Tag: Richard Gasquet

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

Citi Open – Tuesday’s Narrative

August 5, 2015

Mertov

ATP & WTA 8 Comments

I drive into the grounds around 10:30 AM. The first match is not scheduled to start until 1:50 PM. Nonetheless, I come early, because I have a few things to do on my computer, and more importantly, I love watching the players practice. There is hardly anyone around, and they are busy tweaking bits and pieces of their game, or working on a strategy for their upcoming match later in the day. Parking is problematic to say the least at the Citi Open. First, there are not enough spaces. Second, if you arrive later in the day or in the evening, from first-person experiences of a few people that I have talked to, it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to park and get in the grounds. They are directed to another site to park from where they have to take the shuttle, etc. To make matters worse, not all parking attendants are apparently on the same page, and they get conflicting information on how to do what.

For my part, I run into a lady who made the person before me park very close to the car next to hers. I see that and I have no intention of doing the same, so I park about a foot further than she indicates. She gets mad and tells me that I need to “follow instructions.” I tell her I want to be able to get out, and she keeps ranting. I get out of my car anyway and see the lady who parked before me giving me thumbs up and shaking her head to the attendant. She is barely able to squeeze out of her car. I make a note to myself that if I run into the same problem, that parking attendant will hear a few words back from me such as “I follow instructions if they appeal to my common sense, sorry that you have none!” By the way, did I mention that parking costs $15 per day? If you are there every day, that is over a $100 dollars that you plan to spend. For some weekly ticket holders, it’s included in the cost.

I walk around the courts. Andy Murray is hitting with Richard Gasquet who gets a ton of instructions from his coach (and former two-time French Open champion) Sergi Bruguera during the breaks. It is already hot and Gasquet is wearing a black t-shirt (unlike Murray who has a white one) that says “Paris” on it.

They are both concentrated on the task in hand; this is not what one would call a “fun” practice.

A shirtless John Isner is on the next court. The tall guy is fairly slim and in good shape, not too muscular. He is hitting with a youngster and Justin Gimelstob is on the side of the youngster, yelling across the net to Isner for instructions.

The first match begins promptly at 1:50 PM on Center Court between two Americans, Coco Vandeweghe and Christina McHale. I am more interested in the one that starts in 20 minutes on Grandstand between Kristina Mladenovic and Samantha Stosur. Therefore, I only stay for a few points on Center Court, but I am rather astonished by the fact that the stands are virtually empty. As I walk away I see Wayne Bryan (Mike and Bob’s father) running a tennis clinic for adults, and I wonder if the head count is higher in that clinic than in the Center Court!

The Mldenovic vs Stosur match disappoints largely because nothing seems to work for Kiki. She makes routine errors, and as the match progresses, her body language gets more and more negative. Her mother Dzenita, former professional volleyball player and an ex-member of the national team of the former Yugoslavia, walks out to the court as Kiki’s coach once in each set to turn the tide (pictured below is the first one). Alas, the slide never ends and Stosur walks out with a comfortable 6-2 6-2 score to record her 500th career win.

Little did Dzenita know that her “real” coaching/mothering would come after the match. Kiki sits by the wall outside the players’ area, cries, sobs, and rants to herself for at least 30 minutes. Dzenita stands by her side through all of it, attempting to lift her daughter’s spirits up. I feel bad for Mladenovic because any of us who played high-level competitive tennis (and if it sounds patronizing, sorry, but only people who experienced individual competition under great pressure would understand the gravity of these moments) have gone through these types of agonizing emotions following certain losses, and I can only imagine how painful it must be for her at that moment. Although it is the first round of a WTA Event and it is obviously not her first career loss, there could be many reasons behind it, or a culmination of things. In any case, tennis players know and understand that this happens (or will happen) to every one of them, probably more than once. Each may have a different way of manifesting it. I remember going to my dad’s car and staring at the side mirror for 15 minutes, wondering why I am playing tennis if I can’t win a match like this, following an excruciating loss in the semifinals of a national tournament that played a role in the selection of the country’s national team back then. There are highs and lows, this happens to be one of the “lowly lows.” I am hoping she will get through it.

Next, I see Sam Groth who is getting last-minute instructions from his coach. He is totally relaxed, cracking jokes, and laughing. Not all players have the need to get that tunnel-vision “boxing” face prior to a match. He plays a tricky opponent in Thomaz Bellucci. Groth wins the first set in a tiebreaker, and breaks in the second to go up 4-2. Then, a rare occurrence: Groth loses his serve twice in a row, allowing Bellucci to carry the match to a third set. Sam imposes his game again in the third, and this time, does not squander the lead. While his serve never ceases to amaze, I am more struck by how quick he gets from the baseline to the service line after the serve.

His second step is almost midway between the two lines. You may say that in today’s tennis, in order to be a successful serve-and-volley player, you must do nothing less than that, but we are talking about a pretty big, muscular guy here (6’4 and 216), and his forward explosion after the serve is remarkable.

I quickly go to the next court to watch the third set tiebreaker between Jarmila Gajdosova and the qualifier Naomi Broady. Gajdosova can’t capitalize on a match-point opportunity at 6-5 in the tiebreaker. She is fuming. Broady wins the next two points and closes it 8-6. Someone in the stands (British accent) cheers Broady on along with other spectators clapping. On her way to the net to shake hands, Gajodosova yells and scolds that fan. Broady is not happy and says a few words to Gajdosova who looks shocked for a few seconds and stares at her after the handshake. Then, another exchange between the two players ensues before Jarmila packs up her bags and leaves the court.

As that same fan walks out, he passes by Heather Watson who was there to support Broady. He gives her a few words of encouragement. Watson, always friendly, says “no it was terrible yesterday” and laughs (she lost 6-3 6-0 to Louisa Chirico).

I begin to watch the match between Ivan Dodig, a “Lucky Loser” who only found out that he is in the tournament earlier in the day due to Marcos Baghdatis’ retirement, and the qualifier Guido Pella. I am determined to stick through this match, because I admire the tenacity and the desire that these types of players, ones to whom a first-round win in an ATP 500 level event means as much as that first balloon that your parents get you when you are a kid. Pella ranked 100, Dodig at 104, both players were in the qualifying draw and a second round appearance in the main draw would tremendously boost their confidence. They don’t disappoint. They fight for every point, run down every ball within their reach.

Pella wins the first set 6-3, and can’t close the match out in the tiebreaker of the second set, despite earning a match point. Dodig takes a quick bathroom break before the third set, and I see Pella sitting in his chair, shirtless and dejected. I am wondering if he is replaying the match point wasted in his head.

When he loses his serve routinely in the first game of the third set, I begin to think that Dodig may run away with this match. However, out of nowhere, Dodig tries two ill-advised drop shots that he misses in the net, gags an easy put away, and lets Pella back in the match. At 2-1, the rain arrives, which results in a fairly lengthy delay. When the match resumes around 9:30 PM, both players begin to comfortable hold serves until 6-5 where Dodig once again plays a bad game in which he makes two unforced forehand errors to quickly go down 0-40. Pella capitalizes on his second match point and you can see the “relief” (as he called it after the match when I talked to him) on his face. His celebration is subdued, but his face tells it all.

When the clock strikes midnight, there are still 4 matches on the courts, one that is about to begin, and another still waiting for the prior match to end. I watch the Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova vs Magdalena Rybarikova match on Grandstand 2.

It cannot be an easy task to play a match that starts after midnight, and both players spray balls all over the place. Pavlyuchenkova proves to be the one to make fewer mistakes and hit more winners in tiebreakers, so she wins 7-6 7-6. At one point during the second set, 4th seed Svetlana Kuznetsova casually enters the court around 1:30 AM and joins the other 20 spectators left in the stands.

Before I leave little before 2 AM, I watch a couple of games and the first set tiebreaker between Marin Cilic and Hyeon Chung. There are between 50 and 100 people in the stands to watch the defending US Open champion.

I am not that surprised. It has been a long day and the rain delay in the evening did not help. I leave after the first set and see that the car that parked after me is extremely close to my car and I remember the parking attendant from the morning…

It seems so long ago…

Note: Stay tuned to Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter for live updates, and on-site photos…

Men’s Quarterfinals Preview: Potential for a Short Day (*)

July 7, 2015

Mertov

ATP Majors 2 Comments

The last time all four men’s quarterfinals finished in straight sets was in 1998. Even then, Goran Ivanisevic needed three tight tiebreakers (two extended beyond 7 points) to keep the crafty, left-handed, serve-and-volley specialist Jan Siemerink from winning a set. Since then, men have come twice within one set of having all quarterfinals end in straight sets. First one was in 2000 when the unorthodox Jan-Michael Gambill won a tiebreaker from the legendary Pete Sampras, and the second happened when Lleyton Hewitt also managed to steal a tiebreaker from another legend by the name of Roger Federer.

I am sure many would disagree (is that not the fun part of playing the crystal ball game?), but tomorrow’s quarterfinals on the men’s side could be another short day at the office, similar to those in 2000 and 2004, and potentially, to the one in 1998.

On top of the draw, Novak Djokovic takes on Marin Cilic. Last year’s five-set win by Djokovic over Cilic still echoes in a number of heads because as soon as the Serb finally defeated Kevin Anderson in the fifth set played on Tuesday morning, several people mentioned that match from last year and begged the question of whether Novak could sustain another five-set marathon or not. That should never come into question in this year’s case. Djokovic is an established champion, more dominating than last summer, and he is on top of his game. Cilic, for his part, seems to play catch-up (very slowly at that) since coming back down from the clouds where he was residing during the second week of US Open 2014, partially due to a nagging shoulder injury that kept him out of competition. While it is true that he is finally getting back to the form that elevated him inside the top 10, he will need generous help from Djokovic in order to break his serve, or else, he will have to fancy his chances in tiebreakers. Cilic’s game depends a lot on aggressive returns that allow him to control the point and to push his opponents around. Djokovic’s counterpunching skills, best in that category with Rafael Nadal in the 21st century, coupled with his ever-improving serve, should effectively keep Cilic at bay. When Cilic is not returning, he will need a lot of first serves, not necessarily to garner direct points, but to set up the next shot in order to execute his game plan. Cilic’s success hinges on too many things falling into the right places. The chances of a straight-set, lop-sided victory by Djokovic are more likely than a five-set match.

Second quarterfinal of the day will pit Stan Wawrinka against Richard Gasquet. Although it promises some spectacular points scattered here and there, Gasquet will only win a set – thus have a shot at winning – if Stan were to start slow enough to fall behind in the first set, or to simply check out of the match mentally (remember the match vs. Guillermo Garcia-Lopez in the 2014 Roland Garros?). Gasquet and Wawrinka played twice, one too long ago (2006) and the other on clay in 2013. Wednesday’s match has different dynamics. Gasquet will now deal with a two-time Major champion, on top of his game, and against whom, the Frenchman does not seem to possess any weapons to tilt the match in his favor. Gasquet can neither overpower Wawrinka nor win through consistency. Federer learned very fast (gladly for him, he was on the brink of going down 2-0 in sets) in last year’s quarterfinals that you cannot simply rally with Wawrinka from the baseline, who will slowly catch fire, harass you with rock-solid shots, and push you around far behind the baseline. As is the case in many matches that he won against his countryman, Federer knew to switch from one tactic to another, dig deep into his arsenal of shots, and produce a solution that turned the match around. As talented as he is, Gasquet is not Federer, and furthermore, Wawrinka’s level hovers above the one from the summer of 2014. The Swiss has yet to lose a set so far in this tournament, and it could remain that way until Friday.

He would never say it out loud, but if you whispered to Andy Murray’s ear ten days ago that Vasek Pospisil would stand across the net from him in the quarterfinals of a Major, let alone Wimbledon, Andy would have given you his conventional half-smile, with his fingers rubbing the side of the eyebrows, before wondering if you became delusional. Yet, here we are in the quarterfinals, and the Canadian being in the final eight is the biggest surprise of the second week. That is partially why he is unlikely to push Murray, who is in another league from his previous four opponents, beyond a straight-set victory. The other half is the difference in the amount of labor done by the two players on the courts of SW19. In his four matches so far, Murray has spent 8 hours 50 minutes on the court. Pospisil has spent 11 hours 32 minutes with only one match going less than five sets (Fabio Fognini in four). Pospisil did surprise me – I should rather admit that he “stunned” me – when he came back from 0-2 in sets to pull a five-set win against Victor Troicki on Monday. He looked tired at the end of his five-set match against James Ward the round before, and I did not believe that his body, that has proven to be fragile at times in the past, could sustain another grueling five-set match once he was led 2-0 in sets. Having said “all that,” the big stage in a Major (no, doubles titles do not negate that lack of experience in singles) on the most legendary court in the history of the game, against a home-town legend that has the crowd’s support, will prove too much for the young Canadian (assuming 25-year-olds are nowadays perceived as “young” on the ATP Tour?). I see maybe one close set taking place, but nothing more on the horizon for Pospisil.

Roger Federer takes on another French player in a Major for the umpteenth time in his career. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the only Frenchman to whom he has lost in Majors is Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (Wimbledon 2011 and Roland Garros 2013). On top of that, Gilou does not have the necessary ingredients to cook up a plan on grass that can take the Swiss out of his comfort zone. Anyone who has followed my articles or has discussed with me the contrast between overachievers and underachievers on the ATP Tour will know that I mention Simon as one of the emblematic examples of overachievers who get the maximum out of their limited talent due to their high on-court I.Q. as well as their ability to create solutions where none seem to exist. But even Simon will have a tough time stopping the Federer Express steaming along so far this year. I have no doubt that the Frenchman has already concocted a plan for the match, but I am afraid that what he is good differs from what he needs to do to beat Federer. His mid-to-hard-paced baseline shots play into Federer’s hands because they bounce to about thigh or hip level (Federer’s favorite level to strike the ball) and come with enough pace so that the Swiss can punch and accelerate, yet not fast enough to where he will feel rushed. Once Federer takes the lead, watch out, it could be a quick one.

So can it be another 2000, 2004, or even 1998? For the spectators’ sake, I hope not. Personally I also see the beauty in a lop-sided match when one player delights the fans with regal shot-making skills. However, four in a row on a day that historically produces at least one electric moment, if not more, would undoubtedly disappoint even the most avid tennis fans. Let’s hope that I jinxed that possibility with this article. Instead of a quarterfinal day like in 1998, let’s hope for a one quality match after another in which one player excels, and the other goes above and beyond himself to force his opponent to sustain that level while gradually joining him on that plateau of excellence.

(*) “Why the asterisk?” you may ask. Any of my friends with whom I spend any amount of substantial time discussing sports can tell you that I am a horrible prognosticator and that I am notorious for “drying up” some competitors’ chances of winning by simply picking them. Hence, this article is for discussion purposes, I would strongly advise you against taking it into consideration if you intend to bet. Now you know why…

Note: Follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter for live updates throughout Wimbledon.

Australian Open 2015, Logical Men’s Quarterfinals: Can They Materialize?

January 18, 2015

Mertov

ATP No Comments

As soon as the draws were announced at the Australian Open, it did not take long for the logical quarterfinals projections to be announced by the media members and tennis experts. The process is simple: you take the two highest seeds in each quarter and assume that they will beat their opponents to eventually face each other in that section of the draw for a berth in the semifinals. Thus, on the men’s draw the line up would be the following: Novak Djokovic (1) vs. Milos Raonic (8), Stan Wawrinka (4) vs. Kei Nishikori (5), Rafael Nadal (3) vs. Tomas Berdych (7), and Roger Federer (2) vs. Andy Murray (6). While those are dream match-ups for the second week and the tournament organizers, past experience tells us that the chances of this logical outcome coming to fruition is close to zero percent. Here are my takes on each quarter section, assuming that injuries play no part in the outcome:

Top quarter: Djokovic vs. Raonic

The chances of Djokovic getting upset early are close to none. He is a consistent performer in the Majors and it usually takes a monumental effort (Rafa at the French or Wawrinka 12 months ago in Melbourne are good examples) to eliminate Djokovic in a five-set battle. He rarely gets upset by lesser opponents. While I would be interested to see the talented Swede Elias Ymer do well, get past his first two rounds (tall order as it is, and not very likely), and take the stage against the number one player in the world, Djokovic is likely to get to the round of 16s without any complication. Then, he will have a more serious test, possibly against John Isner who has given him trouble in the past in two-out-of-three-sets matches. IIsner’s section, there are also couple of intriguing names, Dominic Thiem and Laurent Lokoli, who are looking for their first breakout Major tournaments. Throw in the dangerous Roberto Bautista-Agut and the in-form Gilles Muller, you have a fantastic early-round section with players battling to face Djokovic. Nevertheless, Djokovic should get to the quarters, possibly without even losing a set. Raonic’s path to the quarterfinals is a bit more complicated, but not until the third round. Once past his first two matches, he should face someone who will challenge him, such as Lleyton Hewitt or Julien Benneteau, who have wnough experience to trouble Raonic. If he gets past that, he will have to face either Feliciano Lopez who performs well in Majors and has the experience, or Gaël Monfils whom everyone fears except Nadal and Djokovic. Chances of Djokovic and Raonic meeting in the quarters: around 70%.

2nd quarter: Stan Wawrinka vs. Kei Nishikori

The big question here is “which Wawrinka will show up?” If it is the one from last year’s Australian Open or Wimbledon, look for him to steamroll his way to the quarterfinals. One player floating dangerously that nobody has heard of: Marius Copil. If he faces Wawrinka in the second round, it should be entertaining, providing that Copil does not melt under the “my-first-Major-appearance” syndrome. I do not see how Fognini, Dolgopolov, or anyone else in the third round, including Guillermo Garcia-Lopez who beat him in Paris, can stop Wawrinka. At first glance, Nishikori’s draw looks tough, but it could turn out to be a cakewalk. Nicolas Almagro would be one of the last players any seeded player cares to play in the first round, except that Almagro has not played an ATP match since Wimbledon due to a foot injury. I personally like Santiago Giraldo and Steve Johnson but I believe they are good match-up for Nishikori who can do everything they do, but a bit better. In the round of 16s, he will face the usually dangerous David Ferrer or Gilles Simon. I use the word “usually” seriously because in 2014, Ferrer was not the Ferrer that we are used to seeing for the last eight years, and Gilles Simon has battled injuries lately. I am looking for Nishikori to make it to the quarters easier than expected. Chances of Wawrinka and Nishikori meeting in the quarters: around 85%.

3rd quarter: Nadal vs. Berdych

Considering that he is not coming into the tournament on a high note, Nadal could not have asked for a better draw. Unlike Federer and Wawrinka, Nadal (like Djokovic) has the ability start a tournament on third gear, and eventually pull it to the fifth gear by the time the second week comes around. And all the names that could have given the Spaniard trouble in the early rounds are dispersed elsewhere. Don’t be fooled by some crazy upset pickers, his first round opponent Mikhail Youzhny is a shadow of his former self. The one name that stands out in his potential early-round opponents is Lukas Rosol. But this is not grass; it’s rather a slow version of hard courts. Does either Richard Gasquet or Kevin Anderson have a chance against Nadal if they play in the round of 16s? Anderson, small chance… Gasquet, none! In contrast to Nadal, Berdych has one of the hardest roads to travel in orderto reach the quarterfinals. Jurgen Melzer, his possible second-round opponent, has too much game and experience to be intimidated by neither Berdych nor a Major tournament atmosphere. Then, he will face Leonardo Mayer, Jiri Vesely, or Viktor Troicki, who are all able to cause an upset, and hungry for victories in the big stage. Even if he makes it through the first three rounds, Berdych will then have to take on a solid player such as Philipp Kohlschreiber (the last guy to get intimidated when playing a seeded player), Sam Groth (dangerous serve-and-volleyer who keeps improving steadily), or Ernest Gulbis (maybe the biggest loose cannon in the draw who can beat anybody depending on which side of the bed he wakes up that morning). Chances of Nadal and Berdych meeting in the quarters: around 60%.

4th quarter: Federer vs. Murray

Federer’s potential early-round opponents are composed of some solid names on the tour, but none good enough to cause a remarkable upset in a Major. Jeremy Chardy, Simone Bolelli, Borna Coric, Juan Monaco, Andres Seppi, Denis Istomin, can all beat a higher seeded player in any other ATP tournament (and have), or even take a set of a top player in a Major, but do not stand a chance to topple a top four seed here. Ivo Karlovic could be a dangerous fourth round opponent, but Federer seems to know how to deal with big servers, and Tommy Robredo (another potential fourth round opponent) defeating Federer in a Major will only happen once (2013 US Open). I can see Federer playing a few tiebreakers, or even losing a set (or sets) but do not see him losing prior to the quarterfinals. Andy Murray’s side has a couple of loose cannons in Marinko Matosevis and Martin Klizan who can be nightmares on the court. And yet, this is precisely what Murray needs, in order to be ready to face either Grigor Dimitrov, or David Goffin, or Dustin Brown (speaking of loose cannons), or Marcos Baghdatis, or Teymuraz Gabashvili in the fourth round. Yes, any of those can make it to the fourth round; this is by far the most contested section of the men’s draw. Again, Murray needs these tests to have a chance against Federer in the quarters, because he, like Djokovic and Nadal, can play himself into form as the tournament progresses. Chances of Federer and Murray meeting each other in the quarters: around 75%.

And now, it’s time to enjoy the first Major of 2015!

Follow MT-Desk on Tweeter throughout the tournament: @MertovsTDesk

In Defense of Arnaud Clément

December 2, 2014

Mertov

ATP 2 Comments

The big "Salad Bowl" sitting pretty in Biel, Switzerland — The big “Salad Bowl” sitting pretty in Biel, Switzerland

For a few days, following the French’s devastating (at least from their perspective) defeat at the hands of the Swiss team in the finals of the Davis Cup campaign, Arnaud Clément, the captain of the French team, experienced what most losing Davis Cup captains go through in such periods: suffer the wrath of retrospectively enlightened critics who seem to know better, the angry fans who are looking for a victim to blame, and anyone (and everyone) who claims that they would have known what to do, had they been in his shoes. While the irresistible art of “armchairing” gripped those who believed – in the after-math of course – that Clément made the wrong decisions, anyone with a rational approach to the ins and outs of the developments leading up to, and through, the final weekend, should be able to see that his choices were not the wrong at the time that he had to make them.

The first challenge that faced Clément was to nominate four players that were to represent the French team against the Swiss. He had an accomplished doubles team composed of Julien Benneteau and Édouard Roger-Vasselin, the winners of the 2014 Roland Garros title. Had he picked them, he would have had to leave out two of the following players out of the team: Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Gilles Simon, Gaël Monfils, and Richard Gasquet. Furthermore, his head would have been hanging at the Place de la Concorde even before the weekend was over, had one of the two singles players that he picked got injured on Friday, and was substituted by one of the doubles players on Sunday, leading to an almost-guaranteed loss. He did what any reasonable coach would do. Unless you have an extraordinary doubles team, such as the Bryan brothers of the U.S.A., you go with your strong singles players who could collect four out of the five points that you need to win the tie, and hope that two of them can combine to provide a solid doubles effort.

Out of the four strong singles players mentioned above, two of them could also play doubles: Gasquet and Tsonga. In fact, they won a crucial doubles match against a formidable Tomas Berdych – Radek Stepanek in Davis Cup when they played the Czech team, and did reach the quarterfinals of the Toronto Masters 1000 having beaten a respectable Laender Paes – Stepanek team, only to withdraw in the quarterfinals. In contrast, Simon and Monfils are singles players. Clément wanted one doubles specialist on the team and he took Benneteau, a sensible choice. It is also reasonable that he picked the two singles players that could also play doubles, and chose only one out of the two other players who could play singles. Calm down Simon fans (and I happen to be one myself), but on clay, Clément’s choice to pick Monfils over your guy was completely understandable and justified.

Friday ended with a 1-1 tie, and displayed a version of Federer that represented a level situated somewhere between “terrible” and “mediocre” compared to his real one. None of the after-the-fact armchair experts could have predicted that Federer’s level would rise in the following 48 hours faster than the Enterprise accelerated from ¼ impulse drive to Warp Speed nine. Most believed that Tsonga and Gasquet would triumph over Wawrinka and Federer, and that is, if Federer played doubles in his limited condition.

However, on Friday two things happened that were completely outside the control of either captain. First, Tsonga injured his wrist which caused him to withdraw, by his own request, from the doubles. Second, Federer played through his match against Monfils with no pain in his back, and although he got crushed by the Frenchman, he was unusually upbeat about the rest of the weekend. Clément once again made the only reasonable decision: replace Tsonga with Benneteau, and thus, put his two best doubles players on the court. Gasquet and Benneteau did not play bad, but Wawrinka and Federer played the kind of sensational doubles that they have not played since their run to the gold metal back in 2008 Olympic Games. Three sets later, Switzerland took a 2-1 lead in the tie, and everything went from bad to worst on Sunday when Federer put up one of his better clay-court performances in the last few years, running Gasquet around and finishing the points with remarkable shot-making skills.

Just like that, the Swiss won the Davis Cup, and the Statlers and Waldorfs of the world came out in numbers, ready to guillotine Clément. Yet, once again, Clément’s choices were not only the most reasonable ones to make, but as seen above, the only ones he could make in certain cases. It was one of the most unfortunate weekends for a Davis Cup captain that I have ever witnessed, because it contained every twist needed to transform it into the “festival of blame” that followed the next few days in the French tennis circles.

Unfortunately for Clément, if someone wanted to write a script to make him look bad at the end of the day, they could not have done a better job. First, the controversy surrounding the Swiss team, involving the Wawrinka-Mirka malaise on the preceding weekend in London, followed by the unexpected injury of Federer that caused him to withdraw from the finals against Novak Djokovic, made the Swiss team look beatable and demoralized, thus giving the impression that the French had the psychological upper hand. Second, the fact that the French had two weeks of preparation on clay, versus the less-than-a-week preparation time for the Swiss, not to mention that Federer had a total of one hour and twenty minutes of total practice time before Friday’s first match, added to the impression that the French had all the necessary elements tilted to their advantage. Last, the aura of having a team composed of Monfils, Tsonga, and Gasquet, that has never lost at home, firmly put the French in the favorite category in the perceptions of many, although reality was the opposite, at least on paper. These factors combined to create a firm belief by the French that losing to Switzerland on that particular weekend in Lille would be considered nothing less than a debacle. Clément ended up in the position of a captain who would either be doing only what was expected had France won, or face the prospect of being profiled as a failure in the case of a loss. Unfortunately for him, the latter took place.

Fortunately for him, however, the French Tennis Federation recently consulted the players, and they stood tall behind Clément, ensuring that he retains his captaincy. Today, The French Tennis Federation confirmed that Clément will continue to serve as the captain, for at least two more years. It must be a relief to the ex-Australian Open finalist, knowing that over the weekend, Yannick Noah expressed his disappointment over the loss and explicitly verbalized his interest to become the captain if given the opportunity. Clement did not take that lightly and struck back at Noah with criticism of his own, saying that he takes the 1983 Roland Garros champion’s words as an attack against him, and that things in reality are not the same as they may have appeared to Noah on the TV screen. Personally, I am a big fan of Yannick Noah, and he has already proven to be an astute Davis Cup captain in the past (remember 1991 and his decision to play Henri Leconte in singles). Yet, I can’t help but agree with the players in Clément’s case, and disagree with the members of the “armchair crew,” including Noah, who have the luxury to speak in retrospect unlike the captain.

Clément did carry them to the finals and the French need to understand that for one weekend in November, they faced a Swiss team that had superior skills and better level of quality in their tennis than they did. Donned with the number two and four players in the world, and one of the most underrated coaches in tennis (Severin Lüthi), the Swiss lived up to their potential under very difficult circumstances. Considering Wawrinka’s form and Federer’s quick recovery, followed by his excellent level of play on Saturday and Sunday, I am not sure if Clément would have coached his team to victory, even under the best of circumstances. Davis Cup captains sometimes do commit mistakes and fail, and even deserve to be fired in extreme circumstances. But the loss against Switzerland two weekends ago was not one of those cases. Clément should rightfully remain in his position and deservedly get another chance to lead his team in 2015.

Little did Federer & Wawrinka know on May 23rd, during this early morning practice on Philippe Chatrier court, that exactly six months from that day, they would be lifting the Davis Cup trophy together!

June 23: Day 1 at Wimbledon in Pictures

June 23, 2014

Mertov

Miscellaneous 1 Comment

The most prestigious tournament in tennis, namely Wimbledon, got underway today at the courts of The All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club with first-round singles matches. Around one month ago, in one of my Roland Garros updates, I decided to let the pictures do the talking and I was suprisingly pleased to hear that many of you enjoyed it. So, what better way to start the Wimbledon updates than with pictures to tell the tale of Day 1? Here we go…

Be ready to trim the fat off your wallet for tickets. At the time of this article, 1 GBP is worth 1.703 Dollars, or 1.252 Euros. You do the math.

Stunning statue of legendary British player Fred Perry, Wimbledon’s winner in 1934, 1935, and 1936.

Henman Hill already in full gear with Andy Murray’s opening match of the tournament.

Two days after losing in the finals of the AEGON International ATP 250 tournament in Eastbourne, the 13th-seed Richard Gasquet practices under the watchful-eye of his Coach Sebastien Grosjean (now-retired 4-time Slam semifinalist and ex-world number 4) – to prepare for his first round match tomorrow against the Australian James Duckworth.

Gasquet’s practice partner was Marsel Ilhan of Turkey, one of the qualifiers to make it to the Main Draw. He practices under the guidance of coach Alberto Nunez and his physical trainer (in blue) to prepare for his match tomorrow against another qualifier Denis Kudla of U.S.A.

Around 2:30 PM…

(Caption) – Ball Girl: “Hmmm, should I ask him how I could get my hair to do that?”

Surely Marcos Baghdatis did not miss this put away, did he?

Around 3:44 PM… Note: Courts 14 and 15, seen here, are out of commission until the 2015 edition of Wimbledon.

Samuel Groth may have lost to Dolgopolov in a tight 7/5 7/6 7/6 match today, but I will gladly hire him as my bodyguard if tennis does not pan out! He has one of the biggest serves in the ATP Tour and has a bright future as a big hitter.

Can Dolgopolov please look at least once like he is not bored on the court? So much talent, yet so casual…

And…. the day ends with the rain interrupting the last round of matches. Should we be surprised?

Stay tuned for further updates!
Mertov’s T-Desk is also on Twitter !

Saturday: Australian Open 3rd-Round Match Previews

Citi Open – Tuesday’s Narrative

Men’s Quarterfinals Preview: Potential for a Short Day (*)

Australian Open 2015, Logical Men’s Quarterfinals: Can They Materialize?

In Defense of Arnaud Clément

June 23: Day 1 at Wimbledon in Pictures

Navigation

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Navigation