Thursday Update:
My latest match report/analysis of the quarterfinal match between Rafael Nadal and Diego Schwartzman is now posted on Tennis with an Accent —> Nadal – Schwartzman: the Pivot Point Before the Rain
Player quotes, tactical analysis, the central sequence of the match (no, it was not the rain interruption), etc..
Note: You can also follow Tennis with an Accent for great coverage of Roland Garros. I am delighted to be contributing to their efforts this week.
Assuming you have some knowledge of these two players’ games and you only see the final score of the match, you probably thought that it was a straight-forward affair. In other words, you probably thought that Diego Schwartzman remained solid from the baseline and Jarry, unable to penetrate his opponent’s armor, committed many errors and faded away as the match progressed.
You would not be wrong. In fact, you may be understating the facts of this 67-minute-long encounter. Jarry did indeed commit 44 unforced errors vs 7 by Schwartzman – no, I do not include double faults in the unforced-error count, thank you very much. Yet, every match has a story, and this one also contains some nuances that go deeper than what the score and stats show.
One of those nuances is the underrated IQ of Schwartzman. Yes, it was a good match-up for Diego. His strength is comprised of footwork, returns, and baseline consistency. What better player to face for him than one that depends on big shots, big serves, but at the same time, one that is prone to errors if he must produce them continually? Jarry happens to be one of those types of opponents.
Yet, every match begins at 0-0 and you have to incorporate those advantages into the early points of the match to set the tone for later. If you don’t come out sharp mentally and your big-hitting opponent gets ahead and builds confidence, he can overpower you with winners. Jarry also happens to be one of those types of opponents.
The Chilean has been on the rise as of late and came into this tournaments in good form. Having concluded 2017 at number 100, his 2018 has been nothing but stellar, placing him at number 65 as the Miami Open began.
It would have most likely been enough for Schwartzman to keep his errors to a minimum, even if Jarry had started on a high note. As long as his baseline game remained solid, he would eventually wear the Chilean down and win the points that mattered. The score would have been closer, but he would have grabbed the victory. Well, he had the clarity to go beyond that which would have been enough.
He made adjustments in small doses, beginning as early as in the first game, while remaining loyal to his overall plan A. The goal was to get doubt to creep in Jarry’s mind early, thus not having to depend on a clutch point or two later to break the match free. Credit to Schwartzman for having done exactly that.
Jarry started the match serving. He went up 40-30, thanks largely to his big first serves and/or the use of 1-2 punch thanks to those serves. Diego’s returns were not particularly bad, but Jarry’s plan was crystal clear. He needed to put the heat on Schwartzman immediately and force him to do more than just keep the play in play. This plan played into Jarry’s strengths, on paper at least. He can create openings with his powerful forehand and his flat backhand. He can also serve big, as well as vary his spots in the box.
The problem is, as noted before, Schwartzman has one of the best returns in the ATP and two of the fastest legs on the tour. To make matters worse, he can counter-punch from defensive positions better than the majority of the ATP field. And boy, did he ever put those skills to use as soon as the match started.
Schwartzman quickly realized that he needed to stop Jarry from taking charge after the serve. He began to go for his returns. It may have seemed like the obvious thing to do, but Schwartzman specifically looked to land the return close to the baseline, and at a higher pace (at the cost of missing one or two), to catch Jarry off-guard and make him take a few steps back in a hurry. He sent a message to Jarry that the Chilean could not simply serve and prepare for the next shot inside the baseline. He wanted to take away the 1-2 punch from Jarry. It worked. He kept Jarry at bay, on the baseline, and made him have to force the issue from there. Jarry erred on a couple of shots, and before he knew it, Schwartzman had stolen the game from him.
The first task was completed. For a player like Jarry who considers his serve as one of his main weapons, getting broken on the first game of the match surely caused a significant dent in his confidence. Schwartzman, for his part, still needed to confirm the break to complete the second half of that step.
At 1-0, he went up 30-15 but committed two double-faults to go down a break point. On the break point, Schwartzman did not dwell on those two double faults that seemed to come out of nowhere. He focused and went back to basics. He got the serve in and forced Jarry to engage in a long rally. It ended with the latter committing the error. Two points later, Schwartzman held serve and confirmed the break. He was now up 2-0 without even having performed at his best.
Still only down a break, Jarry pressed on. To get an idea of the mountain he already had to climb, watch the first and third points of the ensuing 2-0 game. In the first point, Jarry attempted several risky shots to put Schwartzman under pressure, but the Argentine not only got all of his opponents’ shots back but added some extra sauce on them. The rally ended with Jarry’s error. In the third point, Jarry put in an impressive serve and stepped into the court, expecting a weak return. Schwartzman returned deep, pushed Jarry back behind the baseline, and eventually won the point from the baseline on a Jarry error once again.
These details were bound to mess with Jarry’s mental sharpness. I mean, what did he have to do in order to put together a successful string of games and get back in the match? And that is where this particular match-up problem rises to the surface. Jarry, as his game stands now, even with the confidence built on the improved results of late, simply does not have many options other than to keep pressing a pesky opponent like Schwartzman. He must continue to take risks and push the envelope.
To his credit, Jarry did seek solutions. He added some backhand slices to change the pace during rallies, hoping that Schwartzman may give him a short ball to work with. He opted for the drop shot a few times, like in the first point of the 3-1 game, looking to bring Diego to the net. In fact, that whole 3-1 game is the second (and last) example among many that I am willing to give in this piece if you are interested in seeing just how much Jarry had to work – and risk – just to earn a point from Schwartzman.
A last glimmer of hope appeared for Jarry when he broke Schwartzman’s serve, on his fourth break-point opportunity, after a contested sixth game that included a few uncharacteristic errors by the Argentine. Jarry’s hopes were quickly dashed, however, when Diego rose to the challenge and played his best return game of the match.
Once Schwartzman held to go up 5-3, you could tell that Jarry’s resolve had taken a substantial hit. Not only was Schwartzman performing at a higher level better than in the beginning of the match, but he was also limiting Jarry’s options in the process, thus chipping away at the Chilean’s belief.
Jarry’s footwork in the 5-3 game looked like one that belonged to someone who felt dejected. He made a terrible drop-shot attempt on the first point, followed it with two forehand unforced errors on the second and third points. Then, he missed a volley on the 15-40 point to lose the set 6-3.
The second set followed more or less the same pattern. Schwartzman had apparently done the bulk of his work in the first seven games of the match. He never deviated from his successful plan while Jarry kept pounding and missing.
The match ended 6-3 6-1 in Schwartzman’s favor in one hour and 17 minutes, but this loss should by no means diminish what Jarry had accomplished so far this year. The Chilean’s game has the make-up necessary to climb up the rankings. If Jarry ever needed clarity on what he needs to work to reach the next step in his progress, he could not have asked for a better feedback than this match. Schwartzman presented him with the type of barriers that he will need to overcome before turning a veritable threat to the higher-ranked players.
In the next round, Schwartzman will take on the Canadian Milos Raonic.
We are down to the final 8 of the men’s draw at the Australian Open. Each quarterfinal match offers its own narrative, one more compelling than the next. On Tuesday, the line is clearly drawn as to who the favorites and the underdogs are in the two men’s matches scheduled. These players also have, among themselves, different pursuits. Among the two favorites, one is trying to confirm his number-one status and shape further his place in the history of the sport, while the other is attempting to take a giant step toward that elusive elite status. Among the underdogs, one is seeking to earn more respect than he gets despite having reached the finals of Majors twice, winning one, while the other simply wishes to extend the best week of his young career.
Below are my previews of both matches.
Grigor Dimitrov (3) vs Kyle Edmund
Grigor gets another chance to solidify the argument of why he should be considered one of the current elite performers in men’s tennis. He is not exactly there yet, mind you, but he has a golden chance to reach that status this week. Since having defeated the qualifier and 186th-ranked MacKenzie McDonald in the most unconvincing way possible – 8/6 in the fifth set after being bageled in the fourth, 8 aces and 9 double faults, and a slew of unforced errors – Dimitrov has gotten his act together. He put forth an impressive march to the quarterfinal round in his last two matches. I call it impressive in that he faced two quality opponents, Andrey Rublev and Nick Kyrgios, and showed poise almost each time they challenged him at crucial stages of both matches.
Photo: Darrian Traynor – Getty
His opponent’s run to the quarterfinal, however, may take the cake in the overall sense of the term “impressive.”
For starters, Edmund was not supposed to be here. When the draw was made, he was unseeded and scheduled to face the US Open finalist Kevin Anderson in the first round. The 49th-ranked Edmund, with the never-depleting gas tank, recorded the upset victory over Anderson, the first of two five-setters he won prior to his last round. After a straight-set victory over Denis Istomin in the second round, he won his second five-setter against Nikoloz Basilashvili. All three were remarkable wins, but it is the way in which he pulled his four-set victory in the fourth round against Seppi that was truly striking.
After having lost the first set and gone down a break in the second, and suffering from a lingering pain in his shoulder, Edmund suddenly began to produce his best tennis of the week for the next two hours. At times, Seppi looked helpless against the barrage of winners that Kyle was nailing from all areas of the court. He did not give up after the disappointment of losing the tiebreaker of the first set, kept a positive body language, showed all the signs of mental toughness that would delight any player’s fans and coaching team.
Edmund was placed in a relatively advantageous section of the draw (Jack Sock and Kevin Anderson, the highest seeds). He took full advantage of that opportunity once he got past Anderson. With all due respect to Istomin, Basilashvili, and Seppi, they do not impose the same degree of intimidation that his next opponent or his potential future opponents this week will do when standing next to them in the tunnel prior to walking on the court.
Then, there are the tactical possibilities. As tennis fans, we could be treated to a wonderful spectacle if Edmund starts strong and protects his service games. That begins with a high percentage of first serves and an aggressive approach to the next shot coming from the opponent’s return. This 1-2 punch pattern is in fact an essential part of Kyle’s usual A plan, his “bread-n-butter” so to speak.
Let’s ponder for a second. What if Edmund was to catch fire, à-la-sets-three-and-four of his win vs. Seppi?
To grasp the extent of how incredible Edmund’s performance was in that period of time, you would need to watch the replay. He hit so many winners that, at a certain point in the match, I began to simply expect winners every other point and started considering them “routine points,” only admiring the ones hit from impossible positions. Yes, I admit, from that point forward, I became what you would consider a spoiled tennis fan. Shame on me!
Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty
Can Dimitrov extinguish that kind of fire? Yes, only because he moves quicker and defends better than Kyle’s previous opponents. In fact, the Bulgarian is one of the best athletes in men’s tennis. How many shots did Kyrgios hit in the previous round that he thought were winners, but ended up coming back, forcing him to take another crack? Only Nick could accurately answer that, but I will make an educated guess and say that the number was easily in double digits. Did you see, for example, the forehand missiles hit by Dimitrov while he was fully stretched and on the run? I can only hope, Edmund’s behalf, that he did not use up all his winners against Seppi and that he still has plenty in his reserves.
There is also that scenario where some physical pain limits Edmund’s ability to perform and he loses in straight sets, or furthermore, forces him to retire. Ignoring that possibility for a moment, I would like to say that I learned my lesson about picking against Edmund (twice in fact), and that I will not pick against him again. Yet, I cannot. I have believed in Dimitrov to go to the final since day one of this tournament. Edmund will simply have to teach me the same lesson again.
Rafael Nadal (1) vs Marin Cilic (6)
There are reasons for which Nadal has, for the most part, dominated Cilic since his only loss to him in Beijing nine years ago. It can partially be explained by intangibles unrelated to technical and tactical aspects. Rafa is one of the best athletes in the world and Marin is not the only player that he has dominated over extended periods of time. He has more experience in the second week of Majors, and on big stage, than any opponent he faces, unless the latter happens to be another member of the rare elites in our game (you know who they are). He is mentally the best competitor our sport has ever seen. I could continue with this list, but I will stop right here and move on to the tactical side where the forecast looks just as bleak for Cilic.
Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty
Diego Schwartzman frequently gave Nadal fits during their match. He forced the Spaniard to come up with several great shots in a row to eventually collect the point. He sent a message to Rafa from the early stages of the match that he would not go away simply because he lost a long point at deuce or a contested game. In short, he gave Rafa some of his own medicine, because that is precisely how Nadal’s adversaries feel until that moment in the match where they cease being his adversary and give up. Diego remained Rafa’s adversary all the way to the bitter end.
He was able to do so because, first and foremost, he is quick. He could run down so many of Rafa’s shots and send them back high and deep at times, flat and hard at others. His speed, agility, and explosive first step allowed him to change directions in the blink of an eye. His ability to counterpunch from off-balance positions produced winners for which even Rafa was not ready.
Well, I just listed a bunch of qualities about Schwarztman’s game that lack in Cilic’s. Let me be clear: Cilic is a good mover. If you hit an average drop shot for example, he has the speed to get to it and punish you. In a basic side-to-side rally, he can stay with his opponent and overpower him. His shortcomings appear if, for example, he has to quickly go outside the boundaries of the court to return a wide serve and immediately get back to the middle of the court for the next shot. Or if he has to stop and change directions during the rally when his opponent accelerates back to the same corner from which he is trying recover.
You can see two examples of these weaknesses in Cilic’s first-set tiebreaker against Pablo Carreno Busta in the last round. In the first point of the tiebreaker, the two players engage in a rally that Cilic initially dictates until Carreno hits a forehand down-the-line that changes the pattern and forces Cilic to backtrack. It momentarily puts him on his backfoot. This allows Carreno to reverse the dynamics of the rally and make Cilic chase balls. Three shots later, Carreno makes Cilic stretch out to the forehand side, far behind the baseline. Marin nets the defensive slice attempt. Another example occurs later in the 4-2 point. Carreno accelerates inside-out with his forehand, which makes Cilic stretch his long legs wide and reach with his upper body for the two-handed backhand that he ends up floating deep. Look for points like this to multiply against Nadal.
When Nadal used this type of pattern against Schwartzman – the kind that Carreno used against Cilic in the points described above – Schwartzman defended without much difficulty. He got Rafa’s shots back and did not miss a beat in recovery time. Cilic, on the other hand, will make errors, and consequently, Nadal will not feel the need to take more risks.
Photo: Cameron Spencer – Getty
So, what can Cilic do? He must concentrate on his own strengths and use them with conviction. It starts with his serve and court positioning. He has one of the biggest first serves in the ATP Tour. He must earn a large number of aces, and if the return comes back, he must take extreme risks on his forehand to control the middle of the court. He needs to flatten out his shots and basically look to hit Nadal out of the court, or at least keep him scrambling enough to the point where Rafa will not have the occasion to get set and turn the tables around in the rally. In short, Cilic will need to play big, à-la-USOpen-2014. He must either hit the winner or miss going for one. It’s a tall order. Cilic’s chances are slim at best, although it is within the realm of possibility. If he loses the first set, that realm may also disappear. I do not see Cilic winning three straight sets, or three out of four sets, against Rafa under any circumstance.
Enjoy the matches.
Interview done on May 27, 2015, at Roland Garros, following Diego’s loss to Gaël Monfils in the second round of the French Open. Score: 4-6 6-4 4-6 6-2 6-3
This was a one-on-one interview I did with Diego Schwartzman at the French Open, initially for Tenis Dunyasi magazine, the largest monthly tennis publication in Turkey. This is the English version of the interview (which was also its original version). One month earlier, Diego reached the semifinals in the Istanbul Open, his highest achievement at the professional level for the 22-year-old Argentine. He earned a ranking of 57 on the Monday (May 4, 2015) following the Istanbul event, and to this day, it remains his highest ranking. Currently, he stands at number 65.
Diego gracefully accepted to do a one-on-one interview despite having lost a heartbreaker and I cannot stress enough how delightful and modest he is as a person. I have already had the chance to observe him live at the Istanbul Open earlier in the summer. He handled his progress to the semifinal round, and his loss to the eventual winner Roger Federer, with class and sincerity. As if his character needed a confirmation, as I was waiting for him to come, few South American journalists, especially one from Argentina, could not praise him enough to me, telling me what a “nice guy” Schwartzman was and that I would enjoy my interview with him. They were completely right. When I told Diego about this right before we began chatting and mentioned his high reputation among the South American media, he extended a genuine smile and nodded his head with modesty.
About today’s match… In the 4th set Gaël started getting more aggressive compared to the first three sets and it worked for him. Then, in the beginning of the fifth set, you also started well and leveled back the match. He began to pump the crowd up, and you joined in as well, began showing your fist and celebrating the points won with animated passion. However, do you think it would it would have been better to stay calm against someone like Monfils at that point of the match and not join the “pump-fist” parade, because it only motivated the crowd to get even more behind Gaël, further energizing him?
Diego:
I understand what you say. But I was also playing the first three sets aggressive, focused, solid, motivated. I remember in the fourth set, it was 2-2, I had two break points to go up 3-2, and he hit two aces in the break points. Then he felt well, and he broke me immediately after. He started to play with the groove. It’s good for him, not so good for me. In the fifth set, I played well again and had chances in the first games, but again he played well, broke my serve, and served amazing after that. I am not so sure if the motivation from the body language was really the big factor. He served very well in the fifth set.
Few weeks ago, you did very well in the Istanbul Open, reaching the semi-final round of an ATP event, for the first time in your career. You had one year with great success in the past, then last year you had an excellent year in the Challenger circuit. Now, you reach higher in ATP events and to Monfils in 5 sets in the 2nd round of a Major. Now that you are reaching for the next level in the pro circuit, do you sense that Istanbul Open was a big step, a turning point for you, and your confidence?
Diego:
Yes! Istanbul was amazing for everything. I played very well against good players like Jurgen Melzer, Santiago Giraldo.. I played very well in all the matches there [Schwartzman lost to the eventual winner Roger Federer 6-4 in the third set, in the semifinals]. Then I go to Rome and also brought that good feeling there. Then, I came here and played well again the first round. And now I just played a 5-set match against Monfils. I feel really well. I need to be focused on my tennis, training, work with my team the same way. I need to be a “regular” during the whole year and improve my tennis continuously. I need to go step by step.
Schwartzman in his second round win over Giraldo at the Istanbul Open
You just had an injury.
Diego: Yes in Rome.
But it was not a major injury.
Diego: No, it was an extension, 2 mm here (points to the inside of his upper leg), I can’t play in Nice so I pulled out. I came directly here, I felt well all the time. It’s ok.
Have you ever had big injuries in the past?
Diego: No, never, that was actually my first injury.
Question about your tennis game… What is your next goal now? I am asking this in the context of your game. You hit every shot in the book, you hit spin and slice, you hit drop shots and angles, you come to the net, you hit kick or slice serves, as well as a hard first one. So what next would you like to technically improve in your game?
Diego: I need to improve my second serve. My first serve is good I think. Then I need to improve all in my tennis, physically and mentally. My I need to improve my forehand, backhand, and all the other things, because now the players are so good. I don’t have many chances in the match so I need to improve for the few chances that come, I need to be fully focused at that moment and really want to seize that chance.
When you practice in the off-season, do you focus on one particular thing to improve or do you focus on everything?
Diego: No, no, many things many things. The serve, the forehand, you can improve a lot in many things.
You have a big family, two brothers and one sister. Does your family show interest in tennis, or do they love tennis through you? Do they really know the game?
Diego: Yes they show interest. They know about me, and therefore now, they know even more about tennis.
So you are the only one in your family to play competitive tennis?
Diego: Yes, my father and mother play tennis but only amateur tennis in the club on weekends, not professional like me. They are very good models for parents. They support me in every way.