absorbed and consumed by a sport that has such high standards and is 100% merit based.

[divider]

Check back for next week’s Hot Topic on the Frontier!

[divider]

Cover Photo (Creative Commons License: Marianne Bevis.
October 18, 2015
2015 US Open Review

As the 2015 U.S. Open approached, there were two questions that tennis fans wanted answered: Would Serena Williams achieve the first Calendar-Year Grand Slam in 27 years, and who would challenge Novak Djokovic for the men’s title? The tournament gave us the answers in some very unexpected ways.

Embracing the Role of the Villain. Djokovic came into this year’s tournament as the frontrunner, but after losing the Montreal and Cincinnati Masters titles to his two closest rivals, he looked a bit more vulnerable than in recent Majors. He was rarely challenged before the final, and his demolition of last year’s champion Marin Cilic was brutal. In the final against crowd-favorite Roger Federer, he was clearly the villain, the top dog that everyone wanted to see defeated. It is a testament to Djokovic’s mental strength how he handled the adversity from the stands and the threat of Federer’s new “SABR” attack. He fought off repeated attempts to be broken, refusing to let Federer take the match from him. Everyone loves a veteran champion — and Djokovic may be in Federer’s position someday — but for now he will have to wait to be embraced by the public. With this U.S. Open title, Djokovic now has 10 Grand Slam titles, a mark only seven others have achieved in the history of tennis. And he isn’t done yet.

The Dream of a Calendar-Year Grand Slam Vanishes. The pressure on Serena must have been immense. So close to tennis immortality. The first Calendar-Year Grand Slam in 27 years. After she got through a brief challenge from Bethany Mattek-Sands, she fought off Madison Keys and Venus Williams to advance to the semifinals. Two matches away. And with so many rivals falling by the wayside in earlier rounds, it looked almost inevitable that Serena would be lifting her fourth consecutive (and seventh overall) U.S. Open trophy on Saturday. And then Roberta Vinci happened. No one, not even Vinci herself, expected the veteran Italian to pull off the upset. There is no doubt that Serena played tight and was clearly mentally stressed in the semifinal, but Vinci played the best tennis of her career, pulling off one of the greatest upsets in tennis history. Vinci said it best during the interview. When asked, “When did you believe that you could beat Serena?”, Vinci’s responded, “No.”

Mamma Mia! No one — not a single person on earth — predicted an all-Italian women’s final. It still doesn’t sound right, but that’s what we got with the 26^th seed Flavia Pennetta and the unseeded Vinci. After Serena lost, tickets for the women’s final dropped in value by over 80%. Fans were expecting to see history made; instead, they were treated to two women playing in the first Grand Slam final of their careers. After a few nervous games and a first set tiebreak, Pennetta asserted herself and won her first Grand Slam title. And then she shocked everyone by announcing that she would “say goodbye to tennis” at the end of the season. Mamma Mia, indeed.

The Lack of a True Rival. Who is going to step up to challenge Djokovic for the Grand Slam titles next year? This year, we saw Stan Wawrinka take the French Open, but so far he has failed to follow it up in any of the other Majors or Masters. Roger Federer and Andy Murray seemed ready to make a challenge, but Murray didn’t even make the fourth round in New York, while Federer again seemed to be outmatched by Djokovic in another major final. Nadal failed even to make the final four of a single Slam this year. It looks like the Djokovic era will continue for another couple of years until one of the younger players steps up.

Five-Set Matches Are tough! The number of retirements in the men’s draw was ridiculous. There were 14 before the quarterfinals. A lot of factors were involved but there were even retirements by players who were winning when they had to drop out. The humidity certainly played a factor, but this could add some momentum to the debate about changing the men’s Majors to best-of-three set matches like the women. Mamma Mia.

Wanted: A New Female Star. As this tournament proved, there is a big flux after Serena. She was so dominant and winning everything that is was hard to notice, but the performances by the Top 10 women were abysmal. Seven of the Top 10 were gone after the second round. Petra Kvitova ran out of gas against Pennetta in the quarters, and Simona Halep was blown off the court by Pennetta in the semis. New rising stars Garbine Muguruza and Belinda Bencic were gone by the third round. Here’s to hoping that someone will rise up and be more than a one-time wonder in 2016.

Doubles Dominance. Martina Hingis’s collection of doubles titles in 2015 is truly impressive. After getting warmed up with a mixed doubles title with Leander Paes at the Australian Open, she then teamed up with Sania Mirza and took the two doubles titles at Wimbledon and did the same thing again at the U.S. Open. She now has 20 Grand Slam titles and doesn’t look like she’ll retire again any time soon. On a side note, the French team of Nicolas Mahut and Pierre-Hugues Herbert, seeded a lowly 12^th, took home the men’s doubles title. It’s always nice to see two players who have come so close in the past finally win a big one.

A Final Look Across the Frontier… So the final Slam of the year is over. We saw a No. 1 reassert his dominance and enter the top-level of greats, we saw the dream of a Calendar-Year Grand Slam destroyed by a perky Italian nobody gave a chance of winning, we saw a Hall-of-Fame member take all the doubles titles, we saw a pair of unheralded Frenchmen take home a Grand Slam title, and we saw the final rain delay at Arthur Ashe Stadium. The Australian Open is only four months away!

[divider]

Cover Photo (Creative Commons License): kulitat

September 14, 2015