Category: Tactical Analysis

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

Roland Garros 2017 Women’s Final Preview

Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

Simona Halep (3) vs Jelena Ostapenko

Stop the press! There will be a new Major title holder after tomorrow. It will either be the no. 4 player in the world Simona Halep who has chased a Major title for a while now and received a lot of (unfair) criticism for not having won one, or the no. 47 Jelena Ostapenko who was probably unknown to the large majority of casual tennis fans prior to this Roland Garros. One thing that even the most die-hard tennis followers would have never guessed two weeks ago is that these two players would face each other in the final in Paris. For my part, I cannot wait to see this exciting match that pits one of the hardest-hitting players in women’s tennis – one that produces an astonishing amount of winners (245 so far in 6 matches) – against one of the fastest and most consistent ones. The two players’ strengths provide a compelling contrast in style, one that usually results in entertaining, high-quality encounters.

Ostapenko already faced some remarkable baseliners and came out on top each time. Her last two victories came against Caroline Wozniacki and Timea Bacsinszky who both have excellent clay-court skills and play essentially from the baseline, although somewhat different in the type of shots that they produce. Wozniacki banks on her footwork, consistency, and depth. She accelerates the pace only when strategically needed (ask Svetlana Kuznetsova about that). Bacsinzky has a lot more variety on her ground-strokes and prefers to step in the court to hit aggresively at times, and control the rallies. Ostapenko topped both of them in two high-quality three-setters. She will have to beat another baseliner, at least just as solid as those two, in order to lift her first trophy in professional women’s tennis – she has yet to record a WTA title in her young career. Halep’s game stands somewhere between Wozniacki’s and Bacsinzky’s in that, while her A-game is based on her solid groundstrokes and footwork, she varies the speed and the angle of her shots more than the Caroline, yet uses less variety of spins and specialty shots than Timea. Halep also has a first-rate down-the-line backhand that she uses abundantly.

Photo: Jimmie48Photography

The big challenge for Simona centers on her ability to anticipate Ostapenko’s shots early, in order to make the Latvian hit that extra ball or two that may result in errors. However, what Ostapenko does to her opponents can negate that. She begins to nail so many winners that her opponent feels pressured into hitting a few of their own rather than guiding the extra deep shot back. Then, they gradually get sucked into the type of high-velocity game that favors Ostapenko. It happened to Wozniacki and Bacsinszky more than once during their respective matches. If an individual knew neither the history of these two players nor their past performances, and just watched them throughout this tournament without knowing their identity, I believe he or she would pick Ostapenko to defeat Halep. That is how impressive Ostapenko has played.

Yet, there is always the other side of the coin, the side that heavily favors Halep. She is an evolved player, mentally and physically, whose next step into the world of elite cannot be, at this point, anything other than adding a Major title to the list of her accomplishments. She said in her press conference today that this final feels much different (read that as “more serene”) than the 2014 final in which she felt an air of chaos around her with “50 friends and family” around her. It was her first time in the final of a Major. This year, she is just surrounded by her team and you get the sense, from listening to her talk about it, that she feels more tuned in. You can only imagine that coming back from 3-6 1-5 down against Elina Svitolina must have been only increased her desire to win the title.

For Ostapenko, this is all new territory, and it is a big deal! Even the President of Latvia called her to congratulate her on reaching the finals. Everything will be different tomorrow for her, from the moment she steps into the grounds, to warming up for her match, to walking out to the court. Yes, Ostapenko is fearless. Yes, she can whack the ball for a winner, even under pressure. However, the realization of playing on the Philippe Chatrier court with your first Major title on the line carries an inescapable weight, and any player claiming not to get overwhelmed by that, not even a bit, is simply lying or in denial. Do not be surprised if Ostapenko has a shaky start to the match.

Photo: Jimmie48Photography

Unforced errors for Halep, and return efficiency for Ostapenko will be the key stats to look for during the early games. Halep probably understands that she will see several winners go by her. She also knows that she can limit the damage to only spectacular winners by Jelena, by landing a large percentage of first serves in, and trusting her footwork to get back as many shots back in play as possible. Halep should look to add spice to her second serve at the cost of making a few more double faults, because there is nothing that her opponent enjoys, and builds confidence upon, more than hitting return winners. I believe Halep will win her first Major title on Saturday. As for Ostapenko, it will be the first giant step for toward winning her first in the future. I am looking for a straight-set victory, with a close finish at the end. Simona has wonderful strategists in her team, and possesses the high-IQ needed to implement the game plan that they concoct together.

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

Thursday at Roland Garros: Preview of Timea Bacsinszky (30) vs. Jelena Ostapenko

Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

The reason why you don’t see a number in parenthesis next to Ostapenko’s name in the above title is because she is the only unseeded player left in the draw since the quarterfinals. The 47th-ranked player in the world has been the biggest revelation of this year’s Roland Garros, defeating the Olympic champion Monica Puig in straight sets, the 23rd-seed Samantha Stosur in three sets in the round of 16, and Caroline Wozniacki in the quarterfinals, also in three sets. The Latvian is also the last teenager to reach the semifinal in Paris since 2007, although her teenage years will come to an end tomorrow as she will face Timea Bacsinszky who will also be celebrating her birthday – what are the odds, right?

Jelena Ostapenko – Photo: Jimmie48Photography

Ostapenko is a powerful hitter, very powerful. She wins most of her points with direct winners, striking the ball at warp speed. She does it from the very beginning of the point, with either a high-velocity first serve or a speedy return that overwhelms the server. This is a big reason why she leads the tournament in break-points-won category with 31. Her opponent Bacsinszky is close behind her with 29. It is highly unlikely that Ostapenko will play any differently against Bacsinszky than she does against others. She does one thing, and she does that very well. This is not to say that she has not developed any other shots. For example, she can once in a while stick in a wicked drop shot, or a sharp angle. But at this point in her development, she rarely uses specialty shots, rather choosing to produce powerful shots during the large majority of rallies.

Timea Bacsinszky, on the other hand, as I wrote in my preview of her previous match, can vary the effects on the ball as well as any other player. Unlike other players that Ostapenko has faced, she is highly unlikely to give Ostapenko the same look over an extended rally (and against Ostapenko a six-shot rally may be considered an extended one). Look for the Swiss to mix in slices, high and loopy spin balls, as well as occasional accelerations to keep her opponent off rythm during rallies. Timea also has great footwork and anticipation which means the young Latvian will likely be forced into hitting a shot or two more to put the ball away than she has had to do so against her previous opponents.

Timea Bacsinszky – Photo: Jimmie48photography

Finally, there is the experience factor. Bacsinszky has been to the quarterfinal stage three times now, and this is her second semifinals in the last three years. She also has four WTA titles in her career. Ostapenko, in contrast, has done neither. I believe Bacsinszky will seize the opportunity and reach her first Major final on her birthday. I look for a fairly contested straight-set victory or a three-set victory with a strong finish by Timea, in which the unforced error count for Jelena grows quicker as the match progresses.

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

Tuesday at Roland Garros: Selected Match Previews

Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

In this post, I take a look at two quarterfinal matches that will take place on Tuesday, the women’s match that pits the French player Kristina “Kiki” Mladenovic against the Swiss player Timea Bacsinszky, and the men’s match that opposes the defending champion Novak Djokovic to Dominic Thiem, one of the leading members of the ATP’s “next generation.”

Mladenovic (13) vs Bacsinszky (30)

This is a very intriguing match-up not only tactically but also because of the inspiring runs of both players. Kiki, who feeds off the French crowd better than any other French woman (Gaël Monfils would be the one among the French men), has so far recorded three marathon victories against Jennifer Brady
Shelby Rogers and the defending champion Garbine Muguruza, and a straight-set one against Sara Errani, who is a respectable opponent on clay at any moment in her career. Kiki is enjoying, in 2017, the best campaign of her tennis career, moving up to number 7 in the Porsche Race Singles ranking that determines who qualifies for the year-ending WTA Championships. In short, she is on fire this year, and in this tournament.

Jimmie48Photography

She faces Timea Bacsinszky, one of the most versatile players on the WTA Tour. Kiki has faced her twice in the last 12 months, winning once on grass courts, losing the other one on hard. I do not believe that says much (not that I am a big believer of previous head-to-head matches having a big impact on the current match anyway), considering this will be their first encounter on clay courts. Timea defeated Venus Williams in the last round, taking the last two sets comfortably despite the disappointment of losing the first set from 5-1 up, and leaving no Americans in the women’s draw for the second week (none left in men either). Timea is one of the more mature players on the tour, with a life experience that goes beyond the tennis courts. She does not easily gets distracted by the crowd and I am sure she is expecting nothing less than the same type of arduous support from the French spectators for her opponent that the latter received during the third sets of her Brady, Rogers, and Muguruza wins. Especially against Rogers, down 2-5 in the final set, one could almost sense the positive energy from the crowd flowing in Kiki’s direction. Rogers felt it too (and believe me, Rogers is a cool customer in the body-language and mental discipline departments), losing eleven out twelve points in the three-game stretch that brought Kiki back to 5-5. I do not believe I would be exaggerating if I claimed that Mladenovic would not have made it this far had the tournament taken place elsewhere than at Roland Garros.

The key questions here are, can Kiki bring the match to a point in which the crowd can become a factor, and if she does, will Timea manage to mentally block the crowd out? My answer to the first question: yes, Kiki can. My answer to the second: yes, Timea definitely will!

First of all, the Swiss player is fairly well liked by the Roland Garros crowd, and I believe there will be a small group of Timea supporters who will also make their voices heard. I also do not expect any player, let alone Kiki, to sustain the level of play that she has demonstrated over a two-week period, going through one extended (and exhausting) match after another. They take a lot out of your reserves not only physically, but also mentally. I look for Kiki’s game to become a bit more erratic, even with a vociferous crowd pumping her up, if the match goes beyond 5-5 in the final set. Timea will not lose her cool and execute her game plan regardless of the score or tension.

Jimmie48Photography

In terms of tactics, I expect Timea to use all the shots available in her arsenal, without getting into predictable rally patterns that could allow Kiki to accelerate and take charge. I believe the Swiss will use her slice generously on both sides – yes, she also possesses a formidable forehand slice that she occasionally uses –, yet step into the court whenever she can to push Kiki around the baseline, and often use her drop shots when Kiki finds herself backed up (or backing up, expecting an aggressive hit from her opponent).

Kiki, for her part, will need a lot of forehand winners, which she can produce when needed, but more importantly, will have to set up the point so that she can get those types of opportunities. Couple of ways to do that: get a lot of first serves in and take risks on returns when the opponent serves a second serve. I really believe Kiki’s chances of winning decrease drastically if Timea wins the first set, much more so than Timea’s chances of winning the match if Kiki were to win the first set. Timea’s ability to adjust her game and apply a different make-up to her shots is much more developed than that of Kiki’s. The French’s options diminish if she cannot impose her baseline game on her opponent. I am going with a 2-set Bacsinszky win here, one set being very tight, the other one being less contested.

Djokovic (2) vs Thiem (6)

In 2016, when these two players met in the semifinal here in Paris, Thiem was having the best year of his career that saw him enter the top 10 for the first time, and Novak Djokovic was in the process of joining the ranks of the elite in the history of our sport by dominating the tour. He would eventually go on to take the title at Roland Garros, thus winning all four Majors consecutively and accomplishing the “Novak Slam”. In their particular match that afternoon, Novak routed Dominic in three sets.

One year later, Thiem is once again having a career year. Novak, however, is not last year’s version of himself by any stretch of the imagination. I don’t expect this match to be one-sided, in fact, I would guess that it will go to the distance (and hopefully) go down as one of the best matches of the tournament. It has the ingredients to be one.

Julian Finney – Getty Images

Djokovic finally gave signs (just signs) of his old self in the post-1st-set portion of his match against Albert Ramos-Vinolas and sporadically in his earlier matches. However, none of those players are Thiem’s level, and furthermore, none of them had the amount of belief that they could win like the Austrian will, when he steps on the court tomorrow. He has now spent a full year at the top-10 level and has recorded some terrific wins, notably the one against Rafael Nadal in Rome, the only clay-court loss for the Spaniard this year.

I know people will point to Thiem’s 0-5 record vs Djokovic this year, including the lop-sided loss in the finals of the Rome tournament. I am just not sure how much that will matter to Dominic when he steps on the court tomorrow to play a five-set match in the quarterfinals of a Major. First of all, that is no longer undiscovered territory for him. Second, he is taking on a player who may still harbor many doubts in his mind about his game. This also an opportunity of a lifetime for the Austrian. He would have to defeat Djokovic and Nadal, and win one more match, to claim his first Major title. It would be nothing short of a miracle, but if it were to happen, it would once and for all enter him into the elite of today’s game in a matter of five days.

Novak, even at “less-than-his-top” level is still one of the world’s few greatest players. He will still not give away gifts and remain solid from the baseline. Thiem will have to create chances from the backcourt and he is capable of doing that. The problem for him, is that balls will come back a few more times in each rally against Djokovic than they may have done so against lesser players. One key for this match-up: patience. Will Thiem be patient enough to build points up and win them instead of trying to nail spectacular shots for at least three sets? Will Novak be patient enough to endure a possible assault from Thiem for a set or so, knowing that he will prevail if he remains resolved and continues his machine-like consistency?

Clive Brunskill – Getty Images

Another key: serve and return performances. Considering that these two players lead the stats in the return categories at the French Open so far, which one will take bigger cuts on second-serve returns? Can someone like Thiem, who is prone to double faulting at times, be shaken by Nole’s aggressive returns? These are some of the tactical challenges waiting for Thiem and Djokovic.

Then, there is the physical side. Djokovic has the edge here if the match transforms into a long, grueling five-set affair. By Djokovic “having the edge here,” I mean he is “less likely” to suffer fatigue or cramps in an extended match than his opponent. Eventually, that could be the difference in this match. I am picking Nole to record a five-set victory. I think Thiem will have to wait one more year (and probably no longer) to join the ranks of the elite players, barring injuries.

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

Sunday at Roland Garros: Selected 4th-Round Previews

Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

I will attempt to post a preview or two of matches each day, time permitting, for the rest of Roland Garros 2017 on MT-Desk. Here are two previews of fourth-round matches, one from the women’s draw and one from the men’s, both scheduled to be played on Sunday.

Svetlana Kuznetsova (8) vs Caroline Wozniacki (11)

This will be a shorter preview than the men’s match below, simply because there are less unknowns here. Wozniacki’s game is one of the most predictable ones in the women’s game. She will attempt to out-rally and out-endure her opponents until the Sahara Desert freezes over. Her plan A (is there a plan B?) will not change much whether she is playing a touch player, a hard-hitter, a big server, or anyone’s grand-parent.

Kuznetsova’s game is also fairly well-known to every tennis fan. She more one-dimensional than not only Wozniacki but many other WTA players. I do not believe anyone will argue that Sveta has more experience in the Majors, a more complete all-around game, more weapons, and more creativity than Wozniacki. She is also prone to rare concentration lapses, sometimes occurring at important segments in the match. She has been known to blow leads, or play excellent until she has three set points, only to lose them with unexpected errors. This is one area where you can trust Caro more than Sveta. Wozniacki’s level is unlikely to fluctuate throughout the match. Barring that from happening, I believe Sveta should come out on top of this encounter.

Photo: Jimmie48Photography

The first three or four games will play a key role in this match. If Kuznetsova establishes her game from the beginning, pushes Caro around from the baseline, later adds her touch with drop shots and angles, and complements all that with the type of patterns that she likes to set up (consisting of moving into the court with forehands only to finish the point either with a direct winner or a high volley) she could turn the match into a routine two-set win because Wozniacki’s game does not contain anything that can answer the all-around assault of which Kuznetsova is capable. If the reverse were to take place, in other words, if Sveta’s game is not clicking on all cylinders, she becomes error-prone, and Wozniacki gets ahead on sheer consistency, the Russian should still be able to use other options to turn the match around.

Look for aggressive returns from Sveta, along with varying pace and unpredictable patterns in long rallies. I would guess that Sveta will not hit more than two balls to the same side of Caro, unless it is with the intention of surprising her opponent and putting her on the back foot. Also look for the Russian to use plenty of semi-aggressive forehands from the baseline or behind, to set up the winning forehand (or swing-volley) from inside the baseline. Wozniacki will need to rely on her footwork and keeping the cross-court angles wide enough so Sveta cannot get set in the middle of the court and take control.

First-serve percentage plays a more paramount role for Wozniacki than her opponent. Kuznetsova still has the arsenal for shot production once she engages in the rally. But if Wozniacki does not wish to allow Sveta to use that arsenal at will from the first shot of the rally, she will need to get in a lot of first serves. I see Kuznetsova winning this match in two sets, one comfortable, one tightly contested.

Photo: Jimmie48Photography

Milos Raonic (5) vs Pablo Carreno-Busta (20)

This is a tough pick due to two specific reasons: it is 2017 and the match will be played on red clay. Let me elaborate further, first starting with the surface. On hard courts, and especially on grass, I would pick Raonic without much hesitation, especially if he is physically fit. But on clay, which also happens to be Carreno Busta’s favorite surface, I think twice. Raonic, for his part, has not left any doubt in anyone’s mind that clay is his least favorite surface. Most tennis fans would have guessed that anyway, but no need to even make an educated guess, Milos will personally confirm that to anyone’s face if he is asked directly the question. During Istanbul Open, he gave one-word answer, specifically “no,” anytime he was asked if he liked playing on clay, if he felt comfortable on it, or if he would have expected to make the finals on a clay-court ATP tournament (which he did in Istanbul).

One cannot ignore either the kind of year that Carreno Busta is enjoying. Having the best year of his career, at least so far, the Spaniard lifted the trophy on the clay courts of Estoril and, as of three weeks ago, climbed to his career-high ranking of 18 (currently at no. 21).

Thus my mention of the surface and the year as two reasons that make the outcome hard to predict. Yet, tactically, the players’ plans should be fairly straight forward. Raonic will look to attack, Carreno Busta will look to resist and count on consistency. More on that later.

When one scratches below the surface, however, there are minor details that tilt this match, in my opinion, in Raonic’s favor. Let’s dig deeper by beginning this with the surface from the Canadian’s perspective and finishing with Carreno Busta’s 2017 campaign.

Raonic is a top-10 player who has reached multiple second weeks in Majors (going far in a few, remember Wimbledon last year?) and the round of 16s in last year’s French Open. Furthermore, he reached quarterfinals or better in every clay-court tournament leading up to the French Open, including the final in Istanbul, except in Madrid where he lost to a superb David Goffin in the round of 16. While the red dirt may not be his favorite surface, his only losses on it have come against Marin Cilic, David Goffin, Alexander Zverev and Thomas Berdych, all finalists or winners in those tournaments.

AP Photo – Christophe Ena

Carreno Busta, while having racked up a lot of wins this year on clay, has not beaten a player of the caliber of Raonic in any tournament. Nevertheless, he has some very respectable wins by any player’s standards. Defeating Pablo Cuevas (also lost to him once), Fabio Fognini, Gilles Simon and David Ferrer (even their 2017 versions), all on clay, should all be considered solid victories. Yet, Raonic also has a legitimate chance to defeat those players on a given day, even on clay.

One other factor that should be always mentioned when talking about the Canadian: he is physically fine, and as many know by now, that is nothing less than wonderful news for any Milos fan.

Then, and finally, there is the tactical side. Raonic will probably face from Carreno Busta the type of baseline-rally patterns and the amount of topspin that he has seen on numerous occasions against other previous clay-court players. Plus, as Milos himself pointed out yesterday, Carreno Busta is not as much a “clay-court specialist” as some of the other Spanish or South Americans, although he accepts that it is Pablo’s best surface. From Carreno Busta’s perspective, in contrast, chances are he has played very few opponents that can get him ready for Raonic. He will have to confront one of the biggest and most efficient servers on the ATP Tour, with a terrific one-two punch, and the type of game that will not allow Pablo to operate on his well-established patterns to set the points up in his favor. He will probably feel a bit hurried at times and take more risks on his second serves, aware of Raonic’s urge to take charge early in the rally and cut the point short. On the positive side, he will also get a few more “gift” points from Milos than he may receive from a baseline-oriented player.

Getty Images / Dennis Grombkowski

It will be up to the Spaniard to counteract his opponent. I do not believe Carreno Busta can do that for three sets. I am going with Milos in this match, in a tight four-set affair or a five-set marathon, assuming (and it is an important assumption) that he does not get physically get hurt or diminished through the course of the match.

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

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

MENU

Navigation