Category: Majors

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, Match Preview: Magdalena Rybarikova vs Garbine Muguruza (14)

Majors Tactical Analysis WTA No Comments

Among the four semifinalists in the Wimbledon women’s draw, there is one unseeded player and the other three are all seeded outside the top five. With Serena Williams out, Angelique Kerber still trying to find her top form, Victoria Azarenka and Petra Kvitova making their comebacks, it was no secret that the women’s draw in Wimbledon presented an opportunity for some players to advance into the second week, and possibly have a breakthrough. However, only a handful of people would have picked Magdalena Rybarikova, who has never reached the second week of a Major in her 12-year-long career, to be that player in the semifinals.

The 87th-ranked Slovakian did not have a very convenient draw either. Among her victims were the third-seeded Karolyna Pliskova in the second round, the athletic Croatian Petra Martic in the fourth, and the hard-hitting, 24th-seeded American Coco Vandeweghe in the quarters. It was anything but a cakewalk for a player who had spent the larger part of last year recovering from two surgeries, one on her knee and the other on her wrist. She started her comeback in February, having dropped to no. 453 in the WTA rankings. It is nothing less than impressive that she even amassed enough points in such a short time and made the main draw of Wimbledon, let alone advance to the semifinal round.

Photo: Shaun Botterill – Getty Images Europe

Rybarikova was able to do it, thanks to a crafty style of play, with plenty of variety that can at times leave her opponents bewildered. It is the type of game that can throw heavy-hitters like Pliskova and Vandeweghe out of their rhythm and frustrated. She can vary her ground strokes through a multitude of spins (such as high and loopy at times, flat drives at others, with the occasional low-bouncing slice mixed in) and give a different look to the returner through changes in placement and speed on her serves. For example, she has the ability to slice the serve and make it curve further once the ball hits the ground as well as any other players that utilizes that type of serve, such as Lucie Safarova.

Her opponent Garbine Muguruza is another heavy-hitting star. This is partially the reason for which a match that shows her as the clear favorite to win, at least on paper, could quickly turn into a nightmare for the 14th-seeded Spaniard if she does not take the necessary precautions. After all, Muguruza will hit the ball aggressively from the baseline but not more than Pliskova does, and will serve big, but not bigger than Vandeweghe does, and we saw how that all worked out for Karolyna and Coco when they faced Magda. Muguruza will also need to strike a lot of balls from the knee level or below, not exactly her preferred height for ball contact.

The good news for Garbine fans is that their favorite player is more athletic than any of Rybarikova’s previous opponents (except Martic) and she seems to have caught fire as the rounds progressed. She played a terrific match against Svetlana Kuznetsova, never allowing her to get set and gain any control of the rallies. She was even able to hit spectacular counter-punch shots from defensive positions in the court, even when she found herself chasing balls down. She can move side to side, and explode forward, a lot better than most of her colleagues. It means that against Rybarikova’s low-paced shots, she will likely have her chance to frequently get in position, in order to unleash her powerful baseline strokes.

Photo: Shaun Botterill – Getty Images Europe

The outcome of this match will for the most part depend on two things. First, in terms of on-court tactics, the way both players handle the first shots in the rallies – meaning the returns, first-serves and their percentages, accuracy of the second shot the 1-2 punch pattern – will largely determine the outcome of the points. Garbine’s success rate in these will prove central to her game plan. The last thing she wants is to allow Rybarikova to park herself in the middle area of the court, switch her “slice-dice-direct” mode in active mode, and make Muguruza guess the next shot instead of the other way round. Second, in terms of inner game, the way Rybarikova handles being in the semis of a Major for the first time in her career, against a player appreciated by the Wimbledon crowd, will make the difference in the first 20 minutes of the match. Luckily, it is not her first outing on Centre Court where she already defeated Pliskova and finished her match against Vandeweghe.

I do not consider Muguruza a heavy favorite in this match, as most people do. In fact, I believe Rybarikova, with a solid start in the first couple of games, has a legitimate chance to derail Garbine. I am intrigued!

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

Tactical Analysis: Ana Konjuh def. Irina Begu, 2nd Round Wimbledon 2017

Majors Tactical Analysis WTA No Comments

It is an old cliché in tennis to speak of the importance of first-serve percentage, yet every once in a while, there will come along a match where players will depend on it so much that not only can you not avoid discussing it, but you feel compelled to use that particular match to rehash its importance. Such was the match pitting the 29th-ranked Croatian Ana Konjuh against the 64th-ranked Romanian Irina-Camelia Begu.

Let’s begin by numbers alone. Begu won 80% of her first-serve points, but only 29% of her second-serve ones. For Konjuh, the discrepancy between the two numbers was not that large. She won 66% of her points when she put her first serves in versus 53% when she had to settle for a second serve. However, when you look beyond the sheer numbers, it is not hard to see that Konjuh needed first serves just as badly as her opponent did. In fact, I will go a step further and say that, in a match where she served only 58% first serves and gifted 8 double faults to her opponent, the timing of her first serves played a central role in the outcome of the match.

For starters, this match did not feature any long rallies, not that anyone expected it. Konjuh hits the ball hard, very hard. Her baseline shots are rarely intended for merely extending the rally. She will occasionally produce a drop shot to surprise her opponent or sparingly attempt an off-speed slice if extended on her backhand side. Otherwise, her game is driven by power, with her backhand being flatter than her forehand. If you have weathered the storm of a few shots by Konjuh in a rally, there is a good chance that the next ball will either be a winner or an error, with the ball traveling at warp speed 9 in either case. Begu, for her part, is craftier. She can vary her spin, change pace, or generate power if necessary. Both players’ have solid first serves that can produce aces or at least set them up for the second shot.

From the first few minutes, the strategies of both players became fairly clear. Konjuh would seek to mostly go for winners and overwhelm Begu with her power. Knowing that, Begu would look to take charge as early as possible in the point (read that “on the serve or return”) and keep Konjuh in the unfamiliar position of chasing balls and defending. Begu has big backswings, especially on the forehand, so if Konjuh managed to unleash a few shots in a row in, she would eventually pressure Begu into an error.

Begu put herself in a position to take the first set, more than once. In the always-crucial seventh game, Konjuh had to first save two break points (the second one at 30-40 with an exquisite backhand drop shot). At deuce, we witnessed one of the rare long points of the set. At one point in the rally, Konjuh approached and had Begu fully stretched to her forehand. Irina came up with one of the best defensive and high lobs of the day, pushing Konjuh back behind the baseline to reset the rally, and eventually win the point on a forced backhand error by her. In the ensuing break point, Begu produced a mid-pace, floating slice out of nowhere, throwing Konjuh off, and earning a forehand error from the Croatian, one that bounced off the tape and went wide. I know this went down in the stats as an unforced error, but I bet that earning an error from her opponent by feeding her the type of pace and spin that she had not yet seen so far in the match, was precisely what Begu had in mind when she sliced that backhand. Chalk one up for the high-IQ decision by Irina, even if the stats will just remember it as an unforced error by Ana.

Irina Begu — Photo: Shaun Botterill/Getty Images Europe

Begu eventually served for the set at 5-4. Unfortunately for her, she played her poorest serving game of the set. She began the game with two forehand unforced errors and followed them up with a double fault to find herself down 0-40. Two points later, Konjuh equalized at 5-5. Begu once again had an opportunity to take a commanding lead. She went up 0-40 on Konjuh’s serve game, and should have completed the break in four points had it not been for the unexpected forehand error on a shot that she would probably make 8 out 10 times. Subsequently, Konjuh tallied 5 points in a row to force the set into a tiebreaker, in which she took the early lead and never looked back (7-3).

Thus, the first set ended 7-6 in favor of Konjuh, and Begu was probably left feeling that she should have pocketed it 15 minutes earlier. In fact, I would argue that winning the first set, after playing “survival” during most of it, ultimately played the most important role in Konjuh’s three-set victory. The next two sets were more clear-cut in that each player outperformed the other once and split the last two sets.

Now, would be good time to get back to what I underlined in the beginning of my analysis. At that 5-5 game, in which Konjuh went down 0-40, only to come back and hold, she missed her first serve in the first four points of the game. That is when she went down 0-40, and only won the fourth point thanks to the above-mentioned unexpected unforced error from Begu. However, after 15-40, Konjuh made all her first serves. Those four points finished in an ace, a service winner, a forehand winner set up by a big first serve, and a forced return error by Begu. Those four first serves came at a point in the match where she desperately needed them. The same can be said for the 3-5 game, in which Konjuh got 4 out of 5 first serves in and held easier than in any other serving game in the set.

When the match resumed in the second set, Begu broke Konjuh’s serve on the fifth game. Konjuh started that game, when Konjuh started it with a double fault and lost the other two points in which she had to resort to second serve. This is also when Ana’s forehand began to falter. Other than the double fault, she also committed two unforced forehand errors. She would add two more forehand unforced errors in the next game, one more in the 8th game, and throw in a double fault to end the set.

There was going to be a final set.

It was clear that if Konjuh was to defeat her opponent, she needed to cut down the number of double faults and unforced errors, especially on her forehand, and be able to count on her first serves when it mattered.

Ana Konjuh — Photo: Shaun Botterill/Getty Images Europe

Whatever momentum the Croatian garnered when she hit a stunning sharp-cross-court forehand winner to break her opponent’s serve in the opening game of the final set, was negated when Begu produced her best return game of the match in the second game. Two games later at 2-2, things got further complicated for Konjuh when her forehand faltered again when she was leading 15-30 on Begu’s serve. Later in that game, Begu served two clutch aces, both wide on the deuce side, at 30-30 and deuce, that helped her propel to a 3-2 lead in.

Nobody could have guessed it at that moment, but that would be the last game that Begu would win for the rest of the match.

At 3-3 and 30-15 up, she threw in an untimely double fault (one of her two in the set). She would miss her first serve three more times in a row. On one of those, at deuce, Konjuh unleashed a big return on a second serve that forced Begu to miss her backhand. One point later, Konjuh was up 4-3 serving. In that game, she would win 4 out of the 5 points that she started with her first serve, two being aces, helping her to build a 5-3 lead. Konjuh would break Begu one more time to end the match 7-6 2-6 6-3.

In the last 4 games, Konjuh only made two unforced errors and one double fault, consistent with her match-long trend of cutting down on her unforced errors – 19 in the first set, 14 in the second, and 10 in the third. There were three keys to the final set, which I have mentioned above, and Konjuh managed to get them done. She cut down on her double faults (only one in the final set), she cut down her overall number of unforced errors (particularly in the last four games), and she put her first serves in when she needed them.

In the next round, Ana Konjuh will seek to reach the 4th round of a Major for the first time in her career by taking on the 8th seed Dominika Cibulkova.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – Next 2 weeks: live from Wimbledon

A Unique Culture: the Queue at Wimbledon

Majors 2 Comments

Note: This is the expanded (and in English) version of my post-2016-Wimbledon article published in Tenis Dunyasi magazine, one year ago.

It is common knowledge that Wimbledon values traditions and hangs on to them. After all, players are still required to wear white outfits and it was not until 1986 that they changed from white tennis balls to yellow ones, many years after the rest of the tennis arena did.

Then, there is the Queue. A singular experience at Wimbledon, a tradition that has existed for over a century. The name is self-explanatory; you get in the queue and you buy tickets. It is nevertheless unique in that Wimbledon is the only Major that still continues the practice of making tickets available for the public to purchase, on the day of competition. The more you dig down to the details of how the Queue’s mechanisms work, the more fascinating it becomes. It is not just any queue. It is a camp site. It is a social club. It is an over-night (or over-more-than-one-night) stay. It is a thrill. It is a place of joy, if you get the ticket of your choice, or of pain, if you do not. Yes, you read it right; getting in the Queue and waiting for days do not always guarantee you entry.

Here is how it works: there are 500 tickets put aside for Centre Court and Court 1. If you don’t get one of these, you have to settle for a Grounds Pass. Thus, camping out in the Queue for a day or two, before the day of your choice, pays off if you adamantly want a Centre Court or a Court 1 ticket. The Queue begins at a park adjacent to the Wimbledon grounds. You first get a “Queue Card” with a designated number. The card holders set up their tent and equipment to settle in the designated area. Depending on the number on their first card, they receive a second card (in exchange for the first one) 24 hours before the day for which they requested the ticket.

The number of the second card matters, a lot! If you want to guarantee having a Centre Court ticket, that number needs to be 500 or below. You may still get into the Centre Court if it is numbered below 500, but that depends on how many people before you request a Court no.1 ticket instead of a Centre Court one. For example if your card’s number is 650 and you want a Centre Court ticket, you need at least 150 people before you to choose Court no.1 (or other courts) over Centre Court, thus the importance of which (favorite) player is scheduled on what court. If your card is among the first 1000, you are guaranteed to enter either Centre COurt or Court no.1. You get it? If you do not, you can delve into the 26-page brochure that is distributed to the Queue’s denizens at their arrival.

After spending the night in your tent, you pick them up in the morning, leave them at the designed deposit area, and stewards (more on “stewards” little later) show you the way to the actual waiting line of the Queue. When your turn comes up, you get the entry wrist band and you enter Wimbledon grounds with your ticket. This is the moment of victory, of exhilaration, one where you reap the benefits of long hours of wait.

For all the reasons I mentioned above, and more, you can hear the most gripping tales from the people coming from all corners of the world in order to experience of the Queue culture. In fact, the four remarkable individuals with whom I talked come from different continents. Before I go into their stories, let me point out one thing; the Queue is dominated by Roger Federer fans! Before I ventured there, I was expecting plenty of Andy Murray fans, and some fans of other male and female players. Yet, outside of a few exceptions, an overwhelming majority donned Nike clothing with something about Roger on them, or a “RF” hat, or had some sort of Swiss paraphernalia.

Jen and Gloria

Jen from Brisbane, Australia, and Gloria, originally from Hong Kong (now calls Sydney her home), have also traveled to London with the intention of cheering for Federer. It is, in a way, thanks to Federer that they met two years earlier at the Brisbane ATP tournament, during a dinner organized by Tennis Australia with the Swiss in attendance, as well as Patrick Rafter and Rod Laver. During the auction part of the dinner, Gloria won the right to flip the coin on the court before Roger’s first match. Jen, for her part, got a photo op with him and the chance to watch one of his private practice sessions.

Jen and Gloria have been friends ever since that week: “You know, the thing is that Roger attracts different people from different backgrounds. We would have never met if it weren’t for our admiration of Roger” says Gloria.

Jen smiles and remembers more details: “Gloria and I were both at the dinner and seated at the same table. During the dinner, there was an auction. One of the auction items was a chance for four people to attend one of his practice sessions for an hour and a half at Brisbane International, and also for someone to do the coin toss for his first match. Gloria and another girl beat us for that auction [both laughing hard].”

“It was expensive!!” adds Gloria.

Jen agrees [more laughter]: “Yeah it went ridiculously expensive. There was another auction for a photo with him on that night. I was inspired by Gloria’s winning of the previous bid, so I bid on that one and won [laughs]. So, we became friends there with Gloria. We all attended the practice together.”

The planning for Wimbledon and the Queue began before they even departed: “I had to work all the way to Friday and I boarded the 9 PM flight on that evening. The draw came out when I was at the airport. We were texting, trying to organize when we would start the Queue. We were arguing [both laugh hard]. I was saying ‘you have got to give me some sleep, surely! 24 hours on a plane, you know?’ So finally, I arrived here around lunch time on Saturday.”

Gloria came to London before Jen: “I arrived one day earlier, on Friday, to get used to the environment. It’s my first time to come to Wimbledon and unlike Jen, I never lived in London. So I walked around to get familiar with everything. I went to see where the Queue started. On Saturday, I saw the first ones to get in the Queue around noon. It was amazing. I quickly texted Jen and said [using a scared tone] ‘Someone is already in the Queue!’”

Once both in London, their schedule – time of arrival to the park, when to enter the Queue, the type of ticket requested – revolved around the Swiss legend’s matches.

Jen continues: “When I arrived, we went out to Southfields for an early dinner, but we did not neglect to check the Queue before going. There were about 50 tents pitched, and we thought we would be okay. So, we decided to come back to our BnB. We organized with our friends that we would get up early and come back to the Queue about 4 AM early on Sunday morning. Then, we thought ‘Let’s cheat and get up earlier!’ [laughter]. So we had breakfast in the dark around 2 AM, and we arrived to the Queue at 3:30. We waited. At 8 AM, they opened up the gates and usher you in. There are two parks with a golf course in between. The actual Queue is where you come through the gate and through the field, where they put you in rows where you see all the other tents. So, we put down our tents.”

To be clear, Jen and Gloria are doing this early Sunday morning, for the right to gain entry to the grounds on Monday. I should also point out that Gloria bought her tent in London, but Jen brought hers from Australia and had to confirm it, with a giggle I might add, once she saw the shocked expression on my face: “Yes, they are the pop-up kind, really flimsy. A sleeping bag too, you name it.”

Around 3 PM in the afternoon, they receive their Queue cards and see that they are numbered within the first 500. First part mission is accomplished! The true moment of triumph will come they actually enter Wimbledon with their centre-court wristbands the next morning. Having received their Queue cards, they must for now await patiently in their tent from Sunday afternoon to Monday morning.

“Yes! In the tent, all day and all night” confirms Jen. “They wake you up about 5 AM so you can start disassembling the tents. Then, they have a left-luggage area that opens around 5:30. You leave all your camping gear there. They keep your tents, all packed up, until you come back. Once you do that, you get back in the same line where you had your tents.”

Gloria: “We wait on the pitch until about 7 AM. We form a line. Then, they start walking us out.

Jen: “They take us through the Golf Course, we pass through a garden pass. There are some sponsors as you walk along, some entertainment. At the end of that path, you go through security. Then they hand out the wrist bands for the court that you want. They open the gates at about 9:45 and we enter the food village area.”

When I ask if that is a similar feeling to a victory for them, they smile big and answer in unison “Yes!”

Yet, there is still more to this tale after they watch Roger win his first-round match: “We went straight back to the Queue for Wednesday tickets because that is when he would play his next round” says Jen.

“Yes, we want to make sure, we are in the first 500 for Wednesday!” adds Gloria.

Jen: “Roger finished late, around 9 PM on Monday. It was getting dark, we were starving, and it was raining! We were in the third row of tents. We received our Tuesday card on that evening. My number was 772 [which included people wanting to go in on Tuesday]. We put up the tents again. Essentially, when they wake everybody up on Tuesday morning, they tell you to drag your tent over to the side without dismantling it, if you choose not to move in the Queue with the Tuesday crowd.”

When the Tuesday crowd moved out and the cards for Wednesday’s entry were passed around to replace the Tuesday cards, Jen’s new card number was 80.

Gloria was in a similar situation. Mission accomplished, again! Thus continued the tale of Gloria and Jen, not without hardships, mind you? The weather was miserable for a few days and their tents leaked, so they had to buy new ones! The last time I talked to these two wonderful women, it had been 11 days since they began the daily Queue routine.

Edgard

Jen’s “neighbor” in the tent area was a young Brazilian named Edgard. Aspiring to be a lawyer, Edgard had traveled around the world and participated in charitable and humane causes. He had recently gone to Syria to better understand the Syrian refugee crisis. He also had an on-going dream; to see Federer play live. In order to truly understand what an emotional roller-coaster he went through, until Wimbledon and during his time in the Queue, to realize his dream, it is best to show you my question-and-answer session with him, unedited (and if you could have only been there and see him say it with his better-than-average English authenticated with a strong Brazilian/Portuguese accent, priceless!).

Edgard: “I was in Syria helping with the refuge crisis for weeks. After that, before I go back to Brazil, I wanted to give myself a gift. That gift was to realize my dream of watching Roger Federer play. I went directly to Madrid, he pulled out. I said ‘Come on Roger, I came here just to watch you, I don’t have anything to do in Madrid!’ Then I came to Roland Garros, just to watch Roger because I am not sure if he is coming to Olympics. I arrive to Paris, he pulls out! Again! And I was like… man… what about my gift? I was doing talks about the refuge crisis in universities. I was postponing my departure to Brazil to see if I could see Federer.

My last job ended on July 1st at a university in Portugal. So I thought ‘okay I am just two hours from here to London’ but I heard that it was impossible to watch a match at Wimbledon, especially Roger on Centre Court. This was my hugest dream ever, to watch Federer on Centre Court. Everybody in Brazil knows that I am a Federer fan, because I have a huge flag in Brazil, half Brazilian, half Swiss flag. So when I landed here, I came directly from Gatwick Airport to here. Because somebody told me ‘Go Edgard, go there, you can make it!’ I don’t have a place to stay, I didn’t book anything. I arrived here on Saturday morning and I started camping. They began to distribute the Queue card. My number was 503!! When they gave me that card, it killed all my expectations; I thought I couldn’t make it. I started to cry when I saw the number.

But people kept encouraging me saying ‘No Edgar, you can make it, just wait.’ I was sweating, waiting to see if I could make it. During those two days, there was a tournament on a mini court, and I played. People thought I had the same style as Federer, I am a huge fan of him, so they began calling me “Fedgard” and cheering me up, because I was number 503 and they could see that I was desperate. It was the worst two days of my life waiting to see if I could get in. They scheduled Federer and Murray on Centre Court for Monday and I told people that I am more nervous in this Queue than crossing the check points in Syria, seriously!

So, when the stewards began coming with the wrist bands, I asked her ‘am I in?’ She told me ‘I really don’t know.’ And I felt like a heart attack. I lost my mind. Why did I have 503?

Finally, it turned out that I made it by 10 people, I was the 490th person! 13 people chose something other than Centre Court. When the steward came again to me and gave me the good news, I just put one knee down and looked up, seriously. They even took a picture and put it on their Facebook. It’s a dream come true! It’s the biggest dream ever!!! They put me on Centre Court, and I was.. wow! When they showed me the seating to ask where I wanted to sit, they showed me two sections that were closest to the court and asked me to choose (sections 102 or 103). I looked and said ‘Wait, you are joking?’ She said ‘No, no, it’s correct, choose one.’ I said ‘Come on, it’s a mistake, wait!’ The lady said ‘No, no, but hurry, look the line is waiting.’ I was shocked! I got on my knees again. Yes! Again! It was unbelievable.. Unbelievable! I am going to watch Federer at Wimbledon? Seriously, really? I mean, Federer was 5 meters from me! Impossible! Everybody was cheering me up. It was amazing, amazing! After I received the wrist band, I really broke down, because I was exhausted, it was a huge dream. So I got to see him yesterday. I never thought I would get to watch Roger in Wimbledon, on Centre Court!”

Me: So you are going to see him again tomorrow, right? I see that you are in the Queue one more time.

“Yes, I am giving myself a second gift [laughs]. But let me tell you why I had the number 503 in the beginning. I was told to ask for the stewards’ help when I arrived to Wimbledon. You know, I have an accent when I speak English and I don’t speak very good, so when I arrived, I told someone who looked like he was working at Wimbledon for the steward. They understood it as the name “Stewart” and began asking each other who “Stewart” was. One of them used his walkie-talkie to radio others, asking who this “Stewart” was. Nobody could locate this “Stewart” of course. I didn’t realize what was happening because I don’t know the word “steward.” Finally, one of them said ‘do you mean steward? Like one of us’ and she said the last part of “steward” making a big “O” with her lips and not saying the “T.” She then showed her vest with the word “Steward” on it. So I understood where the communication went wrong. But I lost a good 10 minutes during that misunderstanding, waiting for them to find “Stewart.” That is why I got the number 503! Imagine if I didn’t get in because of that!”

Susie

So has the Queue experience always been like this? Or how was the process to enter the grounds before the Queue ever came around? For information on that, I turned to Susie, a self-described “London born and bred” woman who has “played and loved tennis” all her life. She is extremely friendly and does not mind sharing her memories at Wimbledon, and more importantly, she has some fascinating ones to share. She has been attending Wimbledon since 1972. Stan Smith’s 5-set victory over Ilie Nastase in the men’s final was the first match she had ever seen live.

“I was very, very young” she adds, laughing.

“Since then, I followed Connors for years, then Edberg, then Federer! In the 70s and 80s, we used to sleep on the street outside Gate 13. We had no tents. We had make-shift shelters, rain or shine. Remember, they used to have a standing-room only stands on the Centre Court in the front. So when they would open the gates, we would literally charge in [hands waving forward], because we wanted to get to that standing room in the front. I mean, people would lose their flip-flops and shoes. Then, they would pack you in, a bit like in some football stadiums. If you were at the front, you were kind of pressed against the barrier, but you know, I saw up close some of the great finals during those days. I saw Connors, McEnroe, Borg, doubles teams like Gottfried and Ramirez and all the great matches involving all those champions.

In the later years, obviously from a health and safety point of view, they got rid of the free standing and they structured the Queue, but the charm of those days was absolutely fantastic. Sometimes, after we got in, we would go to the old court 1. There was an alley where the court covers sat. In those days, security was not as hot and I used to sneak in with other schoolgirls. We could smile nicely to people and they would let us sit at the top of the stairs or spare seats. Now, of course, that charm is gone, and it’s more disciplined.”

I do not have much to add to what Jen, Gloria, Edgard, and Susie say, but I can comfortably say that one must see the Queue first-hand and talk to the people there to even begin to fathom what they experience. Even then, it would be impossible to truly understand the experience. I could literally sense the enthusiasm of the Queue denizens, and their excitement, when I talk to them. I used to believe that they were going through great pains just to get into Wimbledon. Now, I see it differently. It is a unique place where you meet people and make new memories about which you can talk to your family and friends when you get back home and to your children in the future. So my advice to people who are curious about the Queue and don’t mind a bit of adventure: do not hesitate to join the Queue culture, get your equipment, and begin planning your trip to your next Wimbledon.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – Next 2 weeks: live from Wimbledon

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

MENU

Navigation