Tag: Felix Auger-Aliassime

Australian Open 3rd Round Match Report: Two Matches, Two Lessons

ATP & WTA Majors Tactical Analysis 2 Comments

Félix Auger-Aliassime (20) def. Denis Shapovalov (11) 7-5 7-5 6-3
Quality Plan A, recognition, poise!

I always underline the value of drawing up a good game plan before players step on the court, so I cannot help but wish I were a fly on the wall and listened in as Félix Auger-Aliassime and his team plotted the nuts and bolts of his strategy earlier on Friday over his upcoming match against his compatriot Denis Shapovalov.

Félix’s impeccable tactics led the way to earning him one of the most impressive wins of his career, a 7-5 7-5 6-3 victory over Denis, in a match that not only showcased his brilliant talent, but also his poise between the ears.

The first two sets were alike, with Denis going ahead by an early break, but Félix coming back to win each set 7-5. More than how the scoreline progressed, it’s rather the way in which Félix navigated the highs and lows at various points of the match and remained loyal to his working plan that proved top-notch. The latter consisted of sending the returns and the second shot in rallies deep, while avoiding taking unnecessary risks (read: not going for the lines, just deep to the middle of the court). The idea, I presume, was to establish early an equal footing in baseline rallies, goading his opponent into hitting riskier shots to end the point. Obviously, Denis was more likely to accelerate for the winner or at least control the point to squeeze an opportunity to come to the net rather than engage on long rallies. The longer the rallies went, the more time Denis spent behind the baseline, the better were the chances of Félix earning free points or get his own chance to finish the point.

To be fair, Shapovalov is a favorable match up, in my view, for Auger-Aliassime who has been frustrated in the past by players who count on consistency and keep a steady flow of deep balls coming back at him, thus not allowing Félix to dictate rallies (see this match report from 2020 Roland Garros for more on this). Shapovalov is not that type of player. He prefers to attempt winners from behind the baseline, make or miss, before most rallies reach 12 or 13 shots. I gather that Félix’s plan counted on him keeping the balls deep, not going for the lines too early, but still taking his chances when the opportunity presented itself (after all, it’s not like Félix is a “defensive” player either). It worked to perfection.

Auger-Aliassime seemed to recognize his opponent’s strengths and weaknesses, and that it was not going to be a perfect match from the first point to the last, even if he gets the lead in the scoreboard. Remaining focused on the task was the key to his success. Anyone who closely observed his body language throughout the match would probably agree that he passed the “focus” test with flying colors. He was tuned in, never showing exaggerated emotions, always keeping eyes on the ball, on his racket, or on the court.

The only bad patch for Félix took place early in the second set. With him leading 1-0, and 0-30 on Shapovalov’s serve, he had a chance to run away with the second set because Denis was just coming off a badly lost point at the end of which he went on a rant to his box and looked quite lost. Instead, Auger-Aliassime committed two unforced errors in a row to allow his opponent back into the game and reenter the match mentally. Denis took advantage with conviction, going on a positive stretch, lading a lot of returns in the court and putting some serious heat on his groundies to roll to a 4-2 lead (Félix’s two missed approach shots in the 2-2 game also played a role).

The reality is, as much as people constantly refer to both Shapovalov and Auger-Aliassime as “youngsters” and speak of their “growing pains,” these guys are, frankly, way beyond their ages in terms of maturity. They are not fragile youngsters like many other 20 and 21-year-olds. And in my view, they handle themselves well in the face of adversity during matches and know to evaluate matches with clarity. I would advise the casual tennis fan to listen to podcasts featuring either of these two “up-and-comers” or catch one of their post-match press conferences to witness for themselves the coherence of their thought process.

The above is a central part of the reason why, for example, Shapovalov knew to take advantage of Félix’s momentary blink at 0-1, 0-30 down, and it’s also why Auger-Aliassime did not fall apart after finding himself down 4-2 instead of running away with the set 15 minutes earlier. Auger-Aliassime’s body language looked no different at that point than it did earlier when he had the lead. Equally, watch Denis at 4-5 in the second set, how well he plays that game to stay in the set under pressure, shaking off the disappointment of losing the break minutes ago and finding himself in a position to hold, just to survive.

It was Auger-Aliassime finally ripping the 12th game away from Shapovalov to go up by two sets, rather than Denis giving it away. Félix, sticking to his plan, hit multiple returns back in the court deep, including in the last two points (his return on set point to the corner was exceptional, the more typical return he hit most of the match was in the point before at 30-30).

Auger-Aliassime’s gameplan reduced Shapovalov’s chances of winning points to mainly hitting great first serves or producing non-stop winners (read: taking more risks, even by his own standards). Needless to say, that is a big ask against a player as fast as Félix. Denis did not quit by any means but Félix, overflowing with confidence, was by then stroking freely and hardly making any errors. The way he protected the early break lead and shut the curtains on Shapovalov with four terrific serves served as an apt summary of the match.

The Canadian’s next-round opponent is Aslan Karatsev. It’s another opponent against whom Auger-Aliassime will not have to resort to long rallies, so a similar game plan may possibly work again. Except… have you watched Karatsev?** He can nail winners from anywhere on the court but don’t take my word for it. Watch the replay of his matches this week, especially how helpless he made Schwartzman look at times even though the Argentine is one of the better baseliners in the game.

** Popular question, it seems, all of a sudden.

Remember when Yannick Noah entered the court to console a very young Auger-Aliassime in 2016 following his heartbreaking loss to Geoffrey Blancaneaux in the finals of Roland Garros juniors?

Karolina Muchova (25) def. Karolina Muchova (6) 7-5 7-5
Scoreboard and self-awareness!

Considering their last thriller at Wimbledon in 2019 (13-11 in the final set), this match between two friends who know each other’s game like the back of their hands promised much intrigue. In the first set, neither player put out high-quality performances (Muchova admitted after the match that she came out nervous and thought that maybe her opponent did too). It was a patchy set, with good and bad moments. The difference was on serves, with Muchova giving a clinic on clutch first serves in the latter part of the set, starting with the break point save at 3-4, 30-40. Pliskova, for her part, was not getting the free points from her serves like she usually does and sputtered five double faults, the last one coming on break point down at 5-5.

Pliskova was frustrated and took it out on her rackets, smashing one in the 5-6 game, and another one in the tunnel when she took a break before the start of the second set. That put her down 0-15 to start the second set on a point penalty. Note: I admit, I had no idea that you could be penalized for racket abuse in the tunnel, away from the court. The official who accompanied her reported the infraction to the chair umpire who announced it and slapped the point penalty. Pliskova thought she could “do what [I] want off court.” Apparently not!

Perhaps, that helped her shake the negative vibes out, because she came out smashing her baseline shots, and more importantly, suddenly reading Muchova’s serves like an open book. At one point, Muchova’s points won on second serves dipped to the 20% range and she was not faring much better on her first serves. Pliskova, on a roll, overpowered her way to a 5-0 lead.

Lesson time here…With Karolina Muchova as your instructor…

Muchova came out of the 0-5 break sprinting to the baseline for the first point, as if she were getting ready to play a decisive tiebreaker. After she won the first point, she made a big fist pump, acting as if she got the mini-break lead in that tiebreaker. Why so pumped up out of nowhere at 0-5 down? I am fairly certain that it was not necessarily because she firmly believed, at that point, in her chances to come back from 0-5 down and win the set.

It was rather because she understood the importance of starting the third set with her serve, thus the urgency to hold for 1-5. And if she happened to win the next game to get one break back, that much better. It would mean that she clawed her way back into the match game-wise – and mentally – and be primed for the third, even if she were to lose the second set.

Well, she did indeed get the break and hold for 3-5, and more. So, in retrospect, what may have appeared an exaggerated display of emotional positivity considering the 0-5 score not only served its purpose – halting Pliskova’s roll on the scoreboard and dominance in rally patterns –, but also led to perhaps the most riveting comeback in a set in this tournament so far.

By the time Muchova got in position to level the set at 5-5 on her serve, she was dialed in, pulling off stellar shots on big points. Case in point number one, Pliskova had a last glimmer of hope to close the set out at 4-5, 30-40 on Muchova’s serve, and Muchova erased it with high-velocity first serve to the “T.” Case in point number two at 5-5, with Pliskova serving at 40-30, Muchova showed her underrated footwork to reach Pliskova’s drop shot and placed a sharp-angled placement shot on the full run (this is harder to do than she made it look, easier to rip one on the full run than “caressing” the ball to place it).

Muchova broke her opponent’s serve and held to end the match. The last two games were contested and while Muchova missed a couple of makeable approach shots, she more than made up for it with her anticipation on returns, winner production, and overall aggressive play (propelled by confidence originating in that 0-5 game). The rally patterns late in the set were the reverse of those seen in the first five games with Muchova being the aggressor this time.

She will next face the winner of the match between Belinda Bencic and Elise Mertens.

Note: For those interested, you can also find my match report on Muchova’s previous-round win over Mona Berthel by clicking here.

Muchova at the Australian Open 2020 — Photo: Getty Images, AsiaPac

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Roland Garros 2020, Men’s 1st Round Match Report: Nishioka Advances as Auger-Aliassime Falters

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

After about an hour-long rain delay on the outside courts at Roland Garros on Monday, the opening match on Court 9 pitting the 19th-seed Félix Auger-Aliassime of Canada against the Japanese player Yoshihito Nishioka, ranked no.52 in the ATP, began under gray, cloudy skies, and cold temperatures.

It took about 4 games – a blank hold featuring two aces and a subsequent break to go up 3-1 – before Auger-Aliassime’s day at the office turned just as gloomy as la météo à Paris.

Auger-Aliassime tried to play aggressively from the baseline (his usual Plan A), hitting mostly deep down the middle of the court (not necessarily usual), with the occasional inside-out/in forehand mixed in, while Nishioka adopted a park-4-meters-behind-the-baseline outlook, perhaps out of respect for Auger-Aliassime’s ability to generate power off his ground strokes, running balls down and sending them back deep, intermittently stepping forward to accelerate on the backhand side and catch his opponent off-balance. Since neither player was too keen on coming to the net to finish points (more on this later), it resulted in the outcome of the match being dependent on both players’ consistency.

Neither player clicked on all cylinders in terms of keeping the unforced-error count low, except that one’s engine sputtered a lot more frequently than the other’s did. A ton more!

In the first two sets alone, Auger-Aliassime committed a total of 33 unforced errors as opposed to Nishioka’s 18 (my own count). To make matters worse for the Canadian, his errors often came in sequences of a few points in a row at crucial junctures in the match, whereas Nishioka, while also susceptible to erring in this match, was stingier in the timing of his errors, only a couple of them coming on important points. If I sound like I am describing an average-quality match at best, that is indeed my intention, and this is coming from a fan of both players.

I accept that on clay the outcome relies less on winners than errors committed, but this was a match where one player did just enough to steadily advance on third gear (read: not challenged to shift to fourth or fifth) while the other made no adjustments to his sputtering engine.

As noted above, Auger-Aliassime did build a 3-1 lead early in the match, but that was largely due to Nishioka’s mediocre start on his backhand (five unforced errors on that wing up to that point), which is usually his stronger side.

And this brings me to the other point I would like to make from Auger-Aliassime’s perspective with regard to this straight-forward 7-5 6-3 6-3 losst. At 3-1 up, 0-15 on his serve, Félix had a great chance to attack a short return by Nishioka (one among many such opportunities throughout the match). He struck a solid backhand that put Nishioka on the run, but he opted to step back to the baseline. A rally ensued and it ended with Nishioka hitting a sizzling backhand down-the-line winner. Two points later at 15-30, the same scenario repeated with Nishioka hitting a short return, giving a sitter to Félix, one that he chose once again not to follow to the net. He came in later in that rally on a less convenient shot and got passed.

Nishioka eventually broke serve and equalized at 3-3. In that seventh game at 0-15, Auger-Aliassime passed up yet another chance to attack on Nishioka’s short return and decided to come in on the next shot, after Nishioka had recovered to the middle of the court, and got passed again.

In fact, the only four points Félix lost at the net in the first set were all clean passing shots by Nishioka, two of them because Auger-Aliassime picked the wrong spots and left a target open at which Nishioka could aim (and Nishioka loves targets). I compare that to the 10 points that he won on other approaches in this set, seven of them coming as the result of direct winners from approaches or volley put-aways, and I cannot help but wonder what would have happened had he elected to do otherwise on chances he passed up to follow his great shots to the net, especially those he got to hit from way inside the baseline. Plus, many of them came on short returns by Nishioka, setting the stage for a 1-2 punch, an otherwise favorable play for Félix.

This pattern described above took place again and again throughout the first two sets – I will mainly focus on the third set in this piece, because the second set was a rehash of the first and by the time the third began, Auger-Aliassime appeared discouraged and quickly fell behind a break early in the set. Side note: This reluctance to integrate coming forward into one’s game is something that a vast majority of today’s up-and-comers need to reconsider if they intend to reach the elite section of the ATP rankings. For most, it is a facet of the game that is visibly lagging behind in comparison to their other assets.

One reason why I am beating this particular drum is precisely because Félix was having a nightmarish day at the office with regard to unforced errors committed from his ground strokes alone. Every player has these days every now and then, including top-notch ones, where you simply cannot seem to find your timing no matter hard you try.

One way to cut down on those errors, is to resort to basic safety tactics such as bringing an extra layer of security to your shot, in other words, hit higher over the net, play to the middle of the court away from the lines, etc. Another way is to adopt a Plan B that depends less on those badly calibrated shots du-jour in your game. In Auger-Aliassime’s case, on a day like this, this would mean that he’d look to cut the point short instead of engaging in long rallies and taking advantage of his opponent’s short balls and come forward, in order to not only bring the heat to your opponent and collect errors, but also to avoid possible errors resulting from long baseline exchanges.

If any of this were not clear in the first nine games, it certainly became crystal clear in the last 10 minutes of the first set. Auger-Aliassime led 5-4, and 0-30 on Nishioka’s serve, only to make his 11th unforced error of the set (6th on his backhand), and then, win only three out of the next 14 points to lose the set 5-7. He added three more unforced errors (and a double fault) in the 5-5 game and chipped in two more in the next one, for a total of 16 unforced errors in the set.

He would up that count by one for the second set, and made no modifications to his game plan. You don’t want to take my word for it, just watch the second and third points of the very first game and that should tell you all you need based on what I’ve noted previously. I thought that when Félix took the bathroom break at the end of the first set, he would settle down and perhaps shift his tactics, but that first game proved otherwise.

Credit should be given to Nishioka for recognizing his opponent’s struggles and sticking to what works for him although, as I mentioned before, he was not exactly pristine in the unforced-error count himself (10 in the first set, 8 in the second). He did however tidy up in the important points over the last two sets, and his two critical errors in the first were negated thanks to Félix generously returning the favor in the ensuing points.

This is not a devastating loss for Auger-Aliassime by any means. Nishioka presents a rough challenge in the opening round of a Major for most of his colleagues, not to mention a particularly difficult match-up for Félix because he is fast, he can handle pace, and he can consistently keep his ground strokes deep. His forehand carries a considerable spin while his backhand is much flatter, allowing him to give a different look to his opponent shot after shot. I am not sure that Félix enjoys facing opponents who can keep a steady flow of deep strokes coming his way on clay, pinning him to the baseline and beyond (his two losses to Laszlo Djere in 2019 come to mind, among others).

In the second round, Nishioka will take on the wild-card participant Hugo Gaston of France, making the possibility of a first-ever appearance in the third round at Roland Garros a realizable goal.

Nishioka at the Australian Open 2020 (Photo: Getty Images AsiaPac)

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Click here for the links to listen to Tennis with an Accent’s Roland Garros Preview podcast released on Saturday

US Open Men’s Preview: Anyone (non-Big 3) Ready to Step Forward?

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

Nuance: I am not talking only talking about “stepping forward” in the figurative sense in this piece I wrote for Tennis with an Accent on the upcoming US Open men’s competition. Can anyone get past the Big 3 and lift the trophy?

Click the link for my preview: US Open Men – Anyone Ready to Step Forward?

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Isner Ousts Auger-Aliassime, Narrowly…

ATP Tactical Analysis 2 Comments

The scoreboard at the end of today’s first semifinal at the Miami Open between last year’s title holder John Isner and the young qualifier Félix Auger-Aliassime showed a very Isnerian score, 7-6 7-6 in favor of the American. Nothing groundbreaking there, considering that John has basically marched all the way to the finals via sets won in tiebreakers except one (7-5, whoop-de-doo, a virtual rupture in the flow). He is also known for playing a mammoth number of tiebreakers throughout his career.

There were a couple of aspects, however, that set this victory apart from the others, thus keeping me from labeling it a “vintage” Isnerian win. First of all, he lost his service twice in the same match, once each set, after having lost it only twice during the rest of the tournament. He literally came back from the brink of defeat in both sets. Secondly, he stumbled off the block to begin the match, making uncharacteristic errors, and never seemed to fully settle throughout the match, even after brief sequences of brilliance which made it seem as if he were reestablishing his game. Simply put, he did not play very well.

Isner in action at the 2019 Australian Open
Photo: Mark Kolbe – Getty Images AsiaPac

Instead, at least for the first half hour of the encounter, it looked like it was rather the 18-year-old Auger-Aliassime, playing in his first career ATP1000 semifinal, who was executing his game plan with the disposition of a seasoned pro, even though he was also far from playing a perfect match. For example, I fully expected Félix to have a commanding advantage in points during which both players found themselves on equal footing from the baseline. **

** These “equal footing from the baseline” points that mention in this write-up are not related to the number of shots hit in a rally. They strictly include those points during which Auger-Aliassime had time to get in a position to hit a comfortable ground stroke with Isner also placed at the baseline on the other side.

Yet, Auger-Aliassime never seemed to establish any visible dominance in such points, often committing unforced errors of his own early in rallies. It was only at the end of the seventh game, up 4-3, that he began leading John in this particular category. In that seventh game, two such points catapulted Félix to a 0-30 lead on his opponent’s serve. Two shaky forehand errors by Isner (yes, I repeat, he was error-prone throughout the match) completed the break.

But getting back to my earlier point, I had expected more of those equal-footing rallies to end in Auger-Aliassime’s favor, but as I noted above, they did not. It was not because he was jittery, but rather because he could not establish his rhythm against a player who was not giving him more than two or three shots to hit. This is not a concern unique to Félix, as most ATP players suffer from the same syndrome when they have to play the big-serving American. There is no doubt, however, that Félix was less prepared for it than others. In my opinion, that played a big role in his inability to take an early lead, even before the seventh game when John had yet to find stability in his game.

Having said that, Auger-Aliassime still had a clear advantage when he confirmed the break and went up 5-3. He put in 63% of first serves in up to that point, with two aces and zero double faults. In fact, knowing now what took place in the 5-4 game, one could oddly say that his serve was his most reliable weapon until then.

Well, as to what took place in that 5-4 game on Auger-Aliassime’s serve, the three double faults precisely, nerves seem to be the most reasonable explanation. For my part, I don’t believe his first double fault resulted from nerves. He just went up 15-0 after a very solid point that he won at the net. It was his fourth successful point at the net in five tries up to that moment in the match. He was poised to put the set away. He even went for a powerful serve to the outside at 15-0, clearly aiming for a clean ace. It got stuck in the net. Then, he tossed the ball way to the right and front on his second serve and made his first double fault. I agree with everyone else that the next two double faults at 15-15, and 15-40, were the result of doubt rapidly creeping into his mind.

Auger-Aliassime still showed great resolve at 5-6 by playing one of his best games until then to show Isner, who was suddenly on fire after winning three games in a row, that he was not fading away. The problem is that, even though he was not having a banner day by his standards, Isner can probably stay calmer through a tiebreaker than can most of his colleagues. Auger-Aliassime, not so much.

Up 1-0 and serving twice early in the tiebreaker, Félix lost both of his serving points. The first one was a double fault. The second one was another equal-footing rally (noted above) during which Félix slightly held back on his ground strokes, allowing John to eventually take his chance on a shorter ball and get another mini-break. In that first set tiebreaker, Félix only made one first serve and lost it 7-3 on one of the longest rallies of the match (17 shots) that ended, oddly again, with an unforced error by Auger-Aliassime.

Félix Auger-Aliassime
Photo: Julian Finney – Getty Images North America

Second set progressed much in the same pattern as the first. Félix once again got the early break and served for the set at 5-3. He even won the first point to go up 15-0, just like in the first set. It then got complicated, again, when he did not do enough with his first volley at 15-15 and gave Isner a second chance at a passing shot. He lost the point. To make matters worse, he double-faulted on the next one to go down 15-40. At 30-40, Félix prepared the point beautifully, forcing John to scramble a high floater back. He made the right decision to move forward and hit a swing volley to put it away before John could recover, but he gagged the shot into the net. Just like that, Isner was allowed to crawl back into the set, again.

The second-set tiebreaker began on Auger-Aliassime’s serve with another one of those equal-footing baseline rallies noted above, ending with yet another unforced error by Félix. It turned out to be a precious mini-break as Isner did not lose a single point on his serve in the tiebreaker and rolled to another victory with an unreturnable serve on match point.

At the end of the day, it was a missed opportunity for Auger-Aliassime not only because he served for both sets, but also because Isner’s performance was spotty throughout the match, especially in the first set. Auger-Aliassime just could not win enough key points at different points of the match, and especially in those games when he served for each set. I reckon Isner feels fortunate to have made it to the final. I also suspect that he knows he will need to perform significantly better than he did today, when he faces either Federer or Shapovalov (to be played later) in the finals on Sunday.

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Félix Auger-Aliassime Prevails in a Match of Trials and Tribulations

ATP Tactical Analysis No Comments

Auger-Aliassime, the 18-year-old Canadian reached the quarterfinals of Miami Open ATP 1000 event, by defeating Nikoloz Basilashvili 7-6 6-4 in a tightly contested match, but only sporadic in quality.

I felt that this was a fascinating encounter in that both players sport similar plan “A”s, i.e., seeking to direct rallies from the baseline and avoid patterns that can lead to defensive scrambles. Basilashvili can dazzle with his strike power – 90-95 mph winners from the baseline are not unusual for him – and Auger-Aliassime is a nightmare to defend against if he is allowed to play on or inside the baseline from where he can run his opponents to exhaustion. Furthermore, both have powerful first serves behind which they can set up shop, so to speak. The question was, which player would more effectively use his strength to expose the other’s weakness? I must also admit that my anticipation level was raised instinctively because I am a fan of both players.

Unfortunately, it did not live up to expectations – for me, at least – as both players struggled with unforced errors and missed opportunities. It turned, instead, into a battle of who could avoid errors or perform better on important points.

Let’s begin with the very first game. Three times in that game Niko turned the rally in his favor and put himself in a position to win only to produce an unforced error to lose them. The biggest one came on a break-point opportunity at ad-out when he set himself up perfectly for a short-ball opportunity, yet netted the routine forehand put-away attempt. Looking back, this seems like a minor point considering the scope of Basilashvili’s troubles for the rest of the match, but it turned out to be his only break-point opportunity in the first set in which he had an easy crack at winning the point. Credit goes to Félix for coming up with the goods in the others.

Unforced errors kept coming in bunches for the Georgian who finished the first set with 18 of them (my count), not including his two double faults. Auger-Aliassime, for his part, did not fare much better, recording 15 unforced errors himself, plus three double faults.

Photo: Julian Finney – Getty Images North America

Thus, either player’s success became dependent on which one could do a better job of mentally remaining resolved and brushing off the disappointments, because disappointments, there were many. At a certain point, it almost seemed like one player could rely on the other to blow a chance so that they could recover back from what appeared to be a lost cause. Until 5-5 for example, Basilashvili was serving at below 40% first serves and missing a bunch of makeable returns. At the other end of the court, Auger-Aliassime (who served at 57% himself for the first set) double-faulted a couple of times and framed shots for unforced errors at the most inopportune moments.

There were moments of brilliance though for Félix who served big to save break points prior to the tiebreaker – more about that later. He also showed signs of improvement on what I believe to be a weakness in his game, which has to do with being able to stay long in rallies when he is forced to scramble and retrieve several balls in a row.

Just a paragraph to explain what I mean first, before getting back to this match.

Félix is a fantastic player, way ahead of his peers of the same age range (except his buddy Denis who is actually 16 months older), when it comes to rallies that he can dominate in direction and pace. If you are interested in examples of what I mean, look no further than the first point of the 3-3 game in the first set, or the 15-40 point at 3-2 in the second. There is, on the other hand, a visible drop in performance when he has to play the reverse role, and the drop is more noticeable than you see in most other players who seem to cope better with the difficulties that such rallies present. This showed, for example, in his two losses against Laslo Djere in Rio and Sao Paulo. Djere was able to force him to hit a number of shots from behind the baseline (as a side note, this was also how Jaume Munar got the best of Félix in straight set, with a steady flow of deep shots, in the second round of 2018 Roland Garros qualifying, thus my doubts about clay being the most suitable surface to his game as some appear to claim).

Munar def. Auger-Aliassime 6-3 6-3, second round qualifying, Roland Garros 2018

Paragraph over, back to today’s match.

There were indeed several points where Niko collected errors out of Félix when he forced the Canadian to retrieve, but this particular weakness did not come across as glaringly as it has in the past, because the youngster also played a bunch of points, more than usual when compared to past matches, where he successfully dug himself out of difficult situations.

Take the 40-15 point in the second game for example. Basilashvili hit a wide first serve that Félix got back by lunging for it. Niko moved inside the court, just where he likes to be, and struck a backhand to the open ad corner. Félix ran it down and floated it back. Niko, still inside the court, nailed a big forehand, this time to the open deuce corner. Félix chased it down once more, and this time, he managed to put some sauce behind a forehand counter-punch despite being on the full-stretch and sliding with legs spread. Niko had to take a couple of steps back and hit a slightly rushed forehand that ended up in the net**. This is the type of point that typically does not end up well for Auger-Aliassime. It did this time, and it was not the only one.

** Why Basilashvili refuses to come to the net in such points, it remains a mystery to me. This is not unique to this match, and for a player who has sound technique at the net, he resembles that western-movie cowboy who sports a gun in his belt, but rarely uses it – the second point at 5-5, and the first at 6-5, two rare moments when he did. He won both points.

Don’t get me wrong, this is still an area that requires improvement for Félix. The sky is the limit for him if he can reach that stage where he can consistently absorb one or two, or more, of his opponent’s best power shots and not err on the first out-of-position retrieval (see the 30-0 point at 2-1, the 30-0 point at 2-2, and the second point at 4-3, for three such examples). Having said that, in a match where he committed a high number of unforced errors, the fact that he is showing signs of improvement in an area of concern is encouraging to say the least.

When the score reached 5-5 in the first set, the match seemed stuck. Neither player could turn the wheels enough to settle into a rhythm and impose his game on the other. Something extraordinary needed to happen for a breakthrough. One such opportunity dropped in Basilashvili’s lap at 5-5, 15-15, when Auger-Aliassime made three unforced forehand errors in succession (two of them framed) to lose his serve. However, staying true to the pattern of the set thus far, meaning “more misses than hits,” Basilashvili returned the favor at 30-15 when he was two points within the set, by missing two routine baseline shots and a backhand wide on the third to carry the match into a tiebreaker.

Auger-Aliassime went up 2-0 but lost the mini-break with a double fault and players held until 4-3 when, finally, something even more outré took place to finally end the gridlock. Auger-Aliassime, thanks to two aces and a double-fault by Basilashvili, found himself up 6-4, holding two set points, and without having hit a single shot off the ground in the last three points. Or, you could say, Basilashvili found himself down two set points without hitting a single shot in the court. Your pick! That was enough for Félix to pocket the first set when Niko missed a forehand in the net on the first set point.

If Basilashvili fans thought it was a gloomy first set, the second one would be even more depressing. In his first two serving games, Niko was only able to get one first serve in his first 11 attempts. It was only thanks to some second-serve return errors by Auger-Aliassime that the Georgian stayed within distance, and even got back on serve at 3-3. It was finally at this point that one player, Auger-Aliassime, visibly elevated his level of play and took charge.

The Canadian played an excellent point at 15-30 in that seventh game on Niko’s serve (I am zooming past the two double faults by Basilashvili which first allowed Félix to get to 30), featuring a stunning forehand down-the-line to set up the winner on the next shot. He broke to go up 4-3 on the next point and never looked back. At 15-30 down in the next game, Félix came up with three stellar first serves in a row to confirm the break. Then, again at 5-4, serving for the match, two more first serves gave him a 30-0 lead. Four points later at 40-30, Basilashvili’s miasmic afternoon at the office ended when he sailed a forehand out.

The Georgian finished the match with 25 unforced errors and eight double faults. His first-serve percentage was at 39% for the match. His dismal serving performance had a notable negative impact on the rest of his game, especially considering that his success significantly depends on the 1-2 punch opportunities created behind his serve. You want an example of what he can do when his first serve is on? Take a look at the 1-3 game in the second set. Four out of five first serves go in, resulting in two aces and a clean, painless game. The only such game in the match for him.

Auger-Aliassime’s serving, on the other hand, came in handy when he needed them, especially considering that nothing else was exactly clicking on all cylinders. He will next face the 11th-seeded of Borna Coric for a spot in the semifinal. It’s worth repeating: Félix Auger-Aliassime, the qualifier born in 2000, will have a shot at reaching the semifinal of an ATP1000 event on Thursday. If he succeeds, it will be his seventh win in 10 days against terrific competition.
Just sayin’…

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

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

MENU

Navigation