As Federer and Nadal wrestle over the first set of their Australian Open semi-final- a match whose materialization is a particularly-remarkable occurrence in that it represents the first instance in which these two have been so much as drawn in the same half of a Major draw since the 2005 French Open (including the last year, during which time they were not the top two seeds, but the draws continued to yield the same Nadal/Murray and Federer/Djokovic semifinal pairings which have predominated for the last several years, arousing the suspicions of some fans)- I wish to offer a brief list of predictions for the world's top four players, and for the 2011 season as a whole:
-I expect Djokovic to win at least one Major, and possibly two, but probably not three or more as with last year. During the the Open Era of tennis (the late 1960s through present), let it be noted, Rod Laver won all four Majors in 1969, but failed to win any the following season; Jimmy Connors won three of the four Majors in 1974, but failed to win any the following season; and Rafael Nadal won three of the four Majors in 2010, but won only one the following season. Only the historically-unique Roger Federer has ever been able to replicate such a season- and great as he clearly is, I do not ultimately believe Djokovic to be another Federer. Winning percentage in the mid-to-upper 80s, favorite to retain the world's-number-one ranking.
-I give Nadal better-than-50% odds at capturing another major this season, and better-than-a-one-in-three likelihood for two; he must fairly be accounted the favorite at the French Open (albeit not nearly so securely as in past seasons to my mind), and among the top three choices for each of the other Majors.
-Here, I will make a rare mildly-bold prediction and forecast a Roger Federer Major championship in 2012. It may be that the temporary momentum generated by Roger's recent winning streak is skewing my judgment, but as I expect Djokovic will probably not be able to replicate last year's superhuman standard of play, and Nadal will likely be up and down with injuries and fluctuations in form, the window appears open to me for an inspired Federer to seize the day at least once. With two-thirds' likelihood, Federer to win at least one Grand Slam title.
-Now, having all but already predicted away all four Majors between the top three, I have left little room here for Scotland's Andy Murray; however, remembering that each of the above were mere "probabilities" allowing sizable gaps, I will grant that Murray- under the tutelage of Ivan Lendl, whose career through Murray's age was strikingly similar to that of said newly-acquired protege- may finally be ready to perform at the crucial moment. This year, I allot Murray roughly a 40% likelihood of claiming a Major title, but will make an exception here and extend my forecast to give him a 60% chance at securing one sometime within the next two years. I will also state that I am on his side, inasmuch as his continual frustration over the last three-and-a-half years has earned my sympathy, and that I most earnestly hope (even as I doubt) that he can upset Djokovic tomorrow night.
A few more miscellaneous predictions:
-Raonic to reach the quarterfinals at either Wimbledon or the US Open (better than 50%)
-Roddick to return to the top 10 (better than 50%)
-Ferrer to fall from the top 5 (better than two-thirds)
-At least one "surprise" finalist to reappear in a Grand Slam (remembering that the last five Major finals have been contested exclusively by members of the big four)
January 26, 2012
November 09, 2011
Smokin' Joe
“There’s a fayun here to see you. A fayun. Awll the way from Idaho!” the secretary exclaimed in her thick Philadelphian accent. Upon hanging up the desk phone, she informed me that her boss would be down shortly, and my aunt and I took to a pair of cushioned chairs to wait. Moments later, two figures emerged from a hallway adjacent to the office in which we were situated. One of them, a dark-skinned fellow in a black cowboy hat, I recognized as Smokin’ Joe Frazier.
It was Spring Break my junior year in high school, and I had flown to Philadelphia to visit my sister, who was attending the University of Pennsylvania. From the first, I was keenly aware that these were the streets where walked that mythic pugilist of old whom I had read about, watched and imagined for so many years-- the legendary battler who entered every match with a fire in his belly, who never quit and never backed down and swarmed and hooked and worked and willed his way to victory, even when faced with bigger and more gifted foes. I wanted to stand before one of the greatest living monuments to the power of the human will. I wanted to meet the man, look in his eyes, shake his hand.
In contrast to the soft, squishy palms of we who have lead lives of comfort and privilege, Joe Frazier's hand felt like a leathery mat of sinew, hard and wiry strong. Though his career was now long behind him, his hair grizzled and his gait noticeably hobbled, I harbored no doubt that he could still have easily crumpled me in any contest of fisticuffs. The thought evidently crossed his own mind, for once we had taken adjacent seats and he had graciously signed the two boxing gloves I had brought (one was my own, the other my younger brother's- an unintentional gift, for I had mixed up our left gloves when packing for the flight), he informed me that he had a wayward son about my age (now in military school, he explained) who he used to meet in the ring every day and knock some sense into. I responded to the effect that I was sure he could still give me a good licking as well, at which time his face lit up; "Oh, you wanna fight?" he asked with a twinkle in his eye. It was an offer I could not but decline.
It was Spring Break my junior year in high school, and I had flown to Philadelphia to visit my sister, who was attending the University of Pennsylvania. From the first, I was keenly aware that these were the streets where walked that mythic pugilist of old whom I had read about, watched and imagined for so many years-- the legendary battler who entered every match with a fire in his belly, who never quit and never backed down and swarmed and hooked and worked and willed his way to victory, even when faced with bigger and more gifted foes. I wanted to stand before one of the greatest living monuments to the power of the human will. I wanted to meet the man, look in his eyes, shake his hand.
In contrast to the soft, squishy palms of we who have lead lives of comfort and privilege, Joe Frazier's hand felt like a leathery mat of sinew, hard and wiry strong. Though his career was now long behind him, his hair grizzled and his gait noticeably hobbled, I harbored no doubt that he could still have easily crumpled me in any contest of fisticuffs. The thought evidently crossed his own mind, for once we had taken adjacent seats and he had graciously signed the two boxing gloves I had brought (one was my own, the other my younger brother's- an unintentional gift, for I had mixed up our left gloves when packing for the flight), he informed me that he had a wayward son about my age (now in military school, he explained) who he used to meet in the ring every day and knock some sense into. I responded to the effect that I was sure he could still give me a good licking as well, at which time his face lit up; "Oh, you wanna fight?" he asked with a twinkle in his eye. It was an offer I could not but decline.
November 04, 2011
Glimmers
It is the first round of the 2011 US Open. Andy Roddick, who has had a dismal season to date and fallen to his lowest ranking in nine years, looks to have drawn a "safe" opponent in the tenacious-but-limited Michael Russell. Roddick fairly routinely coasts through the first two sets on the back of his serve and consistent baseline play, but Russell will not go away quietly, stepping up his aggression and beginning to bully his far bigger and more powerful opponent in the rallies.
Before long, it is apparent that Russell has gotten on a roll, and the woefully-defensive Roddick does not appear ready to rise to the challenge. Russell wins the third set, and carries his momentum into the fourth, going up a break within the first five games. For a few moments, it appears to me a very real possibility that the 33-year-old Russell, who has never won a match at the US Open, will rally from two sets down to eliminate this former champion in the opening round- and, indeed, should this happen, I fear that the specter of a Roddick retirement from the ATP tour begins to look very real. Common as it may for many to rashly proclaim a top player's demise every time he suffers an upset or has a slump, this truly feels as though it would constitute the point at which one might reasonably conclude, "He's done."
The moment passes, however; Roddick manages to step up his level of play just enough to break back, and, after a laborious struggle, ekes out the fourth set 7-5 to progress to the second round. I breathe a sigh of relief. The former world-number-one goes on to deliver routine victories over young compatriot Jack Sock and an in-form Julien Benneteau in the second and third rounds respectively, assuring me, regardless of what happens next, that I may shrug and tell myself, "Well, at least he's not done." He goes a step further, however, in the Round of 16, by upsetting the in-form world's number 5 David Ferrer in impressive fashion. Having seen him escape the jaws of ruin and prove once more that he can still compete at a world-class level, I am relatively unperturbed by the trouncing a flat-and-injured Roddick takes at the hands of Nadal in the quarterfinals.
However, I must admit, if Roddick is to go further than merely competing- being "in the mix," so to speak- he must demonstrate that he is still, at this stage, capable of beating the very best. So it is, then, that we arrive at the impetus for today's post.
It was at the Basel event in 2001 that Roddick and Roger Federer, then both promising newcomers, met for the first time in the professional ranks, whereupon Federer narrowly defeated Roddick in a third-set tiebreak. Ten years and a brutally one-sided rivalry later, the two now meet again in the same round of the same tournament. Many will predict a like recurrence in outcome, but through my ever-tinted glasses, I see the hope of renewal.
UPDATE: No such hope, however, when Mr. Roddick is running a 36% first-serve percentage. Let us hope he can at least improve on that for tomorrow's match with Murray.
Before long, it is apparent that Russell has gotten on a roll, and the woefully-defensive Roddick does not appear ready to rise to the challenge. Russell wins the third set, and carries his momentum into the fourth, going up a break within the first five games. For a few moments, it appears to me a very real possibility that the 33-year-old Russell, who has never won a match at the US Open, will rally from two sets down to eliminate this former champion in the opening round- and, indeed, should this happen, I fear that the specter of a Roddick retirement from the ATP tour begins to look very real. Common as it may for many to rashly proclaim a top player's demise every time he suffers an upset or has a slump, this truly feels as though it would constitute the point at which one might reasonably conclude, "He's done."
The moment passes, however; Roddick manages to step up his level of play just enough to break back, and, after a laborious struggle, ekes out the fourth set 7-5 to progress to the second round. I breathe a sigh of relief. The former world-number-one goes on to deliver routine victories over young compatriot Jack Sock and an in-form Julien Benneteau in the second and third rounds respectively, assuring me, regardless of what happens next, that I may shrug and tell myself, "Well, at least he's not done." He goes a step further, however, in the Round of 16, by upsetting the in-form world's number 5 David Ferrer in impressive fashion. Having seen him escape the jaws of ruin and prove once more that he can still compete at a world-class level, I am relatively unperturbed by the trouncing a flat-and-injured Roddick takes at the hands of Nadal in the quarterfinals.
However, I must admit, if Roddick is to go further than merely competing- being "in the mix," so to speak- he must demonstrate that he is still, at this stage, capable of beating the very best. So it is, then, that we arrive at the impetus for today's post.
It was at the Basel event in 2001 that Roddick and Roger Federer, then both promising newcomers, met for the first time in the professional ranks, whereupon Federer narrowly defeated Roddick in a third-set tiebreak. Ten years and a brutally one-sided rivalry later, the two now meet again in the same round of the same tournament. Many will predict a like recurrence in outcome, but through my ever-tinted glasses, I see the hope of renewal.
UPDATE: No such hope, however, when Mr. Roddick is running a 36% first-serve percentage. Let us hope he can at least improve on that for tomorrow's match with Murray.
September 05, 2011
Andy Murray: Grand Slam Champion?
Even before he established himself within the elite tier of professional tennis, there was never any dearth of writers' (now-largely-proverbial) ink spilled nor airtime devoted toward the subject of the career prospects of young British hope Andrew Murray. This furious drumming of keyboards and wagging of tongues has only intensified during the last three years, since Murray claimed his place among the world's top five players. Undoubtedly the most giddily-optimistic prognostication flourished in the weeks and months following Murray's dramatic emergence in the summer of 2008, which saw him claim the championship at Cincinnati and reach the final of the US Open; the most vivid example of this trend to my memory came in early 2009, when the ever-flamboyant Justin Gimelstob enthusiastically proclaimed that there was "absolutely no question Andy Murray will win numerous Grand Slam titles" while covering one of the Scot's matches.
Now, I thought this prediction (and the many others like it which were floating around, to the point at which Murray was made betting favorite for the 2009 Australian Open championship) to be rather wildly jumping the gun, and history has thus far vindicated my perspective on this matter; nearly three years later, Murray has still failed to win a Grand Slam title, and the public discourse has, by and large, cooled to speculation about whether he will ever win one at all- a proposition now seen in some quarters as highly dubious. John McEnroe has announced going into the 2011 US Open that he considers this Murray's "best chance" to win a Major, as if to suggest that it may be a matter of now-or-never for the Scot.
Here, however, I will come to Murray's defense. You see, having spent a fair bit of time sifting statistics, as is my way, it appears to me that he may be, as Roger Federer once suggested, simply too good not to win a Slam. Consider:
-Aside from Andy Murray, every active player who has reached two or more Grand Slam finals has won at least one Grand Slam title (Murray has reached three).
-Aside from Andy Murray, every active player who has reached six or more Grand Slam semifinals has won at least one Grand Slam title (Murray has reached seven).
-Aside from Andy Murray, every active player who has won four or more Masters Series titles has won at least one Grand Slam title (Murray has won six).
-Aside from Andy Murray, every active player who has finished three or more consecutive seasons ranked inside the world's top four has won at least one Grand Slam title (Murray is in line for his fourth).
I do believe there are more such valid comparisons to illustrate this point, and moreover, that most of these comparisons would extend to the entire Open Era of tennis. This demonstrates first, as most are aware, that Murray is already long overdue for a Grand Slam title, and second, that Murray would stand as a truly remarkable historical outlier if he failed to claim at least one Grand Slam title at some point in his career. Now, historical outliers do, of course, exist, but they are outliers for a reason; it is seldom wise to bank on their occurrence. Murray is a healthy 24 years old, and, with continued commitment, likely has three to four more years of elite-level performance ahead of him. Bleak as things may look at a given moment, I do believe the best bet is that it is only a matter of time before Murray makes good.
Now, I thought this prediction (and the many others like it which were floating around, to the point at which Murray was made betting favorite for the 2009 Australian Open championship) to be rather wildly jumping the gun, and history has thus far vindicated my perspective on this matter; nearly three years later, Murray has still failed to win a Grand Slam title, and the public discourse has, by and large, cooled to speculation about whether he will ever win one at all- a proposition now seen in some quarters as highly dubious. John McEnroe has announced going into the 2011 US Open that he considers this Murray's "best chance" to win a Major, as if to suggest that it may be a matter of now-or-never for the Scot.
Here, however, I will come to Murray's defense. You see, having spent a fair bit of time sifting statistics, as is my way, it appears to me that he may be, as Roger Federer once suggested, simply too good not to win a Slam. Consider:
-Aside from Andy Murray, every active player who has reached two or more Grand Slam finals has won at least one Grand Slam title (Murray has reached three).
-Aside from Andy Murray, every active player who has reached six or more Grand Slam semifinals has won at least one Grand Slam title (Murray has reached seven).
-Aside from Andy Murray, every active player who has won four or more Masters Series titles has won at least one Grand Slam title (Murray has won six).
-Aside from Andy Murray, every active player who has finished three or more consecutive seasons ranked inside the world's top four has won at least one Grand Slam title (Murray is in line for his fourth).
I do believe there are more such valid comparisons to illustrate this point, and moreover, that most of these comparisons would extend to the entire Open Era of tennis. This demonstrates first, as most are aware, that Murray is already long overdue for a Grand Slam title, and second, that Murray would stand as a truly remarkable historical outlier if he failed to claim at least one Grand Slam title at some point in his career. Now, historical outliers do, of course, exist, but they are outliers for a reason; it is seldom wise to bank on their occurrence. Murray is a healthy 24 years old, and, with continued commitment, likely has three to four more years of elite-level performance ahead of him. Bleak as things may look at a given moment, I do believe the best bet is that it is only a matter of time before Murray makes good.
July 02, 2011
Sleeping Giants
Those who have known me personally for a long while will know that boxing was once the sport which I followed with greatest passion; tennis, the overwhelming subject matter of this blog, replaced it only within the last two to three years. The driving force behind this shift was what I will call the constipation of modern professional fight game- the elites very seldom fight, and virtually never actually face one another at their best anymore. Case in point, see the way the world's top two fighters pound-for-pound, Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather, have been dancing in circles, pricing or politicking themselves out of an actual in-ring encounter.
The heavyweight division has been worst of all in this regard. It has been several years now that the Klitschko brothers have stood head-and-shoulders above the rest of the division. For understandable reasons, they refuse to fight one another, and the few potentially-interesting challengers (the likes of David Haye and Alexander Povetkin) have been acutely tentative to step in the ring with them, invariably withdrawing from proposed meetings through contractual dispute or timely injury, thus leaving only second-raters like Samuel Peter and an aging Shannon Briggs for our top guns to pick off. In the face of all this, I have grown distant and apathetic toward the modern boxing scene.
However, we are faced today with an exception to this drearying rule, as Haye, the former cruiserweight phenom who has been making waves at heavyweight of late, is set to step in the ring with Wladimir Klitschko within the hour. This is the most exciting heavyweight showdown perhaps since Lennox Lewis and older brother Vitali Klitschko squared off in 2003. Personally-obnoxious as he is, a part of me would dearly like to see Haye pull the upset and shake up the status quo.
The heavyweight division has been worst of all in this regard. It has been several years now that the Klitschko brothers have stood head-and-shoulders above the rest of the division. For understandable reasons, they refuse to fight one another, and the few potentially-interesting challengers (the likes of David Haye and Alexander Povetkin) have been acutely tentative to step in the ring with them, invariably withdrawing from proposed meetings through contractual dispute or timely injury, thus leaving only second-raters like Samuel Peter and an aging Shannon Briggs for our top guns to pick off. In the face of all this, I have grown distant and apathetic toward the modern boxing scene.
However, we are faced today with an exception to this drearying rule, as Haye, the former cruiserweight phenom who has been making waves at heavyweight of late, is set to step in the ring with Wladimir Klitschko within the hour. This is the most exciting heavyweight showdown perhaps since Lennox Lewis and older brother Vitali Klitschko squared off in 2003. Personally-obnoxious as he is, a part of me would dearly like to see Haye pull the upset and shake up the status quo.
June 20, 2011
Wimbledon Whimsy
Good, erm, morning, everyone! I find myself compelled in my restlessness to set down a few choice thoughts, here in the final hours before yet another Wimbledon is set to commence.
We will have to wait until Tuesday for the most exciting first-round match-up on the cards, when- in a development so promotionally fortuitous as to stoke conspiratorial speculation that the draw is rigged- we are to be treated to a rematch of the legendary 11-hour encounter at last year's Wimbledon between John Isner and Nicolas Mahut. Of course, this match also carries with it the potential for a great anticlimax, as neither Isner nor Mahut is a major competitive favorite for the tournament, and a repeat of the kind of epic drama we saw last year seems less than probable.
Andy Murray seems to have had the most promising immediate lead-up to this year's championships, having made an outstanding title run at Queen's Club while Nadal went down meekly against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, and Federer and Djokovic fell dormant. However, it seems clear that the rather-more-grueling clay-court runs shouldered by the latter three contributed to this turn of events, and I expect we will see them fit and refreshed when they take to the court these next couple days. Djokovic reportedly looked back in fearsome form at a recent grass-court exhibition against Gilles Simon, though it remains to be seen whether the sort of magic that seemed to follow him for six months, up until his fateful meeting with Federer at Roland Garros, will still be there for him in London. This year's draw is particularly fascinating because, in contrast to recent years, wherein one could often easily identify a single cut-and-dried front-runner, there are now multiple players (Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, perhaps even Murray) who can be plausibly construed as favorite to claim the title, as well as several darkhorses (Roddick, Tsonga, Berdych) with the potential to upset the apple cart.
Unfortunately, as seen in my last post (juxtaposed with the subsequent thrashing he suffered at the hands of Murray) I seem to jinx Mr. Roddick whenever I say anything terribly optimistic about his competitive prospects, and so I will keep current speculation on his chances here strictly tentative: though he has not often shown it in recent months, I do believe that Roddick is still capable, given the necessary stroke of inspiration, of repeating everything he did in 2009 that carried him so close to the title. However, as we cannot count on this happening, I will say that a quarterfinal showing would be a solid result for him, and encouraging for those of us who are hoping to see him finish in the world's top 10 for a tenth consecutive season, as well as potentially qualify for a ninth consecutive year-end championships- two goals toward which he is a bit behind schedule at the moment.
I shall now wish you well and take leave of the waking world ever so briefly before rousing myself in anticipation of the joys to come.
We will have to wait until Tuesday for the most exciting first-round match-up on the cards, when- in a development so promotionally fortuitous as to stoke conspiratorial speculation that the draw is rigged- we are to be treated to a rematch of the legendary 11-hour encounter at last year's Wimbledon between John Isner and Nicolas Mahut. Of course, this match also carries with it the potential for a great anticlimax, as neither Isner nor Mahut is a major competitive favorite for the tournament, and a repeat of the kind of epic drama we saw last year seems less than probable.
Andy Murray seems to have had the most promising immediate lead-up to this year's championships, having made an outstanding title run at Queen's Club while Nadal went down meekly against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, and Federer and Djokovic fell dormant. However, it seems clear that the rather-more-grueling clay-court runs shouldered by the latter three contributed to this turn of events, and I expect we will see them fit and refreshed when they take to the court these next couple days. Djokovic reportedly looked back in fearsome form at a recent grass-court exhibition against Gilles Simon, though it remains to be seen whether the sort of magic that seemed to follow him for six months, up until his fateful meeting with Federer at Roland Garros, will still be there for him in London. This year's draw is particularly fascinating because, in contrast to recent years, wherein one could often easily identify a single cut-and-dried front-runner, there are now multiple players (Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, perhaps even Murray) who can be plausibly construed as favorite to claim the title, as well as several darkhorses (Roddick, Tsonga, Berdych) with the potential to upset the apple cart.
Unfortunately, as seen in my last post (juxtaposed with the subsequent thrashing he suffered at the hands of Murray) I seem to jinx Mr. Roddick whenever I say anything terribly optimistic about his competitive prospects, and so I will keep current speculation on his chances here strictly tentative: though he has not often shown it in recent months, I do believe that Roddick is still capable, given the necessary stroke of inspiration, of repeating everything he did in 2009 that carried him so close to the title. However, as we cannot count on this happening, I will say that a quarterfinal showing would be a solid result for him, and encouraging for those of us who are hoping to see him finish in the world's top 10 for a tenth consecutive season, as well as potentially qualify for a ninth consecutive year-end championships- two goals toward which he is a bit behind schedule at the moment.
I shall now wish you well and take leave of the waking world ever so briefly before rousing myself in anticipation of the joys to come.
June 11, 2011
Grassy Miscellany
In the aftermath of the historic events of the 2011 French Open, the ATP has turned its attention to the brief-but-crucial grass-court swing, wherein tournaments at London and Halle offer the major warm-up opportunities to the world's finest players. The top performers from the clay-court season seem to be experiencing a bit of burn-out, as Federer and Djokovic both withdrew from their scheduled events, while Nadal, having once more done just enough to maintain his tenuous hold on the exclusive world's number-one ranking (an immediate exit would have created the unique situation of co-number-one status, as Nadal and Djokovic would each have held 12,025 points to their credit come Monday) bombed out in a lackluster showing against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga yesterday afternoon.
I have been pleased to see my countryman, Mr. Andy Roddick, back in strong form this week at Queen's Club; he has dispatched three consecutive potentially-dangerous opponents, each more dominantly than the last, and in so doing set up a semifinal rematch of his gripping encounter with Andy Murray at Wimbledon two years ago. If he brings the same level of play to the Wimbledon championships later this month, he may once more find himself in contention for the greatest prize in tennis.
June 05, 2011
Djokovic Denied
Upon serving one last ace up the tee to complete what will go down in history among the greatest victories of his momentous professional tennis career, Roger Federer gently wagged a forefinger at his conquered foe. "Not yet," he seemed to say.
For the first time in over seven years, it appeared likely that the next week's world ATP singles rankings would show neither Roger Federer nor Rafael Nadal in the number one position. Novak Djokovic, reigning Australian Open champion and winner of 43 consecutive matches, took to the court Friday afternoon but one more victory from seizing the mantle currently held by Nadal, and a clear favorite to accomplish the task; it seemed to many, as pundits had often- though always incorrectly- speculated over the years, that the Federer-Nadal era was at long last coming to an end. In characteristic fashion, however, the Swiss legend came up with a touch of magic at the moment he most needed it, while Djokovic showed what have of late been rare signs of humanity in his sometimes-uneven performance. In one fell stroke, Federer both thwarted Djokovic's immediate number-one hopes and set up the first Grand Slam final meeting between himself and Nadal since the 2009 Australian Open, as if to broadcast the message that their ship still sails.
Powerful heartache surely awaited Djokovic, who fell a single match short of securing the number one ranking and one short of equaling John McEnroe's record start-of-the-year unbeaten run of 1984, but hope still remains. Just as many Nadal fans undoubtedly found themselves in the unusual position of rooting emphatically for Federer Friday, so I expect that Djokovic's supporters will now rally behind their man's conqueror. A Federer win Sunday would enable Djokovic yet still to take the number one position from Nadal, who is defending a championship run from last year.
For the first time in over seven years, it appeared likely that the next week's world ATP singles rankings would show neither Roger Federer nor Rafael Nadal in the number one position. Novak Djokovic, reigning Australian Open champion and winner of 43 consecutive matches, took to the court Friday afternoon but one more victory from seizing the mantle currently held by Nadal, and a clear favorite to accomplish the task; it seemed to many, as pundits had often- though always incorrectly- speculated over the years, that the Federer-Nadal era was at long last coming to an end. In characteristic fashion, however, the Swiss legend came up with a touch of magic at the moment he most needed it, while Djokovic showed what have of late been rare signs of humanity in his sometimes-uneven performance. In one fell stroke, Federer both thwarted Djokovic's immediate number-one hopes and set up the first Grand Slam final meeting between himself and Nadal since the 2009 Australian Open, as if to broadcast the message that their ship still sails.
Powerful heartache surely awaited Djokovic, who fell a single match short of securing the number one ranking and one short of equaling John McEnroe's record start-of-the-year unbeaten run of 1984, but hope still remains. Just as many Nadal fans undoubtedly found themselves in the unusual position of rooting emphatically for Federer Friday, so I expect that Djokovic's supporters will now rally behind their man's conqueror. A Federer win Sunday would enable Djokovic yet still to take the number one position from Nadal, who is defending a championship run from last year.
June 03, 2011
The Final Peak
As of mid-season 2010, Novak Djokovic of Serbia scarcely seemed a serious contender to claim any Grand Slam titles within the foreseeable future. His second serve was dodgy, his forehand was shank-prone, he was exhibiting a disturbing trend toward passivity from the baseline, and his long history of on-court illness-and-injury treatments and retirements had inspired abundant conjecture to the effect that he was either a hypochondriac or a drama queen. All told, the standard of his results had receded since his then-watershed moment at the 2008 Australian Open, and the question hanging over him was not, as it had once been, whether he could advance his ranking further, but rather whether he could so much as maintain the world's-number-three position to which he had so long been wedded.
One year later, all of these faults appear to have vanished without a trace; his service game is rock-solid, he reliably delivers the most consistent and assertive baseline play in the business, he has neither called forth a trainer nor retired from a match even once to my knowledge over the intervening 12 months, and he stands now potentially mere hours from the fulfillment of his lifelong ambition to attain the coveted number-one ranking. His final obstacle will come in the form of Switzerland's Roger Federer, whom he is set to face in the French Open semifinals Friday night. To depose a legend such as Federer- who is the all-time Grand Slam record holder and last man to defeat Djokovic, that coming at the World Tour Finals last November- on a stage such as this would seem a nigh impossible task to most, but Djokovic has already performed the feat on three past occasions, including each of the last two Grand Slam events, and has defeated Federer three times this season alone.
One cannot rule out altogether the possibility that Roger Federer, even in the latter stages of his career, will find some of his old magic now, when he needs it most, but it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the outcome of this contest will, in all likelihood, rest ultimately on the racket of the Serb. It may be pointed out that Djokovic has, in the past, shown tension when faced with the opportunity to reach a new high-water-mark in the rankings, as in 2009 when he failed in his first three attempts to claim the number two ranking, including once in a shocking upset to unheralded Finn Jarko Nieminen- yet, as I have described, Djokovic seems by now to have long since risen to a new and higher plane, casting off like an infant's swaddling cloths the physical and mental constraints which once seemed to bind him. This, then, is the moment of truth; will we see a glimmer of Djokovic the man on the red clay at Roland Garros, or will Djokovic the tennis demi-God complete his ascent to the summit of Mount Olympus?
One year later, all of these faults appear to have vanished without a trace; his service game is rock-solid, he reliably delivers the most consistent and assertive baseline play in the business, he has neither called forth a trainer nor retired from a match even once to my knowledge over the intervening 12 months, and he stands now potentially mere hours from the fulfillment of his lifelong ambition to attain the coveted number-one ranking. His final obstacle will come in the form of Switzerland's Roger Federer, whom he is set to face in the French Open semifinals Friday night. To depose a legend such as Federer- who is the all-time Grand Slam record holder and last man to defeat Djokovic, that coming at the World Tour Finals last November- on a stage such as this would seem a nigh impossible task to most, but Djokovic has already performed the feat on three past occasions, including each of the last two Grand Slam events, and has defeated Federer three times this season alone.
One cannot rule out altogether the possibility that Roger Federer, even in the latter stages of his career, will find some of his old magic now, when he needs it most, but it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the outcome of this contest will, in all likelihood, rest ultimately on the racket of the Serb. It may be pointed out that Djokovic has, in the past, shown tension when faced with the opportunity to reach a new high-water-mark in the rankings, as in 2009 when he failed in his first three attempts to claim the number two ranking, including once in a shocking upset to unheralded Finn Jarko Nieminen- yet, as I have described, Djokovic seems by now to have long since risen to a new and higher plane, casting off like an infant's swaddling cloths the physical and mental constraints which once seemed to bind him. This, then, is the moment of truth; will we see a glimmer of Djokovic the man on the red clay at Roland Garros, or will Djokovic the tennis demi-God complete his ascent to the summit of Mount Olympus?
June 01, 2011
Nadal-Soderling III
Now, my title is not strictly accurate; their Wednesday evening French Open quarterfinal encounter will actually mark the eighth time Rafael Nadal and Robin Soderling have met in an official ATP match. In fact, this won't even be the third, but rather the fourth time the two have met at the French Open itself. However, following up as it does upon historic clashes at both the 2009 and 2010 Opens, it will represent the third installment in what is becoming one of the most compelling rivalries since the days when Federer and Nadal were contesting two Grand Slam finals a year against one another, and with it will come a crossroads of sorts between several compelling supblots, the most notable among these involving Nadal's tenuous hold upon the world's number-one ranking.
In Rafa's favor, it may be pointed out that he soundly defeated Soderling in last year's final, that he holds the 3-1 career head-to-head advantage on clay, and that Soderling has not so much as claimed a set off him in any of their clay-court meetings aside from the 2009 shocker which saw the Spaniard suffer his first- and, thus far, only- defeat at the French slam. Nonetheless, Soderling's backers may rightly point out that Nadal's form throughout the 2011 clay court run has been significantly inferior to the standard he set last season; for example, Nadal lost only 14 games en route to the 2010 Monte Carlo title, but dropped more than double that total in another title-winning effort this year at 34, and had lost only 34 games (and zero sets) prior to the quarterfinals of last year's French Open, compared with 53 games and two sets this year. Furthermore, the Swede would be continuing the pattern he has established over the last two years were he to once again pull off a shock upset over a legend midway through the tournament.
So, how will this all turn out? Will Nadal keep his hopes alive to retain the title and number-one ranking, or will Soderling once again upset the apple cart at Roland Garros, protecting countryman Bjorn Borg's all-time French Open title record in the process? Truth be told, I really haven't the foggiest.
In Rafa's favor, it may be pointed out that he soundly defeated Soderling in last year's final, that he holds the 3-1 career head-to-head advantage on clay, and that Soderling has not so much as claimed a set off him in any of their clay-court meetings aside from the 2009 shocker which saw the Spaniard suffer his first- and, thus far, only- defeat at the French slam. Nonetheless, Soderling's backers may rightly point out that Nadal's form throughout the 2011 clay court run has been significantly inferior to the standard he set last season; for example, Nadal lost only 14 games en route to the 2010 Monte Carlo title, but dropped more than double that total in another title-winning effort this year at 34, and had lost only 34 games (and zero sets) prior to the quarterfinals of last year's French Open, compared with 53 games and two sets this year. Furthermore, the Swede would be continuing the pattern he has established over the last two years were he to once again pull off a shock upset over a legend midway through the tournament.
So, how will this all turn out? Will Nadal keep his hopes alive to retain the title and number-one ranking, or will Soderling once again upset the apple cart at Roland Garros, protecting countryman Bjorn Borg's all-time French Open title record in the process? Truth be told, I really haven't the foggiest.
April 03, 2011
The Streak Phenomenon and its Predictive Application
With Djokovic and Nadal embroiled in their second consecutive Masters Series final, I am once again inclined to favor the Spaniard. I will further state that the strength of the "Djokovic-for-year-end-number-one" movement, endorsed by figures as prominent as, for example, Patrick McEnroe (who predicts another Djokovic Grand Slam title this season along with a number one finish) reflects the strong tendency among tennis fandom to project a player's current form out across the future in a way which very seldom pans out.
For example, note that in early 2008, Djokovic also won both the Australian Open- defeating Federer in the process- and Indian Wells- defeating Nadal in the process- and was also widely feted as favorite to finish as year-end number one; as it happened, however, Djokovic failed to appear in another Grand Slam final for the remainder of the season and finished the year at world's number three. The next season, Nadal won both the Australian Open and Indian Wells, and was widely ballyhooed as a contender for the calendar Grand Slam that year; as it happened, however, Nadal failed to so much as appear in another Grand Slam final for the remainder of the season, and finished 2009 ranked world's number two. The year after that, it was Federer who won the Australian Open, and who was, once again, slated by many for a year-end number one finish and potential calendar Grand Slam; as it happened, however, Federer failed to so much as reach another Grand Slam final for the remainder of the season, and finished 2010 ranked world's number two.
It is thus the case that in none of the last three years has the Australian Open champion gone on to finish the season as world's number one, nor to win another Grand Slam title, nor even to make another final therein. This also holds true in the two of these seasons (2008 and 2009) which saw the Australian Open winner proceed to claim the Indian Wells title. Now, this is not to say that winning the Australian Open and Indian Wells somehow actively decreases one's likelihood of finishing the season at world's number one, but it is to say that it does not seem to be the predictor of season-long performance standard and year-end ranking which many treat it as.
Now, if Djokovic should win today, completing a trifecta of year-to-date titles in major tournaments, I will perhaps promote him to co-favorite for the year-end number one ranking, but at present, I will regard Nadal as favorite both for the match and the season.
For example, note that in early 2008, Djokovic also won both the Australian Open- defeating Federer in the process- and Indian Wells- defeating Nadal in the process- and was also widely feted as favorite to finish as year-end number one; as it happened, however, Djokovic failed to appear in another Grand Slam final for the remainder of the season and finished the year at world's number three. The next season, Nadal won both the Australian Open and Indian Wells, and was widely ballyhooed as a contender for the calendar Grand Slam that year; as it happened, however, Nadal failed to so much as appear in another Grand Slam final for the remainder of the season, and finished 2009 ranked world's number two. The year after that, it was Federer who won the Australian Open, and who was, once again, slated by many for a year-end number one finish and potential calendar Grand Slam; as it happened, however, Federer failed to so much as reach another Grand Slam final for the remainder of the season, and finished 2010 ranked world's number two.
It is thus the case that in none of the last three years has the Australian Open champion gone on to finish the season as world's number one, nor to win another Grand Slam title, nor even to make another final therein. This also holds true in the two of these seasons (2008 and 2009) which saw the Australian Open winner proceed to claim the Indian Wells title. Now, this is not to say that winning the Australian Open and Indian Wells somehow actively decreases one's likelihood of finishing the season at world's number one, but it is to say that it does not seem to be the predictor of season-long performance standard and year-end ranking which many treat it as.
Now, if Djokovic should win today, completing a trifecta of year-to-date titles in major tournaments, I will perhaps promote him to co-favorite for the year-end number one ranking, but at present, I will regard Nadal as favorite both for the match and the season.
March 20, 2011
A Quick Note...
I've been meaning to get some substantial words in with this all-too-often-neglected little soapbox of mine, and hope I shall finally get around to it shortly, but for now, I simply want to note, having heard that Djokovic is considered the favorite, that I expect a Nadal victory in the Indian Wells final set to commence moments from now; this seems to me a lovely opportunity to look good by way of calling an "upset," and if I should prove mistaken, I shall have all the more incentive to get posting and bury the embarrassment.
Nadal in three.
Nadal in three.
January 27, 2011
2008 Redux?
It has been three years since last a Grand Slam final was contested without at least one of Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal numbering among its participants. The 2008 Australian Open saw both crash out in straight sets against inspired foes, paving the way for Novak Djokovic, who was fresh off a runner-up finish at the preceding US Open, and who upset Federer in the semifinals, to claim his first- and, to date, only- career Grand Slam title. As I write, fate seems poised, perhaps, to offer us an eery echo of that peculiar turn of events gone by. Nadal, injured and despondent, has fallen to compatriot David Ferrer, while Djokovic, once again riding the crest of a run to the US Open final, is locked in another Melbourne semifinal with Federer, wherein he has won the first set, and has looked every bit the dynamic and versatile player who claimed the title here three years ago. All the crucial pieces are in place for history to repeat itself.
It has often been the case, however, that the course of events, in unfolding, will tantalize its observers, dangling the prospect of a particular narrative before us, only to unceremoniously withdraw back into the ether that which it once seemed to promise. Should Federer manage to rally in this match, said course may divert itself towards the path it followed last year, when Federer faced down Andy Murray- who stands as a firm favorite in his own semifinal with Ferrer- on this same grand stage.
It has often been the case, however, that the course of events, in unfolding, will tantalize its observers, dangling the prospect of a particular narrative before us, only to unceremoniously withdraw back into the ether that which it once seemed to promise. Should Federer manage to rally in this match, said course may divert itself towards the path it followed last year, when Federer faced down Andy Murray- who stands as a firm favorite in his own semifinal with Ferrer- on this same grand stage.
January 19, 2011
Australian Open Opens
The first major tennis event of the 2011 season is underway this week in Melbourne Australia, with the bottom half of the draw in action today competing for passage into the third round. All of the top men cruised through the first round, with the likes of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Soderling, Murray, and Roddick- incidentally, the same group I will deem to comprise the top six favorites to win the title, and in roughly that order, for reasons I hope to discuss at greater length in the near future- all winning their opening matches without dropping more than five games. The second round has been somewhat more tumultuous, seeing world's #9 Fernando Verdasco snatch victory from the jaws of defeat after saving three match points in a five-setter against an uncharacteristically nervy Janko Tipsarevic, while Roddick had to face down a couple of set points in a tiebreak against Igor Kunitsyn before he could take over his own second-round contest, and Djokovic has, as I write this, just battled his way to a 7-5 first set over Croatian Ivan Dodig.
Roger Federer will take to the court shortly against Frenchman Gilles Simon in what has the potential to be a very interesting encounter. This is, perhaps, a tricky draw for the world's #2; a former top-10 player who was sideline by injury for much of last season, Simon holds a 2-0 head-to-head record against Federer, and has been in very fine form of late, winning the title at the Sydney warm-up event. That said, it may be fairly pointed out that both of Simon's wins over Federer took place in 2008, in the midst of a relative slump in Federer's level of play, and that each of them came in the form of a highly-improbable comeback on Simon's part from a set-and-a-break down. Moreover, Federer has been positively on fire in recent months, having lost only one match since the 2010 US Open. Nevertheless, I will say that Simon is perhaps the most dangerous "floater" Federer could have drawn for a second-round match; I give him at least a 50% chance at taking a set off Federer today, and perhaps a 10-20% likelihood to pull off the upset.
The preceding could represent an instance of irrational optimism on my part, as I do sorely wish to see Mr. Federer knocked out of the draw. This is not out of any personal ire, mind you, but out of concern for certain other players for whom the Swiss legend has long proven an insurmountable obstacle- most notably my countryman, Mr. Roddick, who is theoretically on course to meet Federer in the quarterfinals. Of note tomorrow, Nadal, Soderling and Murray will all be in action against fairly standard-issue second-round opponents, while another past Federer victim and rooting interest of mine, former Australian Open finalist Marcos Baghdatis, is set to contest a very intriguing match-up against comebacking former US Open champion Juan Martin Del Potro.
I am now off to breathlessly fidget and squirm my way through what will hopefully be a gripping three hours or so of elite skill and athleticism, but hope to speak once more to whomever may be listening, or else to my own personal sounding board, very soon.
Roger Federer will take to the court shortly against Frenchman Gilles Simon in what has the potential to be a very interesting encounter. This is, perhaps, a tricky draw for the world's #2; a former top-10 player who was sideline by injury for much of last season, Simon holds a 2-0 head-to-head record against Federer, and has been in very fine form of late, winning the title at the Sydney warm-up event. That said, it may be fairly pointed out that both of Simon's wins over Federer took place in 2008, in the midst of a relative slump in Federer's level of play, and that each of them came in the form of a highly-improbable comeback on Simon's part from a set-and-a-break down. Moreover, Federer has been positively on fire in recent months, having lost only one match since the 2010 US Open. Nevertheless, I will say that Simon is perhaps the most dangerous "floater" Federer could have drawn for a second-round match; I give him at least a 50% chance at taking a set off Federer today, and perhaps a 10-20% likelihood to pull off the upset.
The preceding could represent an instance of irrational optimism on my part, as I do sorely wish to see Mr. Federer knocked out of the draw. This is not out of any personal ire, mind you, but out of concern for certain other players for whom the Swiss legend has long proven an insurmountable obstacle- most notably my countryman, Mr. Roddick, who is theoretically on course to meet Federer in the quarterfinals. Of note tomorrow, Nadal, Soderling and Murray will all be in action against fairly standard-issue second-round opponents, while another past Federer victim and rooting interest of mine, former Australian Open finalist Marcos Baghdatis, is set to contest a very intriguing match-up against comebacking former US Open champion Juan Martin Del Potro.
I am now off to breathlessly fidget and squirm my way through what will hopefully be a gripping three hours or so of elite skill and athleticism, but hope to speak once more to whomever may be listening, or else to my own personal sounding board, very soon.
November 26, 2010
Now That Thanksgiving is Over, a Mild Complaint
It has been a bit of an anti-climactic week thus far at the ATP World Tour Finals in London. Through eight round-robin matches, we have seen only one go the three-set distance- an entertaining see-saw clash between Nadal and Roddick which mirrored their encounter in Miami earlier this season. Every other match has ended in straight sets with relatively little drama. An event which boasts a draw consisting entirely of the world's top eight singles players brings with it the promise of many a close, bitterly-contested nail-biter, as we saw at this event last season.
With but the one notable exception, match after marquee match has proven a competitive letdown this week, even when local hero Andy Murray took to the court against Federer, or Djokovic against Nadal. There have also been relatively few surprising outcomes; Federer's bludgeoning of Murray and Roddick's collapse at the hands of Tomas Berdych are the only two that really come to mind.
On that note, the event has been an even bigger letdown from the perspective of a supporter of Mr. Roddick, who has continued to display his recent propensity for losing sets and matches from clearly winning positions. Against Berdych- an opponent who had not been playing at anything close to a top 10 level since Wimbledon- Roddick was clearly the better man through the first 10 games of the opening set, and held two set points at 5-4, each of which saw him returning standard second serves. Each time, Roddick responded with a soft, short slice return, simply hoping for a Berdych error, and in so doing, he not only enabled his foe to save both set points, but also awakened the sleeping giant that was a confident Berdych, with disastrous results.
Nevertheless, all is not lost even for Roddick just yet, as the identity of the second member of Group B (Nadal, Djokovic, Berdych and Roddick) to proceed to the semifinals (wherein Group A winners Federer and Murray await) remains as yet undetermined. The first criterion for semifinal berth is, of course, a player's round-robin win-loss record, but in the event that Nadal, who is 2-0 thus far in the event, should defeat Berdych and Roddick beat Djokovic today, then all three men will be 1-2, and the selection process will have to make recourse to total sets or even games in order to choose from the three. As I write this, Nadal is on the brink of a straight-sets victory. Going into the final round-robin match-up of this event, Roddick holds an impressive 5-2 head-to-head record against Djokovic and has won their last four meetings, though it does seem that Djokovic's form has improved of late, and that Roddick is low on confidence, as evidenced by his repeated losses from ahead, including one to Berdych, against whom he had previously held a dominant 6-2 record. I will be in his corner, and expect an entertaining match to punctuate the round-robin swing.
With but the one notable exception, match after marquee match has proven a competitive letdown this week, even when local hero Andy Murray took to the court against Federer, or Djokovic against Nadal. There have also been relatively few surprising outcomes; Federer's bludgeoning of Murray and Roddick's collapse at the hands of Tomas Berdych are the only two that really come to mind.
On that note, the event has been an even bigger letdown from the perspective of a supporter of Mr. Roddick, who has continued to display his recent propensity for losing sets and matches from clearly winning positions. Against Berdych- an opponent who had not been playing at anything close to a top 10 level since Wimbledon- Roddick was clearly the better man through the first 10 games of the opening set, and held two set points at 5-4, each of which saw him returning standard second serves. Each time, Roddick responded with a soft, short slice return, simply hoping for a Berdych error, and in so doing, he not only enabled his foe to save both set points, but also awakened the sleeping giant that was a confident Berdych, with disastrous results.
Nevertheless, all is not lost even for Roddick just yet, as the identity of the second member of Group B (Nadal, Djokovic, Berdych and Roddick) to proceed to the semifinals (wherein Group A winners Federer and Murray await) remains as yet undetermined. The first criterion for semifinal berth is, of course, a player's round-robin win-loss record, but in the event that Nadal, who is 2-0 thus far in the event, should defeat Berdych and Roddick beat Djokovic today, then all three men will be 1-2, and the selection process will have to make recourse to total sets or even games in order to choose from the three. As I write this, Nadal is on the brink of a straight-sets victory. Going into the final round-robin match-up of this event, Roddick holds an impressive 5-2 head-to-head record against Djokovic and has won their last four meetings, though it does seem that Djokovic's form has improved of late, and that Roddick is low on confidence, as evidenced by his repeated losses from ahead, including one to Berdych, against whom he had previously held a dominant 6-2 record. I will be in his corner, and expect an entertaining match to punctuate the round-robin swing.
November 20, 2010
Federer, Soderling and Semifinals in France
Before delving into more pressing matters, I would like to point out an odd little observation I've made:
Last week in Paris, the two semifinals (Soderling vs. Llodra and Federer vs. Monfils) were veritably remarkable, not only for their tremendous drama and entertainment value, but for their congruency- each match ended most unusually, with one man saving several match points while serving at 5-6, then roaring back to claim victory in a decisive tiebreak. Seeing this most unusual phenomenon take place and reflecting on it in its aftermath, I was reminded of an eerily similar occurrence which transpired at last year's French Open, when Federer and Soderling, competing on the same national soil, also participated in back-to-back epic semifinals which were distinguished by their uncanny similarity to one another; first Federer squeaked past Juan Martin Del Potro 6-4 in their fifth set, then Soderling rallied to overcome Fernando Gonzalez by precisely the same finishing score- 6-4 in the fifth- in a match with the same net duration time, to the minute.
This compels me to wonder: do Roger and Robin have some kind of bizarre pact to faithfully imitate one another's semifinal showings on French soil, are they psychically linked, or- to close out this little post with a nauseatingly cheesy pun- is it just something in the cheese?
November 06, 2010
On Goes the Ballad of Federer and Roddick
It will be an eminently familiar sight tomorrow in Basel when Roger Federer and Andy Roddick take to opposite sides of the tennis court to duel for a spot in the tournament final. Their "rivalry" has been on a bit of a hiatus, what with their not having met in a competitive match since last year's legendary Wimbledon epic, but there will surely be nothing foreign to either man about what awaits him across the net. The stakes will not be nearly so high as those underlying many of their previous clashes, and yet they are still hefty enough to bring out the competitive fire in most any player- for Federer, a chance to reclaim the title he lost last year on his beloved home turf, and for Roddick, the possibility of an eighth consecutive qualification for the year-end championships.
In searching for an apt analogy to the dynamics of the Federer-Roddick series in other media, I fear one might all too often find his or her thoughts straying towards the "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" films. In 21 professional encounters between these two, Roddick has emerged victorious but twice, and those only narrowly, while Federer has blown through over half of their meetings in straight sets. However, it may be pointed out that things have been somewhat different in the last few additions to this ledger; Roddick has taken at least a set off Federer in four of their last five meetings, including a win (2008 Miami) and, most recently, a near-stunner in a Grand Slam final (2009 Wimbledon).
I have not seen much of Federer's play thus far in Basel, though his results indicate that he is by no means at his worst. His strokes look clean and confident in the portions of his match with Radek Stepanek which I have viewed. However, he has been thoroughly erratic in recent months, and clean rallying against a lower-tier opponent has not always translated into the same in his big matches.
Roddick's form this week been surprisingly strong, given the illness-and-injury problems which have plagued him over the last several months. He has defeated two dangerous opponents in Sam Querrey and David Nalbandian, has not dropped a set and has only lost serve once en route to the semifinals, and has projected an air of confidence and assertiveness on the court that was missing all through this summer.
I believe that, if he brings the same level of play to the court against Federer as he did today in defeating Nalbandian, Roddick should give Federer trouble and will have a "live" shot at pulling the upset. To me, it will feel like justice if he does just that.
In searching for an apt analogy to the dynamics of the Federer-Roddick series in other media, I fear one might all too often find his or her thoughts straying towards the "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" films. In 21 professional encounters between these two, Roddick has emerged victorious but twice, and those only narrowly, while Federer has blown through over half of their meetings in straight sets. However, it may be pointed out that things have been somewhat different in the last few additions to this ledger; Roddick has taken at least a set off Federer in four of their last five meetings, including a win (2008 Miami) and, most recently, a near-stunner in a Grand Slam final (2009 Wimbledon).
I have not seen much of Federer's play thus far in Basel, though his results indicate that he is by no means at his worst. His strokes look clean and confident in the portions of his match with Radek Stepanek which I have viewed. However, he has been thoroughly erratic in recent months, and clean rallying against a lower-tier opponent has not always translated into the same in his big matches.
Roddick's form this week been surprisingly strong, given the illness-and-injury problems which have plagued him over the last several months. He has defeated two dangerous opponents in Sam Querrey and David Nalbandian, has not dropped a set and has only lost serve once en route to the semifinals, and has projected an air of confidence and assertiveness on the court that was missing all through this summer.
I believe that, if he brings the same level of play to the court against Federer as he did today in defeating Nalbandian, Roddick should give Federer trouble and will have a "live" shot at pulling the upset. To me, it will feel like justice if he does just that.
October 16, 2010
Race to the World Tour Championships
2010's Grand Slam action now complete, the ATP World Tour has entered its final phase, as the world's best compete in the overseas indoor hard-court season, which will culminate in London at the year-end championships next month. Only the top eight ranking-point-earners of the 2010 season will qualify to compete in the event, which will follow a unique round-robin format. Four of these eight spots have already been secured, going to Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray respectively. Robin Soderling looks poised to claim the fifth place, while Tomas Berdych, David Ferrer, and Andy Roddick are the leading candidates for the last three, with Spain's Fernando Verdasco close behind.
This week has seen the progression of the Shanghai Masters event, where Roger Federer and Andy Murray will meet in the final tomorrow. Shanghai was the site of the year-end championships from 2002 through 2008, before the event was moved to London last year, and the Shanghai venue opened this event as a replacement. Significant developments have included Rafael Nadal's shocking upset defeat at the hands of Austrian Jurgen Melzer and Andy Roddick's latest injury woes, which forced him to retire from a match he had been dominating against Guillermo Garcia-Lopez of Spain. One will scarcely be able to blame Roddick should he steer clear of Shanghai next season, as this marks the third consecutive season he has left the venue with a debilitating injury a severely-sprained ankle saw him withdraw during the 2008 year-end championships, a hyper-extended knee ejected him from last year's event, and this year, a thigh injury had the same effect, jeopardizing Roddick's place in London.
Federer and Murray have both shown strong form at this event, neither man dropping a set en route to the finals. Although Murray holds a 7-5 career head-to-head advantage over Federer, I am inclined to favor Federer to win the championship in what will likely be a three-set encounter.
This week has seen the progression of the Shanghai Masters event, where Roger Federer and Andy Murray will meet in the final tomorrow. Shanghai was the site of the year-end championships from 2002 through 2008, before the event was moved to London last year, and the Shanghai venue opened this event as a replacement. Significant developments have included Rafael Nadal's shocking upset defeat at the hands of Austrian Jurgen Melzer and Andy Roddick's latest injury woes, which forced him to retire from a match he had been dominating against Guillermo Garcia-Lopez of Spain. One will scarcely be able to blame Roddick should he steer clear of Shanghai next season, as this marks the third consecutive season he has left the venue with a debilitating injury a severely-sprained ankle saw him withdraw during the 2008 year-end championships, a hyper-extended knee ejected him from last year's event, and this year, a thigh injury had the same effect, jeopardizing Roddick's place in London.
Federer and Murray have both shown strong form at this event, neither man dropping a set en route to the finals. Although Murray holds a 7-5 career head-to-head advantage over Federer, I am inclined to favor Federer to win the championship in what will likely be a three-set encounter.
September 12, 2010
US Open Final: Nadal vs. Djokovic
The second name in that title would come as a shock to you, were it not for the fact that anyone liable to be reading this already knows about the outcome of yesterday's second US Open semifinal. With his gripping upset of Roger Federer yesterday afternoon, Novak Djokovic has completed a truly inspiring run to his second final in New York: lucky to escape the first round after trailing two sets to one and a break against compatriot Viktor Troicki, Djokovic saw a swift reversal in form carry him through to the semis, where he found himself faced with the one obstacle he had found himself unable to overcome since his rise to prominence at the Open. By virtue of an uncommon display of nerve and poise under pressure- even in the face of two match points against him- along with strangely erratic play from Federer's end, Djokovic was able to spoil the much anticipated Federer-Nadal Sunday showdown and claim a place in his own first Grand Slam final appearance in over two-and-a-half years.
Standing in his way is world's #1 Rafael Nadal, whose dominance at this event thus far has been truly imposing. Nadal has secured his berth into the final without the loss of a single set, and has only lost serve twice through six rounds of action. "Invincible" does not seem a terribly hyperbolic adjective if one is looking to describe the way Nadal has often looked of late.
That said, if I may engage in a bit of devilish advocacy, it seems to me that Nadal has benefited from a favorable draw to this point in the event, in that he has not had to face a top-tier opponent to reach the final, and has gone through a line-up of foes against whom he had fairly dominant head-to-head histories. Moreover, Djokovic does hold a 7-3 historical head-to-head advantage over Nadal on hard-courts, including the last three. Nevertheless, Nadal is in far better form than he was when last they met, should be the fresher of the two for the final and has generally come through better than Djokovic has on the biggest stages throughout their careers thus far.
I forecast a Nadal victory in four close sets.
Standing in his way is world's #1 Rafael Nadal, whose dominance at this event thus far has been truly imposing. Nadal has secured his berth into the final without the loss of a single set, and has only lost serve twice through six rounds of action. "Invincible" does not seem a terribly hyperbolic adjective if one is looking to describe the way Nadal has often looked of late.
That said, if I may engage in a bit of devilish advocacy, it seems to me that Nadal has benefited from a favorable draw to this point in the event, in that he has not had to face a top-tier opponent to reach the final, and has gone through a line-up of foes against whom he had fairly dominant head-to-head histories. Moreover, Djokovic does hold a 7-3 historical head-to-head advantage over Nadal on hard-courts, including the last three. Nevertheless, Nadal is in far better form than he was when last they met, should be the fresher of the two for the final and has generally come through better than Djokovic has on the biggest stages throughout their careers thus far.
I forecast a Nadal victory in four close sets.
September 11, 2010
Back from hiatus...
Hello, prospective readers,
Before launching into discussion of current events, I will launder out a brief list of excuses for my recent substantial absence from posting on this blog:
1. The outcome of the Cincinnati semifinals was crushing enough (both of my rooting interests falling, with Roddick losing from a set-and-break up after serving for the match) that I felt more inclined to sulk than to write further updates on the tournament at the time.
2. The start of my fall schooling shortly thereafter, along with a job interview with the Lewiston Tribune, served to divert my attention such that I continually failed to get another good update together.
3. Further disappointment, with both Baghdatis and Roddick falling in the first two rounds of the US Open, left me once more inclined to sulk rather than write.
However, more exciting developments have roused me from my proverbial slumber, as the US Open semifinals prepare to commence. Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal have each put forward a tremendous showing thus far in the event, neither man dropping a set and both compiling highlight reels worthy of many a player's full season. A Nadal-Federer US Open final, the historical significance of which would be mind-blowing, now appears probable, though both men have sturdy hurdles to overcome today, in the form of Mikhail Youzhny and Novak Djokovic respectively.
I will admit that I have, for most of this US hard-court swing, been a skeptic of the media narrative which cast Nadal as favorite for the Open, given his relatively unimpressive record therein and less-than-astonishing showings in the lead-up events, but Nadal has changed the equation this year in dramatic fashion through a serving display of the kind few would have thought him capable. Prior to this tournament, I do not believe I had ever seen Nadal's serve break 130 miles per hour on a speed gun; this US Open, he has regularly exceeded that benchmark, topping out at around 135. Of all the strokes in Nadal's repertoire, the serve has historically been his least impressive, perhaps the only one which was subpar for an elite-level player. Now, it appears, that one chink in his armor has been erased. Nadal is faced with a historically difficult foe in Youzhny, who has beaten him four times in their eleven previous meetings, including once at this tournament, and holds a 4-3 edge on hard-courts, but I feel confident nevertheless in predicting a Nadal victory in three or four sets.
Meanwhile, Roger Federer's run to this year's US Open semifinals has hearkened back to his peak heyday moreso than any he has put together in quite some time. He has played clean, confident and assertive tennis set-in and set-out through four consecutive matches to reach the semifinals of a Slam without dropping a set for the first time since Wimbledon 2008. He faces a familiar foe in Djokovic, who he has defeated in the finals or semifinals of the last three US Opens. Djokovic was extremely lucky this year to escape defeat in the opening round, rallying from a deficit of two sets to one and a break in the fourth against compatriot Viktor Troicki, but he has since found his own form and confidence and has looked very impressive in his last two matches, dispatching Mardy Fish and Gael Monfils in one-sided three-set affairs. Of the two semifinal underdogs, I would give Djokovic a stronger chance at upsetting the applecart that is the anticipated Federer-Nadal Sunday clash, but this, too, must be seen as doubtful.
Before launching into discussion of current events, I will launder out a brief list of excuses for my recent substantial absence from posting on this blog:
1. The outcome of the Cincinnati semifinals was crushing enough (both of my rooting interests falling, with Roddick losing from a set-and-break up after serving for the match) that I felt more inclined to sulk than to write further updates on the tournament at the time.
2. The start of my fall schooling shortly thereafter, along with a job interview with the Lewiston Tribune, served to divert my attention such that I continually failed to get another good update together.
3. Further disappointment, with both Baghdatis and Roddick falling in the first two rounds of the US Open, left me once more inclined to sulk rather than write.
However, more exciting developments have roused me from my proverbial slumber, as the US Open semifinals prepare to commence. Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal have each put forward a tremendous showing thus far in the event, neither man dropping a set and both compiling highlight reels worthy of many a player's full season. A Nadal-Federer US Open final, the historical significance of which would be mind-blowing, now appears probable, though both men have sturdy hurdles to overcome today, in the form of Mikhail Youzhny and Novak Djokovic respectively.
I will admit that I have, for most of this US hard-court swing, been a skeptic of the media narrative which cast Nadal as favorite for the Open, given his relatively unimpressive record therein and less-than-astonishing showings in the lead-up events, but Nadal has changed the equation this year in dramatic fashion through a serving display of the kind few would have thought him capable. Prior to this tournament, I do not believe I had ever seen Nadal's serve break 130 miles per hour on a speed gun; this US Open, he has regularly exceeded that benchmark, topping out at around 135. Of all the strokes in Nadal's repertoire, the serve has historically been his least impressive, perhaps the only one which was subpar for an elite-level player. Now, it appears, that one chink in his armor has been erased. Nadal is faced with a historically difficult foe in Youzhny, who has beaten him four times in their eleven previous meetings, including once at this tournament, and holds a 4-3 edge on hard-courts, but I feel confident nevertheless in predicting a Nadal victory in three or four sets.
Meanwhile, Roger Federer's run to this year's US Open semifinals has hearkened back to his peak heyday moreso than any he has put together in quite some time. He has played clean, confident and assertive tennis set-in and set-out through four consecutive matches to reach the semifinals of a Slam without dropping a set for the first time since Wimbledon 2008. He faces a familiar foe in Djokovic, who he has defeated in the finals or semifinals of the last three US Opens. Djokovic was extremely lucky this year to escape defeat in the opening round, rallying from a deficit of two sets to one and a break in the fourth against compatriot Viktor Troicki, but he has since found his own form and confidence and has looked very impressive in his last two matches, dispatching Mardy Fish and Gael Monfils in one-sided three-set affairs. Of the two semifinal underdogs, I would give Djokovic a stronger chance at upsetting the applecart that is the anticipated Federer-Nadal Sunday clash, but this, too, must be seen as doubtful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
