Category: ATP

Nishikori Advances, as His Nemesis Looms Large

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 1: McDonald vs Rublev (first rd)

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

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

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

US Open, Men’s Semis: Del Potro and Djokovic Stand Firm

Friday’s men’s semifinal matches did not provide the thrill that many were hoping for but at the end of the day, Juan Martin del Potro and Novak Djokovic advanced to Sunday’s final probably because they managed in the best possible way the physical challenges presented to them throughout the two weeks. What that means is open to interpretation and enough has been written about those challenges throughout the tournament. Rehashing them falls beyond the scope of this piece which includes on a round-up of the two matches played on Friday, as well as an early look ahead to Sunday.

Rafa never had a chance, or did he?

Rafael Nadal and Juan Martin del Potro were the first ones to step inside Arthur Ashe stadium. They had a memorable quarterfinal encounter at Wimbledon, one of the best matches of 2018 so far. Del Potro came into this match serving extremely well and spent around three and a half hours less time on the court on his way to the semifinals than Nadal did on his. Nadal took four hours and 49 minutes to overcome Dominic Thiem in a terrific quarterfinal match that went to a fifth-set tiebreaker and featured grueling baseline rallies, while Del Potro eliminated John Isner in three hours and 31 minutes earlier on that same day, in a match dominated by short rallies and big serves. In a tournament marked by retirements and physical ailments, it did not come as a surprise that one area of concern was whether or not Nadal could continue to put forth the best version of himself for one more match, if not two.

We did not have to wait long for the answer. It became clear to the naked eye, by the early moments of the second set, that Rafa’s knee was not going to allow him to finish the match. He confirmed that much himself when he was down 1-4 in the second set during an argument with the umpire, telling him that he is “gonna retire anyway.” He did four games later, when Del Potro won the second set 6-2 to take a two-set lead.

Photo: Julian Finney – Getty Images North America

That should not take away any credit from Del Potro who showed the resolve to get past a great deal of dismay stemming from a significant collapse when he served for the first set at 5-4. At 40-30, on his first set point, he sailed a backhand cross-court winner attempt wide. It was on a short sitter hit by Nadal and Del Potro should not have missed it since he got to strike the backhand from about a meter behind the service line.

He earned a second set point after drilling a backhand down-the-line winner at deuce. He hit a big serve to set it up perfectly for his classic 1-2 punch execution. Rafa returned the ball short and high, allowing Del Potro to move inside the baseline for his trademark forehand bazooka winner. He dumped it into the net! In the ensuing deuce point, he missed a similar forehand, long this time, giving Nadal a break-point opportunity. Juan Martin completed the collapse when he landed another backhand sitter into the net to lose his serve.

His body language appeared deflated when he lost the next game in four relatively quick points and went down 5-6. Things appeared to go from bad to worse when he began that game with a first serve that he thought landed out, and stopped playing. Rafa’s return went in and he was awarded the point. Juan Martin challenged his own service call, a rare occurrence, hoping that it was out. The replay confirmed that it caught the line and he was down 0-15. At that point, Del Potro had lost eight points in a row, going from a set point up to being down 5-6, 0-15, in a string of points lost in the most deflating ways possible. He managed to get to 30-30, largely thanks to a couple of solid first serves.

Now, it was Nadal’s turn to squander a golden opportunity. With the momentum completely on his side and his opponent in a mentally fragile state, he had a look at a second serve on the 30-30 point. He hit a superb return to the baseline that forced Del Potro into responding with a defensive backhand while leaning on his backfoot. It landed short and Rafa had a perfectly aligned forehand inside the baseline and in the middle of the court. He had a choice of either corner for the routine forehand winner or even a drop shot since Del Potro was three meters behind the baseline. Rafa has hit thousands of winners from that position routinely, in practice or in matches.

Yet, he hit a fair-paced topspin approach shot that bounced a bit past the service line, one that was not even placed to the corner. Furthermore, he chose to hit it to Del Potro’s forehand side.

The Argentine took two quick steps to his right and struck a forehand down-the-line passing shot that landed on the line. Rafa should have been up a set point, but instead, found himself down 40-30. He then committed a backhand unforced error which brought forth the tiebreaker.

That represented the last key moment of the match as Del Potro, with renewed energy, raised his level to win the tiebreaker. From that point forward until Rafa’s retirement at the end of the second set, the Argentine’s level never dropped. He only committed three unforced errors during that part, whereas he committed 15 of them prior to the tiebreaker. Nadal’s movement appeared visibly diminished from the early portion of the second set forward. Frankly, I was surprised that he even waited until the end of the set to retire.

While Del Potro would have certainly preferred to earn the victory with a full-length match and was concerned for Rafa’s health, I have little doubt that he is delighted deep inside to get past Nadal in two sets and in barely over two hours. After all, he will undoubtedly need every ounce of energy in his tank for a chance to beat an in-form Novak Djokovic and lift the trophy on Sunday.

Novak is unstoppable, or is he?

Well, the answer to the above subtitle is a lot less ambiguous than the answer to the previous one. He certainly appears unstoppable. Djokovic is playing stellar tennis, moving faster, rallying more consistently, hitting deeper, and without a doubt, returning better than anyone. It’s true that Nishikori’s forehand did not get off the gates as quickly as the rest of his game did when the match began, thus facilitating the early-lead jump start by Novak. Yes, it’s also true that Kei missed some makeable returns here and there that could have given him a chance to sink his teeth into the second set. Then what? Would it have made a difference?

Even if Kei’s forehands were on fire, can anyone comfortably say that it would have been enough for him to mount a lead against this version of Novak? Could he have strung together three such sets to score the upset? It would push the boundaries of plausibility to expect Nishikori to perform at that level for three sets. For about three and a half games early in the second set he did, and that still included a game (first of the second) in which he had to bust his rear end for thirteen minutes and save four break points, just to hold serve.

Photo: Julian Finney – Getty Images North America

You want to see how fast Novak was moving? Watch the 15-15 point at 1-1 in the second set for one example among many.

You want to see how many outrageous shots Kei had to produce at times to win a point? See the first point of the 3-2 game in the second set as one example.

You want to see how well Novak returned? Watch just about any of Kei’s service games, including the ones where he produced some first serves on the line. Djokovic would just lunge and send back a deep rocket-shot, forcing Nishikori to take steps back instead of setting up the 1-2-punch combination that he loves. And heavens forbid if Kei missed a first serve. Novak would then move into the court and launch his attack immediately.

In any case, on Friday night, there was no uncertainty as to who the better player on the court was for two hours and 22 minutes. Djokovic secured a 6-3 6-4 6-2 victory and reached his eighth US Open final, tying the record held by Ivan Lendl and Pete Sampras.

Photo: Sarah Stier – Getty Images North America

Looking ahead to Sunday

On paper, this is an appetizing menu for tennis fans.

On the one hand, a beloved player, who overcame multiple injuries and extended lay-offs from the sport, will make his first reappearance in the final of a Major in nine years, on the same venue where he won his only Major title in 2009. On the other hand, you have one of the best players in the history of our game, a phenomenal athlete who recently recovered himself from a grave injury and rediscovered his form so quickly that he is now in a position – or, even favored – to win his second Major title in a row, his fourteenth overall.

By Sunday afternoon, both players should feel fresh and ready to click on all cylinders. The weather will be a relevant factor in that a chance of rain may force the roof to be closed. As to whom that benefits, I am ready to be convinced by anyone who can provide a valid argument for one player or the other.

Otherwise, I can only confirm a couple of things per player. Del Potro must keep his first-serve percentage high to collect free points, as he has done all tournament (except on Friday against Nadal). He must also find a way to deal with Novak’s depth on ground strokes because he cannot be the one scrambling and defending in extended baseline rallies.

Djokovic, for his part, must continue to return explosively as he has all tournament because Del Potro frequently relies on the 1-2 punch following first serves. Let’s not forget that, as well as he may have returned so far, Novak has yet to face a power server of Del Potro’s caliber in the tournament. He must also keep Juan Martin on the move because the big Argentine’s striking power is in direct correlation with how well he sets up his lower body. The classic triangle-rally is also an option for Novak who can, if he chooses to use it, exclusively work Del Potro’s backhand side until he gets a short ball, at which point he can pick his target and end the point with a winner.

Until Sunday…

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Navigation