Category: ATP

Wimbledon 2017: Men’s Semifinal Previews

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

Roger Federer (3) vs. Tomas Berdych (11)

In the third set of his match vs Federer on Wednesday, Milos Raonic played one of the better sets of his career and still could not steal the set. On how Roger kept coming up with one amazing shot after another, Milos said it best: “I was sort of moving on. Okay, let’s see if he can do it again. Let’s see if he can do it again. He kept doing it.” In case you missed it and require some illustration of what Milos is talking about, you only need to watch four points with which Roger climbed from 1-3 down to 5-3 up in the tiebreaker.

Raonic is hundred percent right. Federer keeps doing it over and over again, and does it even better with each match since Wimbledon began 11 days ago. The question is who can stop Federer, and my answer to that, as some readers may remember from my article on Sunday, was a simple “nobody,” at least until the finals. Well, Tomas Berdych is the last one standing between Federer and Sunday.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

The only way to beat Federer is to crush the rallies with heavy shots going at warp speed 9 (see: Star Trek terminology). You can probably tell from the adjectives I used how much I believe in the possibility of such chain of events taking place tomorrow. There are nevertheless only a select few players who can do that to Roger and Berdych happens to be one of them. He did it twice in Majors, in 2010 at Wimbledon, in 2012 at the US Open. He had a great chance to do it even earlier, in 2009, at the Australian Open, but could not close it out, letting Roger come back from two sets down to beat him in five.

However… and you knew there was one coming… Federer has not lost to Berdych since 2013. He also defeated him soundly in this year’s Australian Open. That is more likely to be the scenario tomorrow. Federer is serving betterer-than-everer and Berdych not only lacks the explosion necessary on his first step to return the serves away from him, but also will have a miserable time catching any sort of a rhythm if Federer varies their speed and spin, as well as he has done so until now. Life will get even more complicated for Tomas if, on top of everything else, if he goes down a break down early in the match and allows Roger to play with a lead. Thus, Berdych must hold serve early and aim to create a dent in Roger’s baseline armor with his power. It is the only formula, regardless of how obvious it seems, that gives the 15th-ranked Czech player any chance to disturb Roger.

Photo: Shaun Botterill – Getty Images Europe

Federer, for his part, will counter that with his large arsenal of shots from the baseline and mix in a few rocket forehands of his own, aiming for the corners on Berdych’s side of the court. If the Swiss systematically wins rallies that go over seven or eight shots, I believe we will watch a one-sided, routine affair for three sets. If not, it may still be one-sided, with a more balanced scoreboard, whatever that may mean to you. If I am Berdych, I would first and foremost hope for Roger to have an off day on his serves, then focus on holding my service games, and look to get ahead in the first set. Unless he can derail Federer’s confidence early, there is no “W” for Tomas at the end of Friday.

Marin Cilic (7) vs. Sam Querrey (24)

The fact that Cilic is the favorite in this match certainly has something to do with his much superior record in Majors compared to that of his semifinal opponent. Not only does he have a Major title in his name but also a multitude of quarterfinal and semifinal appearances compared to only one semifinal one for Sam. Marin has also collected eight more ATP titles than Sam has over his career.

Cilic also carries a lot of explosive ammunition with him in the form of forehands and serves that he can unload on the court and make life very uncomfortable for the guy across the net. Don’t take my word for it; ask Kei Nishikori and Roger Federer, his last two victims on the way to his US Open title in 2014.

Yet, same can be said for Sam with regard to his artillery comprised of forehands and serves. If we were to look at the numbers, Sam’s numbers in those departments are as solid as those of Marin. Querrey is collecting points from his serves at about the same rate (84%) as Cilic does (83%). Querrey gets 63% of his first serves in while Marin is serving at 62%. Cilic has hit ten more winners on the forehand side than Sam (78 to 68) over the course of the tournament. Sam has 126 aces throughout the tournament compared to Marin’s 105.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

So, if we are going to praise the power of Cilic’s serves and forehands, we must do the same for Querrey. The story is not much different in the unforced error categories. They are practically the same: 52 forehand unforced errors and 46 backhand ones for Sam, 54 and 46 for Marin.

Points-won-on-returns categories seem to carry the only significant difference between the two players. Cilic has won 32% of his total first-serve-returned points versus 28% for Sam, and on second serves that number is 58% for the Croat, 48% for the American. This distinction in return-points won may nevertheless be the result of Sam having faced more big servers (Kevin Anderson, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga) in the previous rounds than Marin has (Gilles Muller).

This is the reason for which putting too much importance in numbers can be misleading. Cilic may have had trouble reading Muller’s serve but could jump all over Sam’s. He may outlast Sam in rallies every time they can get into a cross-court backhand rally, eventually causing Sam’s unforced error count on the backhand to climb higher than usual. I can multiply such examples when one faces the other. That is why the way a player matches up with another supersedes sheer statistics in terms of importance.

The bottom line is, Cilic is a better baseliner than Querrey. He does the “1-2 punch” better than Sam does, because he can use his backhand just as effectively as his forehand on the second shot of that “1-2 punch” combination, whereas Sam must run around his backhand to be as effective. Both players can generate a lot of speed from deep behind the baseline, but I would argue that Sam can probably hit more “wow” shots with his forehand from that position than Cilic can. These are the details that will make the difference rather than comparison of numbers and percentages.

Photo: Julian Finney – Getty Images Europe

My only question mark for Cilic would be where he will position himself on the returns. In my quarterfinal previews, I mentioned that Marin would wait Muller’s serves closer to the baseline after seeing how much Rafael Nadal struggled on returns against Muller, because he was parking by the line judges to wait for them. To my surprise, he chose to stay few yards behind the baseline, not as far back as Rafa, but certainly not as close to the baseline as I expected. As a result, he also struggled with Muller’s wide serves, albeit not as much as Rafa did. So, I am reluctant to comment on his position on returns when returning Sam’s first and second serves. I will merely “guess” that, for his sake, Cilic will step inside the baseline to return Sam’s second serves.

Speaking of on-court stance, where players choose to hit their shots from will be an important part of the formula for victory. You know the image of the court that the experts put up on your screen, the one on which you see straight lines running parallel to the baseline, one in front of it and one in the back, each separated area colored differently so that they can tell you what percentage of their shots the players hit from each colored zone? That is what I am talking about. If Marin can more hit shots from the colored area inside the baseline than his opponent, he will be the one likely to reach the final on Sunday, and vice versa. I can at least guarantee one thing: we will see plenty of baseline shots, but we will not see many rallies. These two players will hit every ball with a purpose and that purpose will rarely include notions such as “getting the ball over the net” or “making the opponent hit one more shot.”

Have a great Friday afternoon!

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – This week: live from Wimbledon

Wimbledon 2017: Men’s Quarterfinals Preview

ATP Majors No Comments

Fascinating quartet of matches await tennis fans on Wednesday. All of them, maybe except one, have the potential to either finish in three straight sets, or go to the distance. Below are my thoughts on what to expect tomorrow during these encounters, with the first two matches taking place on Centre Court and the next two on Court 1, in the order below.

Andy Murray (1) vs. Sam Querrey (24)

Querrey is a dangerous player, very dangerous. Murray is an excellent scrambler. This match has the ingredients to contain three entertaining sets, maybe four. For anything else to happen, Querrey must have a big serving day against one of the best anticipators in the sport. It is not outside the realm of possibility but Murray can sometimes make his opponents feel like he is standing right at the spot to which they plan to serve, before they even toss the ball. Same can be said for his anticipation on the opponents’ approach shots.

Photo: Julian Finney – Getty Images Europe

This is simply a good match-up for Andy who has at the same time performed at the highest level for most of the tournament, although he has enjoyed a convenient draw compared to other favorites. It would, quite frankly, be a monumental upset, a disaster for the home crowd, and a nightmare for the organizers who would obviously prefer Andy to play on the final day, if Sam were to somehow win and advance to the semis. Querrey will play the spoiler role, but I don’t believe he will ultimately satisfy the role’s requirements.

Roger Federer (3) vs. Milos Raonic (6)

As you may recall, if you read my last entry in Mertov’s Tennis Desk, I expected Federer and Nadal to reach the finals on July 16th. Nadal is out, but I am still expecting Federer to do so. I also do not believe Milos has at this point reached his form of last year before he faced Roger. More importantly, today’s Federer is not last year’s version, when he was full of doubts and nursing an injury.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

Raonic returned better in their last year’s match (see the fourth set’s last two return games and the tiebreaker) than I have ever seen him until and since then. He also had the luxury of winning the first set last year, which is also a must for his chances tomorrow.

The strategies these two players will employ against one another do not require a rocket science degree. Federer will exploit Raonic’s backhand and keep him chasing balls rather than attacking. Raonic will look to serve a lot of aces, and hit his forehands big to earn direct winners or set up the winning volley. First-serve percentage will be a major determinant of the scoreboard. We are likely to see at least one tiebreaker, if not more, if these two men happen to have a good serving day by their standards. It was a very close match last year, yet, I expect not only a different outcome this year, but also a more one-sided affair.

Having said that, I am a fan of Milos and I have always believed he would be the first to break through the success that the Big 4 enjoy at the top of the ATP. Stan Wawrinka has done it before him and injuries have repeatedly hindered his progress. He has been healthy for a while now and that alone keeps the possibility of another long thriller like the one from 2016 alive.

Marin Cilic (7) vs Gilles Müller (16)

This is the one exception that I have mentioned in the introduction. I can see Müller or Cilic winning in three or four sets, but I do not believe this match will see a final set, especially if Cilic is the first to get to two sets. A fifth-set affair could spell disaster for Müller who has already played two “hyper-extended” matches against Lukas Rosol (9-7 in the fifth) and Rafael Nadal (15-13 in the fifth). He is in good shape, but not that good.

Müller faces another problem against Cilic that he did not against Nadal. Marin will not park by the line judges behind the courts to wait for his lefty serves. He is an aggressive returner by nature and likes to hit them when the ball is on the rise. At the cost of getting aced a few times, he will stand close to the baseline and force Müller to volley first from around the service line in case the lefty from Luxembourg were to utilize his serve-and-volley pattern. This is why a high first-serve percentage is essential for Müller. He must be able to collect some free points. He served in the low sixty-percent range against Rosol and Nadal, and won over 80% of those points. However, when he had to resort to a second serve, his winning-point percentage drastically fell, below 50% in both matches.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

The Croate is also unlikely to rally from far behind the baseline, à la Nadal. This means that if Müller has to play the retriever role while Cilic directs the rally’s traffic from the top of the baseline, the lefty can kiss that point goodbye.

I do not want to underestimate Müller though, simply because, at the age of 34, he is having a career year. He garnered his first two ATP titles this year, the most recent one on the grass courts of s’Hertogenbosch. Interestingly, his only loss on grass this season has come against Cilic who, for his part, is also having a solid season. The first two sets should determine the outcome of this match. I am intrigued by this match and plan to watch it.

Novak Djokovic (2) vs. Tomas Berdych (11)

Djokovic finally joined the others today, after his match was postponed from yesterday due to a “series of unfortunate events.” Although he recorded his eighth win in a row on grass, I have yet to see the form he needs to win Wimbledon. The good news, for now, is that he may not need to be at his best to defeat Tomas Berdych who is notorious for beating players he is supposed to beat, appearing to catch fire in the first weeks of Majors, and then fading away when facing an elite player, right when everyone is beginning to wonder if his breakthrough moment has arrived. On the other hand, Wimbledon is the only Major where he had some resemblance of a breakthrough, in 2010, by upsetting Federer and reaching the final. How much of what happened seven years ago is relevant today? I will leave the answer to the readers.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

Berdych is a heavy hitter. He hits the ball so heavy sometimes that the sound of his racket smacking the ball will produce a “boom” sound in your living room if you are watching it on TV, or in the stadium. The problem for Tomas is that he is playing against Novak who, at his best, eats high-velocity flat shots for breakfast. So the big question for this match remains, will Novak be at his best? If yes, this is a routine script with a few impressive baseline rallies and a bad ending for Tomas. If, however, Novak cannot produce a high level of play, we can see anything from a long thriller like the one he played against Denis Istomin in Melbourne or, if he goes further and begins to battle himself along with his opponent, to the debacle against Dominic Thiem in Paris.

If you have the possibility to watch both courts and have the ability to change back and forth between the courts, good for you. If you like focusing on one match from beginning to the end, like I do, you will have to make some tough choices tomorrow. In either case, you are in for treat. Enjoy!

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – This week: live from Wimbledon

Who can stop Roger and Rafa?

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

Let me first begin, for better or worse, by giving my one-word answer: Nobody! I believe that Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal will march on to the finals, not only because they have been the two best players in 2017 by a large margin, but also because they have not shown any signs of considerable drop in their form. It is particularly remarkable that one can take two months off from competition right when he was on top of his form – a risky move even for Roger’s standards – and reach that level again so quickly, while the other adjusts from the clay-courts of Roland Garros, without having played a single match on grass, to the courts at Wimbledon, and still produce his top-quality tennis (not that he has not done the Paris-London victory combination before, twice as a matter of fact).

Can any player challenge them? Sure, but can they actually beat one or the other? Highly unlikely…

First, on Rafa’s path to the final…

It seems that Rafa has picked up where he had left off at Roland Garros. He has yet to lose a set in the 10 matches that he played in Paris and London combined, and there is a legitimate possibility that it may well be the final day of Wimbledon before we see that happening.

Nadal steamrolled through his first three rounds, with the only glitch coming in the third set vs. Karen Khachanov, in the late stages of which the Spanish champion, uncharacteristically, sprayed a few errors on forehands. Many believed the young Russian would push Nadal, even push him beyond three sets. I did not.

While Khachanov has the pedigree of a player that can quickly rise in the rankings in the years to come – powerful serve, decent technique, the ability to unleash during rallies – he still lacks the on-court decision-making that top players possess. A good example of this, among others, took place in his match vs. Victor Troicki in the Istanbul Open where he kept running around his backhand to accelerate with his forehand (although his ability to flatten out the backhand is currently superior to the backhand one, especially on low balls) and leaving the deuce side vulnerable once he was unable to put the ball away. Troicki fed on that throughout the match, and Khachanov never adjusted. In a five-set encounter against a high-IQ champion like Rafa, you can bet that you will need to change and adjust your tactics at some point during the match whether you are leading or trailing. This is not a skill that Khachanov, or any other promising young talent, cannot develop. However, it takes time and the 34th-ranked Russian still has room for improvement in this area, before posing a threat to top players in Majors.

Photo: David Ramos – Getty Images Europe

Rafa faces Gilles Muller next. The 34-year-old veteran from Luxembourg has enough experience, thus he will not be intimidated by any legend on the other side of the net. Furthermore, he has a win over Rafa, at Wimbledon, on his résumé. Yet, that was a dozen years ago and Nadal of today is far better than the one from 2005. I am sure the matchup worries some Nadal fans, for decent reasons. Muller can win a large number of points on his lefty serve, as well as hit a variety of them; flat, sliding slice, kick, curve into the body, you name it, Muller can serve it. Rafa has had trouble with these types of players in the past. Having said that, I do not see how Muller can break Rafa’s serve, especially considering that the Spaniard has increased its velocity to it since coming to London (see the last few break points that he saved against Khachanov). I would guess that Muller will need to get to a tiebreaker or two in order to have any chances to cause an upset.

Like Muller, there are a few other solid players on Nadal’s half. I am simply not convinced if they can defeat him. There are a couple of baseliners, Roberto Bautista-Agut and Marin Cilic, one of whom will face Nadal in the quarterfinals. It has been said that Cilic could have a chance to defeat Rafa, assuming he gets there. Cilic has indeed had a good year and his big game can overwhelm any player when his first serve and forehand are clicking on all cylinders, à-la-2014 US Open. He will nevertheless need to pull one of the best winner-to-error ratios in his career to outlast Rafa from the baseline, as well as a bit of help from him, the kind that Khachanov received (but could not capitalize on) in their third set.

One issue that Rafa has not completely fine-tuned yet is the depth on his groundstrokes. Even in Paris and in his first three rounds here, his shots landed inside the service line at times. I would call this the only apparent difference between the 2008-12 version of Rafa and the one today. On the clay courts of Paris, or against his opponents here so far, this did not present a major problem. Even when they moved in and unleashed on their shots, Rafa’s ability to scramble and get one or two balls back forced them to make errors on their second or third tries. Against the elite players, or the ones that do not think twice when it comes to relentlessly approaching the net on grass, this could present a problem for Rafa. They will either have enough skills to put the ball away when they get their one chance, or immediately approach and challenge Nadal to come up with passing shots from difficult positions. Federer’s two victories over him in Indian Wells and Miami are prime examples of strategies that included this component.

However, this is not the bread-and-butter plan of Andy Murray, Rafa’s potential semifinal opponent. Andy is likely to construct points, look for his opportunity to accelerate down-the-line, and hope to win some free points on his first serve. Coming to the net will not be an essential part of his plan A. Yes, the crowd will be behind him, but alas, depending on “build-up points” from the baseline is a painful way to try to beat Nadal.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

Few more things to keep in mind for Rafa:

– One of his main weapons, the run-around forehand, will be a bit more limited on grass than on other surfaces due to the low bounce. This will not permit Rafa to hit as many forehands from the chest-to-shoulder height, the spot at which he prefers to hit his aggressive forehands.

– Rafa likes to take risks, pound first serves and groundstrokes harder, when he faces break points or trails in a tiebreaker. His first-serve percentage (with the increased velocity), especially on break points against him, will play a major role in holding serve.

– The weather is working in Rafa’s favor. There are only two days on that show rain, less than 50% on each day, for the rest of the tournament. Dryer courts keep the balls bouncing higher, although still nothing like on clay, as Dustin Brown who said grass at Wimbledon is slower than clay in Paris would have you believe, a claim since then refuted (to avoid saying mocked) by a number of other players. They have pretty much unanimously pointed to the dryness of the courts with regard to the speed and admitted that this causes the courts to be slower than usual (again, only by Wimbledon and grass-court standards).

Second, on Roger’s path to the final…

Roger has a more rocky road to the final than Rafa and I would have contemplated for a while about his chances of reaching the final in London, had it not been for what I saw in his victory run in Halle followed by the first two rounds** at Wimbledon. I had believed taking two months off competition while he was at the top of his form had been an extremely risky decision. However, his game improved throughout the five matches he played in Halle, and by now, he seems to have fine-tuned his game just in time to enter the nitty-gritty of the second week.

**I say first two rounds because this had been my thought even before he played Mischa Zverev earlier today and I wrote so, yesterday, in an article published in Tenis Dunyasi magazine website.

He will face Grigor Dimitrov on Monday. I am a fan of Dimitrov’s game and I like his chances to eventually join the elites of men’s tennis at the top of the rankings, but this is just a bad matchup for Dimitrov, very bad. When two players essentially play the same style, possess similar strengths and weaknesses, develop points using similar strategies, and one of them happens to be a tiny bit better than the other, the scoreboard will usually reflect that difference with fairly large margins. Dimitrov will have to wait at least one more Major for his potential breakthrough.

Quarterfinal round is where the plot thickens for Roger. Both Alexander Zverev and Milos Raonic have the game to defeat Federer on a given day and they have both done it before. They are two of the very few candidates with a legitimate shot at dismantling the stranglehold the Big 4, plus Stan Wawrinka, have on the Majors. Milos is a step ahead of Sascha in that he has not only gone further than the German in Majors, but Wimbledon also happens to be the Major in which he reached the final round, having defeated none other than Roger in the semis after a five-set thriller.

Photo: Shaun Botterill – Getty Images Europe

The wounds of that semifinal must undoubtedly be fresh in Federer’s mind. This is the reason for which it is imperative that Raonic somehow “steals” the first set from Roger and makes the Swiss doubt himself again. But this is a different Federer than last year’s version. In 2016, Federer arrived to Wimbledon nursing an injury and questioning his chances of even getting to the finals. He had also been stopped by Novak Djokovic four times in two years, with the most brutal loss coming in the 2016 Australian Open (remember the first two sets?).

This year, Federer made a comeback to the top like no other man probably will for a foreseeable future, at the age of 35. He is full of confidence, injury-free, refreshed, and playing well. I expect him to get to the net a lot against Raonic (not as much if he faces Zverev) and challenge the Canadian’s passing shot skills, as well as backhand returns.

Djokovic will most likely be his opponent in the semis. Among the Big 4, Novak has had the least rocky path until now, and the case remains the same in the next round. If he were to lose to Adrian Mannarino, who has played 25 sets in two weeks, almost half of them in the 105-degrees-Fahrenheit-plus courts of Antalya, it would probably go down as a bigger upset than the loss he suffered against Sam Querrey last year. Then, in the quarters, he will face either Dominic Thiem or Tomas Berdych. That should be the first true test of his game at Wimbledon. Let’s move on and assume Novak makes it past that stage, since our topic is Roger’s path to the final.

Photo: Sahun Botterill – Getty Images Europe

I do not believe Djokovic poses as big a threat to Roger as he did during the 2014-16 period, not only because he is still a few steps away from that level of play, but also because Roger has improved in a couple of areas since then, such as returns and backhand-to-backhand cross-court rallies. The fact that Roger has not beaten him in a Major since in five years will work as a psychological factor in Novak’s favor, but that needs to be coupled with the type of confidence that the Serb can build only if his level of play skyrockets in the next two rounds. I am not talking about the type that you build by beating the likes of Adam Pavlasek, Ernests Gulbis and Mannarino either. Having a convenient draw can work in your favor, but can also work against you. Novak’s case is the latter here.

Few more things to keep in mind for Roger:

– He is slowly but surely fine-tuning his returns. They were worrisome in the first two rounds, but better against Mischa (see his first break early in the match). Nevertheless, there is more room for improvement. He will need his drive and spin returns against Rafa, and his slice and bunt returns against everyone else, to be at their best.

– The larger issue against Mischa was Roger’s success with passing shots. This is where stats can be deceiving. Passing shots missed, or returns missed against serve-and-volley players, count as forced errors, regardless of how easily makeable they may actually be. Thus, you see the number 9 (for the whole match) next to the unforced errors and 36 next to forced error categories in Roger’s stat box. He missed some passing shots yesterday that he should be able to make nine out of ten times in his sleep. There was a particular one in the first set where he literally had time to get set and unleash on either side, with Zverev standing at the net like a traffic officer with no other job but to direct cars to pass on either side of him. This will not be a big issue in the upcoming rounds, unless Roger faces Raonic in the quarters. Milos has one of the highest rates of success at the net and has integrated net play a while ago into his preferred game plan. His serve-and-volley success rate is also among the highest in the tournament, along with Federer and Muller. If Roger does not pass well, Milos may just find a way to get to the tiebreaker and steal a set or two from Roger (see above).

– Speaking of serve-and-volley success… Roger’s high-percentage rate in that category, 83%, must be an encouraging sign to his coaching team. This is central to Roger’s game plan because, during his service games, it keeps the element of surprise weighing heavily on the shoulders of his opponents. Furthermore, Roger’s body language gains a whole new level of positivity when he is cruising on his serve-and-volley points.

– Winning long points has remained a question mark at Wimbledon. In his first two rounds, he only played nine points that lasted above nine shots, and Roger won only three of those. These are not high-enough numbers to draw a sound conclusion, but once Roger possibly faces the likes of Sascha, Novak, and Rafa in the finals, it will be one of the most determining factors in the outcome. Don’t take my word for it. Revisit the Australian Open final.

– See my last note above, in the Rafa portion, with regard to the weather. This should also work in Novak’s favor were the two to meet in the semifinal round.

If I turn out right, we will watch yet another Roger vs. Rafa final on July 16th. If you are an avid fan of either of these two champions, take a few “chill pills,” relax and enjoy. If you are neither, and love tennis, grab your favorite cold or hot beverage, and enjoy the highest quality of men’s tennis possible our lovely sport has to offer.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – This week: live from Wimbledon

On Istanbul Open’s Attendance Woes

ATP 1 Comment

Two weeks of world-class tennis in Istanbul ended on Sunday, first the TEB BNP Paribas Istanbul CUP (WTA) on the last week of April, followed by the TEB BNP Paribas Istanbul Open (ATP) on the first week of May, both taking place at the Koza World of Sports facility in the Esenyurt neighborhood of the greater Istanbul area. I was not here for the Istanbul Cup due to my obligations in my “other” life, but I made it to my hometown on time to catch all the action during the Istanbul Open. Everything that follows, with regard to the attendance woes of the tournament, will be based on my observations during the Istanbul Open. I will add that many people that I know have told me that same type of issues also existed during the previous week, albeit not as blatantly, thanks to the success of two Turkish WTA players reaching the quarterfinals.

My friends, and those who follow me, know that I show great interest in the organizational structure and planning of tournaments, and talk about them often. It is what I plan to do in this article. Istanbul is my hometown, where I was born. I come from the tennis world of the city. I grew up as a tennis player in this same milieus. I want this tournament to succeed. I want the stands to fill up. So, I write a bit more passionately about it than I have for most other tournaments. It may seem like a long post, but there are a lot of pictures and embedded tweets used to clarify the talking points for you, the reader. Having said that, let’s move on to the topic at hand.

There are many contributing factors to the tournament drawing very little amount of on-site spectators. Furthermore, none of this is new. This problem existed in the tournament’s inaugural year 2015, brushed under the carpet thanks to the Roger Federer frenzy that carried the week, and it continued in 2016:

The attendance was a painful issue, once again this year, leading to some people commenting on it on social media. It just looks bad when the stands are empty, and I really mean empty, day after day, match after match.

It was only on the final Sunday, thanks to two top-10 players meeting for the title and the completely unexpected success of Tuna Altuna, a local player who generated much-needed energy by reaching the doubles’ final with his partner Alessandro Motti, that Koza WOS Arena filled up around little more than half-way, between 4500 and 5000 people.

I know 6,700 was the official number given but if you were there, you knew that was an inflated number, in the same way that some universities inflate their attendance numbers above the actual ones through various methods (attendance vs ticket sold vs turnstiles turned, etc) in the College Basketball world of the U.S.A. Yet, nobody who was there all week can deny that “little-more-than-half-full” was a beautiful sight compared to previous days. Here was the attendance on the Raonic vs. Tomic quarterfinal match, at 7 PM on Friday evening:


There is one major contributing factor to this problem, one for which there is no solution in the foreseeable future. The facility is simply too far away from the rest of Istanbul. The Ataturk airport is considered “away from the city center” by many life-long Istanbulites and the tournament site is a considerable distance past the airport. To give you an example, I drove every day from Camlica neighborhood, on the Asian side of Istanbul, but only a few minutes away from the Bosphorus Bridge (the oldest and the busiest of the three bridges that now cross the two continents). It took me anywhere from 1 hour, when I would drive past 10 PM, to over two hours during the day just to go one way! There are a ton of tennis fans living on the Asian side, much further from the bridge than I do, and it takes them longer just to reach the bridge, i.e. add roughly an hour to the trip. People living in the busy neighborhoods of Levent, Etiler, Nisantasi, Bebek, Istinye on the European side, probably spent roughly the same amount of time on the road going one way, meaning it could possibly be a three-to-four-hour affair to go back and forth to the tournament for most of those people. It is thus, a pain to get to the location, a major pain!

Yet, this problem is here to stay. The facility is owned by Garanti Koza, a successful land development company with far-reaching resources part of which they use generously, to their credit and they should be applauded for this, to help the development of Turkish tennis. Furthermore, the construction continues on site to transform it into a state-of-the-art, world-class sports facility. It’s their facility, their point-of-pride (understandably), the tournament is not moving anywhere else, thus the unsolvable problem of location. Istanbul’s infrastructure and the urban public transportation system are simply not there to ease the burden either.

There are, however, smaller issues that exacerbate the problem, ones that are indeed solvable. Let’s keep in mind the central issue: the lack of attendance. Thus, in order to at least ease the burden brought on by uncontrollable factors, one must do all else that remains within one’s power to counter the effect. For example, one can take measures to make the experience pleasant for those who do indeed decide to come, so that they will come back, and encourage others to do so. What should be the primary goal? To make every effort possible to let people know the different ways with which they can get to the site, inform them, do it frequently, do it visibly, and most importantly, do it clearly!

First, it starts with the official website, the number one source for the dissemination of information about the tournament. Let me first point out that the website is an improvement from two years ago, the last time I attended the tournament. It’s nicely designed and has both English and Turkish pages. However, once again, remembering the number one obstacle you are fighting, and the fact that anyone who decides to attend the tournament probably never heard of the site, should the instructions on how to get to the site not be the first thing that appears on it? You type in the web address to Istanbul Open’s homepage, and even if you make the browser full-page, you still don’t see it. You have to scroll down to get to the link that tells you how to get there. In other tournaments, this may be acceptable, but not when the location of your tournament is perennially the main reason why you can’t get people to come out. When I tweeted about the public transportation problem (by which I meant the city’s public transportation system), the tournament director Paul McNamee was quick to point out to me that my tweet was inaccurate, that there was transportation offered (again, my post was about public transportation system and the city’s infrastructure, not the tournament’s sponsor-arranged transportation specifically for the week, but ok..), and had his assistant’s*** phone opened up to the page on which it shows the transportation points, and had her show it to me. That link, more specifically, what it shows on that link, should be the glaring, unmistakable information staring at the person who just arrived to the home page. If not, at least a big bold link saying “Click here for Transportation schedule” should show up, and not be on the lower portion of the page with three other links of same size, where one must scroll down to see. Attendance and location are your main problems: then, make your instructions on how to get there easy-to-reach and visible.

***I will not go into the details of the short dialog that took place between her and I, but anyone involved in public relations of a tournament should have better communication and/or social skills, should definitely keep the second sentence that she said to himself/herself, if anything at all, certainly not say it to a media member (my badge clearly showed that I was), who could easily make a flashy heading for an article, if he/she had bad intentions or aspirations of high clicks or ratings, at the cost of making the tournament look bad (plenty of those around, believe me).

Second, announce relentlessly and continuously that a sponsor has arranged transportation to the tournament site from two key spots in Istanbul. People who use regular public transportation do not automatically become aware of this, because it is not part of the public transportation system. Don’t announce it on the tournament’s facebook page only once, on April 27th, before the Main Draw of the tournament even begins, and then never post it again! Don’t wait until Wednesday of the tournament to announce it for the first time, and the only time, on tournament’s Twitter page! Announce it on social media at least once or twice a day throughout the tournament. Tweet it, Facebook it, Instagram it, tell the broadcasting TV station to remind it to the viewers, every single day, every morning and evening, and get others to do it. Why? Because nobody knew until then about the arranged transportation for the tournament. Here is a great idea to remedy the problem, at least partially, and yet, it is not announced properly. When I was made aware of it, I asked as many people as I could, including people in the world of tennis in Turkey and regular attendees of the tournament, and not a single person said “yes I knew that they set up transportation for this week.” Nobody until that point (we had the conversation on Wednesday) mentioned it either when the lack of attendance was the topic of conversation because, again, they did not know. One facebook post on April 27th and one Tweet on May 3rd are not enough for a tournament taking place throughout the first week of May. When I found about it on Wednesday (May 3rd), I began tweeting about it, underlining it constantly on TV (I was doing daily commentary on the TV station broadcasting the tournament), turning to the camera and literally appealing to the people of Istanbul, to look at the website for the transportation schedule, every day. Yes, I received some feedback from regular listeners and followers saying “thanks” and that they did not know. Unfortunately, I was the only one relentlessly repeating it on either the social media and on TV for people to come and look to the website for transportation schedule. I did not see the same diligence from tournament organizers other than a tweet or two at the most for the rest of the tournament. Below is a tweet from a devoted tennis fan, who had discovered the arranged transportation on that Wednesday, informing other people on the exact location of the bus (translation: “by the Migros located under the stadium”). The website link simply says “by the stadium,” which happens to be Fenerbahce’s big home stadium (50,000+ capacity) and “by the stadium” could be anywhere around it. Good luck walking around that stadium to find the bus. Yes, specifics indeed matter. (Side note: This tennis passionate told me there were only 8 or 9 people in the bus)

Third, make the instructions on how to get there – let me put it in bold letters again – clear! Do not simply assume that everyone owns a GPS-abled phone. It is not enough to instruct those who depend on the directions from the website, to simply “take the Esenyurt Toll Booths exit to reach Garanti Koza Arena” (or the equivalent of on the Turkish version of the page). It is inaccurate, incomplete, misleading, and lazy. You can’t even see toll booths at the exit that you must take, nor does it say anywhere at the exit that there are toll booths. And once you miss the exit and keep going straight on that highway, you end up seeing the tolls on the right. By then, it’s too late, you can’t turn, and there you go swirling around in complicated traffic for another 15-to-20 minutes. If you did manage to take the exit, you don’t just “reach the Garanti Koza Arena.” There are few more turns and splits on the road. The sentence “take the Esenyurt Toll Booths exit to reach Garanti Koza Arena” is anything but accurate. Make the tournament site clear to those who drive up. Have big signs telling people where to turn, and have them at several points, all the way from the toll booths. Perhaps, it’s better to show in pictures:

1) Here is the first time you see the exit as you approach it. As you can see, there are no toll booths within sight, and not even the word “Esenyurt” in this first sign.

2) Then as the exit separates, there is a second sign with Esenyurt on it, but still no toll booths, nor can you see any in the distance. If you remain on the highway (left side) you are lost for 15-20 minutes.

3) If you made it to the toll booths, once you pass them, you come to another road split. It says to go right for “Esenyurt.” You must NOT! You need to stay on the left, which you would not know to do, especially that the site is announced as being located in “Esenyurt.” Now pay attention to the two small signs under the big Esenyurt traffic sign, to the left of the ambulance. The smaller of those signs, the lower one, tells you in small letters to go left for the Istanbul Cup and Istanbul Open. Unfortunately, they are impossible to see if you are driving as you can see from the image, unless you are right up close to them at which point you have already committed to the turn and cannot go back. Could these signs not have been larger? Or better yet, could this not have been explained on the directions rather than saying “take the Esenyurt Toll Booths exit to reach Garanti Koza Arena”?

4) You eventually notice the large Koza WOS Arena on the far right (if you have seen pictures of it), so you feel that you may be approaching. But right here, you must turn right and not go straight (and get lost for another 10-15 minutes), which you could easily do since the Arena straight up the road, on the right side. Again, that “invisible-from-your-car sign” tells you go right, if you can see it while you are driving while frantically trying to figure out where to go. I circled it in orange so you can see which sign I mean. The bigger letters at the bottom say “Parking” and the smaller letters at the top say the names of the tournament (shouldn’t at least that be reversed?). Good luck seeing that from inside your car, which is where I was, when I took this picture.

Fourth, and once and for all, please have a big banner, or some sort of a large sign showing anyone who drives up that there is actually an entrance to the ATP Tennis event taking place, “TEB BNP Paribas ISTANBUL OPEN.” This was the case in 2015, and two years later, there is still not a ‘visible-to-everyone sign’ indicating that you have actually arrived at the entrance of a world-class tennis event! I literally saw dozens of people asking others in buildings nearby where the tournament is, when they were but 50 meters away from the entrance, because they cannot see it. The site is continuously expanding, therefore, there is the constant noise and appearance of construction in the area. This is simply not a pretty sight when you first drive up. It was not in 2015, it is not now. But that is understandable since a world-class sports facility is under construction. However, it is no excuse to make the simple process of parking and finding the entrance to the tournament feel like yet another obstacle. Here are more pictures to clarify further:

1) Let’s pick up from the right turn in the last picture above. This is what you see once you have turned. Now the tournament’s entrance is about 60 meters to the left. Can you tell? Nor can anyone else unless they have already been there or unless they see a big sign of the tournament at the entrance. But, alas..

2) Here is the same street, driving from the other site. The tournament entrance is now to the right, between where the van and the two buses are parked. Again, can you tell? Nor can anyone else coming from this direction. Would a giant, high banner saying “Istanbul Open” help? You bet!

3) I will simply ask the question: Should the entrance to an ATP Event look like this? There are again, two of those small signs on each side, with the words “Turnuva Alani” (meaning “Tournament Area”) added. They are hard to see from your car anyway as you drive past them (and not easy to read unless you are up close to them), and then, they are blocked by people at times(because they are only at about hip-level), or by vehicles at others.

4) The next four pictures illustrate what you see once you walk past the above entrance. (a) You walk a straight path during which you see blue signs ahead saying the tournament’s name, so at least now you know you are headed in the right direction.

(b)You go up two escalators.

(c)Finally, at the top of the second escalator, you arrive to the security and ticket check.

(d) After you go past that, the outside courts are on your left and right, and the impressive Koza WOS Arena is staring at you straight ahead.

The outside area of the tournament is nothing exceptional, but the Koza WOS Arena itself is a wonderful show court to say the least. The players like it, the structure is stunning, and it has a retractable roof. Overall, the tournament is a definite improvement from its inaugural 2015 edition. Paul McNamee, whose tennis past should prove by itself that he is vastly qualified for such position, is obviously an excellent choice as the tournament director. The field of players was also great, featuring two top-10 players in the finals, which happened in only three other ATP 250 events in 2016 and 2017 so far. The players were thankful of how well they were taken care of during their stay. Credit goes to Paul and others who made it a pleasant experience for them.

Nevertheless, there is more to a tournament’s success than the players, and it needs to be a team effort. One person cannot do it all. In all fairness, I would speculate with a certain amount of comfort (for the record, I haven’t talked to him about all this specifically, not that I have not tried) that Paul probably faces the same daunting challenges that the previous two tournament directors faced: trying to make things work in a situation where many elements are out of your control, and sometimes, people to whom you delegate responsibilities do not exactly “get” what you expect them to do in the day-to-day operations.

One must, however, and again I keep coming back to the number one problem facing the tournament – the empty stands -, diligently attack the things that one can fix. Yet, some of the problems I foregrounded above have existed since the first year of the tournament. They are indeed fixable. Once you take care of these (solvable) problem, therefore negate some of the negative effects of the site’s geographical location (the unsolvable problem), and you manage to add a certain amount of a “pleasant” experience to the process of attending the tournament, people may come in larger numbers. It would certainly be worth the effort in order to make attendance numbers improve. But if people have to battle extra elements on top of simply driving/riding for a long time, just to get to the vicinity of the site, they are unlikely to come back, and highly unlikely to talk positively about it to their friends and acquaintances.

I remain hopeful for the years to come.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

Sunday at the US Open: Two Match Previews

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis 2 Comments

1) JO-WILFRIED TSONGA (9) vs. JACK SOCK (26)
Louis Armstrong Stadium, Day Session

I am not sure why I am picking this match for a preview, because it involves one of the more unpredictable players of modern times, the athletic, powerful, talented, yet erratic Frenchman Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, and Jack Sock, an American who certainly has his best chance at a deep run in a Major, but has, every now and then, produced lackluster performances when he found himself in such moments. I should even warn everyone (including myself) that I may be doing this for nothing, since both players have retired from matches in the past due to illness, fatigue, or injury. Unpredictability surrounds this encounter.

Nevertheless, I can comfortably say that Tsonga’s form should play a larger role in the match’s outcome than that of his opponent. On a good serving day, Jo has the ability to ace games away. Even on his second serve, he can bounce it high enough to set the winner on the next shot. Nonetheless, this is one of the unknowns. In the US Open so far, he has served a fair share of aces and won plenty of free points on his serves, but his first-serve percentage remained below 60%. Sock is not a great returner, so Jo may not necessarily need to excel in this category, but it would dramatically help his cause if he could serve at 60% or higher. He has been successful at the net, especially against Kevin Anderson in the third round, and I expect him to continue to approach the net whenever he gets a chance.

Photo: Andy Lyons, Getty Images
Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (Photo: Getty Images – Andy Lyons)

Unlike against Anderson, however, he will have the Louis Armstrong stadium crowd rooting for his opponent. The last thing Tsonga needs are rallies in which Sock uses his powerful forehand to push Tsonga around behind the baseline, and breaks the Frenchman’s fragile backhand down. Sock’s ground stroke velocity is considerably higher than Anderson’s and I do not believe it is in Jo’s best interest to turn the match into a “who-can-whack-harder-from-behind-the-baseline” battle. That pattern spells a straight-set victory for the American in my opinion, but it is up to Tsonga to avoid falling into that trap. With a variety of first serves, followed by forehand strikes or astutely placed backhand approach shots, Jo should put the pressure on Sock on the American’s service games. It will also diminish the importance of Jo’s backhand, and it’s a good thing for him, in the outcome of the match. In the worst case scenario, meaning extended rallies, Tsonga must keep the large majority of the balls away from Sock’s forehand, unless it is for the purpose of opening up the backhand corner. The American is more likely to produce a short ball from his backhand than from his unorthodox-yet-efficient forehand.

Sock is the lower-seeded player in this match, but I would not exactly call him an underdog in this setting. Most Frenchmen, Tsonga included, and often by their own admission, have never felt comfortable in the American continent, not to mention at the US Open. Furthermore, the pattern of success that American players have traditionally achieved when they are playing a tournament on their home turf is undeniable. Tsonga is not what you would call a “fierce competitor” either, and at times, he tends to lose his spirit on the court. I would therefore say that Sock’s chances of victory will greatly increase (more than it usually would against someone else) if he can pocket the first set. It would also behoove Jack to get the crowd involved quickly in the match and exchange positive vibes (and I say this, because Sock can sometimes do exactly the opposite) with the tennis fans present on the seats.

As I noted above, serves and forehands, or some variation of the “1-2 punch” as it’s sometimes called, will play a central role for Tsonga’s success. Yet, the same can also be said for Sock, because those are his biggest weapons too. The contrast is in the other areas of their game. Jack’s baseline game is superior to Tsonga’s, so he may not necessarily want to take risks and go for winners early (as opposed to Jo). The Frenchman’s volleying skills and athleticism make him a better net player than Sock. The difference is that Jo will need those skills to win, Jack may win without needing them.

Again, a lot of unknowns come into play in this match, but Tsonga is the player that will determine whether those unknowns will have an impact on the outcome or not. If he can execute the details listed above, I have no doubt that he will turn the tide in his favor and come out triumphant regardless of what Sock does, unless factors outside the court take over.

RAFAEL NADAL (4)vs. LUCAS POUILLE (24)
Arthur Ashe Stadium, last match Day Session

First, let me say this, in case my friends and my readers do not already know: I like Pouille. I have followed him since my years of living in France when he was a developing junior. His fundamentally sound technique had impressed me and I somehow knew he would steadily improve and reach the biggest stage. I first watched him live in 2009 when he was 15 years old, at a tournament in a small town just outside of Paris. He was the top player in France in his age group if I am not mistaken, and he lost to Tristan Lamasine, the current no. 222 in the ATP rankings, in three sets (the exact score and the name of the club escape me). Along with several other junior players, he remained on my radar. Once he grew older and began to climb up in the ATP rankings, I was not surprised. My only worry was that he would not physically develop as quickly as some other juniors. That did not turn out to be the case, as he has bulked up and improved his conditioning. In short, where his career stands right now was something that I frankly expected. In fact, I would be surprised if he does not continue his rise. He has a sound all-around game, the necessary on-court disposition, and the endurance needed to succeed in the Majors and other big tournament.

Considering that this is a preview of his match against Rafael Nadal on Sunday, at this point, you are probably expecting a “but” or a “having said that,” before I go on.

You won’t get it. That is because I do believe Pouille has a chance to defeat Nadal, although I am sure that he will enter the Arthur Ashe stadium as a heavy underdog. He will, however, walk in the largest tennis arena in the world with a lot of confidence thanks to a quarterfinal appearance in a Major (Wimbledon) and a terrific win on Friday against a solid Roberto Bautista-Agut, as well as a sense of belonging. He also possesses the mental poise to avoid intimidation, cyclical ups-and-downs triggered by frustration or extreme enthusiasm.

His main problem will be the same one that all players encounter when they face Rafa. The Spaniard will hit the ball a bit harder and with a bit more spin than any other solid baseline player on the tour. Lucas, for his part, will have to deal with a lot of pressure on his weaker backhand side. To make matters worse, the cross-court forehand is Rafa’s most natural shot, and calling Roger Federer for advice will not help Pouille on this particular detail. There is nevertheless a path to victory for Pouille in this match.

Photo: Getty Images - Mike Hewitt
Rafael Nadal (Photo: Getty Images – Mike Hewitt)

For starters, he will need to overcome the same challenge that his compatriot Tsonga faces, as noted above, but with more urgency. Oui! He will need a much higher first-serve percentage than what he has shown in his previous three matches – %43 vs Kukushkin, %57 vs Chiudinelli, %56 vs Bautista-Agut. Pouille’s game plan will need to build on his attacking game, especially on his ability to accelerate the ball with his forehand, and for that to happen, he will need a large bucket of first serves to set the pattern up. A percentage closer to 70 would be just what the doctor ordered for Pouille, but it may be too much to ask from someone who has not gone above 60% in the tournament. He will, in addition, need to adopt the same plan that he executed so well against Bautista-Agut: he must stay aggressive from the baseline but not go for straight winners too early, and unleash his forehand when he does get a ball on which he can step inside the baseline. If not a winner, he still has the volleying skills to get it done at the net, assuming he comes in on well-constructed opportunities. Beyond that, a little help from Nadal would help the young Frenchman. It is not impossible (like it used to be in the past) because Rafa has had off-days as late as this year. Remember, Rafa is not the pre-2014 version where his standard rarely dipped below of greatness whenever he stepped on the court. Yes, I agree that it sounds like I am listing a string of “ifs” for Pouille to succeed, but none of it remains beyond of the realm of possibility. Although, he has played 14 sets in his first three matches, I don’t believe fatigue will be an issue for Pouille (probably my most daring assumption).

In any case, it would be the greatest victory in Pouille’s career to date if he were to take out one of the greatest players of all times who is also one of the very few favorites to win the US Open. All the rising youngsters aiming to join the ATP’s elite level need a milestone victory to get on the path to establish themselves as potential candidates. Players such as Kei Nishikori and Milos Raonic have penetrated that realm with a win or two and are paving the way. If he were to rise to the occasion, tomorrow’s match would be that type of win for Pouille.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

Today in Cincinnati, Reilly Opelka Was a Giant

ATP Tactical Analysis No Comments

Reilly Opelka is a big guy at 6’11, but that is not what the title of this article foregrounds. Today, in the Western & Southern Open in Cincinnati, the 2015 Wimbledon Boys’ champion passed a remarkable test against Jérémy Chardy, an established top-50 player who has reached 4th round or better at all the 4 Majors throughout his career. For the 18-year-old Opelka who has recorded his first ATP-Tour win earlier this month in Atlanta, today’s 3-6 7-5 7-6(9) win over the Frenchman was the confirmation that he is, at this point, a considerable opponent at any stage of an ATP event. It’s true that earlier this month, he did beat the 28th-ranked Kevin Anderson – who is still recovering from injury and struggling to find his best form – and the 53rd-ranked Donald Young in Atlanta before losing to John Isner in three sets in the semifinals. That being said, today’s win proved that the Atlanta run was not an isolated performance and that the American will quickly improve on his current ranking of 364 from this point forward.

When today’s match started and Chardy broke Opelka’s serve immediately in the second game of the match, it looked like the American Wild Card recipient would gain some valuable experience but not much more. While Opelka is already known for his big serve, it was Chardy’s serve that stole the show as the Frenchman served 22 aces and 3 double faults to Opelka’s 18 and 9 respectively. Opelka also served at 56% first serves while Chardy did so at 64%. What most tennis fans did not expect was how Opelka rose to the challenge in other parts of the game.

Opelka served big
Opelka served big
But Chardy served bigger!
But Chardy served bigger!

Opelka steadied the ship after the early break and never lost his serve during the rest of the match. But it was impossible to break Chardy’s serve. The Frenchman, time after time, served aces and kept Opelka off balance with strong serves into the body including the one he hit (photo below) to win the first set 6-3.

Opelka jammed forehand

But Opelka was now also winning his service games without much difficulty. The only other break of the match came when the rain interrupted the 6-5 game in the second set when Chardy was about to serve at 30-30. That delay lasted less than an hour and the players came back on the court, but during the warm-up, the weather forecast apparently signaled lightning and the referee made the following rare announcement: “Ladies and gentlemen, we have a big lightning coming this way, we are sending the players back to the locker room.” The so-called “lightning delay” lasted over an hour. The skies turned into a nasty, gray-blue toned color, and a period of heavy rain followed.

"Lightning delay"
“Lightning delay”

During this time, Opelka had a Chobani yoghurt as he waited in the dining room. I don’t know what Chardy did but the delay certainly did not work in his favor. As is often the case when a match gets interrupted at such crucial moments, when the players come back to the court, it is possible that one or both players may not have the intensity or the concentration with which they left the court at a moment like 6-5 30-30. Chardy was the victim this time. What looked like a typical “tiebreaker set” before the weather delay finished in about a minute when Opelka quickly won the first two points and recorded his only break of the match to win the second set 7-5.

Players coming back after the delay
Players coming back after the delay

In the third set, the domination of the servers continued and the second set pattern repeated itself, this time without a delay to throw off either player. In the deciding tiebreaker, Opelka excelled in his decision-making and showed the poise of a player far beyond his years. The match was decided on the tiniest of details. Opelka was willing to take chances and develop patterns to put pressure on Chardy while the Frenchman hesitated on a couple of important points.

The tiebreaker, as it happened

Opelka started the tiebreaker with a successful serve-and-volley point to win the first point. After Chardy hit his signature forehand winner on a short return by Opelka, the American made the first minibreak on a strong return when Chardy hit a kick second serve to his backhand. In the next point, Opelka approached Chardy’s backhand on the first short-ball opportunity, causing the Frenchman to net the passing-shot attempt. Opelka was now up 3-1, but he missed an open-court backhand to record his first big error in the tiebreaker. Another powerful serve by Chardy equalized the score at 3-3 and the players changed ends. In the next point, Chardy had another shot at a forehand winner when he moved into the court on a short ball by Opelka. However, the Frenchman hesitated and instead of going for the usual winner, he simply hit it deep to Opelka’s backhand and allowed him to stay in the point. He paid the price for his reluctance as Opelka slowly gained control of the rally and finished it with a winner of his own. The youngster was up again, holding a minibreak at 4-3. He made his second (and last) unforced error of the tiebreaker when he netted a forehand. The players were back on serve at 4-4.

In the next point, Opelka attacked Chardy’s backhand for the second time in the tiebreaker and Chardy once again missed the passing shot in the net. The Frenchman was down 4-5 but would win the next two points with an ace and a string of dominating forehands to earn his first match point. At 6-5 up, when Chardy hit a powerful return on Opelka’s serve (which is not an easy thing to do) it looked like he would shortly shake hands and go to the locker room as the winner. Yet, Opelka produced a sizzling down-the-line winner off that return with his supposedly weaker backhand side and the players changed sides again at 6-6. Opelka served and volleyed again, this time on his second serve and won the point the classic way, with a winning volley. Now the American held his first match point at 7-6. Chardy was not yet done as he produced two big serves that earned one return mistake and another short return by Opelka, allowing Chardy to hit the winner on the next shot. The Frenchman was up 8-7 with his second match point in hand. Opelka once again rose to the occasion, sticking to the successful pattern that was emerging in the late stages of the match. He served and volleyed yet one more time, this time winning the point on a high forehand volley and saving the match point. At 8-8, Opelka, recognizing that bravery was the path to the win, approached Chardy’s backhand for the third time forcing him to miss the passing shot in the net, again. Chardy saved the second match point against him when he hit a kick serve to Opelka’s backhand and the big American missed the return long. The players changed sides for the third time at 9-9.

In this intense back-and-forth battle, it was the more experienced player that blinked first in the “extended” stages of the tiebreaker. On the 9-9 point, Chardy got another short ball in the middle of the court on his forehand. Usually considered Chardy’s “money shot,” the short forehand sitter let him down a second time in the tiebreaker (first one at 3-3, see above), this time resulting in a direct error in the net. Opelka held his third match point at 10-9, on his serve. As the saying goes, you stick with what got you there. Opelka had been successful serving and volleying or approaching the net to Chardy’s backhand. Sure enough, he did the latter as soon as the opportunity presented itself in the rally. This time, Chardy did hit the passing shot down-the-line over the net, but the tall American was able to reach it and place the cross-court forehand volley to the open court for a winner, ending the tiebreaker with an 11-9 win. He turned to his corner and screamed with joy. His sense of accomplishment was obvious in his face, and Chardy was disappointed as he added to his struggling year another unexpected loss.

Chardy's favorite position on the court
Chardy’s favorite position on the court

Opelka manifested the qualities that competitive players possess during crunch time. He was able to recognize the winning patterns, dare to take chances to put them into action, and execute without fear, realizing that there would always be a chance that it may blow up in his face. He did it whether he was down or up a match point. The bottom line remained that he knew he needed to take those risks, in the form of serving and volleying or approaching to Chardy’s backhand. It was a remarkable display of high-IQ for a player who was performing in the main draw of an ATP-1000 event for the first time in his nascent professional career. It was his opponent, with 11 years of pro experience, who got hesitant with his most powerful weapon while the American became a giant with his decision-making. I am also a fan of Chardy and I believe his career is very underrated, but there is no denying that the 18-year-old stole the show today and made an Opelka fan out of me.

Opelka winsOpelka will take on the 7th-seeded Jo-Wilfried Tsonga next.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

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

MENU

Navigation