Tag: Maria Sharapova

Saturday: Australian Open 3rd-Round Match Previews

ATP & WTA Majors 2 Comments

After two grueling days at scorching temperatures – above 100 degrees Fahrenheit – the weather is finally supposed to calm down on Saturday, and the players could not be more thankful. It will be interesting to see how much of the heat effect from Thursday will carry over to Saturday for those who had to play taxing matches during the day session. Yes, Novak Djokovic, Maria Sharapova, Caroline Garcia, Dominic Thiem, and Ana Bogdan, I am talking about y’all.

Let’s look at three of Saturday’s third-round matches, two of which involve the names mentioned above.

Madison Keys (17) vs Ana Bogdan

The draw is shaping up nicely for Keys, the 2017 US Open finalist. She has had two expeditious wins, allowing her to remain fresh for the next round(s) to come. She would love to play on Rod Laver Arena, the fastest of the show courts at the Australian Open. Regardless of the court, she will be the heavy favorite in this match, and should deliver. Her opponent, the Romanian Bogdan ranked 104 in the WTA, faces a steep hill to climb. To make matters worse, Bogdan played a physically and emotionally (she cried, exhilarated, for a full minute after the handshake) taxing match against the pesky Yulia Putintseva, winning 6-3 in the third after 2 hours and 6 minutes under brutally hot conditions.

Photo: Mark Kolbe – Getty

Unfortunately for Ana, her game does not match up well with Madison’s either. The unseeded Romanian likes to accelerate the ball, but in order to do that, she will need to get her feet set and control the rally from the middle of the court. Keys is the last person to allow her opponents to direct rallies. The American’s plan A also involves aggressive groundstrokes, except that she can do it with more power and accuracy than her opponent. Furthermore, she can produce bazookas even when she is on the full run, something that sorely lacks in Bogdan’s game. Once forced into a game of scrambling and retrieving, Bogdan’s level drops drastically, and I must add strangely, because she is actually a very good athlete.

All signs point to another comfortable win for the American. These two have never played each other, and I am guessing that Keys will still remain undefeated in this head-to-head count after tomorrow.

Angelique Kerber (21) vs Maria Sharapova

Well, what a blockbuster we have here in the first week of a Major! Kerber is so far undefeated in 2018, having won the Sydney WTA event. She seems to have found the form that carried her to two Major titles in 2016, both on hard courts. Sharapova has equally looked sharp in defeating the 14th-seed Anastasija Sevastova, avenging her loss from the 2017 US Open. This could be a final and hardly anyone would be surprised.

What is compelling about an encounter such as this one is the clash of contrasting styles of the two players. On the one hand, the Russian is a relentless attacker, a power hitter, a shot-maker. The German, on the other hand, is an incredible scrambler, retriever, a counterpuncher. If you watched Friday’s thriller between Petra Martic and Luksika Kumkhum, you know what I am talking about. Expect no less from Kerber and Sharapova tomorrow. This is the kind of match-up that produces memorable matches. Their last three matches were entertaining to say the least, all going three sets. They will not matter match in determining the outcome of Saturday’s match however, the last one having taken place in 2015. It is three years later, and both players have evolved in more ways than I can fit in an extended research paper.

Photo: Mark Kolbe – Getty

The match is likely to be scheduled on Rod Laver Arena. Chalk that factor up for Sharapova who will look to flatten out her shots and hit the corners on the fastest show court. She will indeed need every advantage she can get, because Kerber has faced the same test on Rod Laver Arena before, and passed it with flying colors on her way to the title two years ago. I am giving a slender edge to Angelique to win this match in a tight, extended three-setter. I am however looking for Maria to reestablish herself as an elite force in the WTA in 2018, vying for the top titles throughout the rest of the year.

Roger Federer (2) vs Richard Gasquet (29)

Glancing at the social media, I am surprised to observe that many people expect Gasquet to offer some degree of challenge to Federer. Forget about the 16-2 head-to-head record in favor of Roger (Gasquet’s two wins coming on clay), and tell me when is the last time Gasquet won a set against the Swiss on hard courts? I will give you a few hints. George W. Bush was the President of the United States, there was no such thing as an iPhone, and Zinedine Zidane was sent off in a match that saw Italy win the World Cup two months earlier.

This is simply a bad match-up for Gasquet, not only because Roger is in good form, but also because, I believe, Gasquet will walk out on the court with close-to-zero belief that he can beat Roger. We are talking about a player, albeit very talented, who has a 3-44 record against Roger, Rafa, and Novak combined. It is hard to build any confidence after so many failures against the game’s elite players. 2011 was the last time the Frenchman recorded a win against either of those three champions (Federer in 2011, on clay, 7-6 in the third).

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty

Look for Gasquet to either play a close first set, most likely due to a slow start by Federer, and wilt away in the next two, or go down by two sets, only to challenge the Swiss in the third, only because he freely goes for his shots, feeling like he has nothing left to lose. A let-down by Roger is the only way Richard can steal a set and create some tension in this match. Otherwise, Federer will overpower Gasquet from the baseline, stretch him to the backhand side and put the floaters away by sneaking to the net. He will also add a few aces here and there for good measure. I am a fan of Gasquet’s style, but here, the only thing I can say to him is “bonne chance mon pote.”

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

Australian Open: Quarterfinal Previews – Upper Halves

ATP & WTA Majors No Comments

The second week of another Major has arrived. While the women’s draw at the Australian Open has provided plenty of “unexpected” thrills, the men’s side went pretty much according to plans (see my preview in the last post), with the exception of Nadal’s exit in the first round at the hands of Fernando Verdasco and his “spatial tennis” in the final set of their match.

Now, I take a look at the upper halves of each draw. If I have time, I will do the same tomorrow for the lower halves. I will even stick my neck out there and give my say on what I believe will take place. It is not something that I usually do, because I am known for being a terrible prognosticator, therefore I would not desire anyone to place a bet based on my opinions (yes gamblers, I am staring at you). Nevertheless, in the name of having fun, let me know in the comments section if you have different ideas. Let’s get to it.

WOMEN

Serena Williams vs. Maria Sharapova

To ask the outcome of the match is like asking “what will your mother say if you spill the juice on the carpet or on her dress?” or “will Wall Street behave responsibly this year?” or “are Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders good friends?” You know the answer to those. You can play the dialog in your head numerous times and the outcome will not change one bit. The same applies to this match. It has literally been a dozen years and 17 matches since Maria last defeated Serena. It was when Barack Obama just became a senator, and this member of the media was revealing to New Yorkers that the internet “has finally come of age.” Is there any reason to believe that a different scenario may take place? No! Sharapova simply does not possess the weaponry in her game to out-hit or out-rally Williams. The only category in which Sharapova has consistently led Williams is the earned income category. Within the confines of a tennis court, Serena rules, it’s that simple. Any other scenario may perhaps take place in the parallel universe of this summer’s upcoming Star Trek movie.

Keys for Williams: Change nothing from the previous encounters because (1) she moves better than Sharapova during rallies, (2) she serves better than Sharapova, (3) she gets more pumped up for the opportunity to give a shellacking to Sharapova than to other opponents.

Keys for Sharapova: (1) Hope that Serena somehow loses her head, (2) as a result, the crowd rallies behind Maria because of it and because she is an overwhelming underdog, (3) and as a further result, Serena also loses her cool, suffers the tennis collapse of the decade.

I say —> One set surprisingly close as in 6-3 or 6-4, the other an easy stroll for Serena.

Agnieszka Radwanska vs. Carla Suarez-Navarro

This would be an intriguing match, except that Suarez-Navarro (I will refer to as CSN from here forward) is not one-hundred percent physically and has not played her best tennis in the previous rounds. She has benefited from a convenient draw so far, having faced only one top-100 opponent. In contrast, Radwanska has been tested by higher-quality opponents for one thing, and has come to the tournament with confidence for another, having won the year-ending WTA Finals three months ago. Having advanced to the quarterfinals in five of the last six years in Melbourne also makes her a persona grata at this stage of the tournament.

If CSN is healthy and ready to go, she has the game that can cause trouble to Radwanska who usually likes to park a meter or two behind the baseline and drive opponents crazy with her retrieving skills. She is similar to Simon on the men’s side in that sense, except that she possesses more variety, and thus, can “junk” her opponent out when needed. So, CSN will need to often accelerate her forehand to push Radwanska back, and use her backhand slice to bring her forward. In other words, she needs to get Radwanska to move back-and-forth on the court, rather than side-to-side. She can do that with her three preferred shots from the baseline; the aggressive forehand drive when she is in control of the point, the set-up low slice on the backhand, and the high and heavy topspin backhand. All three of those shots put a different spin and pace on the ball and she will need to frequently rotate between them. Assuming that this pattern eventually generates a short ball from her opponent, she must not pass up the chance to take the ball on the rise and approach the net. She needs to send a message to Aga that she will not ease up on future short balls, even if she ends up losing that particular point.

Keys for Radwanska: (1) Observe, test, and evaluate CSN’s physical condition early in the match by making her move in all directions through the use of her craftiness with drops shots and drive accelerations behind CSN (2) If CSN is not at 100%, keep the ball deep, allowing her to self-destruct, (3) If she is at 100%, engage her in repetitive patterns, such as cross-court backhands, and force her to take risks to get out of them, (4) Get the first serve in! Take the pace off it if needed, but do not rely on second serves to start the points.

Keys for CSN: (1) Create, attack, and harass Aga with aggressive returns on her second serves, (2) Vary often your three strong shots – see above, (3) Switch between kick serves and hard, flat serves on the advantage side, and on the deuce side, between slice serves to the outside and hard serves into the body. Execute the 1-2 punch if Aga’s returns, as a result, land short.

I say —> as noted above, there are some unknowns. But either way, Aga is craftier and better prepared mentally for a quarterfinal-round challenge. She should win in two fairly contested sets, but not really face much danger. If CSN comes out healthy and executes all of the above, it may not guarantee her the win, but it would guarantee an immensely entertaining match to the spectators.

Yuru1

MEN

Novak Djokovic vs. Kei Nishikori

Dear Novak fans, do not fret because your man made 100 unforced errors against Gilles Simon and looked less-than-stellar in his ground-stroke production. Simon, one of the biggest overachievers on the ATP Tour, puts many opponents off balance and Djokovic was no exception in that regard. It will be a different Novak against Nishikori, simply because the Japanese player will feed him a steady stream of high pace balls with which your man can display his superior counter-punching skills.

Yes, there is that loss to Nishikori back in the 2014 U.S. Open, but that seems ages ago. Djokovic is today a level above the player he was back then. Let me try to put in one sentence the summary of what we may see in this match. I see many rallies during which Kei produces one great forehand after another, runs Novak left and right, forces him to defend, only to see the roles reversed with one spectacular counter-punch shot by Novak, followed by the point ending a shot or two later with either Novak hitting a winner, or Kei going for the overkill on the run and committing an error.

That is not to say, Nishikori cannot adjust. He can drop shot, stick in a sharp cross-court or two behind Novak to throw him off balance. If he can force the Serb into a few mistakes early in the match, he may be able to build up enough steam to get ahead. I expect him to come out aggressive and go for big first serves. Nishikori has something to prove since that run to the final in New York. He has not yet backed it up. This time last year, many predicted that he would perhaps win a Major, but those same people have now lowered their expectations. Kei could not find a better opportunity than this to show again that he belongs to the top. I think he will be tuned in, and will want to believe (yes, X-Files is on my mind!).

Keys for Djokovic: (1) Counter-punch, repeat and recycle, (2) continue to win key points with first and second serves, (3) take risks on Nishikori’s second serves to take charge early in the point, (4) if the drop shot is off, take it off the menu, period!

Keys for Nishikori: (1) Be aggressive on the forehand from the beginning, (2) do not overkill from far behind the baseline, wait for the next shot, (3) play with a high first-serve percentage, (4) when pushed to the side, use sharp angles.

I say —> Djokovic wins in three sets, or loses the first and wins the next three.

Roger Federer vs. Tomas Berdych

Federer looked tremendous in his last match against David Goffin, but occasionally average in his previous matches. I always believed that Roger, unlike his main rivals, does better in Majors when he starts putting out his best in the earlier rounds. So the positive trend is a good sign, although it would have been preferable if he clicked on all cylinders from the beginning, like he did in the last two Majors. So, there is a bit of doubt in my mind, if he will again perform at the highest level against Berdych. One area in which Roger’s fans can take comfort is his “unlike-a-human-being-in-his-mid-thirties” footwork. He is moving like a cheetah on the court, and it clearly shows when he has to retrieve balls on defense. That will probably be the key to his success against the Czech who enjoys pounding his ground strokes and overpowering his opponent.

Berdych has had some success against Federer in the past, and even beaten him even in Majors (2010 Wimbledon, 2012 U.S Open). In every match that he won against the Swiss (total of 6 times) he seemed to stay inside the baseline and unleash one heavy ground stroke after another, while Federer committed mistakes when the rallies went beyond the ten-shot limit. When Berdych catches fire, he is a sight to behold and can make his opponent look primitive. That being said, his rhythm depends a lot on what Federer feeds him. So, let’s get to the keys of the match.

Keys for Federer: (1) Well-placed serves followed by either a volley, or a second and third shot that keep Berdych running and scrambling on the stretch, (2) tempt Berdych into coming to the net with low slices, forcing him to use topspin from below the net as an approach shot – not Berdych’s forte, (3) adjust the return position, use the SABR if needed, in short, do whatever it takes not to give Berdych a convenient ball to the middle of the court on the return.

Keys for Berdych: (1) A ton of powerful first serves, placement not that important, simply force Roger to block the return in order to take charge in the rally, (2) do not be afraid to come to the net, send a message to Federer that it’s not enough just to get the ball back with floating slices, (3) lull Roger into trading high-octane shots back and forth, like he did at Wimbledon 2010, or like Del Potro did in the 2009 US Open final, (4) hope that Roger’s footwork happens to be off for few hours on that day.

I say —> as previously noted, Federer’s footwork along with his ability to defend makes the difference, but not by much. This will be a tough one for the Swiss. Berdych is also more likely to get tight at critical junctures in the match. Federer wins in five sets, running away in the fifth after four contested sets.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter

Will Roland Garros Reflect the Clay-Court Season?

ATP & WTA Majors 2 Comments

Only a retrospective look after June 7th can provide the answer to the question in the title. The clay-court season does nevertheless give valuable indications on what to expect at the 16e arrondissement of Paris once matches begin seven days from now. And then there are the intangibles, always looming on the horizon, ready to influence outcomes. On the men’s side the three-out-of-five-set format will result in awkward scores during long matches (remember for example Marcel Granollers’ upset of the in-form Alexandr Dolgopolov by the score of 1-6 3-6 6-3 6-0 6-2?). It will also and bring into question injuries and physical endurance. On the women’s side, there will be question marks on whether some players who withdrew from clay-court events in the last few weeks can sustain two weeks of high-level competition or not. One intangible for both draws will be whether some past underdogs can manage the responsibility of being favorites in a Major.

The W.T.A. side

If the head-to-head record of Maria Sharapova vs. Serena Williams were not so lopsided, one could pencil the Russian’s name in as the clear favorite. What is quite underrated is how abundantly Sharapova wins matches on clay without playing a clay-court style tennis. Her success on this surface, with a style that favors hard, flat balls, and not much change of pace, would be the main topic of many tactical studies on different surfaces (read that as “for another day”). The good news for Maria is that she earned her way to the number-two ranking during the clay-court season and will not face Serena before the finals under any circumstances. Serena would love to see Sharapova’s name in the finals if she can get there herself, but that remains in doubt due to her less-than-stellar past appearances at Roland Garros, as well as her injury-related glitches during the spring. It seems like the bigger challenge for Serena will consist of going through the earlier rounds without damage, and then maximizing her performance in the later rounds.

Yet, there are potential challengers in the draw. Carla Suarez Navarro, freshly ranked inside the top 10 for the first time in her career, has proven capable of derailing her opponents with a wide arsenal of shots and her nerves of steel. While the spotlight in a Major will be a novelty for the Spaniard, her cool-headed approach to matches, as well as her high on-court IQ level, should be enough to negate the unfamiliar position of being the favorite against the vast majority of her opponents.

Will Carla still be demoted to the outside courts after her success this year? (photo taken during Roland Garros 2014) Will Carla still be demoted to the outside courts during Roland Garros after her success this year? (photo – during Roland Garros 2014)

Simona Halep, another favorite despite having garnered no clay-court titles in 2015, will have one clearly defined goal in mind as the number three seed: make it to the semifinal and go through Sharapova or Williams, or both. After reaching the finals last year and raising the bar, Halep is one of the few players, maybe the only one other than Sharapova and Williams, who cannot leave Roland Garros satisfied unless she wins the title.

Outsiders, there are plenty. One that has not gotten any mention in the early reports is Timea Bacsinszky who has been on a tear this year. Yes, she is outside the top 20, and yes, she did get taken out by the sensational Daria Gavrilova in Rome. Past years have shown however that any player who experiences unprecedented success in the clay-court tournaments leading up to Paris can also produce an equal type of run during the two weeks. Finally, there are some familiar names who have gotten the job done at the top level during their career, but are coming into this French Open without much momentum. Svetlana Kuznetsova is a name that no favorite wants to encounter in the first week, especially on her best surface. Although their chances of winning are slim to none, Petra Kvitova can rise up to the occasion on a given day, and players such as Carolina Wozniacki, Ana Ivanovic, Jelena Jankovic, Angelique Kerber, and Sara Errani can extract valuable miles from the legs of those favorites who wish to remain fresh for the “final four” rounds.

The A.T.P. side

2015 has anything but concretized the dominance of the Big Four (yes, capitals are necessary in this case). Or should we distinguish the invincible Novak Djokovic from the other three? If you are one of the many followers of the tennis world who choose to do so, I cannot blame you. The number one player in the world has gone undefeated in four Masters 1000 tournaments (last two on clay) and the Australian Open. He is heading into Roland Garros sporting a 22-match win streak that ironically represents only the third longest one in his spectacular career. He outclassed his two biggest rivals Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer in the two finals on clay, Monte-Carlo and Rome. The improvement in his game – and I can’t underline this enough – since he became number one first in 2011, is something to behold. His serve is now a weapon, his drop shots are uncanny, and in the last few weeks, has even shown remarkable progress in the weakest area of his game, the overhead.

NovakFansNovak made his fans in Indian Wells happy. Can he do the same for those in Paris?

Having said that, I am not one of those followers. I cannot separate Novak as a clear favorite from the rest of the field at the French Open, not until a player, as a winner, shakes Rafa’s hand at the net, at the end of an official French Open round match. Nadal has lost before to Djokovic during the clay-court season, only to emerge on the last day at Philippe Chatrier court, as the winner of the only Major of the year on that surface. In fact, this sequence has taken place more than once (2011 and 2014). Last year, Novak entered Roland Garros as the top seed, with a victory against Rafa in Rome, and still came up short. Nadal’s 6-0 record against Djokovic in Roland Garros (three of those in the last three years), and the fact that he lost only one match ever on the red clay of Roland Garros – yes, you read it correctly, ONLY ONE, his record is a stupefying 66-1!! – simply do not allow me to place Djokovic above the Spaniard as the clear favorite. Defeating Nadal by winning three sets against him, in a period of less than a few hours, would still be in the fantasy category for anyone if were not for that one surreal day in 2009, when Robin Soderling banged away warp-speed winners for exactly three hours and a half.

I will thus modify my version to saying that I place Nadal and Djokovic above everyone else, with Federer and Andy Murray slightly below them, followed by a few names that can go no further than possibly spoil the late-round meetings between these four. Roger Federer enters Roland Garros as the second best player of 2015, and even Andy Murray’s late form on clay cannot change that. Roger has earned that seeding, deservedly, by winning three titles, the Istanbul title on clay, and reaching the finals of two Masters 1000 tournaments. The second one of those was today on the clay courts of Foro Italico in Rome, where he was dominated by the lunar play of Djokovic. Murray for his part arrives to Paris with two titles and zero defeats on red dirt (he withdrew from Rome after winning his first match). That is an unprecedented accomplishment for the Scot who, despite often playing well on the surface prior to this year, could never earn a title on it. Yet, Murray and Federer are two of the three reasons – and the only ones in my opinion – that could stop the eventual Nadal vs. Djokovic final. The third is the much-debated seeding question.

Nadal will amazingly be seeded number seven in the very tournament that he won nine times in the last ten years. A combination of rare bad form in the first few months of 2015 and several months of injury-related absence on the ATP Tour in the second half of 2014 has led to Rafa’s lowest ranking ever at the time of Roland Garros. This means that Nadal could face any of the top four seeds as early as in the quarterfinals. The tournament organizers refused to utilize the skewed seeding system that Wimbledon does by taking into consideration the player’s success on the particular surface. Now the ideal situation for them would be that Nadal falls into Berdych’s quarters so that the possibility of semifinals consisting of the Big Four remains alive, and not to mention, likely. It would be a disaster to say the least, if Rafa goes in Novak’s quarters, meaning that by the semifinals, we are guaranteed that one of the two biggest favorites of the tournament, the very two that dominated it for the last three years, will not be present on the last weekend of the event. Rafa could also draw Murray’s quarter of the draw, in which case the next question will beckon: are they on Djokovic’s side or Federer’s side? If they are on Djokovic’s side, Berdych and Federer would rejoice (not publicly of course). If they are on Federer’s side, Federer fans may become the biggest Murray fans for one day if their man makes it to the semis and awaits the winner of Murray-Nadal. These questions will keep the minds of tennis fans, as well as experts, busy until the Main Draw is revealed on May 22nd, at which time all forms of prognostics will inundate social networks and the media.

Rafa TrophyCan Rafa do this again for the 10th time in 11 years, even as the 7th seed in the draw?

So, who could play the role of the spoiler to this Big Four party? One of them is Gaël Monfils whom the crowd could galvanize to a higher level of play. He is a name that neither Andy Murray nor Roger Federer would want to see in their quarters, although for Nadal and Djokovic, I doubt it would make much difference. There is also the loose cannon by the name of Fabio Fognini who holds two clay-court wins over Nadal this year, a feat accomplished only by Djokovic until this year. The Italian does not lack the talent to push any player to the limit on a given day, yet his seeding will likely force him to go through several gritty matches to make any major noise, and by now, everyone knows that grit is not Fabio’s forte. It would be fascinating to see him match up with Nadal for the third time on clay, and it could happen as early as the first week, considering their seeding.

Kei Nishikori remains the biggest threat to the Big 4 and the only one who could reach the final weekend without it being considered a stunning upset. Kei will need some help on the day of the draw. As a below-the-top-four seed, it is unlikely that he could go through three big names to lift the trophy on the last Sunday. The two guys on whom everyone has given up any hope of winning Roland Garros are strangely ranked 5 and 8 in the world. The problem with Tomas Berdych and David Ferrer is their miserable record against the Big 4. Yes, each has reached a Major final before (Berdych in Wimbledon 2010 and Ferrer in Roland Garros 2013) but one required a shocking upset (Berdych defeated Federer in 2010) and the other required one of the luckier draws in recent history (2013 French for Ferrer).

Milos Raonic is recovering from surgery and his participation next week is in doubt. Stan Wawrinka could give major headaches to one of the big names, but will not be more than a nuisance to the ensemble of the top favorites. Stan did oust Rafa in Rome, but that remains the one shining moment in his season since he won a title in Rotterdam in February. He is also breaking the cardinal rule for a contender in Majors by participating in a tournament taking place the week preceding a Major, the ATP Geneva event. One guy that did record two wins over Wawrinka in the clay-court season is Grigor Dimitrov. The Bulgarian has however underperformed in light of to the expectations following his successful 2014 campaign. Two Spanish players, Fernando Verdasco and Feliciano Lopez, have proven capable of winning against the best at some points in their careers, and don’t count them totally out. Gilles Simon could also make a big name feel sick in the stomach, but whether that would last more than a couple of sets remains improbable. But in any case, the above-mentioned players, outside of the Big Four, will have to catch fire, of a colossal size, to have any chance of belonging to the “active participant” category in the last few days of Roland Garros.

There are some “far-and-away” outsiders who could find their form and have career tournaments, such as Dominic Thiem, Roberto Bautista Agut, David Goffin, and Richard Gasquet – sorry dear Americans, no John Isner or Jack Sock -, but my use of the adjective “career tournaments” in this case does not point to a shocking upset of one of the Big Four members. With a bit of luck, they could march into the second week of the tournament, and at the most, could reach the quarterfinal rounds.

As for me, I am looking forward, for now, to my favorite portion of the Majors: the qualifying rounds. That is where emotions fly high, away from the scrutiny of cameras for the most part, and where the importance of winning a round often translates into career-high accomplishments, or in the case of a loss, into crushing blows. Enjoy the week, the Parisian party is near.

Note: Click here to stay tuned to MT-Desk on Twitter

How to Play Piss-Poor and Still Reach the Third Round at a Major 101- Course taught by Feliciano Lopez

ATP & WTA 1 Comment

We have reached the third round stage at the Australian Open, and although the surge in the number of surprise winners in the first days of competition emerged as a major topic of conversation, the title contenders on both women’s and men’s draws have moved forward. Only two of those players, Maria Sharapova and Rafael Nadal, have been in legitimate danger of being ousted by their “lesser” opponents, but both showed why they belong to the elite group of genii in our sport who rise above challenges in ways that others can only imagine. Down a match point twice, Sharapova hit two forehands winners that most other players would only dare to attempt if they were up 5-0 30-0. Nadal overcame violent stomach pains, vomiting on the court, and still found an extra supply of his interminable fighting spirit somewhere deep within him to come back from two-sets-to-one down to win in a battle that lasted over four hours.

This is how these genii operate and that is why they are likely to be there when late next week arrives instead of the emerging group of great players such as Madison Keys, Zarina Diyas, and Caroline Garcia on the women’s side, and Grigor Dimitrov, Milos Raonic, and Nick Kyrgios on the men’s.

The gap between these players and the elite has narrowed, but is still far from disappearing. Even for Eugenie Bouchard and Kei Nishikori, both reaching the finals of one Major each in 2014, the road still seems long before they can step on the same pedestal as the elite few. But this article belongs to one player on the men’s draw who is neither a genius, nor a great up-and-comer. It is about Feliciano Lopez, the veteran who has been around the top 20 for a long time while remaining a nightmare for most top players, and why he is the most unlikely player to still be in the tournament.

First of all, let’s make it very clear: it is not just the four match points saved by Lopez in his first two rounds combined against Denis Kudla and Adrian Mannarino that make his presence in the third round spectacular. It is rather how poorly he has played in those matches and still managed to turn them into victories.

Against Kudla, his first serve, which is usually the driving force for the rest of his game, hovered around the 55% mark throughout the match. It was also only in the mid-portion of the fifth set that (10-8) that the numbers of his winners surpassed that of his unforced errors; and even then, he still had to save three match points in the final stages of the match to survive. He was constantly having to catch up with Kudla’s rhythm, getting outplayed from the baseline, and having to chase the American’s balls down and committing silly errors in his attempts to dig out of that pattern and take charge during the points. Nevertheless, he survived and it could not get any worse for Lopez right? Wrong!

The level of his play dropped even lower against Mannarino. His first serve percentage was this time well below 50% (46% and 43% in the first two sets, respectively) for most of the match. Despite an opponent who kept throwing in double faults at the most inopportune moments, and who did nothing more than return low and bunt the ball back in play, Lopez made mistake after mistake and constantly complained to his corner, in search of answers for the shockingly low quality of shots coming out of his racket. Yes, Lopez did save a match point at 4-6 4-6 4-5, but alone, that does not reflect how lop-sided the match was at times in Mannarino’s favor. The Frenchman was actually up 4-0 in that third set and serving, then 5-3 and 30-0, and finally 3-0 up in the tiebreaker before losing seven points successively to lose the third set, and melting away in the fourth due to illness (he retired down 0-4 in the fourth set, unable to move the last few games).

So how did Lopez do it? Blaming Mannarino’s illness for the Frenchman’s exit from the tournament would be nothing more than telling a tall tale, because he did everything possible in the third set when he had the match in his hands, short of rolling the red carpet for Lopez and inviting him back in the match, to not cross the finish line.

At 4-0 down in the third, Lopez looked like he was ready to get in the locker room and playing terrible, except that Mannarino served a succession of double faults and committed a number of errors on shots that challenged him no more than the five-minute warm-up balls coming from the opponent. To be clear, it is not as if Mannarino led Lopez 6-4 6-4 4-0 because he was outplaying his opponent. He was up because he could not lower the quality of his game as much as Lopez did during that period. This match did not feature a world-class level of tennis, both players serving so poorly that there were a number of consecutive breaks in three and a half sets of play. Although the first sentence of the paragraph asked for an explanation of how Lopez “did it,” the more appropriate question for this particular match would have been “how did Mannarino do it?”

Yet, there must be a reason why, in Majors, Lopez has a 16-8 record in five-setters (win against Mannarino does not count because technically, Lopez did not win in five sets) and has won his last seven five-setters, dating back to Wimbledon 2009.

The Spaniard never loses hope no matter the score, and he does not link the level of his play to his will to win. In Lopez’s world, “playing bad” or “sucking” does not equal a loss. A very common phrase in tennis players’ language, “I can’t win playing like this,” does not exist for Lopez. As far as Lopez is concerned, he can play “like this,” and still win playing “like this.” In this edition of the Australian Open, he is easily the worst performer to reach the third round.

Lopez will face Jerzy Janowicz next round. In order to win, Lopez will desperately need to raise the level of his play against an opponent who has more power and shot-making capability than him. But wait! That is probably not how Lopez thinks. He probably thinks “I can win, but what can I do anyway in order to raise the level of my play?”

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

Fans’ Choice on Friday Evening: ATP over WTA

ATP & WTA 4 Comments

One often hears the likes of Billie Jean King, and other proponents of equal pay, make the argument that the product that the WTA puts out is just as interesting as that of the ATP, or that fans are just as interested in seeing the women play as they are in seeing the men. The evidence however, as the below example will show, points yet again to the contrary. While the argument of equal pay has its merits and is beyond the scope of this article’s main point, it is time for those making the argument to use accurate statements when presenting their case, instead of throwing faulty assumptions and relying on platitudes. Once again, during Friday evening in the Western & Southern Open in Cincinnati, there was visual proof that the ATP product clearly fills more seats than that of the WTA. The tournament had two elite matches scheduled at the same time. Roger Federer squared off against Andy Murray on Center Court at 7:00 PM at the same time as Maria Sharapova took on Simona Halep on the Grandstand Court.

The comparison is fair: Federer and Murray are the two faces of the “Big Four,” two of the most recognizable faces in men’s tennis. Sharapova and Halep are equally recognizable in women’s tennis, especially since their fantastic and recent French Open final. Federer is ranked number 3 and Murray is ranked number 9 in the ATP; Halep is ranked 2 and Sharapova is ranked number 6 in the WTA. Federer and Sharapova are two of the most famous athletes in sports, certainly the most marketable ones in men’s and women’s tennis – and that is a fact; Forbes lists the two celebrities as the highest paid tennis players thanks to endorsements.

The following two pictures were taken about 10 minutes apart. In order to make it fair, they were both taken at the same score line. Here is the Center Court (max. capacity 11,425) at the beginning of the second set after Federer won the first set 6-3:
Center

Now here is the Grandstand Court (max. capacity 5,000) at the beginning of the second set, after Halep won the first set 6-3:
Grandstand

Keep in mind that the Center Court has more than twice the capacity of the Grandstand (11,425 to 5,000). There is no doubt that tennis fans preferred to watch the men rather than the women in this case. This is not to say that women’s tennis does not generate interest. In fact, as soon as the Federer vs. Murray match was over, those fans on Center Court migrated quickly over to the Grandstand, packing the seats to watch Sharapova beat Halep in a thrilling three-set victory. Yet, when given similar choices, they prefer to watch men’s tennis over women’s tennis at the elite level.

Ending Tale of Roland Garros 2014

ATP & WTA No Comments

Clay Court Sweep
Roland Garros ended with two usual characters holding the winning trophies. Ironically, it will remain as one of the most upset-filled Slams in recent memory. Through all the upsets and the unexpected twists, the men’s number one and two seeds kept coming to a collision that all tennis fans expected since the beginning of the tournament. On the women’s side, once the top 3 seeds, Williams, Li Na, and Agnieska Radwanska, lost in the early days of the tournament, Sharapova and Halep were the two names that they predicted for the finals before any other name.

No need to go into details of each match, since most tennis fans have either watched them or read about them. It is worth noting however that for the first time in many years of worth of Slams (and yes, it’s “Slams” and not “Grand Slams”, a whole write-up needed for that mistake that keeps getting repeated over and over), the final weekend of the women’s draw witnessed as much excitement as the men’s, contained more dramatic matches with extremely tight finishes. The semifinals on Thursday – Sharapova vs. Eugenie Bouchard and Halep vs. Andrea Petkovic – undoubtedly provided more thrills for the spectators than the dull Friday of the men’s semifinals in which both matches remained sub-par in quality, and above-par in disappointment in terms expectations. Ernests Gulbis and Novak Djokovic played mediocre tennis for the most part, piling up the unforced errors. Djokovic’s physical condition deteriorated as the match went on and Gulbis could not raise his level of play to take advantage of it. The second match between Nadal and Andy Murray went from start to finish at maximum warp speed as Nadal totally outclassed Murray for a one-man-show that lasted 1 hour and 38 minutes.

On Saturday, Sharapova and Halep brought their “A” games to Philippe Chatrier and provided the crowd, as well as the millions in front of their TV screens, with a spectacle to be remembered for a long time to come. It made me think back to the last three-set-final at Roland Garros, some 13 years before Saturday, when Jennifer Capriati confirmed her comeback year that started at the Australian Open with a thrilling victory, 1/6 6/4 12/10, over the young newcomer Kim Clijsters of Belgium. It was a high flying period for the WTA with the Williams sisters in the beginning of their dominance, with Capriati and Martina Hingis challenging them, the Belgian duo Clijsters and Justine Henin joining the race and Sharapova getting in the mix in the mid-2000s. That match on Chatrier between Capriati and Clijsters was the stamp on the envelope that contained the sealed confirmation that WTA was a highly popular product among tennis fans. Around late 2000s, the product got old and stale, with many of the stars who built it, retiring or losing their skills. Yet, the new crop of players never managed to take over the few remaining names that kept dominating most tournaments. Saturday’s final match was not only a thrill in terms of quality of tennis played but also the stamp that the WTA desperately needed to confirm that it is on its way back. Sharapova may have lifted the winner’s trophy but the fresh crop of players such as Halep, Bouchard, Garbine Muguruza, Ajla Tomljanovic, Sloane Stephens, Caroline Garcia, and few others are not going anywhere, and will stay around for a long time. WTA has a golden opportunity to capitalize on a new, radiant group of players, and it could not have asked for a better Slam final match to launch their product.

The men’s final lacked nothing with regards to hype. The two best players in the world met at the highest stage of clay court tennis. The first two sets matched the expectations in quality and competition. Djokovic and Nadal traded blows, with each attempting to gain control over the other’s baseline game through aggressive shots. In the first set, Djokovic managed to stay inside the court and push Nadal around. In the second set, Nadal began going for winners much more often and succeeded in taking the middle of the court away from Djokovic. With the first two sets split, everyone expected a thrill ride the rest of the way. It never happened, due to two things. First Nadal completely found his rhythm and remained on high gear for the next hour, only to come land from space down to earth for the last few games of the match. Second, Djokovic’s physical state rapidly deteriorated from about 4-3 in the second set to 2-0 in the third set, to the point where he began shaking and stretching his legs and arms between points to relax and recover, stretching for balls to avoid extra steps, and as the usual result of fatigue, increasing the number of unforced errors in abundance. It was only after the middle of the fourth set, when the clouds came and the wind picked up, that Djokovic found a way to get back into the match – and Rafa had a hand in it too, with a few unexpected unforced errors. Yet, it was too little too late, as Djokovic did not have enough reserve in the tank to match the quality of his tennis from the first set. Nadal remained the king of clay and the number one player in the world, improving on his record of French Open titles and adding a new one to his expanding resume: he is now the only player in tennis to have one at least one Slam title for ten years in a row.

That being said, the stars of the last weekend of this Slam were the women. It was the first time in many years that women’s matches outclassed the men’s matches in excitement, thrill, and in quality. Unlike in men’s matches, there were no ‘empty moments’ in the three women’s matches of the last weekend, no one-sided shows, and plenty of quality shot making. Unlike in the men’s matches, each of the three women’s matches remained hard to predict all the way to the very last few points. Roland Garros 2014 was the recipe that the WTA desperately needed, the injection that rejuvenated a stale product.

I hope you enjoyed the series of updates from Paris.
Let the grass court season begin…

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

MENU

Navigation