Category: WTA

Safarova’s Game: Perfect Fit for Williams

Majors Tactical Analysis WTA 4 Comments

Coming into today’s final match, the head-to-head record between Serena Williams and Lucie Safarova was 8-0 in the American’s favor, for a very good reason. Williams is very good at forcing her opponents into a defensive position and demand that they produce a high-level, counterpunch-style tennis. Lo and behold, that happens to be exactly what carries Safarova through most of her wins: the ability to set her feet, shift the shoulders forward to produce some penetrating winners from both sides. Let’s simplify the equation: what Serena does very well, single-handedly negates Lucie’s biggest weapon and ruins the core of the Czech’s plan A.

If you have access to the replay of the match, and you want to see the type of damage that Safarova can inflict on her opponents when she gets her feet set, watch the two points from 30-0 to 30-30 at 4-2 in the first set. Another good example is the first point of the 3-1 game in which Lucie struck three good shots in a row, pushed Serena around, and finally won the point. Now, if you want a great contrast to that last example, watch the following point at 15-0. In that long point, Lucie stays in control for several shots but can’t put it away; then Serena counterpunches with her forehand hard to the cross-court corner and puts Lucie on the run. Next (and yes, you guessed it), Lucie misses the very first shot (a backhand) that she has to hit on the stretch from the outside the boundaries of the singles lines. A second example of the same contrast happened also at 5-5 and 15-0 in the second set, with Safarova serving. During the majority of that long point, the ball traveled back and forth at high speed, yet remained mostly within the singles line, which allowed Lucie to hang tough. However, as soon as Serena hit a hard, sharp cross-court shot and pushed Safarova out to the doubles alley, the Czech had to stretch and float the shot back, which then allowed Serena to hit the winner to the open court.

These are only a couple of examples of why Serena had more trouble against Victoria Azarenka, Sloane Stephens, and Timea Bacsinszky. They could counterpunch Serena’s power with accuracy and speed when they were put on the run. Serena still ended up winning because she has superior skills and, this next one is ex-cathedra, she can raise her game when needed. Azarenka can power back Serena’s shot and surprise her, Stephens and Bacsinsky can hit backhands and forehands on the stretch, generating power with the flick of their wrists (especially Bacsinszky on the backhand side). Safarova, on the other hand, is not the speediest player moving side-to-side, which is an oddity considering how exceptional her movement is around the ball, in place, using quick and small steps (reminds me of Andre Agassi).

You are probably saying to yourself “Wait, did you watch the match? Lucie went three sets too!” My response to you would be, don’t let the second set fool you. This match was never out of Serena’s control. Safarova got back in the set only because Williams began to commit double faults and few untimely errors out of nowhere. It also helped Safarova that throughout the comeback in the second set, from 1-4 down to winning the tiebreaker, the Chatrier crowd got behind her (they chanted her name in two different versions: “Lucie” the French version, “Lu-zi-yé” the Czech version!)

Yet, the main plot remained untouched. When Safarova served her only double fault of the match at 2-1, and 30-40, and lost the early break, one could sense that it was the beginning of the end for the Czech. It was confirmed the next time Serena had a break point, two games later, up 3-2. The players engaged in a rally, and the original pattern ensued, with Serena collecting a mistake from Safarova the first time she pushed her to the outside of the court.

There are three types of matches that end lopsided. First case is when both players play the same style, and one does everything a little better than the other (Nadal-Ferrer on clay comes to mind). Second case is when one player’s weakness plays into the strength of the other, or vice-versa. Third is when a player, for one reason or another, decides not to put forth any effort to win (there are plenty examples of this in the past, you pick your own). Today’s case would have fit the second one if it were not for an extended period of meltdown by the American in the middle portion of the match.

Now Serena Williams stands at 20 Major titles, only second to Steffi Graf’s 22. This could also be the year in which she achieves the Grand Slam, the only elite accomplishment that is still not in her résumé. She is 33 years old, but still rules the W.T.A. arena, and there is no reason to think that both accomplishments are not within her reach.

Serena Williams, the 2015 Roland Garros Champion
Serena Williams, the 2015 Roland Garros Champion

Note: Follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter for frequent live updates from Roland Garros

High Volleys on Floaters: A Lost Art – Ask Azarenka and Muguruza

Tactical Analysis WTA No Comments

The swing volley began to work its way into professional tennis in the 1980s and grew in frequency for the next two decades until it became almost the norm in the 21st century whenever the opponent hit a floater high in the air, in case he or she would get pushed and stretched to a corner. With the addition of new technology, and fitter players, the use of swing volleys generated winner after winner in both professional tours.

The only problem is that you cannot hit a swing volley on every high floater. Sometimes, the ball is too far, or it’s too risky to make a full swing. It is sometimes enough to simply to block the ball to the open court. When that moment arrives, the arm must remain stiff, and the wrist must go through the minimum amount of recoil possible. Unfortunately for Victoria Azarenka, she did neither of those on her high backhand volley at 2-1 up in the third set against Dominika Cibulkova, when she had an opportunity to break her opponent’s serve at 30-40:

You can see Azarenka’s racket head drop all the way below the wrist level when she strikes the volley, causing the ball to float and allow Cibulkova to chase it down. She simply did not keep her forearm muscles clenched and let her wrist loose. Now, remember that this was not just a point like any other.

I have talked in my last article in depth about momentum shifts early in sets. This point above was precisely that! It led in fact to the most decisive momentum shift of this match. Cibulkova crushed Azarenka in the first set 6-2. Vika began finding depth on her strokes early the second set and took control as the set progressed. She often neutralized Cibulkova’s aggressive baseline shots by making use of all the four corners of the court, keeping her guessing. Vika won the second set 6-3 and when the third set began, it seemed that it was just a matter of time before she took control of the final set. The point above was that moment! Had she made that volley, she would have gone up 3-1 and probably continued to steamroll the way she has done so, since early in the second set. Cibulkova would have had to play catch-up, her only hope of coming back resting on an unlikely let-down by Azarenka. However, Cibulkova held serve, regained her confidence, and zoomed at warp factor nine to the finish line from there on, losing only one more game (6-3).

Let’s fast forward to Serena Williams vs. Garbine Muguruza, to the second game of the final set. Muguruza dominated the first set, Serena recovered, as only she can, to equalize at one set all. In the beginning of the third set, Muguruza held serve after a long game in which she faced break points. It was a big hold, giving Muguruza a chance to sink her teeth back in the match after a disappointing second set. She not only did that, but she climbed to a 15-40 lead on Serena’s serve, looking to go up 2-0 and to take charge again in the third set. Then, this happened:

Again, what you see is Muguruza tilting her wrist back quite far, causing the racket to flip back as she blocks (or not) the ball. Thus the floating ball that should have been an easy put away results in a “floating volley” that sails out. As a result, what should have been a guaranteed early break that would have left Serena frustrated (remember that she was already frowning from not having broken Muguruza in the previous game) and allowed Muguruza to move forward with confidence in the final set, turned into a long game that lasted over ten minutes, ending with Serena holding serve. Serena pumped her fist up screamed when she finally held to equalize at 1-1. She returned to her form of the second set and Muguruza slowly began to fade away, only winning one more game the rest of the set.

This type of shot occurs less and less since the topspin-swing volley has replaced the traditional block volley. However, it does not mean that it should not be practiced specifically. Because it can make your day, or as the cases of Azarenka and Muguruza showed today, it can also break it.

Note: Follow MT-Desk on Tweeter throughout the Australian Open: @MertovsTDesk

Tactical Analysis: Importance of Scouting & Knowing the Opponent’s Game

Tactical Analysis WTA 2 Comments

The Case of Zarina Diyas (#52) vs. Irina-Carmelia Begu (#62) – WTA Cincinnati 2014, First Round – Diyas wins 7/6 7/6

On a rather windy morning, two players that have never met each before entered Court 10, one of the “outside” courts at the Western & Southern Open WTA Premier Event. Both Zarina Diyas of Kazakhstan and Irina Begu of Romania came through the qualifying draw. On the one hand, since this is their first meeting, I can understand (to a degree) that they may not know each other’s’ strengths or weaknesses down to the last detail. On the other hand, isn’t that why the players have coaches? Isn’t that why they talk to other players or coaches on the tour to get bits and pieces of information on the next opponent? I am not sure if this was the case for Diyas, but there is no doubt that Begu could have benefited from some quality scouting, especially in a match like this where the balance hangs on a very small number of points.

Diyas is a solid baseliner who likes to drive the ball on both sides rather flat, with some spin at times. Her shots can penetrate the court and derail an opponent because they do not bounce particularly high. She is a short girl and likes to contact the ball below the shoulder level, preferably low. Needless to say, her best results have come on fast surfaces, with a third-round breakthrough appearance at this year’s Australian’s Open and a fourth-round appearance at Wimbledon little over a month ago. She likes to direct the point with her forehand and driving through the ball, especially if she can make contact with the ball at about hip or knee level. Begu is also a baseliner who has more variety in her game, very characteristic of players with a European pedigree, having developed skills by practicing mostly on red clay. She can hit drop shots, heavy topspin, angle shots, and even mix in an occasional slice.

As the match began and I saw point after point, I was a bit surprised that Begu kept on holding rallies with Diyas where she was hitting the ball with the same pace, trying to be aggressive at times, and going for winners at others. This type of game played into Diyas’ hands as she gained momentum and began to strike the balls with perfect timing. My surprise turned to downright bewilderment by the end of the match, because Begu attempted to play a Sharapova-like game, in other words, hit the balls hard to the corners, and go for winners by out-hitting Diyas. She did not drop shot or use angles much, but more importantly, she did not try to make Diyas hit the kind of shot that makes her uncomfortable, which is any ball above her shoulder, especially on the forehand side! As you can see in this picture, Diyas hits an open-stance forehand which gathers force from the right foot rotation:
Diyas 8

Watch also in this clip how essential the right-foot push is to Diyas’ forehand at her comfort zone, as she hits the low forehand on the baseline to force her opponent into a mistake:

A high ball which forces Diyas to make contact above the shoulder may cause her balance to be slightly off, thus take away her control and power. Strangely, Begu forced Diyas to hit forehands above the shoulder level only three times the whole match! First one was at 5-5 in the first set, and it resulted in a short ball by Diyas which allowed Begu to hit a winner. The second was at 4-2 for Diyas in the tiebreaker of the first, and Begu’s high and loopy topspin forehand resulted in a direct error by Diyas! The third time and only other time Diyas had to hit a forehand above the shoulder level is in the clip below. You will see Diyas’ forehand return fall short because she had to hit it above the shoulder level, out of her comfort zone. Begu should have taken advantage of the short ball and gone for the kill but instead she gives Diyas a second chance, and Diyas ultimately wins the point on yet another forehand from her comfort zone around the hip level:

It’s a mystery to me why Begu never centered on hitting high balls to Diyas on both sides and set up the short ball to put the pressure on her opponent? She definitely has that shot in her repertoire and in fact, she used it occasionally against Kimiko Date-Krumm in the first round of qualifying. Yet, she did exactly the opposite against Diyas, mostly hitting the ball hard and going for winners. To exasperate things further, she played that style trying to break Diyas’ forehand down (it’s the only explanation that comes to mind since almost 80% of Begu’s shots went to Diyas’ deuce side as you can see in all of the clips in this article too). Without any surprise, Diyas felt right at home, hitting the type of forehands that she likes, at the pace that she likes, moving the ball around at will. Spectators saw plenty of points like the ones in the three clips below. See how Diyas continuously gets to hit precisely the type of ball that she likes, at the same sweet zone, over and over again even though she remains on defense in this first clip:

And now check out this rally where Diyas gets to play a mixture of offense and defense, always in control of the point because what you don’t see is Begu running from corner to corner on the other side of the net:

In this next rally, see Diyas as the aggressor, stepping inside the baseline, mounting the pressure, and eventually hitting a forehand winner:

As these clips show, the match was played on Diyas’ terms. Considering how versatile her game is, Begu would have done herself a favor by utilizing the full arsenal of shots that she has in her depot, especially the high topspin off-pace ball that she uses on and off on clay courts. Furthermore, a little scouting would have directed the Begu camp in the right path beforehand. Diyas played another Romanian player Monica Niculescu in the last round of qualifying. A close look at that encounter, or some advice from Niculescu’s camp would have pointed to Diyas’ strengths and weaknesses and helped Begu prepare better for the match. Despite the pattern of points in Diyas’ favor, the match’s outcome rested on a handful of points and it was decided in two tight tiebreakers. Thus, the right type of scouting and game-plan preparation could have made the difference between winning and losing. That game plan would not have included allowing Diyas to dictate points with below-the-shoulder level strokes, since she is a rather small girl who has no trouble bending her knees if necessary, as this picture shows:
Diyas 5

I spoke to Diyas after the match and asked her if she felt comfortable with the type of ball that she was receiving from her opponent. She responded “yes” and when I vaguely touched on the above, she remembered the point in the tiebreaker where she made the mistake on the high ball, and did not really have an answer as to why her opponent did not hit higher balls. She did point out that it was windy and that perhaps it was not easy to direct the ball in Begu’s defense, however her response clearly showed that she was very much aware of the fact that she was getting to play match on her terms.

Until next time…

Tactical Analysis: When One Sticks Too Long with the Wrong Strategy

Tactical Analysis WTA No Comments

The Case of Caroline Garcia (#48) vs. Timea Babos (#102) – WTA Cincinnati 2014 Qualifying 1st Round – Babos wins 6-4 6-3

SAM_2542

When Caroline Garcia (picture above) stepped on the court for her first round match in Cincinnati, she was on paper the clear favorite as the seventh seed against the Hungarian Timea Babos who was one of the lowest-ranked players in the qualifying draw. After getting broken in the first game and subsequently going down 2-0, Garcia won three games in a row and went up 3-2. At that point, everything seemed in order for the 20-year-old French player. In that stretch of three games won by Garcia, one of them was a return game in which Garcia hit a forehand return winner and one other return that forced an error from her opponent. Those were aggressive returns, taken very early, with Garcia being at least two or three steps inside the baseline. In other words, being extra-aggressive on returns worked for that one game. Ironically, it would also play a major role in Garcia’s downfall over the duration of the match. Garcia insisted on going for too much on returns, often trying to step far inside the baseline, especially on second serves, to hit return winners that frequently resulted in direct errors such as the one you can see in the clip below:

Click here (11 seconds)

It is possible that Garcia is currently working on improving her aggressive returns in the long run and that in order to attain that goal her coach told her to keep going for the returns regardless of how many errors she may make. If that is the case, I am usually for the idea of sacrifice in the short run if that points to the possibility of adding a new dimension to the game in the long run. However, this tournament was not the right time. Cincinnati is a WTA Premier Tier event. Garcia has been in the mix with the likes of Eugenie Bouchard, Simona Halep, Garbine Muguruza, and the rest of the “new generation” as an up-and-coming player in the last couple of years. She cannot afford the luxury to lose a match in a tournament of such importance, a match in which she would have greatly improved her chances had she simply made one minor adjustment: move back on the returns and put the return in play to construct the point later. Furthermore, Garcia’s confidence cannot be that high since she has recorded mixed results this year so far, on the heels of a very promising 2013 campaign. This was a case where the importance of winning the current match trumped the promise of a long-term goal. Going for broke on every return simply did not translate into winning games.

In any case, Garcia kept on taking high risks on returns, either making direct mistakes (such as the one in the clip earlier) or putting herself in a defensive position from the first shot in the point because her return was turned out to be dismal. In the following clip, we see just that, Garcia trying to do too much with the return on a first serve by Babos, and resulting in a bad return that allows Babos to force an error out of Garcia on the next shot:

Click here (10 seconds)

Ultimately, this wrong strategy gave confidence to Babos who actually started the match not serving particularly well – she made all three double faults in the first two serving games –, but as the match progressed, felt more and more comfortable on her serves because she understood that if she hit a solid enough serve she could collect the error from Garcia or get a ball back that she could attack immediately.

SAM_2540Timea Babos

This particular tactic of going for the big return may not have been the only cause for Garcia’s straight-set loss, but there is no doubt that it had a snow ball effect as Babos felt less and less pressure on her serve. In the first set, Babos faced four break points, whereas in the second set, there was only one that was wasted away once again by Garcia’s missed return. Considering what little it takes to turn matches around in tennis, this was a good case of a match where Garcia could have moved back a bit and modified her returns to put the ball back in play. Perhaps, it could have been enough to win the match and build some momentum going into the U.S. Open in two weeks from now. I have been a fan of Garcia for a couple of years in that I believe she has the athleticism and the fundamentals to transform into a big-time player in the women’s circuit. However, this match was a step in the wrong direction, one that should indicate to her camp that setbacks of this type can be avoided with a little flexibility in the tactical preparation.

Women’s Final Preview: Sharapova vs. Halep

Majors WTA No Comments

Since the eliminations of the top 3 seeds Serena Williams, Li Na, and Agnieska Radwanska in the early days of Roland Garros, the few left who were still daring to make predictions called on two names to meet in the finals: Maria Sharapova and Simona Halep. To their relief, the two players stayed the course and reached tomorrow’s final match, although not without some difficulty in Sharapova’s case.

Logic would dictate that with all her previous Slam titles and her mental toughness, Sharapova should overcome yet another challenge by a newcomer to the elite world of “big time” in WTA in the form of Halep. She has already held off challenges by the so-called the ‘new generation’ by recording remarkable comeback wins against Garbine Muguruza and Eugenie Bouchard, and one other against a proven player in Samantha Stosur. She came back to win in three sets after losing the first against all three. Especially her win against Bouchard deserves special mention.

The 48 hours leading up to the match, a photo of Sharapova taken with an 8-year-old Bouchard circulated all over the social and main stream media, courtesy of the editor at TV Guide who initially posted it on Twitter. The effects of this picture, coupled with Bouchard’s reference to Sharapova as her idol – ‘back then’ Bouchard specified, adding that they are “not friends” now – when asked about it, transformed the match into the image of a champion who stands to cede her younger rival the status of the revered champion and let the newcomer take her place. This was reminded to her more than once in the form of direct question – how did she feel about playing someone who took her as an idol when she was young? –, and in the form of newspaper articles and TV spots, in case she followed the media. She even had to respond to the last-second question by the colorful French TV personality Nelson Monfort on screen right before she walked on the court. He asked her how she felt about being the favorite and Sharapova, probably sick of the hype, bluntly answered that there could be no favorites in a match like this, and walked out. If she lost she would drop out of top 10, and Bouchard would enter it. Thus, it was under tremendous pressure that the Russian took her first steps to the court. To exasperate things further, the Philippe Chatrier crowd overwhelmingly supported Bouchard throughout the match. In short, Sharapova played a match where all the elements worked against her and she had everything to lose, while Bouchard stepped on the court as someone who had everything to gain from a victory.

So, one can understand when Sharapova celebrated her victory as if she won the tournament after her courageous comeback from a set down again. It was not happiness or contentment that she manifested. It was relief! I am not a big Sharapova fan, but I admired her tenacity, her sheer will to find a way to win, or refusal to lose. I believe that she will enter the court much more relaxed against Halep, an recently established top 5 player. She has already passed the toughest mental tests against Muguruza and Bouchard. She will play a match in which she is not the clear-cut favorite, although she is the slightly on paper. Her main advantage is her experience and her awareness that she can accomplish what is necessary when clutch moments arrive.

In contrast, Halep has steamrolled through the tournament, just as she has steamrolled through the last 12 months. If one was to pick the best player on the WTA Tour without a Slam title in the last 12 months, it would be Halep without a doubt. Yet, she has never been to this stage in a Slam tournament. Will that be a factor? It sure did not in her first semifinal in a Slam against Andrea Petkovic. She played the best tennis of the tournament by any player in the first set of that match. Her biggest strength is her footwork. She is able to move around the ball in small steps and get in position better than anyone in the current generation and probably better than any player since Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario of Spain, the French Open winner of 1989, 1994, and 1998. Her forehand is lethal and she does not seem to have a clear weakness.

If the past was not considered and tennis history began in the last 12 months, it would be a 50-50 call. Halep has numerous titles on every surface, skyrocketed to the number 4 ranking. Sharapova recovered from an injury the latter part of 2013, and has won Stuttgart and Madrid. In Madrid and on clay, she did beat Halep in three sets. When the past and the aura are added to the equation, the balance tilts in Sharapova’s favor. She has been to this stage, and has won Slam titles. Halep will play in her first final. All indications show that it has the potential to be a final for ages. Let’s hope it turns out so.

SAM_2144a Friday evening – Trophy presentation ceremony rehearsal on Philippe Chatrier

Coming Soon: WTA’s Much-Needed Facelift

WTA No Comments

Despite the title of the article, for many, it could not come any sooner. After years of Serena Williams’ supremacy and the duo of Victoria Azarenka and Maria Sharapova specializing in failed attempts to dethrone the American, but exceling in the shrieking department, the W.T.A. desperately needs an injection of new and fresh faces into the spotlight.

Fret no more! They are slowly but surely arriving. Three of them were at the Charleston WTA Tournament’s semi-finals, but their road to greatness has been progressing for some time now.

Furthermore, they don’t act like unattainable, superior divas. They actually spend more time praising their opponents in the after-match conferences than the lack of quality in their own game. They don’t necessarily believe the sport revolves around them – read as “I won because I am great, I lost because I played bad, and the girl on the other side of the net is of no consequence.” They behave far more mature than today’s star players did when they were up-and-coming hopefuls.

Eugenie Bouchard (pictured below) is neither jumping up and down for minutes after a win, nor sporting a bitter-face accompanied by comments on how bad she played without a word of credit to her opponent. If you wish to be impressed by the composure and the maturity of a young player in front of cameras, just observe one of her interviews. Belinda Bencic, at 17, keeps her emotions at check whether she saves a match point or chokes one away. You don’t hear the 20-year-old Jana Cepalova complain about being without a coach, a family in her box, or the lack of a hitting partner while she travels in a foreign country playing tournaments. She goes on her business and reaches the finals in Charleston, not to mention defeating Serena Williams, Elena Vesnina, and Daniela Hantuchova on her path. In fact, if it was not for the title-winner Andrea Petkovic mentioning in her after-match speech how much she admires Cepelova for accomplishing that without anyone on her corner, not many people would have even been aware of that remarkable anecdote. You are not likely to witness Caroline Garcia, the 20-year-old French player, talking about how “embarrassed” she is, after losing to a player ranked lower than her.

Bouchard 1

These upcoming and fresh faces constitute what WTA Tour desperately needs. The top players of today ignore the fans for the most part, unless they are fulfilling a contract requirement dictating that they smile for pictures and have a few moments with a number of hand-picked fans for a certain function or a cause. They cannot stand each other and maintain no friendly contact other than the handshake at the end of the match. The other players have expressed many times how these few divas harbor a considerable distance from the rest of the players. When your peers cannot even identify with you, it is naïve for the WTA to expect fans to do so.

John Isner said at the Cincinnati tournament that the top players in the ATP were all “class guys” and that everyone got along incredibly well. Juan Martin del Potro confirmed Isner’s observation. They both talked about how they admire each other as people and as players. Friendships among the top players are well-known. They also don’t mind staying on the court after their practice sessions and after matches to accommodate as many fans as possible, signing autographs. This brief reference to the ATP equivalent of how top players behave was simply to preemptively answer the handful of fans of those divas who will attempt to strike back with the feeble “the top women’s players’ job is not to entertain fans” argument. Fans love to watch Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, Andy Murray, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, David Ferrer and others, because they interact with fans, and remain attainable to the average tennis fan.

It is obvious that the WTA needs a major facelift in terms of who represents its stardom. Being noteworthy athletes can only carry your popularity so far and will prove fatal when the attention begins to diminish. The interest in women’s tennis is nothing like it used to be a decade ago, and there are no notable rivalries (please do not say Williams vs. Sharapova).

This up-and-coming group is talented, athletic, personable, and spectacular to watch. If you have not yet watched Bencic’s sizzling ground strokes, Cepelova’s drop shots, Garcia’s ability to accelerate the ball, Simona Halep’s footwork, and Zarina Diyas’ calmness on the court, and Sloane Stephens’ powerful ground strokes, you do not need to worry. You will get plenty of chances to see them in the near future. I will predict – for the WTA’s sake as much as my own – that by the spring of 2016, we will see a different layer of players fighting for the big titles while the divas of today will be trying to come to terms with what is hitting them. Moreover, instead of hearing yet again the excuses with regards to their games, tennis fans will embrace the change of layer at the top of the women’s game.

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

MENU

Navigation