Tag: Wimbledon 2015

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rafa Fading Away? Think Again!

July 3, 2015

Mertov

If you have observed the media write-ups and social media ramblings, you may have sensed the underlying theme behind all the flashy headlines attempting to grab your attention on Dustin Brown’s victory over Rafael Nadal. For example, I give ten points to Sun Sport for creativity, for sticking the picture of Brown screaming, and his hair flying everywhere while the headline on top read “Rasta la vista, Rafa.”

Having said that, the larger question invading most write-ups and analyses center on Rafa, or more precisely, on the question of whether or not he will ever regain the form that made him an elite-level player over the last decade. The fact that this question pops up now deserves its own perspective.

Rafa lost to Novak Djokovic one month ago, on a court that he views as his temple. Let me modify that statement: he got dominated by the Serb in three straight sets, 7-5 6-3 6-1, eroding away as the match progressed. The invincible player was finally taken down from his throne, on the red dirt that he cherishes. Yet, only a few such as this article announced the nadir for Rafa, the way they announced it for Pete Sampras in 2001 or Roger Federer in 2013. Yes, it is true that the challenge imposed on Djokovic to show that he was capable of winning Roland Garros and defeating Nadal in Paris weighed heavier than any other topic. That being said, Rafa losing his iron hold on his favorite tournament to his biggest rival should have raised more uncertainty about his future than it did.

Now we find out that those concerns were patiently waiting in a for his possible defeat at Wimbledon. The fact that he lost to yet another outside-the-top-100 player early in the tournament only added fuel to the fire. Suddenly, speculations multiplied over the last 24 hours on whether or not he will ever be a top player again, or a top-5 player, or even if this may be his last year on the ATP Tour. Let’s be clear: the “less-than-a-day-old-yet-explosive” trend of declaring Rafa’s rapid downfall originate not in his loss to “Dreddy” Brown yesterday, but in the lingering effects of the one to Djokovic in Paris. Since 2010, Rafa has not advanced to the second week in Wimbledon and has suffered defeats to opponents outside the top 100 (Lukas Rosol, Nick Kyrgios, Steve Darcis) before the one against Brown yesterday. In contrast, Rafa losing to anyone on the Philippe Chatrier court would signify a career-changing moment for Rafa and that someone (ask Robin Soderling) and shatter the economy (ok, I exaggerate). The loss to Brown is the final push that opened wide the heavy door, while Djokovic was the one who removed its rusty hinges, unlocked it and left it ajar. Now the trend of calling for the gloom and doom of Rafa’s career is enjoying free entrance into the domain of drama. And the traffic to that entrance is flowing freely!

Rafa at his best: practicing hard…

Great champions have always made it their business to prove the pundits wrong, especially if the former believe that the latter is ready to put them in the coffin and send them to the graveyard (yes! I am using metaphors). Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, Roger Federer, Serena Williams have all done it, as well as Stan Wawrinka (remember how long he was treated a one-tournament wonder after 2014 Australian Open?), Kim Clijsters and Jana Novotna, to a smaller scale. You can bet that Rafa will do everything he can, in order to prove that the latest surge in the call for the end of his career reflects bad judgment. If anything at all, the Big 4 have repeatedly shown that they can reach for higher grounds when most pundits believe the opposite.

In the middle of this “end-of-Rafa” mania, I dare to remind everyone that if Roland Garros started tomorrow, barring Djokovic, Nadal would be the favorite to win. I use “dare” because I did just that earlier on Tweeter and I got anything from “Nadal’s bubble has burst” to “err… no” from one gentleman and an overall disagreement (or reserved outlook) from a couple of others. I also got strange looks from two colleagues with whom I dared to discuss it (a third agreed with me, but he was Spanish, does that count?). The reasons given were how bad he has done in other tournaments on clay, how his forehand has regressed, and how the coach-player relationship with uncle Toni has run its course. While I was given the examples of Rafa’s losses on clay, how bad Djokovic dominated him in Paris, and his woes on other surfaces, when it came down to it, nobody could say “[fill in the name] would be the favorite against Rafa in a Roland Garros match.” While I agree that Wawrinka, Murray and a couple of others can be more competitive against Rafa today in Paris, I would question anyone’s objectivity who would call them “favorite” in that setting.

Nadal will get back to work, train hard, and find a way to remain longer among the elite players. On a larger scale, I believe that the call for Rafa’s end as an elite player is chaotically premature. Unless he walks away from the game (which is also included in the speculations circulating around, obviously some have somehow built an information streamline into the Rafa camp), I would warn anyone who banks on him to fade away. Can he get back to number 1? Unless Djokovic, Federer, and Murray have historical collapses in form, that seems unlikely in the near future. Can he get back into the top 5? Of course. Can he win another Major? Absolutely. The most likely place would once again be in Paris. There is almost a year before next year’s French Open (and shamefully, I am not even discussing the next U.S. Open and the Australian Open).

To claim that Rafa will somehow continue to compete and practice, yet not find his form during that period, or at least fail to get back to a level nearing his top form, seems hasty. Injuries can always halt improvement and end careers, and that remains a possibility with the Spaniard. However, the chances of Rafa getting back to elite level remain a higher possibility if he is not hampered by injuries. One loss (again, namely the one to Djokovic) does not take you from elite level to an ordinary player. If that was the case, top players would not still be on top after those types of losses (remember Serena Williams losing to Virginie Razzano in Roland Garros 2012? Sampras and Federer losing to Bastl in 2001 and Stakhovsky in 2013 respectively, both in Wimbledon?). Rafa losing to Brown? Been there done that in London before, and that never stopped him from remaining at the top. Losing to Djokovic at the French does not mean Rafa can no longer play on clay, or no longer win Roland Garros. The announcements and declarations ending Nadal’s career as a tennis player at the top level are not only ill-advised, but they are also hasty and impulsive. I expect cooler heads to prevail overtime.

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

Wimbledon 2015 Match Report: Camila Giorgi (no 31) def. Lara Arruabarrena (no 85) 6-0 7-6

July 2, 2015

Mertov

Majors Tactical Analysis WTA 5 Comments

When I looked at the schedule of matches on Thursday at Wimbledon that featured Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Andy Murray, Petra Kvitova, and Caroline Wozniacki, there was a match scheduled on the small court no. 16 that immediately piqued my interest. It pitted the Italian hard-hitting Camila Giorgi against the savvy Spaniard Lara Arruabarrena. Giorgi undoubtedly went into the match heavily favored, not only because she is the seeded player, but also because she possesses aggressive, flat shots that are more likely to do damage on grass-court surface than Arruabarrena’s arsenal of shots that favors the trickier bounce of clay courts. It was also the kind of match where anyone who closely follows women’s tennis knew that Giorgi would come out aggressively, fire on all cylinders, and go for the quick kill. Yet, that some someone would also know that Arruabarrena has one of the highest I.Q levels on the WTA Tour and would not fold easily. She is a cool customer who knows how to earn the maximum return from her bag of tricks. She will scramble, scratch, claw, pull one shot after another from her bag, ultimately find a way to stop the bleeding, and succeed in turning the match into a competitive battle. The match did not disappoint: all of the above took place.

Giorgi floored Arruabarrena in the early going. In the first set, Giorgi hit 8 winners to Arruabarrena’s 1, and won all 6 points at the net. She also hit a ton of returns early, well inside the court (see the picture below), often winning them immediately either with clean winners or by forcing an error out of her opponent.

As a result, you often saw the picture below, Giorgi walking to the other side to return the next point, shortly after hitting a terrific return.

It also led to plenty of looks by Arruabarrena following her forced errors, like the one below, with a grimace on her face, as she watched her second shot sail long or wide after Giorgi hit yet another booming return.

By the time the second set started, Arruabarrena was already seeking solutions to the downfall. She got annihilated the first set 0-6 and something needed to change. She began varying the pace more and using more deliberately her drop shots like the one below.

She also began stepping inside the baseline more herself, and flattening out her shots when she needed to, in order to keep Giorgi from pushing her around.

Arruabarrena even managed to go up a break, forcing Giorgi into the uncomfortable position of chasing balls, thus collecting some errors from the Italian. She did however make one of her six double faults on a break point at 4-3 up, letting Giorgi equalize and recapture the momentum. Speaking of double faults, they were a product of how much pressure Giorgi was putting on the Spaniard on the returns. Camila’s returns forced Lara to take more risks on her second serves, leading to double faults. Just to illustrate Lara’s frame of mind when Camila was returning, see the picture below. Notice how quickly Arruabarrena is looking to step back behind the baseline. You can see her push back with the right leg, fully focused on the aggressive return already coming her way, no later than when she lands from striking the serve into the court.

Right when it looked like the Italian found her rhythm back and was on her way to winning the second set on a string of 4 games (from 2-4 down to 6-4), Arruabarrena saved three match points in a row at 4-5 0-40, leaving Giorgi in a look of disbelief toward her corner, after saving the 3rd one.

At 5-6, Arruabarrena saved the fourth match point on a return blown out by Giorgi and marched into the tiebreaker. Giorgi led in the tiebreaker for the most part and earned another set of match points at 6-3 up. Once again, Arruabarrena did not fold quickly and saved two more match points to get back to 6-5. Finally, Giorgi won the match on her seventh match point, sending her corner, featuring her dad Giorgi, into a bundle of joy (see the clip below).

Speaking of Sergio Giorgi, in case you have not followed closely over the years, he has been a colorful personality, to say the least. Along with the rest of Camila’s team, he is very vocal (you can hear them on the clip too), and extremely passionate about his daughter’s tennis. Having said that, he has also been at the center of some questionable reports and made some controversial comments – see also this report on both Sergio and Camila. But after a first set that inaccurately indicated an easy route to victory followed by an extremely nervous second set, one can understand why he had to take some down time with friends, minutes after Camila’s win, right outside the court.