Author: Mertov

Nishikori Advances, as His Nemesis Looms Large

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

If you are a fan of Kei Nishikori, your hair already turned gray by a few tones this week, and we are still a full day away from the first weekend of the Australian Open. If you are not familiar with what I mean, let me see if I can recap what they witnessed in the last 72 hours, in one long sentence.

After a first-round match two days earlier that must have resembled a nightmare to Kei himself for the first hour and a half before he turned it around, partially benefiting from the physical woes of his opponent Kamil Majchrzak, the number-eight seed survived a nightmare of a different kind in the second round vs. Ivo Karlovic, one in which, following a dreamy couple of sets where his game clicked on all cylinders, he saw his serve broken once each in the late stages of the third and fourth sets, and found himself down three break points at 4-4 in the fifth, before he finally put away the big Croat who blitzed 59 aces past him in a match that needed the newly adopted 10-point tiebreaker to come to an end.

The final score was 6-3 7-6 5-7 5-7 7-6 (10-7). It lasted 3 hours and 48 minutes.

Nishikori is in the third round, but there is enough cause for concern if you are in Kei’s camp, for a very specific reason. Before I point out that reason, let me first make another point.

Nobody can dispute the fact that this 2019 edition of the Australian Open is in the rackets of the big 3, so to speak, Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, and Roger Federer. Until someone else makes a mammoth breakthrough (and yes, the adjective is appropriate considering how they have been dominating the Majors), any other player’s shot at winning one of the four Grand Slam events remains an outside shot at best.

Having said that, if you were forced to pick an outsider to lift the winner’s trophy on that second Sunday, Nishikori may have been one of the few fair choices other than Kevin Anderson (ousted already), Marin Cilic, and maybe one or two others of your choosing. So, these two weeks represent a monumental opportunity for Nishikori to break through, stun the world of tennis, and grab that elusive elite title that would do wonders to his otherwise very respectable resumé. Plus, he came to the tournament in good form, at the heels of a successful comeback from injury after missing last year’s Australian Open. He returned to ATP-tour level competition in New York in February and steadily rose all the way to top 10 by the end of the year. It’s a remarkable comeback that was only overshadowed by Novak Djokovic’s comeback to number one in the world.

What better way to crown the impressive 10 months Nishikori just had than with his first Major title!

Photo: Cameron Spencer – Getty Images AsiaPac

Yet, the reality is that Kei’s biggest nemesis is not the big 3. And that brings me to my central point.

Playing 10 sets (ok, nine and a half) just to reach the third round is anything but ideal for the Japanese star. Kei, whose career has been halted more than once by injuries, cannot be expected to pull an Edberg-1992 or even a Federer-2017 where the winners pulled five-set wins in the three out of four matches in their last four rounds, let alone having a couple or more of those in the first week to begin with, the way Nishikori has so far this week. His nemesis – I reiterate, it is not Novak, Rafa, or Roger – will likely rear its ugly head again unless Kei can get in a couple of short-duration wins in the next round or two.

Having said that, there is a silver lining in what Nishikori has achieved this week. Or, I should more specifically say, in the way that he has earned the two wins.

Out of the ten sets that he has played, one would have a hard time pointing to any one of them and say that his performance was subpar. Furthermore, he has not allowed the downturns in either of the matches to obnubilate his tactical vision or dampen his spirit.

He first had to deal with a youngster who came out firing and outplaying him for two sets. Nishikori remained steady on course and collected the fruits of his hard labor when Majchrzak began running out of steam. Then, against Karlovic on Thursday, he faced a completely different set of challenges and still managed to overcome the hurdle.

One can easily say that 59 aces in an extended five-setter is not a startling number by Dr. Ivo’s standards. Since time immemorial, his opponents have walked on the court against him, expecting to get aced frequently. In order to counterbalance that effect, they aim to get back in the court as many returns as possible out of the ones that they can get their rackets on, so that Karlovic can have a shot at maybe missing a routine volley at a crucial juncture in the match. Beyond that, the occasional appeal to the skies in hopes that he chucks in a couple of double faults may also prove helpful, no?

Nishikori succeeded in going above and beyond the above. He not only got plenty of returns back in the court when he could get his racket on the serve – and he often did, because his first-step is awfully quick – but managed to nail a large number of them down to Karlovic’s ankles, forcing the big Croat to resort to placements volleys rather than straight put-away ones. Even when Ivo got the first volley back over the net, he found himself staring at Kei getting ready to zoom a passing shot by him. And Nishikori did all that with Karlovic serving at… wait for it… 79% first serves for the match! Add 59 aces to that and it’s almost miraculous that Nishikori was even able to break once!

Then, there was Nishikori’s own serving. He served at a whopping 90% first serves until the tiebreaker of the second set and finished the match at 83%. He often served and volleyed, taking advantage of Karlovic’s floating returns to put his (underrated) volleys away. He did not face a break point in the first two sets and faced only two in the next two sets. The problem is that he lost both of those break points, and they came at the late stages of each set, causing him to go down 7-5 in both.

Karlovic’s first break (the one in the third set) was a key one. He needed that to start re-nurturing his belief. At 5-5 on Nishikori’s serve, he nailed a cross-court winner at 0-15. He followed that up with a monstrous return to the middle of the court that caused Nishikori to miss in the net. That eventually led to a blank-game break by Ivo who had not really come close to breaking his opponent’s serve for almost three sets until then.

You could tell that Karlovic’s confidence was growing at that point. His body language went up a level in the positive-vibes department. And when Dr. Ivo feels good, his second-serve performance catapults to impressive levels to complement his bazooka first serves. He won below 50% of his second-serve points in the first two sets, whereas in the last three, he recorded 67%, 80%, and 75% success rates in points won with his second serve. Don’t think Nishikori did not notice: “[Karlovic] was really serving well today, I think, even the second serve.” Kei had only two break-point opportunities (both in the fourth set) after he got broken in that 5-5 game in the third. He also confirmed after the match that Karlovic “mixed up really well” his serves “after [the] third set.”

Nishikori faced oblivion at 4-4 in the fifth. Down 0-40 on his serve, he managed somehow to remain cool as ice, despite horrendously gagging a high forehand volley in the net at 0-30 to dig that hole for himself. They were “virtual match points” for Ivo, quoting Paul Annacone on the Tennis Channel, yet Kei remained error-free for the next five points, and it was Karlovic whose elbow got heavy. Ivo had chances to approach the net in the second and third break points but stayed at the baseline. He really should have ‘pulled a Colin Dowdeswell’ (who remembers that guy?) and chipped and charged from anywhere on the court to get up to the net. Nishikori, contrary to the first two sets, was feeling the heat during that period of the match and had missed some makeable passing shots earlier in the fifth set. Why not test him again? But Ivo chose the option not to instead, and he paid dearly. Five points in a row won by Nishikori, all resulting in Karlovic errors (the one at 30-40 was an unforced forehand error), and the world number nine held serve to lead 5-4.

It was only fitting that the final set would end in a 10-point tiebreaker.

Nishikori got an early mini-break, an advantage that he kept until 6-5. A big return by Karlovic erased that lead and in the ensuing point, Nishikori had an easy put-away on top of the net that he struck inside-out on his forehand, but Karlovic guessed the right side and passed Kei in the open court. Just like that, Karlovic was now up a mini-break at 7-6, and Nishikori’s chances looked bleak once more. Yet again, he did not lose his composure. After a little ‘nudge’ by Karlovic who made a forehand error to lose his mini-break advantage, Nishikori hit a great return (his umpteenth of the match) at 7-7 that forced Karlovic to lunge at the backhand volley and miss.

Now leading at 8-7, Nishikori simply needed to win his two serving points to close the curtain. He did so with two solid serves that Karlovic could not get back in the court.

Karlovic, who will turn 40 next month, got a well-deserved standing ovation from the pro-Nishikori crowd as he left Margaret Court Arena.

As for Nishikori, the question remains, can he sustain his physical prowess in the second week if he has to battle this hard in the early rounds? He remains optimistic: “Yeah, these two matches can go, you know, I could lose these two matches. So yeah, I just need to recover well. But, I mean, it’s only two matches yet, so I’m not too tired yet.”

He will face Joao Sousa who also survived a testing five-setter (4h18m) against Philip Kohlschreiber and has also played ten sets going into the third round. Whether that is another silver lining or not for Nishikori remains to be seen. In any case, Kei will need to find an easy win or two before reaching the quarterfinals in order to have a legitimate shot at upsetting the top players in the second week. Facing a pesky competitor like Sousa in the third round does not sound promising in reaching that goal, but Nishikori’s camp can take comfort in knowing that the quality of his tennis is unlikely waver. It’s just that he will need to defeat the player on the other side of the net and that other nemesis looming large on the horizon, waiting for him to push his physical limits to the edge.

[source for the Nishikori quotes: Australian Open website]

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Australian Open Day 3: Petra Martic Advances Despite Fragmented Play

Majors Tactical Analysis WTA No Comments

Under normal circumstances, any tennis fan would justifiably get excited to watch an encounter between Petra Martic (no.32) and Marketa Vondrousova (no.73), two of the more talented players in the WTA. Both women are fine shot-makers, largely thanks to the large variety of hits they can produce from any position on the court. This particular second-round match between the two at the Australian Open, however, did not meet the expectations despite the close scoreline.

There were a number of eye-opening winners hit by each player – that much was expected in any case – and neither was shy about digging deep into her bag of tricks. Yet, the 6-4 7-5 victory in favor of the Croatian player Martic was also marked by her piecemeal performance that turned out to be just sufficient, largely because of the progressively erratic play by her opponent throughout the match.

In an oddball first set, neither player held serve until 4-3 for Martic. It is not that this never happened before, although it’s quite rare. What made this particular start atypical was that neither player served badly or returned particularly well up to that point, which are the main reasons why such oddity occurs. Marketa served put 64% of her first serves in while Petra did the same at 72% up to that juncture in the match. Although it should be noted that Vondrousova was returning aggressively at times, one can hardly point to spectacular returning as the reason for which neither player could buy a service hold if their lives depended on it. They did not even get close to holding! By the time that eight game began, the total number of game-point opportunities that both players had on their serves was… wait for it… zero!

It was as if each got touched by some magic wand every time the serve changed hands. The server would all of a sudden sail balls out and wide, or slam them into the net, while the returner would suddenly turn solid as a rock, adding a winner or two in the mix for good measure.

Petra Martic at the Miami Open (Photo: Al Bello – Getty Images North America)

A magic wand of a different kind arrived, I presume, after that game, one that brought some degree of normalcy back to court number 8 at Melbourne Park. Martic held serve the next two times to grab the first set 6-4. Through both periods of the set, the “atypical” portion and the “normal” one, Martic made seven unforced errors, a tad better than Vondrousova who committed 12 of them. Simply put, the player that ‘donated’ less won the first set.
[Reminder: I do my own count for unforced errors, so my numbers may differ slightly than the official ones. For example, I don’t include double faults in this category, to cite one possible difference among others.]

Vondrousova began the second set with a clear willingness to get more aggressive from the baseline. She also appeared to be determined to approach the net if any short-ball opportunity presented itself. It worked. She won all but one of the point in which she approached the net in the first four games of that set.

There was one moment where Vondrousova could have truly taken over the reins. She was up 2-1 and had a break-point opportunity with Martic serving at 30-40. She had the chance to grab a two-game lead for the first time in the match and truly swing the pendulum of momentum her way, at least in this set. Martic was showing signs of frustration, accompanied by racket-throwing or self-monologuing outbursts, certainly due the pressure she felt from her opponent’s increasingly aggressive tactics.

Vondrousova got the return in play and a rally ensued. She committed a dreadful unforced error on her forehand that briskly ended the rally and brought the score to deuce. That forehand shot landed to the bottom of the net, literally, and rolled to the other side of the court through that little opening at the bottom of the net caused by the net strap being hooked to the ground. Following the error, Vondrousova bent and grabbed her right knee, rolled her hand over it (more on this later).

Martic served an ace at deuce. Vondrousova followed that up by dipping a routine forehand return into the net again on Martic’s second serve. Just like that, her one chance at taking charge vanished, the only one that she had in the match.

Marketa Vondrousova at the US Open (Photo: Al Bello – Getty Images North America)

Both players sprayed even more unforced errors in the second set than they did in the first. Most of Marketa’s 18 errors (Petra had 11) came in the last several games of the second set after her momentum was halted.

Martic eventually grabbed a 5-3 lead but could not put Vondrousova away due to a few errors of her own. But it almost felt like a delay of the inevitable. At 5-5, Martic won the next eight out of nine points, the last three on unforced errors by Voundrousova, and ended the match after one hour and 32 minutes.

In the upcoming days, Vondrousova must confront a bigger concern than the loss of a tennis match. She clearly has a right-leg problem that has not gone away. It already hindered her progress once in the spring of 2018 when she had to retire in the second round in Stuttgart, leading 3-2 in the third vs. Svitolina. Then it reappeared in September, forcing her to stay away from competition until this week in Melbourne. On Monday, after her straight-set win over Evgeniya Rodina in the first round, Marketa did admit to suffering from pain on that same leg, explaining that it has now shifted to her knee. She admitted that she will need to “deal with it” after the Australian Open in one way or another.

As for Martic, she will need to perform at a significantly higher level than she did on Wednesday, when she takes on fifth-seeded American Sloane Stephens in the third round on Friday. Petra possesses the tools to dismantle anyone’s game on a given day, but Stephens can neutralize the strenghts of an opponent better than most WTA players can, thanks to her on-court sense and counter-punching skills. If they both play at a high level, expect the quality of tennis to skyrocket in that match.

————— Random final thought:

I found it puzzling that Martic seemed fine with engaging in so many cross-court rallies from her forehand (arguably her less versatile side) to Vondrousova’s backhand. I did not count the win-loss numbers on them (I should have, in retrospect) but I have a feeling that a large percentage ended in Vondrousova’s favor, which is not surprising. She seemed perfectly content with sending the ball right back cross-court to Martic’s forehand and waiting for her opportunity to pull the trigger. That’s no surprise, considering that she has the ability to accelerate better – or nail the occasional, flat, warp-speed winner – with her backhand. She is a bit more prone to errors on her forehand, thus more apprehensive on that side. 

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Australian Open Day 1: McDonald vs Rublev (first rd)

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

MacKenzie McDonald won his first main-draw match in Majors one year ago in Melbourne. On Monday, one year later, he improves his record to 5-4 in Majors by defeating Andrey Rublev 6-4 6-4 2-6 6-4 in the first round of the Australian Open. To read my detailed post-match analysis of this match on Tennis with an Accent, click here ——> MacKenzie McDonald Solidifies His Place at the Majors

MacKenzie McDonald in action during last year’s Australian Open
Photo: Michael Dodge – Getty Images AsiaPac

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Fitting End to Alexander Zverev’s Career Week

ATP Tactical Analysis 2 Comments

On Sunday, Alexander “Sascha” Zverev outplayed the world number one Novak Djokovic in pretty much all aspects of the game and grabbed the title at the ATP Finals in London, the biggest one of the German’s career, with a 6-4 6-3 win in one hour and 20 minutes.

For a moment, I considered using, for this article, the title of my post-match analysis of Zverev’s win over Federer in the semifinals from yesterday and adding “Part II” to the end. Initially, it made sense and neatly reflected the rare feat accomplished by Sascha. This title made him the first player to defeat Federer and Djokovic (who won this tournament a combined 11 times in the last 16 years) in the same ATP Finals, as well as the first player to defeat the no.1 and 2 seeds back to back to lift the trophy since Andre Agassi did it in 1990 (source: ATP Media Info).

Then, I remembered my own insertion in yesterday’s piece that regardless of what happened in the finals, Sascha’s win over Roger was a giant step for the German that stood on its own.

And so does Sunday’s win over Novak Djokovic in the finals.

The two accomplishments should not be packaged into the same giant step as parts one and two. It is one thing to earn the biggest win of your career up to that point, and it is another to back it up the very next day with another convincing win over the number-one player in the world that propels you to your biggest title ever.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images

While Zverev’s serves, returns, and footwork may have played substantial roles in successfully countering the challenges thrown his way by Djokovic, it was ultimately the 21-year-old German’s astute baseline-pattern tactics that decisively swung the pendulum in his favor.

I believe most tennis fans will agree with me that Zverev’s most valuable (and reliable) stroke has been his backhand. In fact, I have long contended that he can out-duel any player in a backhand-to-backhand rally, whether that would be a cross-court one against a right-hander or a down-the-line one against a left-hander. And I am convinced that Sascha himself believes that he can go toe-to-toe with anyone in this particular pattern.

Would it not then behoove him to find ways to engage his opponents in such rallies, daring them to outperform him even if they possessed one of the best backhands in the world?

Such was the case against Djokovic, and Sascha came out on top in this department. In my opinion, this was the aspect that derailed the wheels of the Djokovic train and led him to a diminished performance in the second set, along with physical fatigue that slowly began to take over – that, in itself, stemming partially from mental fatigue as a result of running out of answers. In the first set, as Darren Cahill also correctly affirmed on TV, Sascha defeated a very good Novak “fair and square,” and backhand cross-court duels played a paramount role in not only that, but also in Zverev getting the decisive break in the second set.

I was interested in who would win the battle of the backhands. I believed that it was one of the only ways (not a guarantee) that Zverev could weather the storm brought on by Djokovic’s ground strokes. It was also something that I had seen in the past, someone using a similar pattern to defeat Djokovic. It took place in Roland Garros, back in 2015, when Stan Wawrinka pulled one of the best baseline-power performances I have ever witnessed on clay courts and took out Djokovic in four sets. In fact, members of Stan’s coaching team confirmed weeks later that engaging in cross-court rallies from the backhand wing was part of his strategy because it would allow Stan to occasionally accelerate down-the-line for the winner to the open court. But what interested me more was the outcome of those rallies where neither Novak nor Sascha would change the pattern.

Thus, I counted the outcome of all rallies in which Zverev and Djokovic got involved in at least four backhand cross-court shots struck in succession (in other words, two shots each). Four shots in a row was a clear indication to me that the two players were fully engaged in a cross-court backhand rally. Djokovic and Zverev played 16 such points until 4-2 in the second set. Sascha won that battle 11-5 over Novak.

Note: My numbers may be off by one, at the most two, as I was briefly interrupted from watching twice and missed a few points.

Then, I wanted to see how many of these points ended in Sascha’s or Novak’s favor when one or the other decided to change the pattern by hitting down-the-line or a drop shot. I found out that when they did, it did not necessarily benefit them. Novak was 1/4 on those, and Zverev did not fare much better at 2/5.

And what about when neither player changed the pattern, and instead, dared each other to miss first or nail the direct winner? This is where Zverev held an overwhelming 7-1 lead!

The only point won by Novak was the last point of the 2-2 game in the first set, when both players attempted to out-slice each other. It ended with Zverev hitting his into the net. But otherwise, he held a clear advantage over Novak in what is otherwise presumed to be an advantageous area for the Serbian player. It is, after all, rare that Novak is unable to out-duel his opponent on backhands. But even if that were to occur, Novak can still use his backhand down-the-line acceleration, another one of his super assets. Well, they were not enough this time to turn the tide in his favor due to above numbers, and also partially due to Zverev having a fantastic day on his forehand. He continuously landed his forehands deep, using a healthy mix of heavy topspin shots and flat swipes.

It also helped that Sascha served 88% of his first serves in – an extraordinary number for a “bazooka” first serve like his – which led to seven aces and a bunch of opportunities for Sascha to take charge on the follow-up shot. Last but not the least, and I can say this for both of his wins over the weekend, I did not see Zverev’s body language turn distinctively sour, which he has done in the past. Even after points lost on strategic mistakes or disappointing errors, I did not at any point observe Sascha “whine” extensively. He may have shaken his head, or glanced at his corner in dismay, but he moved on within seconds and got ready for the next shot. He was a mental rock throughout four sets over two days.

I must again reiterate that none of the tactic-related or stat-related elements that I mention in the last paragraph above would be enough (or even possible) if Sascha had not gained the upper hand in the baseline battles first. In establishing a dominance on the backhand-to-backhand duels, Zverev was able to kill two birds with one stone; negating one of Novak’s most reliable assets by maximizing the return on his own favorite asset.

If you are a Sascha fan, there is a lot to celebrate here. The lack of Major titles still remains in effect, but this weekend should serve to practically make the “if” question disappear to the point where the “when” question is now the only one nagging your mind. In any case, that concern can be swept under the rug until January at least. For now, enjoy the title that your player thoroughly deserved by passing one of the toughest tests in contemporary men’s tennis with flying colors.

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Another Giant Step for Alexander Zverev

ATP Tactical Analysis No Comments

Alexander “Sascha” Zverev has been taking substantial steps over the last couple of years toward reaching the elite status in the ATP. These manifest steps are already a part of his record, such as the three ATP 1000 titles, the first appearance in the quarterfinals of a Major, and an entrance into the top 5 of the rankings. We have been hearing the footsteps of his forthcoming arrival to the top level of our sport for a while now. You can add this week to that list of steps, a giant one in fact, now that Zverev has reached the final round of the ATP World Tour Finals where, every year, eight players considered the cream of the crop in men’s tennis meet in an attempt to earn the prestigious year-ending title.

Sascha’s win over Roger Federer on Saturday, however, goes a bit further than just jumping through another hoop in terms of ascendancy. It’s not just that the German added another check mark to his list of achievements in Wikipedia. What matters more is that, throughout the 7-5 7-6 victory, Zverev exhibited the type of characteristics that you would want an elite player to regularly put on display with regard to tactics, IQ level, and mental fortitude.

And Sascha decorated the victory with some the highest quality of tennis that he has ever played on big stage, especially in the first set.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

For starters, he did not merely rest on the laurels of his solid baseline game. He also sought to take the initiative and attack. He approached the net more times than Federer despite not using the serve-and-volley like Roger occasionally does. It is undeniable that few – and not the majority – of those approaches were the result of short slices hit by Federer, thus leaving Sascha little choice but to move forward. However, Sascha of the past may have still sent some of those back over the net and step back to the baseline to continue the rally (in fact, an example of that came in the second set at a crucial moment and he paid the price for it – more on that later). In this match though, Zverev was willing to do plow forward and squeeze the bolts on the Federer machine, even in big points (ex: 3-3, 30-30, serving).

There were also the other times when he came to the net with conviction and not as a result of a short ball. There is no doubt that applying pressure to Federer when given the occasion and daring him to produce the passing shot was part of Sascha’s overall plan. That plan also appeared to include a conscious effort to pick on Roger’s backhand. If my count is correct, Zverev approached the net nine times in the first set and only one of those was to his opponent’s forehand. As for rallies from the baseline, Zverev dictated most of them, looking to end the point in the same way that Federer usually does when he is forced to engage in longer rallies.

To top all of the above, he served phenomenally well. No, the numbers will not necessarily tell you that (3 aces, one double fault, 68% first serves), but the fact that he came up with big serves on crucial points will.

Federer, for his part, did not play a bad first set by any means. He did miss a makeable return wide at 15-30 in the 3-3 game on Sascha’s serve, but I would advise people to watch the previous 15-15 point before rushing to judgment on that return miss. After a long and exhausting point in which you had to scramble corner-to-corner multiple times, it is very possible that you have not recovered by the time the ensuing point starts, and you make an error.

Otherwise, Federer had little trouble holding serve despite a below-average first-serve percentage (55%) for his standards because he was using the follow-up shots to his first and second serves extremely well and changing the pace of the ball with great accuracy during rallies. By the time he was serving at 5-6, he was a perfect eight for eight when approaching the net, with only four unforced errors committed in the match.

In that 5-6 game, Federer missed only one first serve (first point). He did however miss a forehand to start the game. In the second point, he only did what had worked well for him up to that point in the match. He hit a first serve, approached the net on the next shot, and volleyed to the open corner. Except, Zverev came up with a spectacular passing shot on the run from the forehand side (not usually his forté). It was his only point won in the set with Roger at the net. At 0-30, Roger got another first serve in but Zverev landed a rock-solid return smack on the baseline, pushing the Swiss into a defensive position, and eventually winning the point on Roger’s forced error. Zverev had three set points at 0-40. He only needed one. Sascha sent back another first serve by Roger who missed the subsequent forehand wide. Two forehand errors by Federer to start and finish the game, with two exceptional points by Sascha squeezed in between. Blank break for the German, 7-5.

In the early part of the second set, Zverev, for some reason, did not stick to the level of aggressiveness that he demonstrated in the first. He was still hitting the ball hard, placing them deep, and continuing to play good tennis overall. Yet, little details make the difference at this level and this particular shift to a less offensive disposition almost cost the German dearly when, at 1-1 in the second set and down a break point on his serve at 30-40, Federer returned short and yet Sascha elected to back-step to the baseline after hitting his backhand instead of approaching the net. It was a strange decision because until that point he had a great success rate (7 out of 8) on points won when approaching Federer’s backhand! To add salt to the wound, he passed on two more shots in that same rally on which he could have pulled the trigger. The rally ultimately ended on a backhand down-the-line winner by Federer for his only break of the match.

Unfortunately for Federer, he played his worst two games of the match after that break and had to then contend with holding serve just to get to the tiebreaker.

He had a final regrettable error at 4-5 in the tiebreaker when he netted a routine forehand volley that he would/should otherwise make in the third cycle of his REM sleep. It was a grave error because it gave Zverev two match points at a moment when it looked like Federer was getting close to having a set-point. To be honest, considering his level since the early break in that set, it was a jackpot opportunity. Zverev had been the better player since that break, getting within two points of breaking Roger’s more than once in the 4-3 game that he lost with two successive unforced errors at 30-30.

Zverev did not let that bother him though. Instead, the tiebreaker only served to confirm how far the 21-year-old German has matured overall. In the three chances that he had to approach the net and apply to pressure to Federer, he did not hesitate, winning all three including the match point. He only missed one first serve out of 6 in the tiebreaker. Following a delay after a ball-boy dropped a ball and the point had to be replayed at 3-4 down, he stepped up to the baseline and bombed an ace. Lastly, he came out on top of a grueling rally at 4-4 when he ended it with a backhand down-the-line winner.

There are the ‘listed’ accomplishments for everyone to see. Then, there are those intangibles that players value as precious assets when it comes to the long climb to the top of the ATP echelon. For Zverev, this particular victory, regardless of the outcome in Sunday’s final, must surely feel like one of those treasured intangibles.

Until next time…

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

WTA Luxembourg: Julia Goerges Meets the Bar

WTA No Comments

Although I eventually decided against it, I was tempted to add “time and again” to the end of the title, to avoid any misunderstanding. So, I will clarify. It is not by winning the WTA Luxembourg Open that Julia Goerges “met the bar” this week. There is a lot more nuance to her run to the title than simply accomplishing what was expected on paper from the top-seeded player in the field. What must be emphasized here is the consistent way in which the ninth-ranked German “met the bar” every time she was challenged by her opponents and the stakes got higher.

Any coach/supporter will tell you that, while watching your player roll through matches with great overall performances may feel ecstatic, seeing him/her overcome challenging situations, making the right decisions under duress, and turning into a mental giant each time the score points to a critical stage, corresponds to a unique type of jubilation that satisfies at a far deeper level than one generated by watching him/her dominate an opponent during a routine win.

Let’s take a look at the key moments of the last three matches played this week by Goerges, her quarterfinal win over Donna Vekic, her comeback semifinal one over Eugénie Bouchard, and her victory over Belinda Bencic in the final.

Photo: Lintao Zhang – Getty Images (from the China Open)

Vekic took Goerges to a third set in the quarterfinals and pushed her hard in the final set. Down 2-3 and serving, Vekic saved three break points to hold and get back to 3-3. At the time, it felt like a significant momentum change in a match where each previous set had been decided by a single major momentum shift. When Goerges started that seventh game with a double fault, it felt like the beginning of a final shift in the match. Vekic’s chance to take command of the match had arrived.

Instead, Goerges popped a first serve to the “T,” and followed it up with a backhand down-the-line winner, classic execution of a 1-2 punch, to get to 15-15. Two points later, at 30-30, she pulled the trigger on a running forehand that forced Vekic into a defensive position. Goerges followed her shot to the net, but Vekic made a high – and impressive – retrieval that left Goerges little choice but to back up and hit a forehand swing-volley in the air from less than two meters inside the baseline. She smacked it right on the corner for a winner. She pumped her fist and let out her loudest scream of the match in relief. It was after all at 3-3, 30-30, in the third set, that she pulled those shots of her hat. Yet, that point alone was only a part of the whole.

Outside of the double fault to start that 3-3 game, Goerges committed no unforced errors from that point forward and won eight out of the last nine points to shut the curtains down on Vekic with a 6-3 3-6 6-3 victory. In that short segment, she also hit four winners and an ace.

In the semifinals, she faced qualifier Bouchard who had guaranteed her reentry to the top 100 by reaching the semifinal round and was riding a five-match winning streak, first one since her breakthrough year in 2014. Playing solid from the baseline and keeping the balls deep, Bouchard built a 7-6 5-3 lead on Goerges before the pendulum began tilting, sharply and suddenly, in the German’s favor.

Julia had her back against the wall when Bouchard served for the match at 5-4. It is true that Bouchard could not buy a first serve in that game and double-faulted at 15-15. Nevertheless, it also undeniably true that Goerges nailed three forehand winners on the most important points of the game. The first was to start it, the second at 30-30, the third to end it and earn the break. After Goerges held serve to grab the 6-5 lead, she broke the Canadian’s serve again at love, hitting two return winners in the process. In a matter of few minutes, she went from being two points away from defeat to starting a third set.

Although Goerges may have recorded a stunning +22 difference in the number of winners vs. unforced errors (48-26) for the match, the seven winners that she hit in those three games mattered the most. They came when she found herself in the do-or-die. They also bore dire consequences for her opponent Bouchard because Goerges never looked back, winning 10 out of the last 11 games to get past the Canadian 6-7 7-5 6-1 in two hours and two minutes.

In Saturday’s final, Goerges prevailed in two close sets to outlast the former top-ten player and qualifier Belinda Bencic and earn her second WTA title of the year. Bencic, the 21-year-old Swiss, is climbing back toward the top 20 after a miserable 2016 campaign that saw her suffer from a wrist injury, ultimately requiring surgery and causing her to plummet outside the top 100. She is currently ranked no.47 and poised to climb higher next week following her run this week.

On Saturday, both players had little trouble holding comfortably. For a player to take command, she either needed to pull a few magic shots on a return game, or her adversary had to gag points away on her serving game. Goerges did the former and pulled ahead. At 2-2, she exclusively went for bazooka returns on every point. She missed two out of the first three, going down 30-15. She made the next three, two of them resulting in clean winners, and the other, an almost-clean one. Four huge returns made brought Goerges the only break that she needed, to win the set.

It would not be fair though if I did not mention the 5-4 game. Goerges rode the early break until 5-4 and had the chance to serve the set out. She lost the first point when she sailed her forehand deep. She did not let the scoreboard pressure get to her. She served her first ace of the match to get to 15-15. Two points later, another big first serve brought her two set points at 40-15. She only needed the first. Another vintage 1-2 punch 3ending with a forehand winner put the first set in Julia’s pocket. It was perhaps her best serving game of the match, right when it counted the most.

In the second set, Goerges found herself serving at 4-5 to remain alive in the second set. She met the bar, yet again! Cool as a cucumber, she served four first serves to hold serve, one being an ace, the other two resulting in follow-up winners. In the next game on Bencic’s serve at 5-5, Goerges produced three more winners but also got an assist from her opponent when Bencic missed a high-forehand volley from the top of the net. That was the decisive break.

In the 6-5 game, Goerges earned her first match point at 40-0 when she served two aces and hit an unreturnable second serve. On her second match point at 40-15, Goerges pulled her umpteenth 1-2 punch winner to earn the title with a score of 6-4 7-5.

Goerges had 19 more winners than unforced errors (35-16), another spectacular spread in those numbers. She never faced a break point in the match. However, the stringing together of a few great points by Goerges at crucial junctures mentioned above played the largest role in deciding the match. Goerges seemed to find the extra gear whenever she needed it.

The above-noted segments from her last three matches are fresh in Goerges’s memory. When one uses the type of aggressive game that she plays, confidence can be the cornerstone of one’s performance. For three days and three matches, Goerges repeatedly met the bar, and that should mean something. I would not be surprised if a series of wins like these, combined with the title, propel her to a period of rapid improvement, perhaps even to the next level in her progress, whatever that may represent to her.

A baseline player who mainly operates on safe groundstrokes and consistency can maintain a certain level even during a down cycle in confidence. In the case of a striker like Goerges, down cycles can be painful and filled with an abundance of sprayed errors. At the same time, that which she can accomplish would have no limits if she can ride on a high degree of confidence and belief. If anything at all, the Luxembourg Open serves to bring Goerges closer to that ride.

Until next time…

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

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

MENU

Navigation