Greetings again from Roland Garros! This second entry offers a hodgepodge of diverse tidbits to make up for the tedious, tactical match analysis of the first one back on Thursday. I know many readers enjoy the X’s and O’s of our wonderful game, but I bet that even the most meticulously rigid readers of this blog cannot honestly say that they wouldn’t enjoy some light-hearted material to browse through. Thus, here is hoping that your definition of “light-hearted” matches with mine.

How about the best picture from each day of this week, so far? It will be chosen from a variety of shots taken by me and carefully selected by the photo committee consisting of one member, me. I only arrived on Monday, May 25th, so there is nothing for the first day of the tournament which took place on Sunday the 24th.

Monday – From the Musée Roland Garros
Men’s tennis shoe, or rather “boot,” from the 1900s – on display at the Musée Roland Garros
——————

Tuesday – let’s have fun with captions.
Federer: “I wish Sevi wouldn’t look at me this close.”
Luthi: “I can’t even look at that forehand, it’s so terrible!”
——————

Wednesday – The crowd gathered around the entrance to the protocol and the player’s lounge at Court Philippe Chatrier, all in the name of catching a glimpse of their heros.
——————

Thursday – The most-traveled walkway in Roland Garros, the alley from Suzanne Lenglen to Philippe Chatrier. Yes, to walk the distance of around 100 meters between the two courts can (and will most likely) turn into a nightmare trip.
——————

Friday – You cannot be serious! What is he doing here? One certainty, he definitely seems to be in pain trying to bend down for that low ball. Actually, he is here for the Legends’ Trophy (June 2-7).
——————

Saturday – Jeremy Chardy defeating his second to-20 opponents in a row (John Isner, David Goffin) on the “Bull Ring” court, Court no. 1. When asked, Chardy said he feels as if that court is his home.
——————

Say what? – Part 1
If you have followed tennis remotely, you may not know this. If you are an avid fan of tennis, you will know it. If you are a casual fan of tennis but an ardent fan of Roger Federer, you will know this without a doubt. If you are working as a media member at one of the four Majors, you should know this. What am I talking about? It’s Federer’s yearly stop by the grass-court tournament in Halle, Germany, prior to Wimbledon. In fact, a good portion of the people who fit in one of the categories above will know that the Swiss has a lifetime agreement with that tournament that takes place during the same week as the Queens tournament in London, another well-known grass-court event. Yet, a media member asked Roger – after listing the names of the important grass-court tournaments leading up to Wimbledon mind you? – if he was going to play a tournament on grass and which one it would be. Roger answered in one word before the guy even finished his question completely: “Halle”

Say what? – Part 2
Earlier today Timea Bacsinszky entered the post-match press conference, probably expecting an awkward question or two coming her way, in the same way that every other player does, after having acquired some experience in dealing with media members who have never played competitive tennis in their lives outside of club/veteran tennis (and that is, if…), or others who are looking for a sensational slogan. But I am not sure she expected this. A journalist, impressed with Timea’s concentration level during the match, said one “could put Brad Pitt or Leonardo DiCaprio naked in front of her, and she would still remain focused on the match!” What do you say to something like that? How about Bacsinszky’s response? –-> “Could you find another example of what could destabilize me? That would make me neither hot nor cold.”

More pictures

I love the staircase that takes you down to the Museum at Roland Garros, because you have to walk by this giant wall donning all the previous winners.
——————

11 AM at the main A and B gates.. Endless crowd waiting to get in. At least, the kids in front kept their good humor.
——————

German Fans – No commentary needed!
——————

The Americans’ hopes rest on the shoulders of Jack Sock! Next up for him on Sunday: none other than Rafael Nadal.

Note: Follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter for frequent live updates from Roland Garros

Tactical Analysis: Pablo Cuevas vs. Dominic Thiem, 2nd round Roland Garros 2015

May 28, 2015

Mertov

One of the best matches of the early rounds in the 2015 edition of Roland Garros took place on Court 3 between the veteran and the 21st seed Pablo Cuevas and the much-younger, yet fast rising, Dominic Thiem from Austria. Both players, enjoying the high points in their career in the recent months, showcased why they are among the best clay-court players in the world. Endurance, topspin, footwork, and patterns preceded big serves and flat winners. As a bonus, spectators got to enjoy two of the most stylish one-handed backhands in the game. More importantly, two highly intelligent players continued to modify their game plans to outwit the other, taking the spectators through a crescendo in each of the four sets, thus the score 7-6 7-5 6-7 7-5.

In this article, I will mostly focus on the first set, only because going through the whole match would take too long to write. But no worries! There was plenty happening in the first set alone. Furthermore, the first set largely determined the outcome of the matches for reasons to be explained later.

When the match started, it quickly became obvious that both players planned to begin the match with their respective plan A’s. On the one hand, Cuevas would stay back, keep the ball deep, move Thiem around with his forehand, and get aggressive only if the opportunity presented itself. On the other hand, Thiem would dictate the rallies with his big forehand, go for winners if the ball came short, and avoid high and loopy rallies. Although each player held to equalize at 2-2, it was evident that Cuevas was winning the long rallies, and Thiem was feeling more and more pressure to finish the point, or else. Cuevas was beginning to impose his game, keeping Thiem on the run just enough to let his forehand direct the traffic of the rally’s pattern.

Cuevas, exactly in the position he prefers in rallies..

If you are in Thiem’s position at that stage, the last thing you want is your first serve to take a vacation. You need it for a few free points, and to set the tone for the next shot in the rally. Yet, it is exactly what happened to Thiem at 2-2. He only made one first serve that game, and was forced into rallies. In fact, Thiem knew going into that game that it was just a matter of time before Cuevas breaks him unless he can keep coming up with big serves and shots. And if you can’t hit big serves, it puts that much more pressure on your groundstrokes. In Thiem’s case, it led to errors that looked like unforced errors, but are in fact errors that resulted from the Austrian player putting too much pressure on himself due to his opponent flawlessly dictating every extended baseline rally up to that point (if only there were a way to keep stats on such categories). Here are the first two points of the 2-2 game:

And just like that, it’s 0-30. Thiem does recover to 30-30 thanks to aggressive play, but then tries to go for too much too soon again:

On that break point, Thiem attacks again, this time on a ball that allows him to step inside the baseline. Moving all the way to the backhand doubles’ alley, he unleashes a forehand winner (who does not do that nowadays anyway?):

Having gotten back to deuce, now Thiem finds himself stuck exactly in the kind of point that he would like to avoid. Cuevas pushes him around the baseline, never giving him a chance to get a firm grip on the rally and get on the offensive.

This is precisely why Thiem has been unloading on those early shots in the rally that led to errors. If he does not go for them, this type of point happens over and over again. In the ensuing break point (2nd one of the game), Thiem once again steps in to hit a big “jump” backhand but does not quite pull the trigger. So what happens? Cuevas punishes Thiem’s half-way-passive-aggressive backhand by sticking a winner right back to the open corner:

Now, you would think that at this point, Cuevas has taken charge in the match. He would have, except that in the next game, he pulls out of his “error” bag one of his 3 double faults in the match, and follows it up with a forehand drop volley in the net that he would make nine out of ten times. It is an uncharacteristically generous game by the otherwise error-free Cuevas that brought Thiem back to life.

Thiem did indeed come alive. For example, until then, Cuevas was exclusively serving to his backhand to start the rally, including a high-kick serve to the ad side, making the Austrian hit above the shoulder and from the outside of the court. But now, all of a sudden, Thiem begins to step in and catch the ball on the rise, immediately putting Cuevas on the defensive. Check out his placement on the backhand returns during the 4-3 game:

He even got to run around the backhand to hit some direct forehand winners (this one at 4-3 up, and 40-30 down on Cuevas’ serve):

This led to Cuevas taking bigger cuts on his first serves, or using a strong outside kick as the first serve, in order not to allow Thiem to attack. This resulted in Thiem having to slice some of the backhand returns because he either had to stretch too far and/or too high to hit topspin, as is the case in this return below in the 6-5 game:

In other words, Cuevas adjusted and responded to Thiem’s increasingly intimidating game by tweaking his serve, just enough to hold his serve and carry the set to a tiebreaker. Thiem still had the momentum going into the tiebreaker, and definitely looked like he was on his way to a 1-0 lead in sets, when he went up 5-1 in the tiebreaker. Check out how Thiem punishes Cuevas for favoring his forehand too much and leaving too much court open on the deuce side at the 2-1 point in the tiebreaker:

Thiem gets a commanding 5-1 lead in the tiebreaker. Then, for one reason or another, he gets passive for the first time in the tiebreaker and lets up during the rally. Did he think that Cuevas lost hope at 1-5 and would hand the next two points to him? In any case, here is what happens that point:

Cuevas also wins the next point to get back to 3-5. Suddenly, it’s a different dynamic. Thiem feels the pressure, leading to this gag on the 5-3 point:

It is now 5-4 and what looked like a blow-out tiebreaker for Thiem has turned into a tight, tedious affair. It soon turns into a nightmare for him when this happens when he has set point on his racket at 6-5:

Yep! Thiem served his only double fault in the set (total of 3 in the match) on set point! The clip showed you Pablo’s subdued relief as if he were saying to himself “Wait! I saved a set point without ever having to hit a ball?”

At 6-6, the players change sides. Thiem, despite the disappointment, plays a solid, aggressive point, only to be passed by Cuevas. Pay particular attention to Thiem’s body language after the point before you read on:

From the end of that point until the beginning of the next, Thiem kept looking at his corner, talking and yelling to himself, seethed with anger over how he now finds himself a set point down after leading 5-1 in the tiebreaker and double-faulting on set point. Yet, here is when youthful enthusiasm can help you. You can mumble and whine for the full 20-to-30 seconds between two points, and still come up with the goods once the ball is in play. Watch how Thiem, still talking to himself few seconds before the point begins (continuous since the end of the last point above), plays his best point of the tiebreaker:

But it is not enough as Cuevas wins the next point to earn another set point at 8-7. This time, the veteran capitalizes on it when Thiem cracks on the very shot, the forehand from the backhand side of the middle, that has worked for him so well for the most part of the first set:

First set goes to Cuevas. How important was that? It was devastating enough for Thiem to temporarily lose focus and go down 0-3 in the second set. It forced him to play catch up the rest of the second set and the match. He did eventually get the break back, but still lost the second set 7-5. Thiem’s mental maturity is far ahead of his biological one. Most young players would have fallen apart after losing two sets like these against a seasoned, seeded player in a Major tournament. However, Thiem found a way to extend the match to a fourth set, playing a much smarter tiebreak in the third set (did go up early again, this time not letting up). Cuevas, unfazed by the length of the match, or the challenge from the talented Austrian, kept his cool and came up with the goods (which, in his case, means that he turned error free) in the latter stages of the fourth set to avoid a fifth one.

The match lasted 3 hours and 51 minutes. If the analysis above showed anything, Thiem and Cuevas do not just have plenty in the tank to survive long duels on clay, but also the I.Q. power to make them entertaining. The “chess” part of the first set was a fascinating “intangible spectacle” while the tangible ones such as stroke production and execution, tremendous agility and speed, and creative baseline tennis while maintaining consistency added the icing on the cake.

Note: Follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter for frequent live updates from Roland Garros

Will Roland Garros Reflect the Clay-Court Season?

May 17, 2015

Mertov

ATP & WTA Majors 2 Comments

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

The W.T.A. side

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

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

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

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

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

The A.T.P. side

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ATP Istanbul Open Wrap-Up

May 4, 2015

Mertov

ATP Tactical Analysis 2 Comments

Part 1: Cuevas and Federer engage in a cerebral duel in the final

While the level of play never came close to the kind of spectacular tennis one would expect from the number 2 player in the world and one of the better clay-court specialists in the top 30, the spectators at the Garanti Koza Arena and others watching on TV witnessed a fantastic chess battle between the two players. At the end of the day Roger Federer prevailed with a 6-3 7-6 win, and lifted the winner’s trophy at the inaugural TEB BNP Paribas Istanbul Open.

Cuevas came out with a simple and expected plan. He would stay solid from the baseline, work Federer’s backhand, and win through consistency. However, Federer sent a firm message from the very first game that he was not going to submit to Cuevas’ plan A. Whenever Cuevas tried to engage in backhand cross-court rallies that have worked so well for him in his previous matches, including his upset of Grigor Dimitrov in the semi-final, Federer would either run around and accelerate his forehand, or switch the pattern with a down-the-line backhand or a drop shot. In his post-match press conference, Federer did say that hitting his backhand down-the-line was not part of his main game plan because he saw that “Grigor did it and it didn’t work for him.” Nevertheless, the fact that he avoided more than one or two cross-court backhand rallies (something from which he usually does not shy away), whether intentional or unintentional on his part, did negate a pattern that would have favored the Uruguayan player. Let’s remember that Cuevas hits a heavy topspin backhand and that pattern would have forced Federer into hitting several backhands in a row above the shoulder level. Federer also stepped inside the baseline often, rushing Cuevas into mistakes. Add to the mix a few surprise serve-and-volley attempts and the Swiss was already up a break at 3-0, before Cuevas could gain any footing in the set.

Seeing that his Plan A is getting him nowhere, Cuevas began to go for more on his forehands, step inside the baseline, and even attack the net when Federer’s shots landed short. The adjustment did work enough to level the play in the set, except that he was already down a break. He then faced a bigger issue: Federer was having his best serve day of the tournament and collecting two or three points per game just on his serves. Federer said after that he felt his serve was the one thing that worked well for him throughout the week, but added that he served best against Cuevas.

Second set picked up where the first ended. Cuevas continued to depend on his plan B, while Federer got more and more aggressive to push his opponent back and gain the upper hand once again. Both players won their serves until Federer drew first blood at 3-3 to break Cuevas’ serve. Most people thought the match was over when Federer jogged to his seat straight from having hit his volley winner and broken Pablo’s serve (see picture below).

JHFM~??uap©cq — Federer jogs to the bench after hitting the winning the volley to go up 4-3

Cuevas would not fold. At the 4-3 and 30-30, Cuevas won two points that probably corresponded closely to his original game plan. They were both fairly long rallies in which Federer looked to close the rally with risky shots to the corners, Cuevas running them down and making Federer hit the extra shot, and the Swiss finally making the mistake due to impatience. It was now 4-4 and back to being on serve. However, Cuevas stuck to playing aggressive for two reasons: first, it got him to level the play when he was initially being pushed around, and second, he was feeling some pain in his arm, enough to have it massaged earlier and to motivate him to keep the points shorter.

From 4-4 on, it was anybody’s set. Once the players arrived to the tiebreak, everyone thought the quality of tennis would reach a new plateau. It never happened. In fact, both players probably chalked that tiebreaker down in their notebooks as one to forget, quickly! From 4-3 to Cuevas in the tiebreaker to the end of it, it was mistakes galore for both players. At 4-4, Cuevas had an easy put away the service line, and shanked the forehand almost into the stands. At 6-4 and two match points, Federer made two direct unforced errors, and then again one at 7-6, in the third match point.

Cuevas had three set points himself, one of which was another forehand that he would have probably made in his sleep. In fact, the only spectacular point of the tiebreaker came on a backhand return winner that Federer hit on a set point for Cuevas, but one that he later called “lucky, because the ball bounced off the line.” Federer admitted that he reflexed the racket into the ball due to the awkward bounce and it somehow turned into a winner when it could have easily gone “to the stands.”

METADATA-START — “Lucky shot” – on the return winner on set point

At 11-11, Federer served and volleyed, hitting the most terrific “intentional” shot of the tiebreaker: a diving low backhand volley on Cuevas’ low return that landed deep in the opposite corner of the court, completely catching Cuevas off guard. He was moving forward, thinking Federer would either miss the volley or barely get it over the net. Instead he found himself sprinting backward and to the backhand corner to retrieve the ball. He did, and Federer won the point on the next, much easier shot. Federer finally closed the curtain on the next point on a Cuevas error. You could see the exhilaration on Roger’s face when he won the match point. He came to Istanbul with the goal of getting some miles on clay under his shoes, and he accomplished his goal while earning his 85th career singles title.

Part 2: Parting shots

Unfortunately the parting shot of the tournament for the spectators live at the tournament was the trophy presentation. Why unfortunately? Because a portable well was put up for the presentation, in front of which the ceremony took place, and in the back of which half of the stadium who paid the same amount of money for corresponding tickets as the other half of the stadium, were denied the trophy presentation. How did it look to those who happened to be on the “wrong” side? See the view below:

Next time, please find another way to show the sponsors’ names on TV. Many other tournaments have found ways to have the trophy presentation, showcase the sponsors names, and yet not put up a “wall of denial” basically disrespecting half of the spectators who came to the stadium, not knowing that they paid for the match only while others earned the right to see the match and the trophy presentation for the same price.

One small negative note goes to the spectators who pass as “tennis fans” but who are really no more than “I-want-to-simply-earn-the-right-to-say-I-saw-Federer” fans. There is something wrong when there is a tennis fan who would be happy to buy a ticket to watch every match, yet he/she can’t, because some person bought that ticket, came and watched a set and a half of Federer (probably because he couldn’t care less about the game of tennis that he half understands) and left, leaving the seat open. There is also something wrong when the organizers succeed in bringing an elite player, a star player, and a few great clay-court players, and yet Federer plays to an almost-filled stadium, while Dimitrov, half an hour later, plays to only half full arena (in the case of semifinals), or no more than 2000 people (in the case of quarterfinals). Next time, dear Turkish “tennis fans”, please treat the tournament as tennis fans and not a showcase event where one earns the title “cool” if he/she attends it.

Major kudos to Federer, a true professional who fulfilled his role as the main actor of the tournament, not only by reaching the finals and putting his name on the winners’ list for the future to come (I don’t even want to think what the attendance would have been if he got upset in the semis and the final match featured Cuevas vs. Schwartzman), but also by engaging in the scheduled activities with enthusiasm, running the kids’ clinic more efficiently by himself than anyone else I have ever seen, becoming basically the advertising face of Istanbul for several days through his facebook and press conferences, and doing everything he can to promote the tournament.

Despite all its problems this year (see previous posts this week), I remain hopeful that they will be addressed and that the necessary measures will be taken so that next year tennis can become the center of attention. I know there are capable people in position of authority who should manage to turn things around and avoid these errors in the future. But they must galvanize everyone around them to follow their lead. One cannot bank on a super star to come every year and carry the tournament on his shoulders: Federer and this 2015 edition was the exception from that standpoint, and not the rule.

I would like to thank readers for following MT-Desk throughout the TEB BNP Parisbas Istanbul Open. For now, it looks like the next live coverage will be the French Open, however stay tuned for regular blog posts on the tour at any time, and click here to follow MT-Desk on Twitter for continuous tweets from the tennis world.

“Fait-divers” from Roland Garros

Tactical Analysis: Pablo Cuevas vs. Dominic Thiem, 2nd round Roland Garros 2015

Will Roland Garros Reflect the Clay-Court Season?

ATP Istanbul Open Wrap-Up

Navigation

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Navigation