There has been no tennis since the break of Coronavirus but you can listen to four podcasts on Tennis with an Accent, with me as a guest with hosts Saqib Al and Matt Zemek, in which we took a retro approach to both Majors. Below are the links and synopses.
Roland Garros Podcasts
1) For Roland Garros, we “time-traveled” back to the Monday after the 1991 men’s tournament (meaning we do not know what the future may bring at that point, ha!) that saw Andre Agassi defeat Jim Courier in the final. We examined that final, along with the important events of the two weeks:
2) In our second Roland Garros podcast, the conversation focuses on the type of game that is suited to succeed on the clay of Roland Garros. Saqib and I delve into the evolution of classic styles from a pure baseliner to attacking players. Seles vs Graf battles from the 90’s are used as illustrations on how the playing trends kept evolving even from the baseline. Some iconic finals such as Lendl vs. McEnroe, Evert vs. Navratilova, and Courier vs Bruguera, among others, are covered. A lot of details are packed in this one.
1) 2006 Wimbledon – Time-Travel episode. Once again, Saqib and I beam back to the Monday after the 2006 men’s tournament and look back in detail to the first Federer vs. Nadal final on the grass courts of Wimbledon. We weigh in on the turn-around moments of the match and discuss its importance in the launching of the the rivalry (Nadal came in with a 6-1 lead in the head-to-head count). This also happened to be Andre Agassi’s last championships. We discuss his Wimbledon career in depth and where does he rank with some of the modern greats of the game. Plus, we talk about the potential up-and-comers (at the time) who performed well in the tournaments. Some names will be very familiar with today’s tennis fan.
2) I join Matt Zemek to chronicle women’s tennis at Wimbledon from the start of the Open Era in 1968 through the 1990s. Playing styles, surface speeds, racquet technology, and other changes over the course of Wimbledon history are weighed and evaluated in this study of women’s tennis at the All-England Club. The Martina Navratilova-Chris Evert rivalry is a natural centerpiece of this discussion, but don’t forget about Margaret Court versus Billie Jean King in the early 1970s, or Steffi Graf versus multiple challengers in the 1990s, and the 2000s with Venus Williams taking the spotlight. Many players mentioned and notes discussed on the tournament’s evolution.
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?
Roger Federer needed a near-perfect performance on Friday’s semifinal match to defeat an in-form Rafael Nadal on Centre Court at Wimbledon. Read my post-match analysis on Tennis with an Accent by clicking on the link below:
Alexander “Sascha” Zverev has been taking substantial steps over the last couple of years toward reaching the elite status in the ATP. These manifest steps are already a part of his record, such as the three ATP 1000 titles, the first appearance in the quarterfinals of a Major, and an entrance into the top 5 of the rankings. We have been hearing the footsteps of his forthcoming arrival to the top level of our sport for a while now. You can add this week to that list of steps, a giant one in fact, now that Zverev has reached the final round of the ATP World Tour Finals where, every year, eight players considered the cream of the crop in men’s tennis meet in an attempt to earn the prestigious year-ending title.
Sascha’s win over Roger Federer on Saturday, however, goes a bit further than just jumping through another hoop in terms of ascendancy. It’s not just that the German added another check mark to his list of achievements in Wikipedia. What matters more is that, throughout the 7-5 7-6 victory, Zverev exhibited the type of characteristics that you would want an elite player to regularly put on display with regard to tactics, IQ level, and mental fortitude.
And Sascha decorated the victory with some the highest quality of tennis that he has ever played on big stage, especially in the first set.
Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe
For starters, he did not merely rest on the laurels of his solid baseline game. He also sought to take the initiative and attack. He approached the net more times than Federer despite not using the serve-and-volley like Roger occasionally does. It is undeniable that few – and not the majority – of those approaches were the result of short slices hit by Federer, thus leaving Sascha little choice but to move forward. However, Sascha of the past may have still sent some of those back over the net and step back to the baseline to continue the rally (in fact, an example of that came in the second set at a crucial moment and he paid the price for it – more on that later). In this match though, Zverev was willing to do plow forward and squeeze the bolts on the Federer machine, even in big points (ex: 3-3, 30-30, serving).
There were also the other times when he came to the net with conviction and not as a result of a short ball. There is no doubt that applying pressure to Federer when given the occasion and daring him to produce the passing shot was part of Sascha’s overall plan. That plan also appeared to include a conscious effort to pick on Roger’s backhand. If my count is correct, Zverev approached the net nine times in the first set and only one of those was to his opponent’s forehand. As for rallies from the baseline, Zverev dictated most of them, looking to end the point in the same way that Federer usually does when he is forced to engage in longer rallies.
To top all of the above, he served phenomenally well. No, the numbers will not necessarily tell you that (3 aces, one double fault, 68% first serves), but the fact that he came up with big serves on crucial points will.
Federer, for his part, did not play a bad first set by any means. He did miss a makeable return wide at 15-30 in the 3-3 game on Sascha’s serve, but I would advise people to watch the previous 15-15 point before rushing to judgment on that return miss. After a long and exhausting point in which you had to scramble corner-to-corner multiple times, it is very possible that you have not recovered by the time the ensuing point starts, and you make an error.
Otherwise, Federer had little trouble holding serve despite a below-average first-serve percentage (55%) for his standards because he was using the follow-up shots to his first and second serves extremely well and changing the pace of the ball with great accuracy during rallies. By the time he was serving at 5-6, he was a perfect eight for eight when approaching the net, with only four unforced errors committed in the match.
In that 5-6 game, Federer missed only one first serve (first point). He did however miss a forehand to start the game. In the second point, he only did what had worked well for him up to that point in the match. He hit a first serve, approached the net on the next shot, and volleyed to the open corner. Except, Zverev came up with a spectacular passing shot on the run from the forehand side (not usually his forté). It was his only point won in the set with Roger at the net. At 0-30, Roger got another first serve in but Zverev landed a rock-solid return smack on the baseline, pushing the Swiss into a defensive position, and eventually winning the point on Roger’s forced error. Zverev had three set points at 0-40. He only needed one. Sascha sent back another first serve by Roger who missed the subsequent forehand wide. Two forehand errors by Federer to start and finish the game, with two exceptional points by Sascha squeezed in between. Blank break for the German, 7-5.
In the early part of the second set, Zverev, for some reason, did not stick to the level of aggressiveness that he demonstrated in the first. He was still hitting the ball hard, placing them deep, and continuing to play good tennis overall. Yet, little details make the difference at this level and this particular shift to a less offensive disposition almost cost the German dearly when, at 1-1 in the second set and down a break point on his serve at 30-40, Federer returned short and yet Sascha elected to back-step to the baseline after hitting his backhand instead of approaching the net. It was a strange decision because until that point he had a great success rate (7 out of 8) on points won when approaching Federer’s backhand! To add salt to the wound, he passed on two more shots in that same rally on which he could have pulled the trigger. The rally ultimately ended on a backhand down-the-line winner by Federer for his only break of the match.
Unfortunately for Federer, he played his worst two games of the match after that break and had to then contend with holding serve just to get to the tiebreaker.
He had a final regrettable error at 4-5 in the tiebreaker when he netted a routine forehand volley that he would/should otherwise make in the third cycle of his REM sleep. It was a grave error because it gave Zverev two match points at a moment when it looked like Federer was getting close to having a set-point. To be honest, considering his level since the early break in that set, it was a jackpot opportunity. Zverev had been the better player since that break, getting within two points of breaking Roger’s more than once in the 4-3 game that he lost with two successive unforced errors at 30-30.
Zverev did not let that bother him though. Instead, the tiebreaker only served to confirm how far the 21-year-old German has matured overall. In the three chances that he had to approach the net and apply to pressure to Federer, he did not hesitate, winning all three including the match point. He only missed one first serve out of 6 in the tiebreaker. Following a delay after a ball-boy dropped a ball and the point had to be replayed at 3-4 down, he stepped up to the baseline and bombed an ace. Lastly, he came out on top of a grueling rally at 4-4 when he ended it with a backhand down-the-line winner.
There are the ‘listed’ accomplishments for everyone to see. Then, there are those intangibles that players value as precious assets when it comes to the long climb to the top of the ATP echelon. For Zverev, this particular victory, regardless of the outcome in Sunday’s final, must surely feel like one of those treasured intangibles.
Below is the link to my contribution to Tennis with an Accent —> My recap/analysis of Kevin Anderson’s epic upset of Roger Federer in the quarterfinal round of Wimbledon on Wednesday.
At this point in the Roger Federer – Marin Cilic rivalry, their 2014 US Open encounter, in which the Croat crushed the Swiss in straight sets, looks more and more like a colossal exception to the norm. It remains to this day Marin’s only victory over his rival. In return, Roger has defeated him eight other times, with the only “close call” having taken place at the Wimbledon 2016 quarterfinals (Federer came back from two sets down and saved three match points in the third). Roger played average tennis for most of that particular match and, by his own admission much later, did not prepare adequately for the tournament due to an arthroscopic surgery that required substantial time-off earlier in the spring. This Sunday, I strongly doubt he will play average tennis on Centre Court.
There are several reasons for which Federer dominates Cilic. I will not list all of them here because most are obvious to every enthusiastic tennis fan. The one that makes the biggest difference, in my opinion, is the fact that Cilic’s first step on returns and change of directions lacks the explosiveness needed to position his upper body for his shot, without which he cannot generate enough power on his groundstrokes.
Cilic’s upper-body rotation on the forehand and his ability to lean into the ball on his two-handed backhand are two essential elements required to produce his best tennis which mainly consists of overpowering the opponent. It is a complete change of equation when Cilic has to stretch for his shots and reach with his upper body to make contact.
Photo: Scott Barnour – Getty
I believe most readers will agree with me when I say that Federer is one of the best in the history of our sport when it comes to exploiting the glaring weaknesses of his adversaries. It should be no different on Sunday. Federer will look to vary his serves – some into the body, many out wide, some flat ones to the “T” – with the goal of exploiting Marin’s lack of speed on his first-step. He will use his serves to force the Croat to either get out of the way quickly on a serve that is curving into his body, or lunge wide to reach a sliding serve to the outside on the deuce side, or retrieve a flat serve bouncing on the “T.”
The only way this advantage in favor of Federer gets negated is if he struggles with his first serve and begins to depend on second ones. I do not, obviously, mean to knock down Federer’s second serve since it is one of the best in the Open Era, probably right behind Pete Sampras’ second serve. I intend simply to emphasize the fact that a bad first-serve day by Roger will not allow him to take advantage of an edge that he would otherwise have against Marin.
That still does not solve Cilic’s potential problems during baseline rallies. Federer is a master of creating angles and not relinquishing the upper-hand in the rally once it turns in his favor. He can keep his opponent on the run until he puts it away with a winner at the net or from the baseline, or until his opponent makes an error on a low-percentage winner attempt from a difficult position under pressure. He can also accelerate the ball to the same corner from which the opponent is recovering, putting him on his backfoot. Did that ring a bell? See two paragraphs above if it did not.
For his part, – and this will sound like a repeat of my semifinal preview – Cilic needs to focus on his strengths and not contemplate too much on aspects that he cannot control. He was able to do it against Kyle Edmund, another player with a big forehand and first serve, and raise the rest of his game as a consequence. Can he not do the same on Sunday? So what if his opponent serves well? So what if the opponent out-rallies him? Can he still not stay toe-to-toe with his oppponent if he serves at a high first-serve percentage and adds in a healthy number of aces? Can he not successfully put to use his solid 1-2 punch skills as a follow-up to those serves? Sure, he can. In that scenario, he would probably need to take the set to a tiebreaker and steal it, but yes, it is possible. But now change the word “opponent,” used thrice earlier in this paragraph, to “Federer.” All of a sudden, Cilic’s task seems a lot more difficult than it did against Edmund.
Defeating an in-form Federer is an imposing mountain to climb for any player. It is a challenge that very few players have been able to overcome, and that, only a handful of times. Cilic is not one of those players. I do not expect that to change on Sunday. His first serve and 1-2 punch – assuming the first serve clicks – may earn him a set, and then he would need help from Roger (or something…).
Otherwise, look for an extremely jovial Federer to break a new record, his own, for the number of Majors won, as well as the record for the “duration-of-post-match-interviews” statistic, also his own, set earlier this week (I gather).
