Author: Mertov

Preview: This Summer on MT-Desk

ATP & WTA Majors Players Sitting Across Mertov's Tennis Desk Series Tactical Analysis 6 Comments

Dear friends and tennis fans,

Following a three-month-long absence on new posts (because of an important period in my “other life” that ended with great success I shall add), I am back to dedicating my time to tennis, the sport that I love. I planned trips to big tournaments this summer, and I may add more depending on my schedule. I will be happy to share my thoughts as much as possible on MT-Desk.

Here is what you will find on Mertov’s Tennis Desk during the next 2 months:
– Frequent comments and updates from Roland Garros 2016 on Twitter and MT-Desk, throughout the three-week period (Qualifying and Main Draw).
RG2

– Frequent comments and updates from Wimbledon 2016 on Twitter and MT-Desk, throughout the three weeks (Qualifying and Main Draw).
Wimby

– Match analysis, tactical comments,and pictures from the world of tennis…
– More chats with players for the “Sitting Across Mertov’s Tennis Desk” series…
– I will, at some point, probably at the start of Wimbledon, post the English version of my article/story on Cagla Buyukakcay, the 2016 Istanbul Cup winner, and her trials and tribulations during the pre-2016 period that will appear on the upcoming issue of Tenis Dunyasi, Turkey’s number one monthly tennis magazine.
Cagla

And later in the summer —> Western & Southern Open in Cincinnati (ATP Masters 1000 and WTA Premier 5), and more…
Cincy

As always, keep your comments and feedback coming on Twitter, or here in the comments section, or by email.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

2016 Australian Open: M. Raonic vs A. Murray, Semifinal Preview

ATP Majors 2 Comments

In a match-scheduling pattern that is unique to the Australian Open, the finalist from the upper half of the men’s draw will have rested almost a day by the time the semifinalists from the bottom half take the court, for the right to face him for the title in the year’s first Major. That is what the thirteenth-seeded Milos Raonic and the number two player in the world Andy Murray will do on Friday.

There is no doubt that on paper, Andy Murray is the favorite to win. On the court, however, the match may play out differently. Raonic was already a monster server in the 2012-13 seasons. Then, starting midway through the 2014 season, his already-solid forehands turned into deadly weapons. About a year later, he began venturing more and more to the net because he improved his volleys to the point where he could back up with ease his big forehands at the net. If there is anything that the young 2016 season has shown us so far, Raonic has established a winning game plan based on these three elements (serve, forehand, volleys), and this plan is ready to challenge the elites of the game. He already passed the test recently against the Swiss connection, with a straight-set win over Roger Federer in the Brisbane finals, and a five-set thriller against Stan Wawrinka in the fourth round here. He now has the chance to record victories over four elite members of the game, Wawrinka, Murray, Federer, and Novak Djokovic, before even February begins. Can he? I happen to believe he can. More on that later, let’s get back to the X’s and O’s of this encounter.

Yuru1

One small problem for Milos: Andy’s repertoire is well-equipped to respond to the challenges that Raonic’s weapons pose. In other words, “he got game.” He returns well, defends well, passes well, and lobs well. This is why this match is so intriguing and promising. It is a contrast of styles featuring two high-I.Q. players who will adjust their tactics and modify their patterns during the course of the match depending on the circumstances.

The pattern that Murray will seek probably centers on baseline rallies in which he can force Raonic, for the most part, into going backhand-to-backhand. It would also behoove Andy to strike the ball once in a while to Raonic’s deuce side to expose the Canadian’s backhand on the next shot. However, Raonic is highly unlikely to hit more than two, maximum three, backhands with the intention of waiting for the next shot. He will most likely strike his awkward-looking, flat, down-the-line backhand that works sometimes, but one that has a low margin for error. That particular shot’s efficiency will be one of the three keys to his victory. If he can make those for the most part, Andy will have to run those down and get it back in the court to a spot where Raonic can get in position to strike his deadly forehand for the winner.

The second key to Raonic’s victory rests on how much damage he can cause when he gets a look at Andy’s second serve which remains one of the Scot’s weaknesses. The third key to beating Andy is for Milos to maintain the high velocity on his underrated second serves. They are underrated largely because his first serve is so impressive (currently one of the three best in men’s tennis with Isner and Karlovic) that his second-serve gets overlooked. Yet, it is a wonderful weapon to set up the second shot, which usually ends up being a high bouncing ball in the middle area of the court, allowing Milos once again to unleash his forehand. The Canadian must take risks on his second serves, even if it means he may double fault a couple of more times than he usually does. If he plays it safe, he will get back a deep return from Andy and will have to engage in a baseline rally. He is better off losing a few points on double faults and playing his “A” game, than sparing the double faults but being forced to get involved in numerous baseline rallies.

Andy, for his part, will rely on his footwork, his ability to hit spots on the court (the desired spot would mostly be his opponent’s backhand), and his counter-punching abilities when Milos begins his assault during rallies. He will absolutely need to put in a large amount of first serves, in order to avoid giving Milos looks on second-serve returns. One factor in Andy favor is that he has been here before, and by that I mean, in the elite stages of a Major. A persona grata in the last weekends of Majors since 2010, he will probably approach this match as another day at the office, and will already have mastered the pre-match routine for the 24 hours leading to the match. Milos has only been to the semifinals of a Major once, Wimbledon 2014. He has however been to the second week of Majors several times. Add to that his maturity level as a competitor and as an individual, I am not exactly sure how much edge Murray has over him in this category, as they step on the court Friday.

Raonic, in my opinion, is poised to take the next step, much to the dismay of those who have mocked him three weeks ago when he said that he was ready to win Majors. The fact that he is 3-3 against Murray, thus playing the one member of the sport’s elite group against whom he has the best chance to win, should add to his motivation. I have championed Milos since the tournament began, and I am sticking with him now. I am going with the upset win over Murray in 4 sets, for an opportunity to face the best player in the world on Sunday for the title.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

IMG_7174_Raonic_Murray_win2012 Barcelona Open – Raonic, seconds after he records his first victory over Murray

Australian Open: Quarterfinal Previews – Upper Halves

ATP & WTA Majors No Comments

The second week of another Major has arrived. While the women’s draw at the Australian Open has provided plenty of “unexpected” thrills, the men’s side went pretty much according to plans (see my preview in the last post), with the exception of Nadal’s exit in the first round at the hands of Fernando Verdasco and his “spatial tennis” in the final set of their match.

Now, I take a look at the upper halves of each draw. If I have time, I will do the same tomorrow for the lower halves. I will even stick my neck out there and give my say on what I believe will take place. It is not something that I usually do, because I am known for being a terrible prognosticator, therefore I would not desire anyone to place a bet based on my opinions (yes gamblers, I am staring at you). Nevertheless, in the name of having fun, let me know in the comments section if you have different ideas. Let’s get to it.

WOMEN

Serena Williams vs. Maria Sharapova

To ask the outcome of the match is like asking “what will your mother say if you spill the juice on the carpet or on her dress?” or “will Wall Street behave responsibly this year?” or “are Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders good friends?” You know the answer to those. You can play the dialog in your head numerous times and the outcome will not change one bit. The same applies to this match. It has literally been a dozen years and 17 matches since Maria last defeated Serena. It was when Barack Obama just became a senator, and this member of the media was revealing to New Yorkers that the internet “has finally come of age.” Is there any reason to believe that a different scenario may take place? No! Sharapova simply does not possess the weaponry in her game to out-hit or out-rally Williams. The only category in which Sharapova has consistently led Williams is the earned income category. Within the confines of a tennis court, Serena rules, it’s that simple. Any other scenario may perhaps take place in the parallel universe of this summer’s upcoming Star Trek movie.

Keys for Williams: Change nothing from the previous encounters because (1) she moves better than Sharapova during rallies, (2) she serves better than Sharapova, (3) she gets more pumped up for the opportunity to give a shellacking to Sharapova than to other opponents.

Keys for Sharapova: (1) Hope that Serena somehow loses her head, (2) as a result, the crowd rallies behind Maria because of it and because she is an overwhelming underdog, (3) and as a further result, Serena also loses her cool, suffers the tennis collapse of the decade.

I say —> One set surprisingly close as in 6-3 or 6-4, the other an easy stroll for Serena.

Agnieszka Radwanska vs. Carla Suarez-Navarro

This would be an intriguing match, except that Suarez-Navarro (I will refer to as CSN from here forward) is not one-hundred percent physically and has not played her best tennis in the previous rounds. She has benefited from a convenient draw so far, having faced only one top-100 opponent. In contrast, Radwanska has been tested by higher-quality opponents for one thing, and has come to the tournament with confidence for another, having won the year-ending WTA Finals three months ago. Having advanced to the quarterfinals in five of the last six years in Melbourne also makes her a persona grata at this stage of the tournament.

If CSN is healthy and ready to go, she has the game that can cause trouble to Radwanska who usually likes to park a meter or two behind the baseline and drive opponents crazy with her retrieving skills. She is similar to Simon on the men’s side in that sense, except that she possesses more variety, and thus, can “junk” her opponent out when needed. So, CSN will need to often accelerate her forehand to push Radwanska back, and use her backhand slice to bring her forward. In other words, she needs to get Radwanska to move back-and-forth on the court, rather than side-to-side. She can do that with her three preferred shots from the baseline; the aggressive forehand drive when she is in control of the point, the set-up low slice on the backhand, and the high and heavy topspin backhand. All three of those shots put a different spin and pace on the ball and she will need to frequently rotate between them. Assuming that this pattern eventually generates a short ball from her opponent, she must not pass up the chance to take the ball on the rise and approach the net. She needs to send a message to Aga that she will not ease up on future short balls, even if she ends up losing that particular point.

Keys for Radwanska: (1) Observe, test, and evaluate CSN’s physical condition early in the match by making her move in all directions through the use of her craftiness with drops shots and drive accelerations behind CSN (2) If CSN is not at 100%, keep the ball deep, allowing her to self-destruct, (3) If she is at 100%, engage her in repetitive patterns, such as cross-court backhands, and force her to take risks to get out of them, (4) Get the first serve in! Take the pace off it if needed, but do not rely on second serves to start the points.

Keys for CSN: (1) Create, attack, and harass Aga with aggressive returns on her second serves, (2) Vary often your three strong shots – see above, (3) Switch between kick serves and hard, flat serves on the advantage side, and on the deuce side, between slice serves to the outside and hard serves into the body. Execute the 1-2 punch if Aga’s returns, as a result, land short.

I say —> as noted above, there are some unknowns. But either way, Aga is craftier and better prepared mentally for a quarterfinal-round challenge. She should win in two fairly contested sets, but not really face much danger. If CSN comes out healthy and executes all of the above, it may not guarantee her the win, but it would guarantee an immensely entertaining match to the spectators.

Yuru1

MEN

Novak Djokovic vs. Kei Nishikori

Dear Novak fans, do not fret because your man made 100 unforced errors against Gilles Simon and looked less-than-stellar in his ground-stroke production. Simon, one of the biggest overachievers on the ATP Tour, puts many opponents off balance and Djokovic was no exception in that regard. It will be a different Novak against Nishikori, simply because the Japanese player will feed him a steady stream of high pace balls with which your man can display his superior counter-punching skills.

Yes, there is that loss to Nishikori back in the 2014 U.S. Open, but that seems ages ago. Djokovic is today a level above the player he was back then. Let me try to put in one sentence the summary of what we may see in this match. I see many rallies during which Kei produces one great forehand after another, runs Novak left and right, forces him to defend, only to see the roles reversed with one spectacular counter-punch shot by Novak, followed by the point ending a shot or two later with either Novak hitting a winner, or Kei going for the overkill on the run and committing an error.

That is not to say, Nishikori cannot adjust. He can drop shot, stick in a sharp cross-court or two behind Novak to throw him off balance. If he can force the Serb into a few mistakes early in the match, he may be able to build up enough steam to get ahead. I expect him to come out aggressive and go for big first serves. Nishikori has something to prove since that run to the final in New York. He has not yet backed it up. This time last year, many predicted that he would perhaps win a Major, but those same people have now lowered their expectations. Kei could not find a better opportunity than this to show again that he belongs to the top. I think he will be tuned in, and will want to believe (yes, X-Files is on my mind!).

Keys for Djokovic: (1) Counter-punch, repeat and recycle, (2) continue to win key points with first and second serves, (3) take risks on Nishikori’s second serves to take charge early in the point, (4) if the drop shot is off, take it off the menu, period!

Keys for Nishikori: (1) Be aggressive on the forehand from the beginning, (2) do not overkill from far behind the baseline, wait for the next shot, (3) play with a high first-serve percentage, (4) when pushed to the side, use sharp angles.

I say —> Djokovic wins in three sets, or loses the first and wins the next three.

Roger Federer vs. Tomas Berdych

Federer looked tremendous in his last match against David Goffin, but occasionally average in his previous matches. I always believed that Roger, unlike his main rivals, does better in Majors when he starts putting out his best in the earlier rounds. So the positive trend is a good sign, although it would have been preferable if he clicked on all cylinders from the beginning, like he did in the last two Majors. So, there is a bit of doubt in my mind, if he will again perform at the highest level against Berdych. One area in which Roger’s fans can take comfort is his “unlike-a-human-being-in-his-mid-thirties” footwork. He is moving like a cheetah on the court, and it clearly shows when he has to retrieve balls on defense. That will probably be the key to his success against the Czech who enjoys pounding his ground strokes and overpowering his opponent.

Berdych has had some success against Federer in the past, and even beaten him even in Majors (2010 Wimbledon, 2012 U.S Open). In every match that he won against the Swiss (total of 6 times) he seemed to stay inside the baseline and unleash one heavy ground stroke after another, while Federer committed mistakes when the rallies went beyond the ten-shot limit. When Berdych catches fire, he is a sight to behold and can make his opponent look primitive. That being said, his rhythm depends a lot on what Federer feeds him. So, let’s get to the keys of the match.

Keys for Federer: (1) Well-placed serves followed by either a volley, or a second and third shot that keep Berdych running and scrambling on the stretch, (2) tempt Berdych into coming to the net with low slices, forcing him to use topspin from below the net as an approach shot – not Berdych’s forte, (3) adjust the return position, use the SABR if needed, in short, do whatever it takes not to give Berdych a convenient ball to the middle of the court on the return.

Keys for Berdych: (1) A ton of powerful first serves, placement not that important, simply force Roger to block the return in order to take charge in the rally, (2) do not be afraid to come to the net, send a message to Federer that it’s not enough just to get the ball back with floating slices, (3) lull Roger into trading high-octane shots back and forth, like he did at Wimbledon 2010, or like Del Potro did in the 2009 US Open final, (4) hope that Roger’s footwork happens to be off for few hours on that day.

I say —> as previously noted, Federer’s footwork along with his ability to defend makes the difference, but not by much. This will be a tough one for the Swiss. Berdych is also more likely to get tight at critical junctures in the match. Federer wins in five sets, running away in the fifth after four contested sets.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

2016 Australian Open Men’s Draw: More of the Same?

ATP Majors 6 Comments

Although all the top players participated in the so-called warm-up tournaments to the first Major of the year, tennis fans came to the realization that they will have to wait for this Monday to satisfy their craving of some high-quality, exciting encounters. However, the draw that came out Friday did not do any favors to anyone looking for a thrilling narrative to carry the two weeks, starting Monday. By “thrilling narrative,” I mean an eye-opening one that will end up being one of the main stories of 2016. Sorry Novak Djokovic fans, but your man lifting the winner’s trophy would not qualify as one. Nor would seeing the Big Four members (and/or Stan Wawrinka) play each other for the umpteenth time again in the semis. Yet, one look at the draw and that seems to be the most probable outcome.

Sure, there is some potential for first-week match-ups that feature two players who would probably be more than happy to make it the second week. I will even entertain the idea that Rafael Nadal or Roger Federer, or both, may get knocked out before the semis (only to have their conquerors melt away in the next round). But I neither see an emerging name reach the finals à-la-Kei in New York, nor envision an unlikely winner lifting the trophy like Wawrinka did two years ago, or Marin Cilic did in New York later that same year.

That being said, ticket holders should get their money’s worth. The possibility that this Australian Open may not go down as a trend-setting tournament does not mean that matches will be boring or of low quality. Without further ado, here is how I see the draw fill out section by section. In order to increase the suspense, I will not reveal the player favored to win the tournament. Read and see if you can figure it out (hint: pay attention to titles).

Yuru

TOP HALF OF THE DRAW

Djokovic’s “early” victims
Prior to eventually running into Djokovic in the third round, Andreas Seppi and Teymuraz Gabashvili will square off with the winner likely to battle Denis Kudla next. Although Gabashvili is down 1-3 in the head-to-head count against Seppi, he has a great chance to advance. He is enjoying his highest ranking of his 14-year career and Seppi, who is going through a dangerous slump, could see his ranking plummer in the first half of the season if he does not recover soon. Gabashvili is the only one from that top section who could challenge Novak in the third round, provided he can live up to his nickname “Tsunami” for three sets (which is almost like saying “provided that Ivo Karlovic finishes a match with less than 5 aces”). Otherwise, look for Djokovic to get to the 4th round being more challenged in practice sets than in the actual matches.

Djokovic’s “midway” victims
Speaking of “Dr. Ivo,” he finds himself as a possible opponent of Djokovic if he makes it to the fourth round. Stands in his way one of the biggest overachievers in today’s tennis by the name of Gilles Simon who, unfortunately for the French, matches up terribly with the big-serving Croate. Simon will still make Karlovic earn the victory if they both make it that far. Anyone knows by now that even when Simon is losing to you, he will make you suffer before doing so. I don’t see any other name from that section (sorry Vasek Pospisil, not in Australia) reaching the fourth round to be victimized by Djokovic.

In the quarters, Djokovic could face a number of players. The two highest seeds in that section are Kei Nishikori (7) and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (9). I do not like the fact that I am writing this while the three qualifying spots in this section still display the word “Qualifier” instead of names. I am one of those who believe that careers are made in the Majors, and they are made when a player comes through qualifying and unexpectedly creates a sensation (or with an “s”) in the first week of a Major, and then, backs it up in the following months, before finally establishing himself as persona grata in the upper echelons of the ATP Tour.

Regardless of who the qualifiers are, Tsonga has a rocky road to the quarters. Even before a possible match against Nishikori or XYZ player in the 4th round, he will have to knock out Marcos Baghdatis, the in-form Ilya Marchenko, and his countryman Benoit Paire. In any case, unless Nishikori or Tsonga somehow catch fire, Djokovic could have an easier win in the quarters than in his previous round. I consider Kei’s chances of catching fire low, but still higher than that of Jo-W.

Djokovic’s “later” victims
Novak’s most serious opponent in 2015, the one that he faced 7 times in the finals, could line up on the other side of the net to challenge him, this time before the finals. His name is Federer, and as incredible as it sounds with the kind of season that Djokovic had, he managed to beat the world number one three times, all on hard courts. The reality: Federer has not beaten Djokovic in a Major since the 2012 Wimbledon. The irony: Federer has not lost to Djokovic (4-0) in their matches before the finals since 2013.

Federer’s quarter also happens to be loaded with loose cannons. While I don’t see his first-round opponent Nikoloz Basilashvili, who had his best year by a long mile in 2015, shock a top player any time soon, Federer’s potential opponents in the next rounds could cause him some headaches. Alexandr Dolgopolov, his likely opponent in the second round, and Grigor Dimitrov in the third round, are both respectable players who have proven their ability to beat top players on a given day. In the fourth round, Federer’s “on-paper” opponent is David Goffin, but the bigger dangers for Federer are Goffin’s first-round opponent Sergiy Stakhovsky and the Belgian Dominic Thiem. I have argued for two years now that Thiem is destined for greatness and I am not wavering from my position on him. He is one of the faces of the next generation, and I expect him to break through to the top 10 in 2016. That path could begin in Melbourne. Having said that, the reality remains that for anyone to reach the quarterfinals from that section, they would need some help from Roger who, dare I say, played well only sporadically in Brisbane.

Federer could eventually face an experienced top-10 player like Tomas Berdych, or another young talent like Nick Kyrgios. I am not as sold on Kyrgios as everyone else is, and it is not because I don’t believe in his talent. It’s a cliché, but for some reason, it’s one that takes time to dawn on people: champions are made in practice. Kyrgios’ level of intensity and focus in practice is nowhere near that of the elite champions in our sport. Kyrgios may not make it that far anyway. Cilic, Tomas Berdych, and Roberto Bautista-Agut are nearby in the draw, as well as Borna Coric, another name that represents the future face of men’s tennis. The young Croat would need to beat Cilic, Bautista-Agut, Kyrgios or Berdych, in a row, just to get to the quarters. Can he do it? Yes! This section will be my favorite one to watch during the first week.

BOTTOM HALF OF THE DRAW
(i.e. Djokovic’s “final” victim)

Some are intrigued by the first-round clash between Fernando Verdasco and Nadal. We are quickly reminded of the five-set semifinal in the 2009 Australian Open, in which Verdasco pushed Rafa very hard. He also defeated Rafa as recent as nine months ago, in Miami. Despite that win, Verdasco is nowhere near his 2009 level, and Rafa is playing a lot better than in March 2015. I don’t see an upset happening, and with all due respect to Benjamin Becker and Dudi Sela, I expect them to challenge the world number 5 even less in the second round. Rafa’s road will get rockier starting with the third round. He should face the Frenchman Jérémy Chardy who is known to put out his best tennis in the Majors. Chardy can hang with Nadal from the baseline, and even overpower him, like Fabio Fognini did at the US Open. However, whether Chardy himself believes that he can do that or not, is a rather large question mark.

Nadal would then have to get past either Kevin Anderson or Gaël Monfils. I must again point out that, Anderson and Monfils have three qualifiers yet to be named in their little eight-man section. Despite his 0-3 record against Nadal, Anderson is the only name with a legitimate chance to beat the Spaniard, simply because he has improved in 2015 and added to his experience of facing the elite players in the Majors. He also has a big serve which has been a trade mark of most of the players who have upset Nadal in the Majors. It does not help either that Rafa has been unable to erased the question marks surrounding his game. But this is different. Two weeks ago in Doha, he played some of his best tennis in a long time and the fact that he got floored by Djokovic in the finals should not change that. If anyone can overcome a steep challenge, Rafa is that man. This Australian Open represents a golden chance for the 14-Major winner to reestablish himself as the top player, along with Djokovic, Murray, Federer, and Wawrinka.

In the quarters, Nadal will no doubt face a tough opponent. There are again four qualifiers in this section. Unless one of them pulls a stunner or two, and/or Viktor Troicki’s form soars even higher than it did this week in Sydney, I don’t see who can stop Raonic and Wawrinka (sorry Jack Sock fans, not yet) from battling each other to earn the right to face Rafa.

I have long maintained (since 2010 exactly) that Raonic would be one of our sport’s top players and I believe he is on the right track. Despite injuries hampering his progress over the last three years, he has steadily improved. He arrives to Melbourne healthy and confident. He has a legitimate chance to go far, even if it means going through Wawrinka and Nadal just to reach the semifinals. The success of Nadal, Wawrinka, or Raonic, when one of them reaches the “final four” stage, will largely depend on how much they have labored in the previous rounds. I dare anyone to predict this early how they will do in the semis where they would likely face Murray.

So what of Murray’s quarter of the draw? Big-serving Sam Groth could frustrate him – it does not take much to do that – in the second round, but can he do it for three sets? Fognini and Tomic, the two major head-cases of our sport, could play against each other in the third round, which may possibly make that encounter the highest-rated third-round match in the history of Majors. But can either one challenge Andy? The section with John Isner and David Ferrer is wide open and should provide someone with a golden opportunity to reach the quarterfinal. But, can that quarterfinalist, whomever it may be, surprise Murray? I believe the answer to all the questions in this paragraph is a “No.” Meanwhile, squeezed in-there-somewhere in this section is Brian Baker who has managed more comebacks than Aaron Krickstein has come back from two sets down in his days.

I see some sections of the draw that fascinate me for the first few days. I see others that should be exciting when we get to the third and fourth rounds. Then, from the quarterfinals on, I expect great tennis. What I do NOT expect, is to find names in the semifinals that are different than the ones we have seen in the last several Majors.

The show begins in 48 hours!

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

59-2: Not Just a Stat for Federer

ATP Tactical Analysis 12 Comments

The well-known scenario usually repeats itself. Rafael Nadal steps on the court, Federer stands on the other side of the net. Nadal reboots the game plan which consists of two simple components. First, rip the topspin shots hard and high to Federer’s backhand over and over again. Most rallies will end with a mistake from the Swiss, or with the Spaniard stepping further and further into the court until he hits a winner. Second, hit an overwhelming majority of serves, again, to Federer’s backhand. He will chip it most of the time and miss, or will return it short, allowing Rafa to make Roger chase one shot after another for the remainder of the rally.

There are, of course, contributing factors to this plan’s success. For instance, it helps that Nadal, unlike the rest of the ATP, is not bothered by Federer’s slice backhand. It also helps that Nadal is left-handed, allowing his heavy forehand to push Federer outside the court on his backhand. It does not hurt either that Federer’s game is not based on booming flat shots, like that of some lesser players who have been able to bother Nadal. In any case, this simple plan consistently produces the desired result for Nadal, mostly explaining the skewed head-to-head record (23-11 for Nadal) between the two legends. For over a decade, Nadal has dominated Federer adhering to a game plan designed around these two major components.

In Basel, Federer showed from the first game of the match that he was determined to shake the grounds of at least one of those components: the second one. If you have watched their countless encounters, you have noticed how many times Federer chips the defensive backhand return back on Nadal’s serve. You have consequently seen how large a percentage of serves Rafa hits to the Swiss’ backhand. It happened today too. Out of 90 serves put in play by Nadal, 61 of them were directed to Federer’s backhand. That is 68% of all serves in, and that does not even include the times that Rafa served to the backhand, only to see Roger moving around the ball to hit a forehand.

At 4-2 up in the first set, after Federer had just consolidated his break, Nadal hit a first serve to Federer’s backhand, the Swiss chipped the return in the net. Another one happened at set point for Rafa in the second set. The Spaniard served to the backhand (what’s new?), Roger chipped the return, Nadal got aggressive and punished Roger. Another example was when…….

……….
No!
That was it!
Just twice!

Yes, out of the 61 times that Nadal served to Federer’s backhand, those were the only two times that Roger sliced the return back! And he lost both points.

The other 59 times, he came over the top, hitting drives! Even when he was stretched, Federer continuously refused to block/slice/chip (however one chooses to term it) his backhand returns, at the cost of making a few more errors. Federer won 6-3 5-7 6-3 to claim his 88th career title.

New ImageThis… 59 times out of 61! (Image: Getty)

For example, in the first game of the match, he drove the backhand return to the corner, came in, and got passed to go down 0-1. It did not matter. Next return game, he went right back to his plan, driving more backhand returns. Did it rattle Rafa? You bet it did.

If you have access to the match, watch the 2-2 game in the first set. In the first point, he will push Rafa back (Rafa moved as if he was expecting a slice return which usually gives him time to set his feet on or inside the baseline), enough to force him into hitting a short ball, to which he will smack the winner. Four points later, at 30-30, you will see his drive backhand return, put Rafa off balance enough to the point where he will sneak in to the net, and hit the volley winner. That would end up being the game that Federer first broke Nadal’s serve, one in which he faced seven backhand returns, and came over the top of all of them! But, he was just getting started.

At the 5-3 game, he once again started with a drive backhand return that allowed him to dominate the rest of the point. Then again, on set point, the backhand drive return set up the winner on the next shot. Over and over again, Rafa expected the backhand return to fall short, have nothing more than a neutralizing pace, give him enough time to set the next shot up, and pin his opponent behind the baseline. Over and over, Roger caught him off guard.

I will give only one example out of many in the second set. At 4-3 for Federer, and 30-15 with Rafa serving, watch how Federer responds to a solid serve to his backhand with a drive that pushes Rafa deep, resulting in his miss. It looks like a bad miss on a routine shot by Nadal, but it is far from it. For a player used to receiving a weak return on that serve he just dished out, not getting the short ball you have come to expect for a decade can play tricks in your mind. Another example (out of many) took place on the second point of the 2-1 game in the final set. Rafa, finding himself in an unfamiliar spot on the second shot after the serve, missed the next shot again. On the 4-3 game, when Federer finally broke Nadal’s serve for the decisive lead, he came over the top of all the six backhand returns that he had to hit.

Did Federer also miss some of those returns? Of course he did, several times. But that is not the point. His adjustment led to Rafa to not being able to count on a major component of his Plan A that had, until today, been very reliable. Federer broke Nadal three times. He was 3 out of 7 on break points, which is, as you may suspect (unless you have not followed their rivalry), surprisingly high for Federer when he faces Nadal.

More importantly, beyond the numbers, standing tall is the pay-off for the hard work that Federer has put in since almost a year ago, meticulously honing a single skill. This pattern change did not “out of nowhere” take place on Sunday. Federer’s increased tendency to come over the top on the backhand returns since the 2015 season started in Brisbane, has been remarkable to anyone who was willing to notice it. I suspected that it was an essential goal that he set with his team, to focus on the aggressive drive backhand return, starting with the off-season practice in December of 2014. When I asked him, during the Istanbul Open, if that was the case, he confirmed that it indeed was. 2015 showed that he would apply it to his matches… Relentlessly…

Clay Fed IstHere he is, practicing it on clay (Istanbul Open)
Grass Fed WimbHere he is, doing it on grass, at Wimbledon (vs. Simon)
Hard Fed CincyAnd on hard courts (Cincinnati final)

He may have had to wait ten months, but this final match in Basel was the first time that his hard work and long-term planning bore fruit, in a concrete and visible manner. The numbers showed it, his growing confidence manifested it as the match progressed, and Nadal’s reactions to the returns confirmed it. It does not necessarily mean that Federer turned the corner on his rivalry with Nadal. Let’s be honest, the conditions were favorable to Federer (indoors, hard court, Basel). It does nonetheless show that even at 33 (and 34), an elite player in the ATP, can improve a specific aspect of his game, even in the long term. Tennis is indeed a sport for all ages, with room to improve, even for the most skilled player.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

Sitting Across MT-Desk: Alberto Lopez Nuñez

ATP Sitting Across Mertov's Tennis Desk Series No Comments

The following interview appeared (translated to Turkish) on the last issue of Tenis Dunyasi, the most widely read tennis magazine in Turkey. Alberto Lopez Nuñez is the current coach of Marsel Ilhan, the highest-ranked Turkish player in the ATP, and a former coach of Garbiñe Muguruza. During Wimbledon, I sat down with him and discussed in detail his tennis background, developmental years at the Bruguera Tennis Academy, coaching philosophy, and issues important to coach-player relationships. It was one of the most informative interviews I have ever had. Alberto, whom I admire as a coach and a friend, was candid and forthcoming with his commentary. Here is the full interview, in its original English version.

(Interview held on July 1, 2015, at Wimbledon)

New Image2

For followers of tennis who may not know more than the fact that you are Marsel’s coach, let’s give an introduction to the person Alberto Lopez Nuñez. We know that you became Marsel’s coach at the end of 2013, and that tennis has been life-long passion for you. You were a player, now you are a coach. How was your transition from playing to teaching/coaching tennis? When did you decide that you had enough as a player, and was that when you decided to coach?

Alberto:
At the age of 23, I was young and playing challengers, I was winning some good matches, but I got unlucky. But ok, “unlucky” is perhaps not a precise way to call it, but the bottom line is I lost around 12 out of 14 first rounds in a row. I got tired of that feeling and I no longer wanted to keep going. I felt deep inside that it was my time to stop. Once I stopped playing competitive tennis, I did not go straight into coaching. I went into studies. My parents lived in Galicia so I went back home, and I began studying financial management at a university. When the Galician Tennis Federation found out few months later that I was in the area, they called and asked if I wanted to help. I said to myself “Why not?” because I prefer to stay busy. So I did not start coaching right away after I stopped playing but it was only a short break from tennis. I was going to be studying for three years, so I wanted to be productive during that time. I felt that at the end of my studies I could always come back to Barcelona. During the three years of studying, I went to the university in the mornings, had lunch around 15:00, and then, worked for the federation in the afternoons.

As soon as I finished my last exam at the end of my studies, I went straight back to Barcelona. Once in Barcelona, it was funny because during the first few months, I was planning things around the idea that I was going to work in bank. I had a CV prepared and applied to banks for positions. During that time, Lluis Bruguera Tennis Academy [more on the academy later] knew that I was in Barcelona. One day they called and asked me if working at the academy would interest me until I found a job. Once again, I said “ok, why not?” In the first few months there, I started working with older players from different levels. Five months later, I already found myself working with the top professional players at the academy. There were 2 top 300, 2 top 200, and 2 top 50 players. I was working with all of them, along with another coach. They were a group of six players working with the two of us. That is how it started, and since then, I have been coaching.

Do you contrast the two lives sometimes? You probably discovered that your experience as a player adds to your coaching. But have you also discovered that you understand players better now since you began coaching? Do you feel that you realize things now that you wish you knew when you were a player?

Alberto:
Yes, completely. Do you know what keeps my passion going now in this line of work? I am open, I do learn something new every day, and that brings me to your question. Of course now I am seeing and understanding things in a totally different way than when I was a player, of course I am more mature, and yes, I wish I would have known all this when I used to play. You feel so bad when you are at home watching on T.V. top 50 players that you have beaten before and you have to watch them from the couch of your home instead of being at the same tournament with them. So yes, there are so many things that I have learned during the last 14 years which is how long I have been coaching. I learn something new every day.

Let’s move on to your coaching philosophy in detail. How important are off-season practices to you? Does the amount of training increase in terms of time and intensity during those practice periods? Is there an approximate ideal length to off-season work?

Alberto:
For me, there should be two preseasons during the year. It depends on the ranking and position of the player. Top players normally have around 4-week preseason time at the end of the year, approximately from late-November to late-December. Of course, during that period, intensity should be higher in all aspects. For me, it is one of the most important periods of the year, because you have to get ready for the season. And then, at the midway point of the year, I believe in a two-week preseason training again, to fully get ready for the second half of the season. That means you cut the year in two seasons. You get 4 weeks preseason practice at first, and you get two more in the middle.

If the player comes from a lower-level in the rankings, they don’t play as many matches or long tournaments. Then, five to six weeks of preseason training is better. They are more likely to start late January and you can extend the preseason which is good because they need to work on wider areas or aspects of their game whereas the top players focus more on specific areas. This is why for them, four weeks at the end of the season and two weeks in mid-season is enough. To me the importance of these periods are as obvious as knowing how to play tennis. If players do not accordingly prepare during those times, they cannot be ready or for the season, so it is extremely important to have a proper off-season practice period.

During the year, especially during the tournaments, you can work on specific things but not too long! During the preseason, you can “clean” the player’s game. You can work on technique, you can improve the physical aspects such as strength, in ways that you cannot do during the season because the player cannot really do weights and physical conditioning at 100%, play matches at 100%, and try to reach targets, all at the same time. Normally, during a year you set some targets. When you achieve one goal, you have to move on to the next one. For that next one for example, you have to still practice first during the preseason. You can call them technical targets, tactical ones, or understanding the next step in a game style, like for example in the case of a player with a solid consistent baseline game and you want to develop it toward a more aggressive style game that maybe includes coming to the net.

In your observation of coaches and players in both ATP and WTA, can you think of anything that strikes you as being unique or strange? Is there a moment where you observe other coach-player duos and say to yourself “I wish the coach would do this or the player would do that” or “I wish I did that with my player”?

Alberto:
Never! Because, I believe in the work done by the coach and the one done by that coach’s player. Others are working on their career, not my player’s or mine. So, everyone has a point of view. Obviously different people do some helpful things that can be put to good use by others, but first, you have to keep your eyes open towards your player and concentrate on the details on his or her development as a player. I am open to learn, but first, I believe in the job that I do and in the job that my player does. Of course, I can learn from everyone, but I will not do anything simply because someone else does it.

Ok, some coaches in general could be close to each other in style or philosophy, or even some players among each other. But, tennis is an individual game, it is impossible to be like this. If such thing existed, it would then be something fake, it would make no sense.

What is your opinion on the idea of on-court coaching on the tour? Some say tennis is an individual game it should remain without on-court coaching, others say there should be limited coaching, and others say it should be allowed like in Davis Cup or college tennis in the U.S.A. What do you believe?

Alberto:
I don’t think there should be on-court coaching, I don’t like it and I will tell you why. In my opinion, the job must be done before going on the court. Everything must be clear for the player before stepping on the court. If the player needs to understand something when things are not going right, there are millions way to tell. I believe this whole on-court coaching thing has to do with marketing. For the women for example, maybe in order to increase the viewership on TV, they added this new rule. It makes it more interesting for the viewer because there is a microphone and you hear the dialog between the coach and the player. For the viewer, there is no doubt it is interesting, but for me as a coach, I think you create too much dependence on the coach for the player. The players should be able to make decisions on the court based on the work done with the coach before the match. In a way, from a selfish point of view, it would be easy for me to say “Yes, let’s have coaching so I also become more visible, everyone sees me” and it would give coaches more importance, but then, I would not be respecting my player or fully thinking about my player’s well-being.

What are your future plans? Would you like to continue what you are doing now? Would you like to maybe one day coach a top player? Or in the future, would you like to perhaps get away from what you are doing now and create your own academy, produce tennis players in masses so to speak. Do you think about such long term goals or plans such as these?

Alberto:
Yes, of course, of course! [Pauses a moment]. All of those and in the order that you have said them. I believe that while I am young, I can do what I am doing now which requires to travel all the time and be dedicated 100% to the player. Of course, the target would be to coach a top player. A coach who cares about his job should have ambitions, and the ambition of a coach is to make his player reach the top or get to the point where you can coach a top player. If you make your player go to the top, that is of course the best.

But if you coach a top player how would you manage or run an academy?

Alberto:
This is why I want to do the coaching part first. I feel that I have already accomplished a bit in coaching. I have coached lower-ranked players, I have coached highly ranked women, and I have helped my current player get to a higher level, so I have done it with girls and boys. I would still like to coach a top player. And then, the academy or group projects, or the idea of being a director of a club, that would all come later when I will have a family. That would be the next step, in years’ time, if it is possible and I had some luck, everything went fine etc. In any case, it would all happen in that order hopefully. Now is the time to do what I am doing, but maybe in fifteen years, when I have a family and kids at home, I would change and do things differently. Until then I would like to continue what I am currently doing.

Did you follow Marsel closely before you became his coach? How much did you know him or his game?

Alberto:
I heard from him earlier in 2013. I finished coaching Garbiñe Muguruza in 2012. After four years with her full time and other players prior to her, I felt that I needed a break. I put a lot of emphasis on the individual players during those years, and I wanted to spend some time at the academy. I began working for a while with some girls that were playing in $10,000 ITF futures. During that time, I saw Marsel and talked to him a couple of times because Lluis Bruguera was the tennis program director for the Turkish Tennis Federation. We didn’t even talk about tennis during those conversations. So, I knew about him. I knew about his late results, but nothing else.

Marsel called me one day and asked me if I wanted to work with him. I spoke to Lluis, Lluis spoke to Marsel. Before starting to work with him, I made sure that I had all the information on him, in order to be able to build my own perspective. Obviously, when I started working with him I developed that perspective about how he is and how he behaves, but of course, I got a lot of information on him so I knew who I was going to work with. I did not just say “let’s work and see what happens”, I got informed.

New ImageAlberto and Ilhan, Wimbledon 2014

Once you started working with him at first, you probably had immediate goals at the time. Now, in June 2015, you also have goals. Are they completely different from back then? Have you achieved your first goals and moved on to others?

Alberto:
Yes, and they are definitely different now. I remember before I started working with him, I arrived to TED Club in Istanbul and we sat down. Before my arrival, having considered all my information on Marsel and what I knew of his game, I had prepared a written plan with all the different targets and goals. With a full understanding of our situation, I first told Marsel that before him and I started working together, I needed to tell him that from the beginning, we will change several things. Then I told him what those things were in detail. It was a list of around six or seven things. Of course, now, those have changed. There is one that is still the same unfortunately [smiles], but the others have all changed.

Are there any other details that you would like to add? Or perhaps, is there perhaps anyone in particular you would like to address?

Alberto:
Yes, for sure. I want to take this opportunity to say something about Turkish Tennis Federation. I believe they are creating a big, huge opportunity for Marsel with their help. They made it possible for him and I to work together, and I believe that their help is something for which all people involved should be thankful, because nobody forces anyone to do anything. Yes, Marsel is the top player in Turkey, but ok, sometimes help comes in one way, sometimes in another way, and things don’t always work out in the right way, etc. But the Turkish Tennis Federation deserves a big thanks for the type of assistance that they provide.

I would also like to speak about Lluis Bruguera and the Bruguera Tennis Academy where I work, because I am who I am now, thanks to Lluis. I have learned a lot during the years that I competed as a player when I was practicing there, and the years that I have coached while working there, and Lluis helped me become the coach that I am now. Other coaches that are at the Academy are there because of him. I speak a lot to his son Sergi too. Of course it helps the Academy that he is also involved. Both Lluis and Sergi have explained so many things to me and helped me understand a lot. I have a very good relationship with both of them. We are constantly in touch. Lluis closely follows Marsel and me. When we practice in Barcelona, he always spends time with us, constantly helps us, which is also something to be thankful for as well. This is why I am glad I can take advantage of this opportunity that you give me to publicly speak about everything that the academy has done and at the same time thank Lluis. Also, let’s not forget, Lluis is after all allowing me to do this when he could actually require me to stay at his academy and help.

Can you say a bit more on the facilities at the academy?

Alberto:
There are 15 courts in total. Eight hard courts and seven clay courts. We have a swimming pool, large residence for the students where they can sleep and eat. Their school is also right there. Everything is in one site, the players don’t need to go anywhere. It’s a complete academy.

I believe in the system of work that we have there, which is the same system that has produced for us eighteen top-100 players, six top-50 players, and we had two top-10 players, and there is a reason for that success. Our system of work, during the last 25 years, has worked and brought success to many players, men and women.

Alberto thank you very much for taking the time.
—–

A month later, at the Citi Open in Washington D.C., Alberto’s friend and the former two-time French Open champion (1993 and 1994) Sergi Bruguera, who currently coaches Richard Gasquet, had this to say about Alberto:

“I always believed that Alberto constantly remains eager to improve himself and grow as a coach now, just like he did in the past when he used to be a player. More importantly, he knows how to deliver his message to his players which is the most basic yet important thing for a coach. He has succeeded in doing this with all the players he has worked with, for example with Muguruza for a few years in the past, and now with Ilhan for two years, and helped them improve, as well as their rankings during his time with them.”

Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

© Mertov's Tennis Desk / 2014-2018 / All Rights Reserved / Powered by WordPress

MENU

Navigation