Tag: Roger Federer

Wimbledon 2017: Men’s Semifinal Previews

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

Roger Federer (3) vs. Tomas Berdych (11)

In the third set of his match vs Federer on Wednesday, Milos Raonic played one of the better sets of his career and still could not steal the set. On how Roger kept coming up with one amazing shot after another, Milos said it best: “I was sort of moving on. Okay, let’s see if he can do it again. Let’s see if he can do it again. He kept doing it.” In case you missed it and require some illustration of what Milos is talking about, you only need to watch four points with which Roger climbed from 1-3 down to 5-3 up in the tiebreaker.

Raonic is hundred percent right. Federer keeps doing it over and over again, and does it even better with each match since Wimbledon began 11 days ago. The question is who can stop Federer, and my answer to that, as some readers may remember from my article on Sunday, was a simple “nobody,” at least until the finals. Well, Tomas Berdych is the last one standing between Federer and Sunday.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

The only way to beat Federer is to crush the rallies with heavy shots going at warp speed 9 (see: Star Trek terminology). You can probably tell from the adjectives I used how much I believe in the possibility of such chain of events taking place tomorrow. There are nevertheless only a select few players who can do that to Roger and Berdych happens to be one of them. He did it twice in Majors, in 2010 at Wimbledon, in 2012 at the US Open. He had a great chance to do it even earlier, in 2009, at the Australian Open, but could not close it out, letting Roger come back from two sets down to beat him in five.

However… and you knew there was one coming… Federer has not lost to Berdych since 2013. He also defeated him soundly in this year’s Australian Open. That is more likely to be the scenario tomorrow. Federer is serving betterer-than-everer and Berdych not only lacks the explosion necessary on his first step to return the serves away from him, but also will have a miserable time catching any sort of a rhythm if Federer varies their speed and spin, as well as he has done so until now. Life will get even more complicated for Tomas if, on top of everything else, if he goes down a break down early in the match and allows Roger to play with a lead. Thus, Berdych must hold serve early and aim to create a dent in Roger’s baseline armor with his power. It is the only formula, regardless of how obvious it seems, that gives the 15th-ranked Czech player any chance to disturb Roger.

Photo: Shaun Botterill – Getty Images Europe

Federer, for his part, will counter that with his large arsenal of shots from the baseline and mix in a few rocket forehands of his own, aiming for the corners on Berdych’s side of the court. If the Swiss systematically wins rallies that go over seven or eight shots, I believe we will watch a one-sided, routine affair for three sets. If not, it may still be one-sided, with a more balanced scoreboard, whatever that may mean to you. If I am Berdych, I would first and foremost hope for Roger to have an off day on his serves, then focus on holding my service games, and look to get ahead in the first set. Unless he can derail Federer’s confidence early, there is no “W” for Tomas at the end of Friday.

Marin Cilic (7) vs. Sam Querrey (24)

The fact that Cilic is the favorite in this match certainly has something to do with his much superior record in Majors compared to that of his semifinal opponent. Not only does he have a Major title in his name but also a multitude of quarterfinal and semifinal appearances compared to only one semifinal one for Sam. Marin has also collected eight more ATP titles than Sam has over his career.

Cilic also carries a lot of explosive ammunition with him in the form of forehands and serves that he can unload on the court and make life very uncomfortable for the guy across the net. Don’t take my word for it; ask Kei Nishikori and Roger Federer, his last two victims on the way to his US Open title in 2014.

Yet, same can be said for Sam with regard to his artillery comprised of forehands and serves. If we were to look at the numbers, Sam’s numbers in those departments are as solid as those of Marin. Querrey is collecting points from his serves at about the same rate (84%) as Cilic does (83%). Querrey gets 63% of his first serves in while Marin is serving at 62%. Cilic has hit ten more winners on the forehand side than Sam (78 to 68) over the course of the tournament. Sam has 126 aces throughout the tournament compared to Marin’s 105.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

So, if we are going to praise the power of Cilic’s serves and forehands, we must do the same for Querrey. The story is not much different in the unforced error categories. They are practically the same: 52 forehand unforced errors and 46 backhand ones for Sam, 54 and 46 for Marin.

Points-won-on-returns categories seem to carry the only significant difference between the two players. Cilic has won 32% of his total first-serve-returned points versus 28% for Sam, and on second serves that number is 58% for the Croat, 48% for the American. This distinction in return-points won may nevertheless be the result of Sam having faced more big servers (Kevin Anderson, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga) in the previous rounds than Marin has (Gilles Muller).

This is the reason for which putting too much importance in numbers can be misleading. Cilic may have had trouble reading Muller’s serve but could jump all over Sam’s. He may outlast Sam in rallies every time they can get into a cross-court backhand rally, eventually causing Sam’s unforced error count on the backhand to climb higher than usual. I can multiply such examples when one faces the other. That is why the way a player matches up with another supersedes sheer statistics in terms of importance.

The bottom line is, Cilic is a better baseliner than Querrey. He does the “1-2 punch” better than Sam does, because he can use his backhand just as effectively as his forehand on the second shot of that “1-2 punch” combination, whereas Sam must run around his backhand to be as effective. Both players can generate a lot of speed from deep behind the baseline, but I would argue that Sam can probably hit more “wow” shots with his forehand from that position than Cilic can. These are the details that will make the difference rather than comparison of numbers and percentages.

Photo: Julian Finney – Getty Images Europe

My only question mark for Cilic would be where he will position himself on the returns. In my quarterfinal previews, I mentioned that Marin would wait Muller’s serves closer to the baseline after seeing how much Rafael Nadal struggled on returns against Muller, because he was parking by the line judges to wait for them. To my surprise, he chose to stay few yards behind the baseline, not as far back as Rafa, but certainly not as close to the baseline as I expected. As a result, he also struggled with Muller’s wide serves, albeit not as much as Rafa did. So, I am reluctant to comment on his position on returns when returning Sam’s first and second serves. I will merely “guess” that, for his sake, Cilic will step inside the baseline to return Sam’s second serves.

Speaking of on-court stance, where players choose to hit their shots from will be an important part of the formula for victory. You know the image of the court that the experts put up on your screen, the one on which you see straight lines running parallel to the baseline, one in front of it and one in the back, each separated area colored differently so that they can tell you what percentage of their shots the players hit from each colored zone? That is what I am talking about. If Marin can more hit shots from the colored area inside the baseline than his opponent, he will be the one likely to reach the final on Sunday, and vice versa. I can at least guarantee one thing: we will see plenty of baseline shots, but we will not see many rallies. These two players will hit every ball with a purpose and that purpose will rarely include notions such as “getting the ball over the net” or “making the opponent hit one more shot.”

Have a great Friday afternoon!

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – This week: live from Wimbledon

Wimbledon 2017: Men’s Quarterfinals Preview

ATP Majors No Comments

Fascinating quartet of matches await tennis fans on Wednesday. All of them, maybe except one, have the potential to either finish in three straight sets, or go to the distance. Below are my thoughts on what to expect tomorrow during these encounters, with the first two matches taking place on Centre Court and the next two on Court 1, in the order below.

Andy Murray (1) vs. Sam Querrey (24)

Querrey is a dangerous player, very dangerous. Murray is an excellent scrambler. This match has the ingredients to contain three entertaining sets, maybe four. For anything else to happen, Querrey must have a big serving day against one of the best anticipators in the sport. It is not outside the realm of possibility but Murray can sometimes make his opponents feel like he is standing right at the spot to which they plan to serve, before they even toss the ball. Same can be said for his anticipation on the opponents’ approach shots.

Photo: Julian Finney – Getty Images Europe

This is simply a good match-up for Andy who has at the same time performed at the highest level for most of the tournament, although he has enjoyed a convenient draw compared to other favorites. It would, quite frankly, be a monumental upset, a disaster for the home crowd, and a nightmare for the organizers who would obviously prefer Andy to play on the final day, if Sam were to somehow win and advance to the semis. Querrey will play the spoiler role, but I don’t believe he will ultimately satisfy the role’s requirements.

Roger Federer (3) vs. Milos Raonic (6)

As you may recall, if you read my last entry in Mertov’s Tennis Desk, I expected Federer and Nadal to reach the finals on July 16th. Nadal is out, but I am still expecting Federer to do so. I also do not believe Milos has at this point reached his form of last year before he faced Roger. More importantly, today’s Federer is not last year’s version, when he was full of doubts and nursing an injury.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

Raonic returned better in their last year’s match (see the fourth set’s last two return games and the tiebreaker) than I have ever seen him until and since then. He also had the luxury of winning the first set last year, which is also a must for his chances tomorrow.

The strategies these two players will employ against one another do not require a rocket science degree. Federer will exploit Raonic’s backhand and keep him chasing balls rather than attacking. Raonic will look to serve a lot of aces, and hit his forehands big to earn direct winners or set up the winning volley. First-serve percentage will be a major determinant of the scoreboard. We are likely to see at least one tiebreaker, if not more, if these two men happen to have a good serving day by their standards. It was a very close match last year, yet, I expect not only a different outcome this year, but also a more one-sided affair.

Having said that, I am a fan of Milos and I have always believed he would be the first to break through the success that the Big 4 enjoy at the top of the ATP. Stan Wawrinka has done it before him and injuries have repeatedly hindered his progress. He has been healthy for a while now and that alone keeps the possibility of another long thriller like the one from 2016 alive.

Marin Cilic (7) vs Gilles Müller (16)

This is the one exception that I have mentioned in the introduction. I can see Müller or Cilic winning in three or four sets, but I do not believe this match will see a final set, especially if Cilic is the first to get to two sets. A fifth-set affair could spell disaster for Müller who has already played two “hyper-extended” matches against Lukas Rosol (9-7 in the fifth) and Rafael Nadal (15-13 in the fifth). He is in good shape, but not that good.

Müller faces another problem against Cilic that he did not against Nadal. Marin will not park by the line judges behind the courts to wait for his lefty serves. He is an aggressive returner by nature and likes to hit them when the ball is on the rise. At the cost of getting aced a few times, he will stand close to the baseline and force Müller to volley first from around the service line in case the lefty from Luxembourg were to utilize his serve-and-volley pattern. This is why a high first-serve percentage is essential for Müller. He must be able to collect some free points. He served in the low sixty-percent range against Rosol and Nadal, and won over 80% of those points. However, when he had to resort to a second serve, his winning-point percentage drastically fell, below 50% in both matches.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

The Croate is also unlikely to rally from far behind the baseline, à la Nadal. This means that if Müller has to play the retriever role while Cilic directs the rally’s traffic from the top of the baseline, the lefty can kiss that point goodbye.

I do not want to underestimate Müller though, simply because, at the age of 34, he is having a career year. He garnered his first two ATP titles this year, the most recent one on the grass courts of s’Hertogenbosch. Interestingly, his only loss on grass this season has come against Cilic who, for his part, is also having a solid season. The first two sets should determine the outcome of this match. I am intrigued by this match and plan to watch it.

Novak Djokovic (2) vs. Tomas Berdych (11)

Djokovic finally joined the others today, after his match was postponed from yesterday due to a “series of unfortunate events.” Although he recorded his eighth win in a row on grass, I have yet to see the form he needs to win Wimbledon. The good news, for now, is that he may not need to be at his best to defeat Tomas Berdych who is notorious for beating players he is supposed to beat, appearing to catch fire in the first weeks of Majors, and then fading away when facing an elite player, right when everyone is beginning to wonder if his breakthrough moment has arrived. On the other hand, Wimbledon is the only Major where he had some resemblance of a breakthrough, in 2010, by upsetting Federer and reaching the final. How much of what happened seven years ago is relevant today? I will leave the answer to the readers.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

Berdych is a heavy hitter. He hits the ball so heavy sometimes that the sound of his racket smacking the ball will produce a “boom” sound in your living room if you are watching it on TV, or in the stadium. The problem for Tomas is that he is playing against Novak who, at his best, eats high-velocity flat shots for breakfast. So the big question for this match remains, will Novak be at his best? If yes, this is a routine script with a few impressive baseline rallies and a bad ending for Tomas. If, however, Novak cannot produce a high level of play, we can see anything from a long thriller like the one he played against Denis Istomin in Melbourne or, if he goes further and begins to battle himself along with his opponent, to the debacle against Dominic Thiem in Paris.

If you have the possibility to watch both courts and have the ability to change back and forth between the courts, good for you. If you like focusing on one match from beginning to the end, like I do, you will have to make some tough choices tomorrow. In either case, you are in for treat. Enjoy!

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – This week: live from Wimbledon

Who can stop Roger and Rafa?

ATP Majors Tactical Analysis No Comments

Let me first begin, for better or worse, by giving my one-word answer: Nobody! I believe that Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal will march on to the finals, not only because they have been the two best players in 2017 by a large margin, but also because they have not shown any signs of considerable drop in their form. It is particularly remarkable that one can take two months off from competition right when he was on top of his form – a risky move even for Roger’s standards – and reach that level again so quickly, while the other adjusts from the clay-courts of Roland Garros, without having played a single match on grass, to the courts at Wimbledon, and still produce his top-quality tennis (not that he has not done the Paris-London victory combination before, twice as a matter of fact).

Can any player challenge them? Sure, but can they actually beat one or the other? Highly unlikely…

First, on Rafa’s path to the final…

It seems that Rafa has picked up where he had left off at Roland Garros. He has yet to lose a set in the 10 matches that he played in Paris and London combined, and there is a legitimate possibility that it may well be the final day of Wimbledon before we see that happening.

Nadal steamrolled through his first three rounds, with the only glitch coming in the third set vs. Karen Khachanov, in the late stages of which the Spanish champion, uncharacteristically, sprayed a few errors on forehands. Many believed the young Russian would push Nadal, even push him beyond three sets. I did not.

While Khachanov has the pedigree of a player that can quickly rise in the rankings in the years to come – powerful serve, decent technique, the ability to unleash during rallies – he still lacks the on-court decision-making that top players possess. A good example of this, among others, took place in his match vs. Victor Troicki in the Istanbul Open where he kept running around his backhand to accelerate with his forehand (although his ability to flatten out the backhand is currently superior to the backhand one, especially on low balls) and leaving the deuce side vulnerable once he was unable to put the ball away. Troicki fed on that throughout the match, and Khachanov never adjusted. In a five-set encounter against a high-IQ champion like Rafa, you can bet that you will need to change and adjust your tactics at some point during the match whether you are leading or trailing. This is not a skill that Khachanov, or any other promising young talent, cannot develop. However, it takes time and the 34th-ranked Russian still has room for improvement in this area, before posing a threat to top players in Majors.

Photo: David Ramos – Getty Images Europe

Rafa faces Gilles Muller next. The 34-year-old veteran from Luxembourg has enough experience, thus he will not be intimidated by any legend on the other side of the net. Furthermore, he has a win over Rafa, at Wimbledon, on his résumé. Yet, that was a dozen years ago and Nadal of today is far better than the one from 2005. I am sure the matchup worries some Nadal fans, for decent reasons. Muller can win a large number of points on his lefty serve, as well as hit a variety of them; flat, sliding slice, kick, curve into the body, you name it, Muller can serve it. Rafa has had trouble with these types of players in the past. Having said that, I do not see how Muller can break Rafa’s serve, especially considering that the Spaniard has increased its velocity to it since coming to London (see the last few break points that he saved against Khachanov). I would guess that Muller will need to get to a tiebreaker or two in order to have any chances to cause an upset.

Like Muller, there are a few other solid players on Nadal’s half. I am simply not convinced if they can defeat him. There are a couple of baseliners, Roberto Bautista-Agut and Marin Cilic, one of whom will face Nadal in the quarterfinals. It has been said that Cilic could have a chance to defeat Rafa, assuming he gets there. Cilic has indeed had a good year and his big game can overwhelm any player when his first serve and forehand are clicking on all cylinders, à-la-2014 US Open. He will nevertheless need to pull one of the best winner-to-error ratios in his career to outlast Rafa from the baseline, as well as a bit of help from him, the kind that Khachanov received (but could not capitalize on) in their third set.

One issue that Rafa has not completely fine-tuned yet is the depth on his groundstrokes. Even in Paris and in his first three rounds here, his shots landed inside the service line at times. I would call this the only apparent difference between the 2008-12 version of Rafa and the one today. On the clay courts of Paris, or against his opponents here so far, this did not present a major problem. Even when they moved in and unleashed on their shots, Rafa’s ability to scramble and get one or two balls back forced them to make errors on their second or third tries. Against the elite players, or the ones that do not think twice when it comes to relentlessly approaching the net on grass, this could present a problem for Rafa. They will either have enough skills to put the ball away when they get their one chance, or immediately approach and challenge Nadal to come up with passing shots from difficult positions. Federer’s two victories over him in Indian Wells and Miami are prime examples of strategies that included this component.

However, this is not the bread-and-butter plan of Andy Murray, Rafa’s potential semifinal opponent. Andy is likely to construct points, look for his opportunity to accelerate down-the-line, and hope to win some free points on his first serve. Coming to the net will not be an essential part of his plan A. Yes, the crowd will be behind him, but alas, depending on “build-up points” from the baseline is a painful way to try to beat Nadal.

Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images Europe

Few more things to keep in mind for Rafa:

– One of his main weapons, the run-around forehand, will be a bit more limited on grass than on other surfaces due to the low bounce. This will not permit Rafa to hit as many forehands from the chest-to-shoulder height, the spot at which he prefers to hit his aggressive forehands.

– Rafa likes to take risks, pound first serves and groundstrokes harder, when he faces break points or trails in a tiebreaker. His first-serve percentage (with the increased velocity), especially on break points against him, will play a major role in holding serve.

– The weather is working in Rafa’s favor. There are only two days on that show rain, less than 50% on each day, for the rest of the tournament. Dryer courts keep the balls bouncing higher, although still nothing like on clay, as Dustin Brown who said grass at Wimbledon is slower than clay in Paris would have you believe, a claim since then refuted (to avoid saying mocked) by a number of other players. They have pretty much unanimously pointed to the dryness of the courts with regard to the speed and admitted that this causes the courts to be slower than usual (again, only by Wimbledon and grass-court standards).

Second, on Roger’s path to the final…

Roger has a more rocky road to the final than Rafa and I would have contemplated for a while about his chances of reaching the final in London, had it not been for what I saw in his victory run in Halle followed by the first two rounds** at Wimbledon. I had believed taking two months off competition while he was at the top of his form had been an extremely risky decision. However, his game improved throughout the five matches he played in Halle, and by now, he seems to have fine-tuned his game just in time to enter the nitty-gritty of the second week.

**I say first two rounds because this had been my thought even before he played Mischa Zverev earlier today and I wrote so, yesterday, in an article published in Tenis Dunyasi magazine website.

He will face Grigor Dimitrov on Monday. I am a fan of Dimitrov’s game and I like his chances to eventually join the elites of men’s tennis at the top of the rankings, but this is just a bad matchup for Dimitrov, very bad. When two players essentially play the same style, possess similar strengths and weaknesses, develop points using similar strategies, and one of them happens to be a tiny bit better than the other, the scoreboard will usually reflect that difference with fairly large margins. Dimitrov will have to wait at least one more Major for his potential breakthrough.

Quarterfinal round is where the plot thickens for Roger. Both Alexander Zverev and Milos Raonic have the game to defeat Federer on a given day and they have both done it before. They are two of the very few candidates with a legitimate shot at dismantling the stranglehold the Big 4, plus Stan Wawrinka, have on the Majors. Milos is a step ahead of Sascha in that he has not only gone further than the German in Majors, but Wimbledon also happens to be the Major in which he reached the final round, having defeated none other than Roger in the semis after a five-set thriller.

Photo: Shaun Botterill – Getty Images Europe

The wounds of that semifinal must undoubtedly be fresh in Federer’s mind. This is the reason for which it is imperative that Raonic somehow “steals” the first set from Roger and makes the Swiss doubt himself again. But this is a different Federer than last year’s version. In 2016, Federer arrived to Wimbledon nursing an injury and questioning his chances of even getting to the finals. He had also been stopped by Novak Djokovic four times in two years, with the most brutal loss coming in the 2016 Australian Open (remember the first two sets?).

This year, Federer made a comeback to the top like no other man probably will for a foreseeable future, at the age of 35. He is full of confidence, injury-free, refreshed, and playing well. I expect him to get to the net a lot against Raonic (not as much if he faces Zverev) and challenge the Canadian’s passing shot skills, as well as backhand returns.

Djokovic will most likely be his opponent in the semis. Among the Big 4, Novak has had the least rocky path until now, and the case remains the same in the next round. If he were to lose to Adrian Mannarino, who has played 25 sets in two weeks, almost half of them in the 105-degrees-Fahrenheit-plus courts of Antalya, it would probably go down as a bigger upset than the loss he suffered against Sam Querrey last year. Then, in the quarters, he will face either Dominic Thiem or Tomas Berdych. That should be the first true test of his game at Wimbledon. Let’s move on and assume Novak makes it past that stage, since our topic is Roger’s path to the final.

Photo: Sahun Botterill – Getty Images Europe

I do not believe Djokovic poses as big a threat to Roger as he did during the 2014-16 period, not only because he is still a few steps away from that level of play, but also because Roger has improved in a couple of areas since then, such as returns and backhand-to-backhand cross-court rallies. The fact that Roger has not beaten him in a Major since in five years will work as a psychological factor in Novak’s favor, but that needs to be coupled with the type of confidence that the Serb can build only if his level of play skyrockets in the next two rounds. I am not talking about the type that you build by beating the likes of Adam Pavlasek, Ernests Gulbis and Mannarino either. Having a convenient draw can work in your favor, but can also work against you. Novak’s case is the latter here.

Few more things to keep in mind for Roger:

– He is slowly but surely fine-tuning his returns. They were worrisome in the first two rounds, but better against Mischa (see his first break early in the match). Nevertheless, there is more room for improvement. He will need his drive and spin returns against Rafa, and his slice and bunt returns against everyone else, to be at their best.

– The larger issue against Mischa was Roger’s success with passing shots. This is where stats can be deceiving. Passing shots missed, or returns missed against serve-and-volley players, count as forced errors, regardless of how easily makeable they may actually be. Thus, you see the number 9 (for the whole match) next to the unforced errors and 36 next to forced error categories in Roger’s stat box. He missed some passing shots yesterday that he should be able to make nine out of ten times in his sleep. There was a particular one in the first set where he literally had time to get set and unleash on either side, with Zverev standing at the net like a traffic officer with no other job but to direct cars to pass on either side of him. This will not be a big issue in the upcoming rounds, unless Roger faces Raonic in the quarters. Milos has one of the highest rates of success at the net and has integrated net play a while ago into his preferred game plan. His serve-and-volley success rate is also among the highest in the tournament, along with Federer and Muller. If Roger does not pass well, Milos may just find a way to get to the tiebreaker and steal a set or two from Roger (see above).

– Speaking of serve-and-volley success… Roger’s high-percentage rate in that category, 83%, must be an encouraging sign to his coaching team. This is central to Roger’s game plan because, during his service games, it keeps the element of surprise weighing heavily on the shoulders of his opponents. Furthermore, Roger’s body language gains a whole new level of positivity when he is cruising on his serve-and-volley points.

– Winning long points has remained a question mark at Wimbledon. In his first two rounds, he only played nine points that lasted above nine shots, and Roger won only three of those. These are not high-enough numbers to draw a sound conclusion, but once Roger possibly faces the likes of Sascha, Novak, and Rafa in the finals, it will be one of the most determining factors in the outcome. Don’t take my word for it. Revisit the Australian Open final.

– See my last note above, in the Rafa portion, with regard to the weather. This should also work in Novak’s favor were the two to meet in the semifinal round.

If I turn out right, we will watch yet another Roger vs. Rafa final on July 16th. If you are an avid fan of either of these two champions, take a few “chill pills,” relax and enjoy. If you are neither, and love tennis, grab your favorite cold or hot beverage, and enjoy the highest quality of men’s tennis possible our lovely sport has to offer.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – This week: live from Wimbledon

A Unique Culture: the Queue at Wimbledon

Majors 2 Comments

Note: This is the expanded (and in English) version of my post-2016-Wimbledon article published in Tenis Dunyasi magazine, one year ago.

It is common knowledge that Wimbledon values traditions and hangs on to them. After all, players are still required to wear white outfits and it was not until 1986 that they changed from white tennis balls to yellow ones, many years after the rest of the tennis arena did.

Then, there is the Queue. A singular experience at Wimbledon, a tradition that has existed for over a century. The name is self-explanatory; you get in the queue and you buy tickets. It is nevertheless unique in that Wimbledon is the only Major that still continues the practice of making tickets available for the public to purchase, on the day of competition. The more you dig down to the details of how the Queue’s mechanisms work, the more fascinating it becomes. It is not just any queue. It is a camp site. It is a social club. It is an over-night (or over-more-than-one-night) stay. It is a thrill. It is a place of joy, if you get the ticket of your choice, or of pain, if you do not. Yes, you read it right; getting in the Queue and waiting for days do not always guarantee you entry.

Here is how it works: there are 500 tickets put aside for Centre Court and Court 1. If you don’t get one of these, you have to settle for a Grounds Pass. Thus, camping out in the Queue for a day or two, before the day of your choice, pays off if you adamantly want a Centre Court or a Court 1 ticket. The Queue begins at a park adjacent to the Wimbledon grounds. You first get a “Queue Card” with a designated number. The card holders set up their tent and equipment to settle in the designated area. Depending on the number on their first card, they receive a second card (in exchange for the first one) 24 hours before the day for which they requested the ticket.

The number of the second card matters, a lot! If you want to guarantee having a Centre Court ticket, that number needs to be 500 or below. You may still get into the Centre Court if it is numbered below 500, but that depends on how many people before you request a Court no.1 ticket instead of a Centre Court one. For example if your card’s number is 650 and you want a Centre Court ticket, you need at least 150 people before you to choose Court no.1 (or other courts) over Centre Court, thus the importance of which (favorite) player is scheduled on what court. If your card is among the first 1000, you are guaranteed to enter either Centre COurt or Court no.1. You get it? If you do not, you can delve into the 26-page brochure that is distributed to the Queue’s denizens at their arrival.

After spending the night in your tent, you pick them up in the morning, leave them at the designed deposit area, and stewards (more on “stewards” little later) show you the way to the actual waiting line of the Queue. When your turn comes up, you get the entry wrist band and you enter Wimbledon grounds with your ticket. This is the moment of victory, of exhilaration, one where you reap the benefits of long hours of wait.

For all the reasons I mentioned above, and more, you can hear the most gripping tales from the people coming from all corners of the world in order to experience of the Queue culture. In fact, the four remarkable individuals with whom I talked come from different continents. Before I go into their stories, let me point out one thing; the Queue is dominated by Roger Federer fans! Before I ventured there, I was expecting plenty of Andy Murray fans, and some fans of other male and female players. Yet, outside of a few exceptions, an overwhelming majority donned Nike clothing with something about Roger on them, or a “RF” hat, or had some sort of Swiss paraphernalia.

Jen and Gloria

Jen from Brisbane, Australia, and Gloria, originally from Hong Kong (now calls Sydney her home), have also traveled to London with the intention of cheering for Federer. It is, in a way, thanks to Federer that they met two years earlier at the Brisbane ATP tournament, during a dinner organized by Tennis Australia with the Swiss in attendance, as well as Patrick Rafter and Rod Laver. During the auction part of the dinner, Gloria won the right to flip the coin on the court before Roger’s first match. Jen, for her part, got a photo op with him and the chance to watch one of his private practice sessions.

Jen and Gloria have been friends ever since that week: “You know, the thing is that Roger attracts different people from different backgrounds. We would have never met if it weren’t for our admiration of Roger” says Gloria.

Jen smiles and remembers more details: “Gloria and I were both at the dinner and seated at the same table. During the dinner, there was an auction. One of the auction items was a chance for four people to attend one of his practice sessions for an hour and a half at Brisbane International, and also for someone to do the coin toss for his first match. Gloria and another girl beat us for that auction [both laughing hard].”

“It was expensive!!” adds Gloria.

Jen agrees [more laughter]: “Yeah it went ridiculously expensive. There was another auction for a photo with him on that night. I was inspired by Gloria’s winning of the previous bid, so I bid on that one and won [laughs]. So, we became friends there with Gloria. We all attended the practice together.”

The planning for Wimbledon and the Queue began before they even departed: “I had to work all the way to Friday and I boarded the 9 PM flight on that evening. The draw came out when I was at the airport. We were texting, trying to organize when we would start the Queue. We were arguing [both laugh hard]. I was saying ‘you have got to give me some sleep, surely! 24 hours on a plane, you know?’ So finally, I arrived here around lunch time on Saturday.”

Gloria came to London before Jen: “I arrived one day earlier, on Friday, to get used to the environment. It’s my first time to come to Wimbledon and unlike Jen, I never lived in London. So I walked around to get familiar with everything. I went to see where the Queue started. On Saturday, I saw the first ones to get in the Queue around noon. It was amazing. I quickly texted Jen and said [using a scared tone] ‘Someone is already in the Queue!’”

Once both in London, their schedule – time of arrival to the park, when to enter the Queue, the type of ticket requested – revolved around the Swiss legend’s matches.

Jen continues: “When I arrived, we went out to Southfields for an early dinner, but we did not neglect to check the Queue before going. There were about 50 tents pitched, and we thought we would be okay. So, we decided to come back to our BnB. We organized with our friends that we would get up early and come back to the Queue about 4 AM early on Sunday morning. Then, we thought ‘Let’s cheat and get up earlier!’ [laughter]. So we had breakfast in the dark around 2 AM, and we arrived to the Queue at 3:30. We waited. At 8 AM, they opened up the gates and usher you in. There are two parks with a golf course in between. The actual Queue is where you come through the gate and through the field, where they put you in rows where you see all the other tents. So, we put down our tents.”

To be clear, Jen and Gloria are doing this early Sunday morning, for the right to gain entry to the grounds on Monday. I should also point out that Gloria bought her tent in London, but Jen brought hers from Australia and had to confirm it, with a giggle I might add, once she saw the shocked expression on my face: “Yes, they are the pop-up kind, really flimsy. A sleeping bag too, you name it.”

Around 3 PM in the afternoon, they receive their Queue cards and see that they are numbered within the first 500. First part mission is accomplished! The true moment of triumph will come they actually enter Wimbledon with their centre-court wristbands the next morning. Having received their Queue cards, they must for now await patiently in their tent from Sunday afternoon to Monday morning.

“Yes! In the tent, all day and all night” confirms Jen. “They wake you up about 5 AM so you can start disassembling the tents. Then, they have a left-luggage area that opens around 5:30. You leave all your camping gear there. They keep your tents, all packed up, until you come back. Once you do that, you get back in the same line where you had your tents.”

Gloria: “We wait on the pitch until about 7 AM. We form a line. Then, they start walking us out.

Jen: “They take us through the Golf Course, we pass through a garden pass. There are some sponsors as you walk along, some entertainment. At the end of that path, you go through security. Then they hand out the wrist bands for the court that you want. They open the gates at about 9:45 and we enter the food village area.”

When I ask if that is a similar feeling to a victory for them, they smile big and answer in unison “Yes!”

Yet, there is still more to this tale after they watch Roger win his first-round match: “We went straight back to the Queue for Wednesday tickets because that is when he would play his next round” says Jen.

“Yes, we want to make sure, we are in the first 500 for Wednesday!” adds Gloria.

Jen: “Roger finished late, around 9 PM on Monday. It was getting dark, we were starving, and it was raining! We were in the third row of tents. We received our Tuesday card on that evening. My number was 772 [which included people wanting to go in on Tuesday]. We put up the tents again. Essentially, when they wake everybody up on Tuesday morning, they tell you to drag your tent over to the side without dismantling it, if you choose not to move in the Queue with the Tuesday crowd.”

When the Tuesday crowd moved out and the cards for Wednesday’s entry were passed around to replace the Tuesday cards, Jen’s new card number was 80.

Gloria was in a similar situation. Mission accomplished, again! Thus continued the tale of Gloria and Jen, not without hardships, mind you? The weather was miserable for a few days and their tents leaked, so they had to buy new ones! The last time I talked to these two wonderful women, it had been 11 days since they began the daily Queue routine.

Edgard

Jen’s “neighbor” in the tent area was a young Brazilian named Edgard. Aspiring to be a lawyer, Edgard had traveled around the world and participated in charitable and humane causes. He had recently gone to Syria to better understand the Syrian refugee crisis. He also had an on-going dream; to see Federer play live. In order to truly understand what an emotional roller-coaster he went through, until Wimbledon and during his time in the Queue, to realize his dream, it is best to show you my question-and-answer session with him, unedited (and if you could have only been there and see him say it with his better-than-average English authenticated with a strong Brazilian/Portuguese accent, priceless!).

Edgard: “I was in Syria helping with the refuge crisis for weeks. After that, before I go back to Brazil, I wanted to give myself a gift. That gift was to realize my dream of watching Roger Federer play. I went directly to Madrid, he pulled out. I said ‘Come on Roger, I came here just to watch you, I don’t have anything to do in Madrid!’ Then I came to Roland Garros, just to watch Roger because I am not sure if he is coming to Olympics. I arrive to Paris, he pulls out! Again! And I was like… man… what about my gift? I was doing talks about the refuge crisis in universities. I was postponing my departure to Brazil to see if I could see Federer.

My last job ended on July 1st at a university in Portugal. So I thought ‘okay I am just two hours from here to London’ but I heard that it was impossible to watch a match at Wimbledon, especially Roger on Centre Court. This was my hugest dream ever, to watch Federer on Centre Court. Everybody in Brazil knows that I am a Federer fan, because I have a huge flag in Brazil, half Brazilian, half Swiss flag. So when I landed here, I came directly from Gatwick Airport to here. Because somebody told me ‘Go Edgard, go there, you can make it!’ I don’t have a place to stay, I didn’t book anything. I arrived here on Saturday morning and I started camping. They began to distribute the Queue card. My number was 503!! When they gave me that card, it killed all my expectations; I thought I couldn’t make it. I started to cry when I saw the number.

But people kept encouraging me saying ‘No Edgar, you can make it, just wait.’ I was sweating, waiting to see if I could make it. During those two days, there was a tournament on a mini court, and I played. People thought I had the same style as Federer, I am a huge fan of him, so they began calling me “Fedgard” and cheering me up, because I was number 503 and they could see that I was desperate. It was the worst two days of my life waiting to see if I could get in. They scheduled Federer and Murray on Centre Court for Monday and I told people that I am more nervous in this Queue than crossing the check points in Syria, seriously!

So, when the stewards began coming with the wrist bands, I asked her ‘am I in?’ She told me ‘I really don’t know.’ And I felt like a heart attack. I lost my mind. Why did I have 503?

Finally, it turned out that I made it by 10 people, I was the 490th person! 13 people chose something other than Centre Court. When the steward came again to me and gave me the good news, I just put one knee down and looked up, seriously. They even took a picture and put it on their Facebook. It’s a dream come true! It’s the biggest dream ever!!! They put me on Centre Court, and I was.. wow! When they showed me the seating to ask where I wanted to sit, they showed me two sections that were closest to the court and asked me to choose (sections 102 or 103). I looked and said ‘Wait, you are joking?’ She said ‘No, no, it’s correct, choose one.’ I said ‘Come on, it’s a mistake, wait!’ The lady said ‘No, no, but hurry, look the line is waiting.’ I was shocked! I got on my knees again. Yes! Again! It was unbelievable.. Unbelievable! I am going to watch Federer at Wimbledon? Seriously, really? I mean, Federer was 5 meters from me! Impossible! Everybody was cheering me up. It was amazing, amazing! After I received the wrist band, I really broke down, because I was exhausted, it was a huge dream. So I got to see him yesterday. I never thought I would get to watch Roger in Wimbledon, on Centre Court!”

Me: So you are going to see him again tomorrow, right? I see that you are in the Queue one more time.

“Yes, I am giving myself a second gift [laughs]. But let me tell you why I had the number 503 in the beginning. I was told to ask for the stewards’ help when I arrived to Wimbledon. You know, I have an accent when I speak English and I don’t speak very good, so when I arrived, I told someone who looked like he was working at Wimbledon for the steward. They understood it as the name “Stewart” and began asking each other who “Stewart” was. One of them used his walkie-talkie to radio others, asking who this “Stewart” was. Nobody could locate this “Stewart” of course. I didn’t realize what was happening because I don’t know the word “steward.” Finally, one of them said ‘do you mean steward? Like one of us’ and she said the last part of “steward” making a big “O” with her lips and not saying the “T.” She then showed her vest with the word “Steward” on it. So I understood where the communication went wrong. But I lost a good 10 minutes during that misunderstanding, waiting for them to find “Stewart.” That is why I got the number 503! Imagine if I didn’t get in because of that!”

Susie

So has the Queue experience always been like this? Or how was the process to enter the grounds before the Queue ever came around? For information on that, I turned to Susie, a self-described “London born and bred” woman who has “played and loved tennis” all her life. She is extremely friendly and does not mind sharing her memories at Wimbledon, and more importantly, she has some fascinating ones to share. She has been attending Wimbledon since 1972. Stan Smith’s 5-set victory over Ilie Nastase in the men’s final was the first match she had ever seen live.

“I was very, very young” she adds, laughing.

“Since then, I followed Connors for years, then Edberg, then Federer! In the 70s and 80s, we used to sleep on the street outside Gate 13. We had no tents. We had make-shift shelters, rain or shine. Remember, they used to have a standing-room only stands on the Centre Court in the front. So when they would open the gates, we would literally charge in [hands waving forward], because we wanted to get to that standing room in the front. I mean, people would lose their flip-flops and shoes. Then, they would pack you in, a bit like in some football stadiums. If you were at the front, you were kind of pressed against the barrier, but you know, I saw up close some of the great finals during those days. I saw Connors, McEnroe, Borg, doubles teams like Gottfried and Ramirez and all the great matches involving all those champions.

In the later years, obviously from a health and safety point of view, they got rid of the free standing and they structured the Queue, but the charm of those days was absolutely fantastic. Sometimes, after we got in, we would go to the old court 1. There was an alley where the court covers sat. In those days, security was not as hot and I used to sneak in with other schoolgirls. We could smile nicely to people and they would let us sit at the top of the stairs or spare seats. Now, of course, that charm is gone, and it’s more disciplined.”

I do not have much to add to what Jen, Gloria, Edgard, and Susie say, but I can comfortably say that one must see the Queue first-hand and talk to the people there to even begin to fathom what they experience. Even then, it would be impossible to truly understand the experience. I could literally sense the enthusiasm of the Queue denizens, and their excitement, when I talk to them. I used to believe that they were going through great pains just to get into Wimbledon. Now, I see it differently. It is a unique place where you meet people and make new memories about which you can talk to your family and friends when you get back home and to your children in the future. So my advice to people who are curious about the Queue and don’t mind a bit of adventure: do not hesitate to join the Queue culture, get your equipment, and begin planning your trip to your next Wimbledon.

Note: Click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter – Next 2 weeks: live from Wimbledon

Federer “Finds A Way,” yet Again!

ATP Majors Players Tactical Analysis No Comments

Wimbledon’s official site, in its immediate official website update following Roger Federer’s spectacular comeback win vs. Marin Cilic, 6-7 4-6 6-3 7-6 6-3, used the headline “Extraordinary. Exhausting. Exhilarating.” It was an appropriate exclamation, considering that what took place on Centre Court on Wednesday was less about the quality of Federer’s game than about the nature and circumstances of the comeback. The way a tennis legend fabricated a win that seemed so unlikely at several moments of the match was indeed breathtaking.

Prior to the match, I shared my opinion on social media on what to expect. Quite frankly, the match could go either way, in any number of sets, because both players have not yet faced any redoubtable opposition, and thus, there were still many questions unanswered. Federer got to the quarterfinals without much trouble, taking full advantage of a draw that put him against considerably weaker adversaries. His performances in Stuttgart and Halle, two of the leading grass-court tournaments before Wimbledon, were less than impressive, and from his previous matches at SW19, it was hard to tell where his game stood. Adding to the doubt, Federer was still on the comeback trail from his injury. Last but not the least, the last time Roger had to go to distance, playing five sets in a Major, dated back to the 2014 US Open (vs Gaël Monfils). Cilic, for his part, had to overcome a challenging stretch of 10 minutes in the second set of his match vs Sergiy Stakhovsky, but he had yet to face a formidable opponent. At the same time, it is well-known fact, as Roger will be the first one to say so, that on a given day Marin could dominate anyone on the ATP Tour if his game is clicking on all cylinders. For all the reasons above, I felt that the first set would be a central component of the match. If Federer came out swinging freely, he would put doubts to rest and move on to the next round without much headache. If Cilic won the first set, it would be a long duel with the pendulum slightly tilting in the Croat’s favor. Although, I turned out right for the most part – and this is rare – I still did not foresee some of what took place for 3 hours and 17 minutes on the court.

Photo: Clive Brunskill - Getty Images
Photo: Clive Brunskill – Getty Images

Both players held serve throughout the first set that went to a tiebreaker. While Federer was serving well, he was alarmingly losing most of the baseline rallies. Cilic was solid overall, but not hitting Roger out of the court like he did at the US Open two years ago. Although Cilic did face two break points at 2-2, he only lost one point on his first serve during the rest of set. He won the tiebreaker 7-4 and took the lead. Now there was no doubt. As he usually does when he plays from behind, Federer was going to have to pull all the weapons from the arsenal and find a way to turn the match around.

However, things went from bad to worse in the second set. Even Federer’s only reliable shot so far, his serve, took a hit. He served barely over 50% in the second set and in the game that he was broken at 1-1, Federer’s footwork looked dismal as he committed one uncharacteristic error after another to lose his serve. Cilic, on the other hand, seemed to remain solid, but not without glitches. He fell behind in a later game 0-30 after two double faults, but Federer was unable to take advantage as he committed a mix of forced and unforced errors during rallies. Cilic led two sets to zero and Federer still looked unsettled in the beginning of the third. Many thought his quest for an 18th Major was soon coming to an end. The quality of his tennis was just not at the point where he could contend for a Major title, or so it seemed. Even Cilic, one of the nice guys on the ATP Tour, would later say that he thought Federer was committing unlikely errors from the baseline, including the fourth-set tiebreaker.

Accordingly, it looked like Cilic was headed for the locker room with a three-set victory when the scoreboard showed 3-3 in the third set and he held three break points at 0-40 on his opponent’s serve. One pattern that kept troubling Federer was the second shot after the serve. Following Cilic’s returns, he often looked out of balance and committed mistakes (although Cilic’s returns would make them “forced errors”) on that particular shot. At 0-40, Cilic once again nailed a return right at Federer’s feet. The Swiss barely had time to take a step back and answered with an off-balance forehand that barely scraped over the net. It landed short. Cilic hit into the net what should be a routine backhand approach shot. It turned out to be one of the key points of the match. Cilic himself would later admit that this point, along with two of the three match points he had, were the points that he “regretted” the most once the match ended. Then at 30-40, Federer hit a well-placed, high-bouncing second serve that forced the Croat into an error. Federer finally held, and all of a sudden, the momentum shifted tiny bit in his favor for the first time in the match. He broke Cilic’s serve in the ensuing game and pocketed the third set 6-3.

Federer would admit later to remembering, during that set, his comeback vs. Tommy Haas in the 2009 French Open. In that match, Haas also led Federer two sets to zero, had a break point to go up, and serve for the match. Federer hit the line with his forehand for a winner and the match turned around quickly, eventually leading to Roger’s win in five sets and his only French Open crown two matches later. The only difference: he won the fourth and the fifth sets handily, whereas that would not be the case here against Cilic. Fourth set would be another battle back and forth, similar to the first set, except that Marin would have the opportunities to put the match away, while Roger would still play catch-up tennis. Cilic had his first chance to reestablish his dominance when he led 2-1, and 15-40 on Federer’s service game. Two effective second serves by the Swiss, second being much riskier than the first, got him out of trouble and he held for 2-2. At 4-5 would come a bigger opportunity for Cilic to put this encounter in the record books when he had a match point at 30-40. Federer missed his first serve on yet another crucial point. However – and yes, you may be noticing a pattern by now, more on it later – served an exceptional second serve to get out of trouble once again. A second match point would arrive at 5-6, but this time, Federer would hit an ace to save that one and bring the set to a tiebreaker.

In a thrilling 4th-set tiebreaker, Federer saved another match point and squandered four set points himself before finally winning it 11-9 on his fifth one. He especially found himself in big trouble after missing a forehand sitter on his first set point at 6-4 and losing the next two points to go down 6-7 and a third match point. His second serve once again took the leading role. He placed it wonderfully, forcing Cilic into another return error. Did I mention he also served an unreturnable second serve earlier in the tiebreaker? Well, I just did.

The fifth set was finally where Federer, for the first time in the match, did swing freely, serving better and better, and beginning to dominate Cilic on all facets of the game. One break was enough and he would find it in the eighth game of the set. In the next game, he served out the match and lifted his hands high up in the air after the ace that officially finished the match. Federer would characterize this comeback as a “big one” but not necessarily his biggest.

This was a special win, not because of the tennis that Federer played, but more because of his often-underrated competitor persona that surfaced. Tim Henman would confirm on his post-match commentary on BBC, accurately so, that Roger’s “will to win” was what got him over the hurdle. Federer said later that he was “lucky to some extent,” but he also affirmed that he would “rather be here than booking a jet.” Isn’t it the sign of a champion anyway to find some solution and fabricate a win when he/she cannot perform at the desired level? The elite athletes in our sport prove repeatedly that it is the case.

One of the most underrated shots in tennis is the second serve, yet somehow one that elite players usually lead in all categories to which it relates. As you read above, it was Federer’s second serve that got him out of trouble on the majority of critical moments during the match. Two match points and three crucial break points that almost felt like match points were all saved thanks to second serves that had faster-than-usual pace or risky placement, or both. Roger said that his serve was the one shot he felt he could always fall back on, specifically mentioning his second serve.

How much does he rely on it? Here are a few numbers to ponder. In yesterday’s five-set match, Federer committed zero double faults. Keep in mind that he was not, by any means, “playing it safe” on his second serves. In fact, he took high risks on many of them simply because he had trouble handling Cilic’s returns. On the break and match points noted above, they were placed extremely close to the lines. At Wimbledon so far, the Swiss has committed a total of 2 (“two” in writing) double faults in five matches! He won 59% of his second-serve points against Cilic, and that stat is at 63% for the overall tournament. Are these details? Maybe… But for some reason, these details are always present and relevant when the topic revolves around the top players of our game.

Federer plays Milos Raonic in the semis. The Canadian is also winning 63% of his second-serve points. Federer will need to extend to the whole match the level of tennis he put on display in the fifth set against Cilic. He will (possibly) need to do that again, in order to lift the trophy on Sunday. In short, he has to play his two best matches of 2016 in succession, in order to win his favorite Major. I neither see him defeating Raonic nor winning the tournament if he plays another match at a level no higher than the previous ones in which he was challenged throughout the grass-court season. The good news: he has improved with each match and during yesterday’s match. He reiterated the importance of the seven matches that he got to play in Stuttgart and Halle in terms of getting prepared for Wimbledon. At the end of the tournament, I am guessing that this particular one against Cilic may yet turn out to be the biggest.

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

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

MENU

Navigation