Tag: novak djokovic

  • You Know You Made It When…

    You Know You Made It When…

    Hours before Andy Murray opens his 2013 US Open title defense campaign, there seems to be an unusual — but welcome — air of tranquility surrounding him, or more accurately, surrounding his critics, supporters, and tennis pundits in general. Sure, there is no escaping the clichéd narrative of “defending champion pressure,” as it seemed to become the de facto question mark once the media ran out of reasons to doubt the Brit, but that almost seems like a compliment when compared to years of harsh assessments, inaccurate labels, and false predictions of a gloomy future following every loss. In the span of twelve months, Murray went from everyone’s obligatory choice on a “best player never to win a Slam” shortlist, to the heaven-sent savior of British tennis and a multiple Grand Slam champion.

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss “You Know You Made It When …” in our discussion forum.

    [divider]

    For years, Murray was impatiently crucified for every high profile loss, every shocking defeat, and yes, even every Masters 1000 event tournament win because “if only he can do that in Majors.” At times, he was given a few deserved passes due to competing in an era where three of the greatest ever to play the game happen to dominate, but he was ultimately a victim of his own success: He had proven he could beat them on more than one occasion, but had yet to do so when it mattered most. Of course, in an ever fickle tennis world, failing to string together two consecutive wins over Nadal and Federer in your first ever Major semifinal (and final) appearance, losing to Novak Djokovic on his beloved Australian Open turf, and succumbing to the Swiss master on the Centre Court of Wimbledon dubiously brings your mental toughness into question.

    If the general consensus was to be believed, every Slam was Murray’s last chance to win a Major, and every Grand Slam final loss somehow meant his chances of finally snatching one were decreasing, despite the fact that he was continuously putting himself in a position to do so. Murray’s years of unfair media treatment were largely a result of him not winning a Slam as early as most predicted. Typically, he was quick to be put on a pedestal only to be shot down once he didn’t immediately meet the needlessly inflated expectations.

    In hindsight, Murray’s career has been far from unusual. In fact, its evolution makes sense, once one looks at the tennis aspect of his game, what he lacked, what he excelled at, and what he has managed to improve. If experts simply distanced themselves from the fanfare and unreasonable demands of immediate glory, the reasons behind Murray’s “failings” were fairly evident, especially once contrasted with his subsequent success in winning Grand Slams.

    Murray was long chastised for his inability to play aggressively in key matches or moments, but this was hardly a mental block that he was somehow unable to overcome, or an elusive strategy he had yet to comprehend. From a pure tennis perspective, Murray’s forehand was letting him down against the game’s elite. That is not to suggest that he had never approached a match the wrong way, implemented an ill-advised strategy, or remained too content to stay within his comfort zone. In fact, those factors definitely contributed to many of his defeats. Likewise, while he was never nearly as shaky between the ears as many would have you believe, the Scot didn’t always have the most exemplary attitude facing adversity (a semifinal match with Nadal at the 2011 US Open particularly stands out), and he was obviously nervous in his first ever Grand Slam final appearance against Federer.

    However, for the bulk of his career, Murray’s forehand was what was stopping him from employing the aggression many urged him to, while the improvement he later made to that very shot (helped immensely by the partnership with Ivan Lendl) turned him into the champion many predicted he would become. Heartbreaking as it must have been, Murray’s 2012 Australian Open semifinal loss to Novak Djokovic was the definite sign of things to come. Up until that point, Murray had been routinely dominated in forehand-to-forehand crosscourt exchanges by Djokovic, Federer, and even by Nadal’s crosscourt backhand. That Djokovic semi marked the first time since his brilliant 2010 Australian Open performance against Nadal that Murray used his forehand with authority against one of the game’s “Big 3” in a Major. The Lendl partnership was immediately paying off.

    Looking back at the pre-2012 US Open phase of Murray’s career, you can pinpoint four crucial matches that perfectly capture his development. Often, a player turns in an eye-opening performance (even in defeat) that earns him premature predictions of guaranteed greatness by trigger-happy fans and pundits, only to spectacularly fail to live up to the hype. Murray, on the other hand, is a rare case of a player whose defining matches were corroborated by his career trajectory.

    Murray had shown flashes of his future brilliance in a five-set loss to David Nalbandian at Wimbledon in 2005, and a straight-set upset of Roger Federer at the 2006 Cincinnati Masters. However, his real “take notice” moment, at least as far as I’m concerned, was his five-set loss to Rafael Nadal at the 2007 Australian Open. A more fit version of Murray would have more than likely emerged victorious, but the Brit looked noticeably winded in the deciding set. Nevertheless, Murray’s talent was on full display, as he handled Nadal’s spin with crosscourt backhands all day, toyed with his opponent with silky-smooth drop shots, and showed incredible hands at the net. While injury would soon derail his momentum that year, it remains the match which gave us the first glimpse of Murray against a future rival, and one of the sport’s giants on the Grand Slam level.

    Eighteen months later, Murray got his shot at redemption, this time producing what was the most sensational tennis of his career to topple Nadal in 4 sets at the 2008 US Open semifinal. Murray had just broken into the Top 10, and cemented his status as a legitimate threat at Majors by eliminating the Spaniard in the midst of the hottest run of his career. The match remains among Murray’s finest hours, as his serve, aggression, and forehand looked near unplayable. Despite a disappointing outing against Federer in the final, Murray would build off that monumental win over Nadal with an impressive fall indoor season, winning his second Masters 1000 event in Madrid (his first was at Cincinnati earlier that summer), thus officially becoming part of the sport’s “Big 4” (when the term was first coined).

    If the two Nadal matches were turning points as far as Murray cementing his status among the sport’s very best is concerned, his aforementioned semifinal with Djokovic at the 2012 Australian Open was the turning point with regards to his eventual Grand Slam triumph. The Lendl partnership was still in its early stages, but the intent was clear. Despite the loss, there was an overwhelming amount of positives for Murray to take. The match saw him combine his variety, defense, and aggression to deliver an absolute classic that would have been even more fondly remembered had it not been for a rough opening set and the subsequent Djokovic/Nadal final.

    Murray built off that match to take himself all the way to his first Wimbledon final, where he was once again toppled by his Grand Slam final tormentor, Roger Federer. However, a few weeks later, Murray would gain revenge in one of the greatest moments of his career, and his ultimate pre-Grand Slam win turning point, when he beat Federer in the final of the 2012 Olympics in London. From a tennis perspective, the performance itself may not have been as telling as Murray’s aggressive outing against Djokovic in Melbourne, but it finally gave Murray a satisfaction that rivals winning a Major, and the emotional boost he needed on his way to realizing his dream. It took him mere weeks to do so, as Murray once again used  that career exemplifying match against Federer to win the US Open crown by beating Novak Djokovic in five windy sets.

    Almost a full year later, Murray revisits the ground that provided him his first taste of Grand Slam glory, and walks in as the Wimbledon champion to boot. There are no talks of last chances,  mental obstacles, “first British man since…”, or the need to adopt a more aggressive approach. In fact, there have been no overreactions to his now-customary post-Slam final lulls when he surprisingly loses early in Masters 1000 events. There is only “Andy Murray: US Open and Wimbledon champion.”

    You know you’ve made it when the media manage to keep a level head after you lose, and still pencil you in as one of the favorites for a Major, instead of using said defeat as a sure-fire sign of a tennis apocalypse. Only a few players are offered this luxury. Andy Murray, you have officially made it.

    Credits: Cover Photo: anonlinegreenworld (Creative Commons License)

  • US Open Day 2 Schedule of Play / Scores: Tuesday, August 27

    US Open Day 2 Schedule of Play / Scores: Tuesday, August 27

    [Scores added as known.]

    Arthur Ashe Stadium – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Petra Kvitova (CZE) (7) d. Misaki Doi (JPN) — 6-2, 3-6, 6-1

    Not Before: 1:00 P.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Caroline Wozniacki (DEN) (6) d. Ying-Ying Duan (CHN) — 6-2, 7-5

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Roger Federer (SUI) (7) d. Grega Zemlja (SLO) — 6-3, 6-2, 7-5

    Not Before: 7:00 P.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Novak Djokovic (SRB) (1) d. Ricardas Berankis (LTU) — 6-1, 6-2, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Victoria Azarenka (BLR) (2) d. Dinah Pfizenmaier (GER) — 6-0, 6-0

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Men’s matches in our discussion forum.

    Click here to discuss the Women’s matches in our discussion forum.

    [divider]

    Louis Armstrong Stadium 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Milos Raonic (CAN) (10) d. Thomas Fabbiano (ITA) — 6-3, 7-6(6), 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Sam Querrey (USA) (26) d. Guido Pella (ARG) — 7-6(3), 4-6, 6-1, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Sara Errani (ITA) (4) d. Olivia Rogowska (AUS) — 6-0, 6-0

    Not Before: 5:00 P.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Victoria Duval (USA) d. Samantha Stosur (AUS) (11) — 5-7, 6-4, 6-4

    [divider]

    Grandstand – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Ana Ivanovic (SRB) (13) d. Anna Tatishvili (GEO) — 6-2, 6-0

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Christina McHale (USA) d. Julia Goerges (GER) — 6-4, 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    John Isner (USA) (13) d. Filippo Volandri (ITA) — 6-0, 6-2, 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Tomas Berdych (CZE) (5) d. Paolo Lorenzi (ITA) — 6-1, 6-4, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Tobias Kamke (GER) d. Steve Johnson (USA) — 6-7(4), 6-4, 7-6(7), 6-2

    [divider]

    Court 17 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Alexandra Dulgheru (ROU) d. Varvara Lepchenko (USA) — 6-7(5), 6-2, 7-6(5)

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Gael Monfils (FRA) d. Adrian Ungur (ROU) — 6-1, 6-2, 6-0

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Tommy Haas (GER) (12) d. Paul-Henri Mathieu (FRA) — 6-4, 6-4, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Svetlana Kuznetsova (RUS) (27) d. Mallory Burdette (USA) — 6-3, 7-5

    [divider]

    Court 13 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Bojana Jovanovski (SRB) d. Andrea Petkovic (GER) — 6-2, 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Maximo Gonzalez (ARG) d. Jerzy Janowicz (POL) (14) — 6-4, 6-4, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Jack Sock (USA) d. Philipp Petzschner (GER) — 7-6(2), 3-6, 5-2 Ret.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Shuai Peng (CHN) d. Yvonne Meusburger (AUT) — 6-3, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 11 – 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Philipp Kohlschreiber (GER) (22) d. Collin Altamirano (USA) — 6-1, 6-3, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Alize Cornet (FRA) (26) d. Maria Joao Koehler (POR) — 6-3, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Carlos Berlocq (ARG) d. Santiago Giraldo (COL) — 6-3, 3-6, 6-7(6), 6-4, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Donald Young (USA) d. Martin Klizan (SVK) — 6-1, 6-0, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Simona Halep (ROU) (21) d. Heather Watson (GBR) — 4-6, 6-4, 6-2

    [divider]

    Court 4 – 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Julien Benneteau (FRA) (31) d. Michal Przysiezny (POL) — 6-4, 5-7, 6-4, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Flavia Pennetta (ITA) d. Nicole Gibbs (USA) — 6-0, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Denis Istomin (UZB) d. Nicolas Almagro (ESP) (15) — 6-3, 6-1, 4-6, 6-3

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Alison Riske (USA) d. Tsvetana Pironkova (BUL) — 6-3, 6-3

    [divider]

    Court 6 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Roberta Vinci (ITA) (10) d. Timea Babos (HUN) — 6-4, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Adrian Mannarino (FRA) d. Horacio Zeballos (ARG) — 4-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Elina Svitolina (UKR) d. Dominika Cibulkova (SVK) (17) — 6-4, 6-3

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Donna Vekic (CRO) d. Mariana Duque-Marino (COL) — 7-6(5), 4-6, 6-2

    [divider]

    Court 7 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Maria Kirilenko (RUS) (14) d. Yanina Wickmayer (BEL) — 6-1, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Joao Sousa (POR) d. Grigor Dimitrov (BUL) (25) — 3-6, 6-3, 6-4, 5-7, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Sachia Vickery (USA) d. Mirjana Lucic-Baroni (CRO) — 6-4, 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Florian Mayer (GER) d. Juan Monaco (ARG) (28) — 6-4, 6-2, 3-0 Ret.

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Eric Butorac (USA) / Frederik Nielsen (DEN) d. Johan Brunstrom (SWE) / Raven Klaasen (RSA) — 7-5, 6-7(5), 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 8 – 11:00 A.M.

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Pablo Andujar (ESP) d. Thiemo de Bakker (NED) — 6-4, 6-4, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Karin Knapp (ITA) d. Grace Min (USA) — 6-3, 6-1

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Daniela Hantuchova (SVK) d. Maria Sanchez (USA) — 7-5, 6-2

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Mona Barthel (GER) (28) d. Johanna Larsson (SWE) — 6-1, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 9 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Lucie Safarova (CZE) d. Lesia Tsurenko (UKR) — 6-3, 2-6, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Ajla Tomljanovic (CRO) d. Casey Dellacqua (AUS) — 3-6, 6-1, 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Yen-Hsun Lu (TPE) d. Daniel Gimeno-Traver (ESP) — 6-4, 7-6(5), 6-3

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Aleksandra Wozniak (CAN) d. Vesna Dolonc (SRB) — 7-5, 7-6(5)

    [divider]

    Court 10 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Elena Vesnina (RUS) (22) d. Annika Beck (GER) — 6-1, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Edouard Roger-Vasselin (FRA) d. Albert Montanes (ESP) — 6-3, 6-2, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Julia Glushko (ISR) d. Nadia Petrova (RUS) (20) — 6-3, 6-4

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Denis Kudla (USA) d. Jiri Vesely (CZE) — 6-2, 6-2, 6-7(6), 7-5

    [divider]

    Court 14 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Su-Wei Hsieh (TPE) d. Klara Zakopalova (CZE) (31) — 6-3, 6-3

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Jarkko Nieminen (FIN) d. Lukasz Kubot (POL) — 7-5, 7-5, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Rogerio Dutra Silva (BRA) d. Vasek Pospisil (CAN) — 4-6, 3-6, 7-6(9), 6-2, 7-6(10)

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Feliciano Lopez (ESP) / Andre Sa (BRA) d. Alexandr Dolgopolov (UKR) / Xavier Malisse (BEL) — 6-1, 6-3

    [divider]

    Court 15 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Camila Giorgi (ITA) d. Jana Cepelova (SVK) — 6-2, 6-2

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Jeremy Chardy (FRA) d. Sergiy Stakhovsky (UKR) — 6-4, 4-6, 6-2, 4-6, 6-4

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Chanelle Scheepers (RSA) d. Chanel Simmonds (RSA) — 2-6, 6-2, 6-1

    Men’s Singles – Round 1
    Benjamin Becker (GER) d. Lukas Rosol (CZE) — 6-3, 3-6, 6-3, 6-4

    [divider]

    Court 16 – 11:00 A.M.

    Women’s Singles – Round 1
    Michelle Larcher De Brito (POR) d. Eleni Daniilidou (GRE) — 6-4, 6-3

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Fabio Fognini (ITA) / Albert Ramos (ESP) d. Paul Hanley (AUS) / John-Patrick Smith (AUS) — 7-6(10), 7-6(4)

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Daniel Brands (GER) / Philipp Oswald (AUT) d. Kenny De Schepper (FRA) / Victor Hanescu (ROU) — 6-3, 7-6(5)

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Ivan Dodig (CRO) (10) / Marcelo Melo (BRA) (10) d. Nicholas Monroe (USA) / Simon Stadler (GER) — 7-6(2), 6-4

    Men’s Doubles – Round 1
    Chris Guccione (AUS) / Bernard Tomic (AUS) d. Juan Sebastian Cabal (COL) / Robert Farah (COL) — 7-6(2), 7-6(5)

    Credits: Cover Photo:  Melodie Mesiano (Creative Commons License)

  • Luck of the Draw: US Open 2013

    Luck of the Draw: US Open 2013

    The draw for the US Open has been released in the traditional fashion, which is to write the names of every eligible player on little slips of paper, place them all in an antique cannon in the middle of Arthur Ashe Stadium, and fire them straight up. From there the strong prevailing winds take over, and a player’s placement is determined by where in the tri-state area his name flutters to rest. It is for this reason, one presumes, that the year’s final Major is always contested during hurricane season. Sadly, the USTA has announced that in 2017 there will be roofs over the main stadiums at the Billy Jean King National Tennis Center. The US Open will have to find a new way of conducting the ceremony (since it is unthinkable that something as momentous as populating a tournament draw could be achieved without due pomp). It’s always a shame when old traditions disappear.

    [divider]

    Discuss this article, the match and lots more with fellow tennis fans in the forums.

    [divider]

    Of subsidiary interest, the placement of the very highest seeds is decided by where their names fall in relation to David Ferrer’s. As it happened, Rafael Nadal was the luckiest one. We can safely ignore scurrilous rumours that the slips of paper bearing the two Spaniards’ names had been stuck together with adhesive. Meanwhile, Novak Djokovic’s name turned up in Stamford, Connecticut. It could have been worse, I suppose.

    Once again we’re invited to marvel at the vagaries of the ATP rankings, especially the situation whereby Andy Murray, reigning US Open (and Wimbledon) champion and eternal saviour of British tennis, is ranked number three in the world. This is one place lower than Nadal, who holds only a single Major (Roland Garros), lost in the first round at Wimbledon, and didn’t even play at the others. It is two places lower than Novak Djokovic, who holds only the Australian Open. As a result the Scot is seeded lower than both those men at the upcoming US Open. As far as the population of the small island positioned off the extreme western coast of the Eurasian landmass is concerned, this is nothing short of a cosmic injustice.

    Although Sky Sports have never attained the febrile derangement of their compatriots at the Daily Mail, they have nonetheless elevated cheerleading on Murray’s behalf into something of an art form, and will reliably ascend to heights of outrage when they feel he’s been hard-done-by. While raucous advocacy presumably doesn’t reflect management’s official position, it certainly isn’t discouraged, and any failure to address Britain’s top player in sufficiently rapturous terms presumably results in disciplinary action. (This policy, incidentally, isn’t limited to Sky: word is that John McEnroe received a stern talking-to from ESPN after he repeatedly excoriated American players on air during last year’s US Open. He and his brother really did go to town on Donald Young one evening. Here in Australia, failure to sing the praises of either Lleyton Hewitt or Bernard Tomic will earn the offender a baleful visit from John Newcombe.) Anyway, Peter Fleming pronounced the latest rankings to be “crazy”. Marcus Buckland suggested it “seemed unfair”. Others were less circumspect, in each case betraying a deliberate ignorance of how the rankings actually work. It is understandable that the average punter’s knowledge of the sport ends with the Majors – we shouldn’t necessarily be thrilled at this, and American coverage in particular can grow pathetically grateful at any public interest at all – but for those paid good money to follow professional tennis from week to week, the Majors should merely be the start. There is no mystery why Nadal is ranked higher than Murray: there’s more to tennis than Grand Slam events.

    Anyway, the reason why the second and third seedings matter so much at this US Open is that David Ferrer is seeded fourth. There are probably kinder ways to say it, but the reality is that even when Ferrer was in decent form he represented a more benign semifinal opponent than whomever the alternative happened to be. Right now, however, he is in execrable form, and still troubled by a lingering injury. Not only that, but these are the potential quarterfinal match-ups based on seedings:

    • Djokovic – del Potro
    • Murray – Berdych
    • Nadal – Federer
    • Ferrer – Gasquet

    Which of these is not like the others? Any one of Berdych, del Potro, or Federer could have fallen in Ferrer’s quarter, and in each case would have been favoured to reach the last weekend. Alas, it wasn’t to be. So it goes. Let’s just call Ferrer’s quarter a grand opportunity for someone. There are nine qualifiers in this quarter, and four of them are facing each other. I’m going to venture out on an especially shaky limb, and suggest that Dmitry Tursunov’s time has arrived. Seeded thirty-two, the Russian won’t encounter anyone ranked higher until the third round at the earliest. By wisely choosing to be drawn in Ferrer’s quarter, he has ensured that he won’t face anyone truly terrifying until the semifinals. So pencil him in for that. Gasquet is in there, too, of course, seeded eighth. I could pencil him in for a quarterfinal, but history suggests that would be a waste of graphite. On the small chance that Tursunov doesn’t push all the way through to Super Saturday, I suspect either Milos Raonic or Jerzy Janowicz will. Or Ernests Gulbis, who is now seeded and can thus stop thinking of himself as the world’s most dangerous floater, since it was frankly getting him nowhere. But really it’s anyone’s guess.

    Ryan Harrison’s appalling luck at Grand Slam level continues. He has once again drawn a lofty seed early on, in this case Nadal in the opening round. Last year in New York he faced Juan Martin del Potro in the second round. The upshot is that even last year’s modest points will almost certainly go undefended. It’s rotten luck, undoubtedly, though one shouldn’t pretend there aren’t other reasons why Harrison isn’t ranked high enough to elude this kind of misfortune. It’s bound to be a featured night match, and thus a test of McEnroe’s generosity. It’s hard to imagine either Nadal or Federer will suffer upsets before they meet in the quarterfinals, unlike at Wimbledon, where I totally foresaw those early losses to Steve Darcis and Sergiy Stakhovsky, but didn’t want to spoil the surprise.

    Only one first round match really stands out – setting to one side the possibility that those qualifiers will entertainingly pulverise each other in fifth set tiebreaks – which is the one between Lleyton Hewitt and Brian Baker. Joints creaking and metal pins clanking, they’ll contest the chance to play del Potro. Whoever comes out of all that, it’ll be a triumph for medical science.

    Credits: Cover Photo: Wallyg, (Creative Commons License)

  • 2013 US Open and Draw Analysis

    2013 US Open and Draw Analysis

    It is the final week in August.  Workers are eager to escape from their tedium to play in the remaining sun baked summer warmth.  Beaches and pools teem with families and friends who enjoy the last days of summer before the school year begins.  Barbecues and grills still sizzle with the aroma of an array of culinary delights, while fresh salads and sumptuous fruits lay in tempting displays on picnic tables.  For tennis fans and players alike, though, these seasonal festivities lead to a single focal point.  We and they are swooping in on the New York City borough of Queens, at Flushing Meadows, and the hard courts of the US Open, the year’s final slam event in tennis.

    [divider]

    Discuss this article, the match and lots more with fellow tennis fans in the forums.

    [divider]

    The context of this year’s US Open for the men is similar to last year.  So far the first 3 Majors have produced 3 different winners: Novak Djokovic at the Australian Open; Rafael Nadal at Roland Garros (French Open); and Andy Murray at Wimbledon. However, the most in-form and consistent player of the year is without a doubt Rafael Nadal. Since his comeback to the tour in February after a seven-month absence, he has won an astonishing 9 titles, winning all but 2 finals out of 12 tournaments played, including Roland Garros and 5 Masters 1000 tournaments – 3 of those on hard courts.

    Nadal’s results since his comeback are in the words of the struggling Mardy Fish “not normal”.  As Andre Agassi has noted, historically, players that have been off a significant amount of time usually take approximately double the time to return to previous form.  How and why Nadal has been able to get to a level that is seemingly above his peers in such a short time is a subject for another discussion.  But there it is. His form cannot be ignored.  If he can maintain his form for the duration of the US Open, while also taking into considering his draw, he has to be considered the favorite, though he would probably never admit that.

    And yet, there can always be surprises in a Major.  128 players and 7 best of 5 set rounds over two weeks can introduce roadblocks to ultimate success.  The key for every player is overcoming all of the roadblocks to gain the title.  Players can underperform and over perform; players can get hurt.  Court/ball conditions may be different from the previous year.  Weather conditions can change abruptly leading to different playing conditions each day.  There are many variables, many intangibles. One can be the favorite, but it is definitely no sure thing.

    Much the same can be said about draw predictions before a single match has been played.  We can make a good analysis made on the basis of the past, but since humans and varying conditions are involved, we can never be sure of the future.  We can make predictions based on seeding, based on past performances of individual match-ups, based on overall class, based on consistency, based on favorite players of the moment.  And it’s almost impossible to avoid one’s own biases, even though one makes an effort to be unbiased. But in the knock-out system of tennis, anyone can be eliminated and change the nature of the draw, thus invalidating one’s original prediction.  It can be said that one may have as much success of predicting the outcome simply by choosing their favorite player or players.

    But let’s pretend that on average, a reasoned analysis, even with the unknowns, can lead to better predictions than simply picking your favorite top player or players.  So here it is:

    Top Half and 1st Quarter

    1st section – Novak Djokovic should have little trouble in the first two rounds getting past Ricardas Berankis and probably Benjamin Becker.  His 3rd round opponent will likely be either Jarkko Nieminen or Grigor Dimitrov.  Nieminen has not lost to Dimitrov in their only two meetings.  Either one will probably be Novak’s earliest roadblock.  He’s had a loss to each of them, and Nieminen has played him pretty close in his losing matches.

    2nd section – #16 seed Fabio Fognini should get past Rajeev Ram and Granollers over Zopp, but then it can go either way between those two winners.  The winner will likely prevail over any of the other 4 in this section, probably Benoit Paire, but one never knows with Paire as he can play wonderfully one day and atrociously the next.

    In any case, the winner of the first section is likely to prevail against the winner of the second section in the 4th round and get through to the quarterfinal.  I’ll pick Novak Djokovic over Nieminen or Dimitrov to make it to the quarterfinals.

    3rd section – Tommy Haas plays Paul-Henri Mathieu in the first round.  Mathieu beat Haas both times they played, way back in 2005. But Tommy is having a fairly solid year, while Mathieu’s ranking has plummeted.  I’ll pick Tommy here despite the head-to-head record.  The winner will likely beat either Lu or Gimeno-Traver. The other part of this section has David Goffin vs. Alex Dolgopolov, and Nicolas Mahut vs. Mikhail Youzhny.  I see Youzhny coming out of here to play probably Haas.  Their hardcourt record against each other is 3-2 in favor of Haas, but Tommy demolished Mikhail in their only slam meeting at Roland Garros this year.  It could go either way, but I’ll pick Haas to advance in this section.

    4th section – I can’t see anyone beating a healthy Juan Martin del Potro.  He might play former #1 Lleyton Hewitt, but Hewitt would have to roll back the years to beat del Potro and I don’t see that happening.

    Del Potro has never lost to Haas in 5 meetings all on hardcourts.  He stands out to win here and make it to the quarterfinals against Novak Djokovic.

    Quarterfinal – Juan Martin del Potro vs. Novak Djokovic

    The last meeting between Djokovic and del Potro went the distance on grass at the Wimbledon semifinal, with Djokovic barely prevailing.  But del Potro took their previous meeting on hardcourt at Indian Wells.  It’s a toss up, but I think Djokovic’s confidence is a bit shaken, and as long as del Potro is healthy, he should be fresh for this battle.

    1st Quarterfinal – Juan Martin del Potro to upset Novak Djokovic

    [divider]

    Top Half and 2nd Quarter

    1st Section – Murray heads this quarter and has a fairly easy road all the way to the quarterfinals.  He should go through the first 3 rounds without too much trouble as he plays Michael Llodra in the first round, probably Hanescu in the 2nd, and a little tougher battle in the 3rd, probably against Florian Mayer, who hasn’t played badly this year.

    2nd section – The highest seed in this section, Nicolas Almagro, is not a lock to win his first round match.  He plays Dennis Istomin, who has beaten Almagro on both clay and grass in their only two meetings, both in 2010.  Still, Istomin’s record at the US Open is not as good as Almagro’s.  But no matter, whether it’s Almagro, Istomin, Malisse, or anyone else in this section, I don’t see anyone beating my projected 1st section winner, Andy Murray, who should make it to the quarterfinals.

    3rd section – #9 seed Stan Wawrinka plays nemesis Radek Stepanek, who has beaten Stan all 4 times they have played.  But the last match was in 2009, and Stepanek has fallen to world #58, while Stan is #10.  This is actually a tricky section.  James Blake plays Ivo Karlovic, who has done reasonably well after being out for a few months. Marcos Baghdatis plays Go Soeda, and Daniel Brands plays Kevin Anderson.  I’ll go with Stan to win this section, but it wouldn’t surprise me if one of the other big servers gets through.

    4th section – #5 seed Tomas Berdych tops this section, and I don’t see anyone troubling him here, with the possible exception of Julien Benneteau. That’s the likely 3rd round match, and I see Berdych winning that to advance to the 4th round, and probably play Wawrinka for the right to get into the quarterfinals.  I can’t call this battle.

    Quarterfinal – Murray vs. Berdych/Wawrinka  – This quarterfinal match is difficult to call.  Murray beat Berdych in a windy semifinal here last year, but Berdych can beat Murray when he is on as well — and just did in Cincinnati.  A similar situation exists for Wawrinka vs. Murray. Stan beat Andy in their last US Open match in a tough 4 sets, but Andy has beaten Stan more on hardcourts.  If one goes on the most recent form on hardcourts, Berdych is the man to beat even though Murray won Wimbledon. But then if Wawrinka and Berdych have a tough match, Murray might gain the advantage.

    2nd Quarterfinal – Berdych/Murray/Wawrinka – Too close to call, but the order here is just a gut feeling.  I believe Murray has more mental strength than the others, but the others can still hurt him with their game.  This is a combination I would prefer to call before the quarterfinal.

    Top Half Semifinal – Juan Martin del Potro d. Berdych/Murray/Wawrinka

    Juan Martin might be tired after the Djokovic match, but the same goes for the other possible quarterfinalists.  I think whomever wins this semifinal is likely to be quite exhausted for the final vs. the winner of the bottom half.  I’m going to flip a coin and pick Juan Martin del Potro, but anyone could win this, and I would really prefer to wait till the semifinal to pick the match.

    [divider]

    Bottom Half and 3rd Quarter

    David Ferrer heads the undoubtably weakest quarter of the lot, which has a fair chance of producing a surprise quarterfinalist.  With 8 qualifiers, a lucky loser, and 2 wild cards in this quarter, one shouldn’t wonder at the level of difficulty required to forge through.

    1st section –  I expect this to come down to Richard Gasquet and Dmitry Tursunov.  Tursunov has had Gasquet’s number over the years, and I expect the 32nd seed to upset the number 8 seed.

    2nd section – Milos Raonic  and Feliciano Lopez should meet in the 3rd round. Lopez has beaten Raonic in their only meeting on clay, and could upset Raonic.

    If Lopez beats Raonic, I believe he will beat Tursunov to advance to the quarterfinal, but in any event, I think the winner will go down to the winner from the other sections.

    3rd section – This ultimately looks like a Jerzy Janowicz vs. Janko Tipsarevic match in the 3rd round. Tipsarevic is falling, and Janowicz is rising.  Janowicz should take this section.

    4th section – David Ferrer and Ernests Gulbis would be hard pressed to lose this section before meeting in the 3rd round.  They have only played each other one time, 6 years ago when Gulbis was just under 19 and Ferrer 25.  Ferrer won handily, but I think we have to forget that.  Ferrer has been unsteady of late, and Gulbis is always unpredictable.  I can’t call the winner of this match, but I think that player will lose to Janowicz.

    Ferrer beat Janowicz in the Paris final last year, but Janowicz played his 8th match in 9 days and was clearly exhausted.  I think Jerzy can beat David if he plays near his best level.  Gulbis and Janowicz would be a very interesting match and either could win.

    Quarterfinal – Lopez vs Janowicz/Gulbis/Ferrer

    I think Lopez will lose to whomever wins the 4th round from the other side. I favor Janowicz over Ferrer, while Janowicz vs. Gulbis is a toss up. In a very open quarterfinal, I’m going to give the edge to Jerzy Janowicz who should have more confidence and less nervousness after getting to his first semifinal at Wimbledon.  If it’s not Jerzy, it will be either Gulbis or Ferrer, but in any event, I believe they will lose to the winner of the 4th quarterfinal.

    3rd Quarterfinal – Jerzy Janowicz d. Feliciano Lopez

    [divider]

    Bottom Half and 4th Quarter

    I’m not going to bother with analysis of each section in this quarter.   World #2 Rafael Nadal has a fairly easy first couple of rounds (I don’t see Harrison troubling him), but the third could be tricky depending on the health and energy of Nikolay Davydenko.  Davydenko has only lost once to Nadal on a hardcourt in 7 matches (their first meeting, in 2006), and he leads their overall head-to-head 6-5. The other 4 wins by Nadal were on clay. They last played in 2012 in Madrid on the blue clay. Their last hardcourt match was in Doha in 2011, where Nadal lost 3 and 2. But in their relative form right now, it’s still difficult to pick Davydenko.  If Nadal gets past Davydenko, he will probably face Fernando Verdasco in the 3rd round, and Verdasco can be tough on Nadal on hardcourts. If Nadal gets past Verdasco, he could have to deal with John Isner again in the 4th round, and we saw how close that was on the high bouncing courts this year in Cincinnati. The trouble for Isner is the amount of energy he will have left by the 4th round to fight Nadal in a best-of-5 match. Should Nadal get past the 3 roadblocks mentioned, Roger Federer will probably be there in the quarterfinal, as I don’t see anyone in Federer’s sections who should be beating him before then — though this year, with Federer’s inconsistent form, I guess anything is possible.

    Quarterfinal – Rafael Nadal vs. Roger Federer
    Nadal and Federer have never met at the US Open, even though Federer has 5 USO titles and a final to his credit, and Nadal 1 USO title and a final to his. It would be an interesting battle. Nadal certainly is riding high, and has definitely been the best player during 2013 so far, despite missing the AO and exiting early at Wimbledon. Their last match in Cincinnati was closer than it appeared, and the bounce was higher there this year than in the past, as many players mentioned.

    The bounce makes all the difference to me in matches between these two. Nadal wins close to 100% when the bounce is higher as Federer cannot be as aggressive, especially on the backhand side, without making lots of errors, and Federer nearly 100% when the bounce is lower. Fortunately for Nadal, the trend overall on tour in the last few years favors higher bouncing surfaces, and they have mostly met on higher bouncing surfaces, and Rafa has a 2-to-1 ratio of matches won. How will it be in New York on Arthur Ashe at night? Arthur Ashe has been slowed over the past 3 years. Weather could also play a factor. Still, they both have to make the quarterfinals for this to play out.

    As previously mentioned, Nadal is without a doubt the most in-form player on the planet right now. Will his form continue to hold?  Will he be able to get past the 4th round without injury to his knees?

    Roger Federer is very light on matches this year, between his back, racquet experimentation, and some poor matches. He has only played 43 matches up to the US Open, his lightest year since his first full-time year on the tour in 2000 where he played 41 leading to the US Open. In his winning US Open years, he played at least 64 matches prior to playing the US Open with the exception of 2007, where he only played 52. Still, his Cincinnati performance was encouraging for him, probably his best level since the Australian Open this year, or the World Tour Final in 2012. If he doesn’t have any problems with his back, then with his draw, he has a good chance. Only Nadal stands in his way.

    Based on their most recent 2 or 3 tournaments, one would probably have to favor Nadal over Federer if they met in the quarterfinal, but I would never count Federer out at the US Open, even though his recent play has not been stellar, and he hasn’t won the title since 2008. But then again, nobody has won the US Open more than once since Federer won 5 in a row.  Again, this is a match I would prefer to pick just beforehand. Conditions are such a factor in this match up. Nadal will take it if it’s high bouncing; if it’s low bouncing, Federer. Since it is a toss up to me at this point, I won’t separate them.  But regardless, I think the winner of the bottom half will win the tournament as long as the draw does not open up in the top half, which would provide an easier path for the winner of that half.

    4th Quarterfinanal – Rafael Nadal – Roger Federer – toss up

    If I were forced to pick one or the other, I would probably have to go with Rafael Nadal, considering their relative form of late and the trend toward higher bouncing surfaces at most tournaments over the last few years.

    Bottom Half Semifinal – Rafael Nadal/Roger Federer d. Jerzy Janowicz

    Note that if Nadal and Janowicz meet, it could be a very interesting semifinal.  It would not surprise me to see Janowicz  pulled off an upset.  If it’s Federer vs. Janowicz, I think Federer will take it.

    Final – Rafael Nadal/Roger Federer d. a tired Juan Martin del Potro

    That’s how I see it as of now, dear readers.  The implications are clear.  Anything other than a Djokovic, Nadal, or Murray win would mean no multiple slam winners this year.  A Nadal win would probably seal a #1 ranking for the end of the year.   A Murray or Djokovic win would help their cause.   A first time winner would be a pleasant surprise.  Anything is possible in tennis.  Let’s hope for some great tennis, and wish health and good play to all of the players.

    Credits: Cover Photo: Wallyg, (Creative Commons License)

  • US Open – Men’s Draw

    US Open – Men’s Draw

    Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray set to meet in the semifinal in the top half; Rafael Nadal and David Ferrer in the bottom half; Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal will face off in the quarterfinals.

    Click here to discuss the US Open Men’s Draw in our discussion forum.

    First Quarter

    Novak Djokovic (SRB) (1)
    Ricardas Berankis (LTU)

    Benjamin Becker (GER)
    Lukas Rosol (CZE)

    Lukasz Kubot (POL)
    Jarkko Nieminen (FIN)

    Joao Sousa (POR)
    Grigor Dimitrov (BUL) (25)

    Benoit Paire (FRA) (24)
    Alex Bogomolov Jr. (RUS)

    Tim Smyczek (USA)
    James Duckworth (AUS)

    Jurgen Zopp (EST)
    Marcel Granollers (ESP)

    Rajeev Ram (USA)
    Fabio Fognini (ITA) (16)

    Tommy Haas (GER) (12)
    Paul-Henri Mathieu (FRA)

    Yen-Hsun Lu (TPE)
    Daniel Gimeno-Traver (ESP)

    David Goffin (BEL)
    Alexandr Dolgopolov (UKR)

    Nicolas Mahut (FRA)
    Mikhail Youzhny (RUS) (21)

    Jurgen Melzer (AUT) (29)
    Evgeny Donskoy (RUS)

    Igor Sijsling (NED)
    Qualifier

    Lleyton Hewitt (AUS)
    Brian Baker (USA)

    Guillermo Garcia-Lopez (ESP)
    Juan Martin Del Potro (ARG) (6)

    [divider]

    Second Quarter

    Andy Murray (GBR) (3)
    Michael Llodra (FRA)

    Victor Hanescu (ROU)
    Leonardo Mayer (ARG)

    Qualifier
    Martin Klizan (SVK)

    Florian Mayer (GER)
    Juan Monaco (ARG) (28)

    Andreas Seppi (ITA) (20)
    Xavier Malisse (BEL)

    Lukas Lacko (SVK)
    Qualifier

    Tobias Kamke (GER)
    Steve Johnson (USA)

    Denis Istomin (UZB)
    Nicolas Almagro (ESP) (15)

    Stanislas Wawrinka (SUI) (9)
    Radek Stepanek (CZE)

    James Blake (USA)
    Qualifier

    Marcos Baghdatis (CYP)
    Qualifier

    Daniel Brands (GER)
    Kevin Anderson (RSA) (17)

    Julien Benneteau (FRA) (31)
    Michal Przysiezny (POL)

    Sergiy Stakhovsky (UKR)
    Jeremy Chardy (FRA)

    Jiri Vesely (CZE)
    Denis Kudla (USA)

    Paolo Lorenzi (ITA)
    Tomas Berdych (CZE) (5)

    [divider]

    Third Quarter

    Richard Gasquet (FRA) (8)
    Michael Russell (USA)

    Qualifier
    Qualifier

    Jan-Lennard Struff (GER)
    Guillaume Rufin (FRA)

    Aljaz Bedene (SLO)
    Dmitry Tursunov (RUS) (32)

    Feliciano Lopez (ESP) (23)
    Qualifier

    Kenny De Schepper (FRA)
    Bradley Klahn (USA)

    Pablo Andujar (ESP)
    Thiemo de Bakker (NED)

    Qualifier
    Milos Raonic (CAN) (10)

    Jerzy Janowicz (POL) (14)
    Qualifier

    Jack Sock (USA)
    Qualifier

    Andrey Kuznetsov (RUS)
    Dudi Sela (ISR)

    Pablo Cuevas (URU)
    Janko Tipsarevic (SRB) (18)

    Ernests Gulbis (LAT) (30)
    Andreas Haider-Maurer (AUT)

    Qualifier
    Qualifier

    Roberto Bautista Agut (ESP)
    Thomaz Bellucci (BRA)

    Qualifier
    David Ferrer (ESP) (4)

    [divider]

    Fourth Quarter

    Roger Federer (SUI) (7)
    Grega Zemlja (SLO)

    Santiago Giraldo (COL)
    Carlos Berlocq (ARG)

    Horacio Zeballos (ARG)
    Adrian Mannarino (FRA)

    Guido Pella (ARG)
    Sam Querrey (USA) (26)

    Tommy Robredo (ESP) (19)
    Marinko Matosevic (AUS)

    Robin Haase (NED)
    Qualifier

    Albert Ramos (ESP)
    Bernard Tomic (AUS)

    Qualifier
    Kei Nishikori (JPN) (11)

    John Isner (USA) (13)
    Filippo Volandri (ITA)

    Adrian Ungur (ROU)
    Gael Monfils (FRA)

    Albert Montanes (ESP)
    Edouard Roger-Vasselin (FRA)

    Collin Altamirano (USA)
    Philipp Kohlschreiber (GER) (22)

    Fernando Verdasco (ESP) (27)
    Ivan Dodig (CRO)

    Rhyne Williams (USA)
    Nikolay Davydenko (RUS)

    Qualifier
    Vasek Pospisil (CAN)

    Ryan Harrison (USA)
    Rafael Nadal (ESP) (2)

     

    Credits: Cover Photo:  Adam Isserlis (Creative Commons License)

  • John Isner Upsets Novak Djokovic in Cincinnati

    John Isner Upsets Novak Djokovic in Cincinnati

    The American John Isner beat world No. 1 Novak Djokovic 7-6(5), 3-6, 7-5 in the quarterfinal of the Cincinnati Masters 1000 today. It was Isner’s second win over Djokovic, having first beat him last year in Indian Wells.

    After losing the first set in a tiebreak, Djokovic was finally able to break the 6’10” American’s serve in the second set. But once again in the final set Djokovic was unable to break Isner. Serving to take the match into a third set tiebreak, Isner broke the world No. 1’s serve, grabbing the final set 7-5.

    Djokovic was looking to complete what has been dubbed the Career Golden Masters by winning in Cincinnati, the only Masters 1000 he has never won. Denied the victory once again, he will have to try again next year.

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Isner/Djokovic match in our discussion forum.

  • Cincinnati Western & Southern ATP/WTA Schedule/Scores: Friday, August 16

    Cincinnati Western & Southern ATP/WTA Schedule/Scores: Friday, August 16

    [Scores added as known.]

    CENTER COURT — Start 11:00 A.M.

    (7) Juan Martin Del Potro (ARG) d (Q) Dmitry Tursunov (RUS) — 6-4, 3-6, 6-1

    John Isner (USA) d (1) Novak Djokovic (SRB) — 7-6(5), 3-6, 7-5

    Not Before 3:00 P.M.
    (1) Serena Williams (USA) d Simona Halep (ROU) — 6-0, 6-4

    Not Before 7:00 P.M.
    (4) Rafael Nadal (ESP) d (5) Roger Federer (SUI) — 5-7, 6-4, 6-3

    Not Before 8:30 P.M.
    (2) Victoria Azarenka (BLR) d (10) Caroline Wozniacki (DEN) — 6-3, 7-6(5)

    [divider]

    GRANDSTAND — Start 11:00 A.M.

    (2) Marcel Granollers (ESP) / Marc Lopez (ESP) d Mariusz Fyrstenberg (POL) / Marcin Matkowski (POL) — 6-4, 6-2

    Not Before 1:00 P.M.
    (14) Jelena Jankovic (SRB) d (12) Roberta Vinci (ITA) — 6-0, 6-4

    Not Before 3:00 P.M.
    (6) Tomas Berdych (CZE) d (2) Andy Murray (GBR) — 6-3, 6-4

    Not Before 7:00 P.M.
    Anna-Lena Groenefeld (GER) / Kveta Peschke (CZE) d Julia Goerges (GER) / Barbora Zahlavova Strycova (CZE) — 6-3, 6-2

    [divider]

    COURT 3 — Start 12:00 noon

    (8) Rohan Bopanna (IND) Edouard Roger-Vasselin (FRA) d (4) Leander Paes (IND) / Radek Stepanek (CZE) — 6-3, 6-7(3), 10-8

    (3) Su-Wei Hsieh (TPE) / Shuai Peng (CHN) d Ekaterina Makarova (RUS) / Elena Vesnina (RUS) — 6-1, 3-6, 10-3

    Not Before 4:00 P.M.
    (1) Bob Bryan (USA) / Mike Bryan (USA) d James Blake (USA) / Steve Johnson (USA) — 6-2, 6-4

  • Strong Believers

    Strong Believers

    Western & Southern Open, ATP Third Round

    [1] Novak Djokovic def. [Q] David Goffin 6-2, 6-0
    [5] Roger Federer def. [11] Tommy Haas 1-6, 7-5, 6-3
    [2] Andy Murray def. Julien Benneteau 6-2, 6-2
    [4] Rafael Nadal def. Grigor Dimitrov 6-2, 5-7, 6-2

    ESPN, Inc., formerly the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network Rulers of the Universe, has a way of making its fellow cable network, The Tennis Channel, look like it has the earnings potential of an independent bookseller—an independent used-bookstore with a leaky roof and a big CD section. I could watch Cincinnati tennis on two different ESPN stations today, while the Tennis Channel was stuck re-airing the Kooyong Classic from 2004. But, I could watch ESPN today, because today was a happy work-at-home paperwork-day. (This is a special kind of day, similar to a holiday. Sadly, it is also a type of day that has become all too rare in recent months.)

    Aside from making the Tennis Channel feel bad about itself, ESPN also has a way of reminding American tennis fans exactly how unimportant their sport-of-choice is in the grand scheme of chosen sports. Today they managed it by regulating Rafael Nadal and Grigor Dimitrov to ESPN3, an online stream, while airing Little League on television. Yes, a 1000-level ATP tournament contested on U.S. soil (specifically in the Western & Southern portion of the U.S.) took a back seat to eight-year-olds standing in a meadow chewing bubble gum. A match featuring one of the best players in tennis history versus the only active player on tour to be nicknamed after one of the other best players in tennis history was shunted aside by actual baby athletes.

    But I digress. Hmm. Why was I telling you about the ESPN programming schedule? Oh yes, for metaphorical purposes! And I’ll come to those in a moment, I promise. Everybody loves a metaphor. But first, since I’m on the subject of ESPN, I want to say a few words about ESPN commentator, Darren Cahill.

    In fact, you can consider this post my formal petition for Darren Cahill to take full coaching responsibility for Marion Bartoli’s post-retirement commentary career. Because, really, with Cahill in the booth, the video stream is almost optional. It isn’t simply that Darren Cahill mostly confines his commentary to the match at hand; it’s that his comments are so sensible. Indeed, when he has nothing sensible to say, he seems to say nothing at all. (Psychotherapists love this trait in their sportscasters.)

    For instance, during set one of Roger Federer’s three-set victory over Tommy Haas, Cahill wasted little time in the usual speculation about whether Roger was actually Federer, or if this Roger might not be an imitation version of the Swiss who had never learned to play tennis. Instead, he commented that Federer was more than typically nervous, rushing himself into poor decisions, mostly involving losing points at the net. Cahill also noted that Tommy Haas’s court position on the return was taking the out-wide serve from Roger forcing him into uncomfortable choices, and that Haas’s returns—flat and hard, down the middle of the court—were the best strategy to draw errors from Papa Fed.

    At some point in the middle of Nadal/Dimitrov match— the point when the Bulgarian ran down a drop shot, hit a winner, and then jumped into the air with glee—Darren Cahill chortled warmly, saying, “Goodness me, he’s fun to watch.” With Cahill in the ESPN booth, it’s also fun to listen.

    OK. That turned out to be an official second digression, which might be some type of digressive record, if such records were tracked. (I tried to keep track once, but I kept getting distracted.) So, without further ado, the metaphorical section of the post, wherein I compare the Big Four—defined herein as Djokovic, Nadal, Murray and Federer*— to ESPN, or perhaps Amazon.com, and their opponents to a cross between the Tennis Channel and various indie booksellers.

    [divider]

    Novak Djokovic d. David Goffin 6-2, 6-0

    The first men’s match on Center Court today was Novak Djokovic versus David Goffin. During Djokovic’s match, morning-time for me, I listened to my voicemail, ate a bagel, and blinked, twice. By the time I’d finished, it was all over. The second set took approximately five minutes and Goffin won exactly zero games. Djokovic, on the other hand, won six. Every time I had the opportunity to glance at my monitor I was treated to the sight of a blonde Belgian standing roughly fifty feet behind the baseline, and lunging in the general direction of a tennis ball.

    Goffin made his way to the third round via a 6-1, 6-1 win over Mackenzie McDonald, who is the first non-ranked ATP player to qualify for the main draw in Cincinnati. Ever. Mackenzie hails from Piedmont, California, an American hill-town so wealthy that it seceded from its surrounding city-state, which is a rough-and-tumble place called Oakland. Piedmont has a very tidy set of public courts. It is doubtful Mackenzie makes much use of them. In the second round, David Goffin bested last week’s Rogers Cup semifinalist Vasek Pospisil, 7-5, 1-6, 7-6. Neither of these victories offers exquisite insight into Goffin’s current form. Nor did today’s loss. Djokovic didn’t let him near the tennis ball. The Serb is looking fearsome.

    Djokovic has never won the Western & Southern Open. Conquering Mason, Ohio, would make him the only ATP player to win all nine of the Masters titles. I Googled No. 9 and it turns out to be – according to the internet’s most reputable numerology sites — “the number of destiny.” Wikipedia also defines nine as the number that follows eight and precedes ten. Make of that what you will.

    [divider]

    Roger Federer d. Tommy Haas 1-6, 7-5, 6-3

    Given that Federer spent a goodly portion of his third round match looking as if he were concerned that sustained rallies might damage his antique tennis racquet, you might be surprised that I’ve listed him among the metaphorically ESPN-esque players of the day. But—and I think I’m right about this—part of the reason Federer was able to come back and win the match from 1-6, 1-3 down is precisely because he is Roger Federer, or RF, Inc., for short. No matter how low the RF stock plunges, there is always a chance that his opponents will remember that they are up against a 17-time slam champion. (Sometimes, there is even opportunity for Federer to remember this, too, especially when he’s not wearing his special “warming shirt” and is therefore capable of hitting serves.)

    In Tommy Haas’s case, he must have also been aware of his 3-11 (now 3-12) career head-to-head against Federer. A tennis fan doesn’t need a numerology site to tell her that numbers like that can get in a player’s head. Nonetheless, the German got off to a stellar start, and looked as if he could continue being outstanding all day. Meanwhile, Federer proceeded to go from OK, to distinctly not OK, to much worse than that. By the end of the first set even his serve had abandoned him, protesting its owner’s wild net-rushing ways.

    But, midway through the second set the Cincinnati fans got to witness one of the marvels of today’s interdependent tennis economy. At very nearly the same moment in time, Federer began to produce his money shots, while Tommy’s currency took a sudden nosedive. Haas started his descent by re-gifting an early break back to Roger, leveling the set at 4-4. Federer consolidated, making one small fist pump in the process. Haas then gave away three straight points, which turned out to be set points, so he changed his mind and took them back. The set was still level at 5-5, but the momentum now rested with Federer.

    By the time the No. 5 seed closed out the match—an excellent drop shot to bring up match point, and a forehand winner to end it—Roger Federer looked like he had some measure of his aura back. (If you looked closely, you could even see it, shimmering in the Cincy sun — a pretty cornflower blue.) After the match, Federer was quoted as saying he is a “strong believer” he’s on the right path. Should Federer lose in the quarters, there’s still no proving him wrong. Even the most vintage version of Roger Federer could be excused for losing to Rafael Nadal at his most passionate™.

    [divider]

    Andy Murray d. Julien Benneteau 6-2, 6-2

    OK, I admit I did not see one ball of Murray’s win over Julien Benneteau. (I had to do some actual work today.) Andy Murray had to do some work, too — exactly one hour, nine minutes, and two seconds’ worth. Since I have no observations to make about this match, I’ll guess (blogger prerogative): the Scot is much improved this week from last. He is also the reigning Wimbledon Champion and the defending US Open Champion. He is a factor, whether he is happy about it or not.

    [divider]

    Rafael Nadal d. Grigor Dimitrov 6-2, 5-7, 6-2

    Nadal’s three-set defeat of Grigor Dimitrov was an exciting match, or might have been if I weren’t watching it while also trying to cook dinner for four. It is not easy being a Rafa fan, chopping vegetables, and watching a 6-2, 5-3 lead slip entirely away. In such moments one needs to be especially careful not to accidentally include small pieces of oneself in with the chopped kale and beans. (It’s what people like to eat in Northern California, I swear.)

    At some point during the first set, Darren Cahill said (sensibly), that, under pressure, Grigor Dimitrov had a tendency to abandon a winning strategy. As if Dimitrov knew he was being discussed, he demonstrated the truth of Cahill’s observation by gaining a hard-fought advantage in a long rally and proceeding to back it up by backing up, way up—deep into Goffin territory—losing the point because he couldn’t track down an inside-out forehand from Nadal. Case in point.

    However, when the Bulgarian made a mighty last stand, which came, as last stands will do, near the end of the second set, it turned out to be Nadal who abandoned his winning strategy. Instead of aggressively going for winners off his forehand, backhand, serves, and volleys, he mostly did not go for winners off all those same shots. When he did, he missed. Grigor, meanwhile, became good fun to watch.

    Fortunately for Rafa, he is, at the moment, well in touch with his trademark inner-passion for the game. As with Federer, you can see it in his aura, which shines bright yellow, and looks not unlike an incandescent tennis ball in the shape of a T-shirt. Even at night, the brilliant glow helps Rafa find anything from a moth resting its wings on the service-line to an aggressive baseline strategy. Having located his strategy Rafael Nadal, being Rafael Nadal, broke to open the third set. There were close games and see-saw moments in Set No. 3, but Nadal never relinquished the break. Why should he? He’s Rafa.

    [divider]

    At the beginning of Roger Federer’s match he was pronounced by many (many times over) to appear “not at all like Federer.” By the time he won, his play was dubbed “vintage Federer.” True Federer. (Though he was still far from full-flow-Federer, which is even truer than truth.) It fascinates me how often top players are defined as playing “like themselves.” It isn’t just linguistic laziness, or I don’t think it is. The technique is descriptive. If you tell me Djokovic was playing like Djokovic, I don’t picture baseline errors. No, I think it’s to do with how frequently the Big Four are able to channel their best selves, which — and this applies to all of us — is the truest version of the self. I am a strong believer in that.

    And because I’ve used up my entire allotment of words, including half my allowance for next week, I’ll end with mentioning players who deserved more mention: John Isner, Dmitry Tursunov, Juan Martin del Potro, and Tomas Berdych. Each man won a match today, and tomorrow they play Novak Djokovic, each other, and Andy Murray, respectively. I wish every one of them strong belief. I also wish tomorrow were another special stay-at-home-paper-work-day. So I could watch.

    *The Top Four (as opposed to the Big Four) includes Djokovic, Murray, Nadal, and David Ferrer, who is having a terrible time moving around tennis courts lately. I have to think it’s at least partly due to the damage done to his ankle at Wimbledon. The Spaniard tried so hard to give his second round match away to Ryan Harrison, but the American refused to take it. (Respect for his elders, and whatnot.) As a consequence, David Ferrer has now been Tursunoved twice this season. But it’s worth noting that last time he lost to the Russian was in Barcelona, mere weeks before he reached the French Open final.

  • Nadal Prevails Over Djokovic in Epic Rogers Cup Semifinal

    Nadal Prevails Over Djokovic in Epic Rogers Cup Semifinal

    Reversing expectations, and changing the conversation about the upcoming US Open, Rafael Nadal beat Novak Djokovic tonight in their semifinal at the Rogers Cup: 6-4, 3-6, 7-6(2).  It was their first meeting on hard-courts since their epic final at the Australian Open, won by Djokovic, who was hugely favored to win here.  It was also their 36th meeting, tying the Open Era record set by John McEnroe and Ivan Lendl.  Nadal leads the head-to-head 21-15, which matches Lendl’s record over McEnroe.

    Djokovic started sluggishly, the wind possibly a factor, and Nadal broke in the first game.  Djokovic had break points in the second, which possibly set the tone for a long slog, though Nadal prevailed in that game.  Nadal was the dominant player through the first set, but Djokovic broke back with Rafa serving for the set at 5-2, to make things interesting.  On the second time of asking, however, on his serve, Nadal closed it out.

    By the 2nd set, the wind had died down, and Djokovic seemed dialed in, his serve clicking.  From there, it became a dog-fight, and a minor classic.  They fought each other tooth and nail, with many thrilling exchanges until the seemingly inevitable  tiebreak in the 3rd.  Surprisingly, Nadal went up 6-0 before Djokovic countered with two points of his own. Too little, too late, though, and Nadal walked away the better man on the day.

    In the earlier semifinal, Milos Raonic defeated fellow Canadian Vasek Pospisil 6-4, 1-6, 7-6(4) to get to the final of the Rogers Cup today.  He will face Nadal in the final.  In three encounters, Raonic has never beaten Nadal.  Win or lose tomorrow, though, he will still break into the top 10 for the first time when the ATP rankings come out on Monday.

    Oddly, the only time that Nadal and Djokovic have played as a doubles team they played here, at the Rogers Cup, in 2010.  They lost to a Canadian wild card team:  Milos Raonic and Vasek Pospisil, all four being the last standing in this year’s Rogers Cup.

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Nadal/Djokovic semifinal with other tennis fans in our discussion forum.

  • Rogers Cup Semifinals Schedule/Scores

    Rogers Cup Semifinals Schedule/Scores

    Today’s ATP matches [See below for WTA] Scores added as known.

    Not before 3:00 P.M.
    (11) M Raonic (CAN) d (WC) V Pospisil (CAN) — 6-4, 1-6, 7-6(4)

    Not before 8:00 P.M.
    (4) R Nadal (ESP) d (1) N Djokovic (SRB) — 6-4, 3-6, 7-6(2)

    [divider]

    Today’s WTA matches. Scores added as known.

    Not before 1:00 P.M.
    S Cirstea (ROU) d (4) N Li (CHN) — 6-1, 7-6(5)

    Not before 6:30 P.M.
    (1) S Williams (USA) d (3) A Radwanska (POL) — 7-6(3), 6-4

    [divider]

    Click here to discuss the Nadal/Djokovic semifinal with fellow tennis fans.

    Click here to discuss the Raonic/Pospisil semifinal with fellow tennis fans.

    Click here to discuss the women’s semifinals with fellow tennis fans.