Playing Like an Ex-Davis Cupper

It gets harder and harder to be an attack player as one gets older, in my opinion. Of course, it's also harder to be a baseline retriever as one gets older.

In general, it's gets harder to win matches when you play younger and faster opponents, especially on clay.

Of course, you could choose younger opponents who are hopelessly slow and out of shape, but I don't come across too many of those at my club and in tournaments.

What to do when you aren't the younger and faster player?

I've been able to observe some of the tricks of high level super senior players ( ex- davis cup level) and I've also been experimenting with some tactical changes in my game. Here are some of the tactics to consider.

1. In general, wily veteran tennis players position themselves on the baseline or preferably inside the baseline. This reduces the amount of court they need to cover and can compensate for being the slower opponent.

2. Of course, being on or inside the baseline, means that you have to take balls early -- either off the bounce in half volley fashion, or at a height somewhere below the shoulders.

3. If the ball is hit very deep and is going to land near the baseline, these wily vets don't move back and hit the ball as it falls. Instead, they often just volley the ball out of the air.

The net effect of playing someone with this style is that many balls come back to you much earlier than you expect, often flatter, and with less pace. It can create awkwardness and throw off your timimg. And, if you're not careful, you could find yourself at the bar trying to explain how you just lost to a 70 year old!

Now, let me tell you how this all relates to my game.

My fundamental style in my youth could be described as an attack player who could get to the net quickly, and had a good overhead. So, if I could hit a good approach shot, I could usually get good net position, and be in good position to win the point.

As I've gotten older, I've lost a step or two in approaching the net which means that it's now a lot easier for my opponents to get the passing shot at my feet, and the odds now favor them.

So, I'm in the process of adjusting some of my tactics against certain opponents.

Many of the guys I play are younger, faster guys who like to play the modern, heavy topspin, defensive game. Which means that if I hit a deep ball, they like to maove way back behind the baseline, and then hit a heavy topspin back to me.

What I've begun to do is to come in the moment that I read that they are moving way back behind the baseline. And, if they hit the high topspin ball, I either hit a swinging volley or hit a drop volley. If I execute correctly, they will have great difficulty covering my shot. I don't have to be right on top of the net to hit these shots which compensates for my lack of closing speed.

Playing this way, means that I can be patient and then punish them for not being willing or able to hit balls early.

It gives an older, slower guy a chance!

Oh, and just in case you think it only applies to older guys, check out Jeff Salzenstein's video tip on the same topic

Swinging volleys

Until next time,


Glenn Sheiner M.D. - author of Insider Tennis Strategies Swinging volleys guaranteed to make you a smarter tennis player and take your tennis to the next level. Also, check out the world's top tennis humor screensaver
Tennis Cartoon Screensaver. You can download a trial version for FREE.

Behold Ernie, ‘Creature of the Night’.

    
It’s the eyes – they’re all “in league with Lucifer”. Well that’s one way to get sh*t done.

Not gonna lie – a little scared right now.



Gulbis d. del Potro 6-2 6-4

When he broke his 5 match losing streak with a win over Malisse,  it was a mere curiosity.

When he followed it up it  with a straight sets win, it was a reminder that, whatever else you might think of him, he’s still relevant.

When he dusted off Delpo 2 and 4 last night, it became a “thing”. Oh yeah, I think we can call it that now.

By all accounts (after hours for me), it was a one-sided demolition with Ernie reminding us of why he is indeed a thing, why he’s always been a thing.

I doubt very much that Delpo would have underestimated the threat, but he cannot have expected this.

Here’s hoping this form carries over. Not to rain on anyone’s parade, but this ain’t a Slam (not even a Masters 1000) – Ernie hasn’t been beyond one of those in his last 7 attempts.

*That* particular streak needs to end too. And FAST. Else this ain’t a “thing”. Not even close.




Williams d. Sharapova 6-1 6-3

I know I was meant to have been all “IT’S ON” ever since it was clear these two would meet – I just couldn’t dismiss the possibility of precisely this kind of a letdown.

But I would have preferred it if Pova had simply been tuned – far better to have simply been able to say “too good” rather than imploding the way she has all too often recently.

As it happened, Pova was neither here nor there – she simply looked utterly terrified of Serena (so I’m told).

"I think I’ll need to win a couple of more matches before it becomes a true rivalry," said the fifth-ranked Sharapova, who is now 2-7 against Serena and who hasn’t beaten her since 2004. "It’s not really a rivalry until I win few more matches. She’s experienced enough to know that even if it’s a small or big event you have to go out there and do our job and still go out there and win it."

Not that Serena instilling fear in her opponents should surprise any of us. But it’s a little disappointing when that opponent happens to be one of the best competitors the sport has ever seen – perhaps the only player  left in the WTA with the requisite mental hardware to pose Serena a challenge.

Still, as with Ernie, this ain’t a Slam is it, so what does it matter? Right? Right?

“I decided it’s time to get serious not only at the Slams but every other tournament as well.”

-- Serena Williams

OH.

Sabine next. On paper, this spells all sorts of Boombastic. But then that’s what we said about the Wimbledon semis.

Obligatory Happy Domi pic.

No one else serenading the run she’s been on, so I will.

4th round or better at every Slam. QFs or better at three out of the four.

She plays Marion in the semis in a match custom built to test my loyalties to the nth degree.

Stanford: This Descent into Despair just got Asymptotic

Morita d. Ivanovic 6-3, 7-5

This is not even funny or tragic anymore. I’m not even sure it qualifies as an upset. In fact, I don’t know what it is. It’s certainly not analysis-worthy any more. For one thing, there ain’t nothing there to analyse.

How many times do we need to be told that she has an ergonomically-challenged service toss?

Or that its all a problem of confidence?

YOU DON’T SAY.

Never fun to see any player struggling – let alone a Slam winning former #1.

And I REALLY  don’t buy into those continual attempts by some to lampoon her success and caricature her as a one-trip pony….a kid that got a lucky break.

Lest we forget, her rise (and arguably some of her best matches) came during 2006-2007 – a time when Serena, Venus, Pova and Henin were all very much in their prime and at the top of their game…..all at the same time. Call it what you want, but that ain’t no fluke.

Even so, 3 years is a long time, and unless you’re a fan (a big fan) and feel a need to fashion colourful laments on how, sink or swim, you’ll be there till the end, it’s likely better to just give her some room to regroup – and she will regroup even if that doesn’t mean winning another Slam or even a position in the top 5 ever again – and say nothing at all. So that’s what I’ll be doing.


 

Kirilenko d. Georges 6-2, 6-3

I know, I know, I don’t get it either.

To be honest I never really believed Julia would follow up on her success early on this year the way, say, Petra has. That doesn’t mean I consider this even a remotely acceptable result.

Having won Stuttgart, and made the semis of Madrid (beating Caro twice in the process *snigger*) she then failed to make the second week at either RG or Wimbledon.  That’s more than simply a letdown.

And now this: a first round exit to Kirilenko – a competent and likeable enough player, but not, quite frankly, in nearly the same league.

Or maybe she is. Maybe I’ve got Julia all wrong – predictions tend, after all, to be anything but predictable.  Maybe Julia will follow the more common debutante route of continuing to languish emerging only sporadically to bag a scalp that is as big as the blaze of publicity it commands.

Frankly, I’ve had my fill of that and am holding out for something better. And not just from Julia.

Stanford: Pretty Sure This Qualifies as #Winning

6-0 6-0 in 47 mins.

And she didn’t face a single break point. Nor did she lose a single point on her first serve. Not one.

“It was me being focused,” Williams said. “I’ve always said if I play my best no one can beat me. Hopefully I can get back to that level.”

Hell, that’s not even a brag (let alone a humblebrag) – more like  a demonstrable law of nature.

Guess that means she’s “back”.

Except we’ve always known that words like that simply don’t feature in Serena’s tennis altereality (neither do “form” and “momentum”). And it bears repeating that Rodionova ain’t even a top 50 player – never has been. But then she ain’t canon fodder either…or, at least, not the type of canon fodder that fails to win even a single game.

So yeah, unsurprisingly surprising. Parrot green ecstasy for her fans. Crisis talks for her “not a fans” and players in her section of the draw. Speaking of which:

“She’s coming back and she’s winning again,” Kirilenko said of Williams. “I need to be focused every minute.”

I’m no Kiri fan, but you have to love how she takes the edge off her imminent destruction with the word “focus”. You can do it with almost anything:

“It’s no longer a question of when but if Murray will win a Slam….he needs to be focused every minute.”

“I’ve spent nearly three unsuccessful years trying to unify Quantum Mechanics with the General Theory of Relativity…..I need to be focused every minute.”

”The worlds biggest economy may default - may not even be able to send out welfare cheques come Tuesday next week…..we have to be focused every minute.”

Assuming Serena doesn’t catastrophically implode between now and Friday, or that “focus” isn’t all its cracked up to be (and it really isn’t, not in itself) Serena will meet Masha in R3.

YES I’ve heard about the “womance” (that is what they’re calling it right?):

“I really like playing Maria and I really admire her and never giving up and developing the confidence that she has… Always just walking around and having so much aplomb, it’s good. I always admired that, it’s really cool.”

…..NO it doesn’t surprise me that two of the greatest competitors this sport has ever seen should have something like mutual admiration.

But then neither do I think there’ll be anything other than cat claws, fire and brimstone on court come Friday. You really do need to focus if you do, and more than just “every minute”.

Spanish Tennis Drills

If The United States and Spain were both tennis stocks, then for the last 10 years, the Spanish stock has been in a bull market, while the United States stock is bearish all the way.

The most obvious sign of this would be the number of Spanish players who have been populating the men's top ten, as compared to the shrinking number of Americans.

Add to that, the fact that even the USTA hired a Spaniard Jose Higueros as the Director of Coaching in 2008.

Not to mention that even without Rafa, the Spanish Davis cup team just took out the Americans in Austin, on Andy Roddick's home court.

Ok, but is there a difference between the coaching that one receives in Spain versus the US?

And, I won't be a smart ass and suggest that the difference is that the lessons in Spain are given in Spanish. If that's all that was required, the the USTA could send its pros to Berlitz language training and everything would be AOK.

I won't pretend that I have trained at a Spanish tennis academy or that I know the inside scoop about what they talk about at the USTA. I will say though that I have read quite a bit about the differences from people who have trained in both places.

A great example would be the pro Chris Lewitt who has written articles on John Yandell's excellent site Tennisplayer.net and who has his own site at chrislewit.com . It seems that the difference is that the Spanish system is fanatical about movement, defense, and racket head speed to generate heavy topsin.

Growing up in North America, every tennis lesson that I have ever seen or taken involved a pro on the other side of the court hitting balls to me(except for the serve). But, it seems that having the pro on the same side of the court and feeding balls by hand is a big part of the Spanish training. And, there are designed movement drills that incorporate both offense and defense.

What's nice as well about these drills, is that it looks like it would be quite easy to have a friend feed balls and for you to get a high level workout.

Here are a few links to a few spanish type drills. Enjoy and maybe you can incorporate them into your training.



Spanish Hand Fed Drill

Spanish Tennis Drill

Spain Tennis Academy


Until next time,

Glenn Sheiner M.D. - author of Insider Tennis Strategies Spanish Tennis Drills guaranteed to make you a smarter tennis player and take your tennis to the next level. Also, check out the world's top tennis humor screensaver
Tennis Cartoon Screensaver. You can download a trial version for FREE.

Technorati Tags Tennis

“Happy dancing Spaniards”

Nothing I can say will do justice to the distilled quanta of awesome that  is this video.

Can we all, instead, simply agree that it “does what it says on the tin”?




(word, big-up, hat-tip and many, many thanks to @andy_murray)

Whatever July might have lacked for on court – it gave, and gave, AND GAVE *off* court.

Howdy all.

As you’ve no doubt already gathered from my little sabbatical, I’m not especially fond of the tennis in July. In fact, I abhor it….especially when it’s on clay.

FACT: July is to the Tennis Calendar what “no-man’s land” is to the serve-volleyer –  the type of place you exile a recently demoted German Masters event when you want to add insult to injury.

And you know what? I think the players agree with me. Well most of them.

Since Newport they seem to be doing anything and everything other than actually plying their trade (that would be tennis). Shaving their head, getting married, staging (slightly tasteless) mock-assassinations, dating (non-tennis) sports stars, amongst other middle-earthy type things.

Whatever works for you tennis. Get whatever’s plaguing you right outta your system, right outta yer hair. Just so long as you’re good to go for August.

I had hoped to ease myself back in. Only I don’t think that’s going to be  possible with the Stanford draw being what it is:

1) Five of the eight seeded players are from my tennis pool.

2) Serena’s in the mix

3) Potential/actual matches: Kimiko/Domi R1, Sabine/Sam R2, Serena/Georges R2, Dani/Pova R2, POVA/SERENA R3,  

The mind doth boggleth….not at all conducive to “easing in” of any sort.

Welcome back tennis.

Drive By

I'm in the weeds. Literally. Despite drought-like conditions, the weeds are growing faster than mold. The soil is dry as corn meal, but the pigweed and plantain weed and purslane and crabgrass and belladonna and every other climbing, spreading, strangling weed you can think of are thriving.

Thriving.

I haven't seen but about two games of tennis since Wimbledon and have read about it even less.

I suppose I'll get back to it sometime during the US Open Series. But I've got to save my sweet corn and watermelon, my blackeye peas and okra, and my sweet potatoes and peppers from extinction.

See you when I see you.

2Hander's Take: Born-Again Single-Hander...

I'M BACK BABY!!! [Z: *falls off stool* Well look what the cat dragged in...]

Well, it's been a long time to say the least. I have not been keeping track of the Blog as much as I should have (explanation, well, sort of, offered below). However, like old friends, it should take us no time to carry on where we left off. [Z: Uh-uh...you don't get to shake off going AWOL for 2 years that easy...]

For those of wondering "WHO the HELL is this guy?!?", and there have been enough changes to the Blog and its readers to make me think that's a sizeable proportion of you wonderful people, I am an old (and hopefully good) friend of Zafar's - he used to be called Topspin - what happened to that?! [Z: Think its probably ok to use my name after 3 years ;)]

The last time I posted must have been around the 2009 mark, around the US Open time. A lot has gone on and a lot has changed. Firstly, I have changed job and location to one where internet is more expensive (But I still pay for it! Hey, I don't have a TV!) and the work is more stressful. That's a super combination to keep me off posting, but hey, I got there in the end - question is, will Andy Murray?! [drums and cymbal] [Z: To quote Mr President: YES HE CAN. AND WILL :( ]

(On a side note, whilst I am quite a fan of Muzza, it is not because of his image as David Lloyd suggested. I did like Murray's retort of 'stick to building fitness clubs') [Z: I like the shaggy look - its not like he went 'George Bastl' on us :p ]

Another change has been to my tennis game (hence my nick?). I have abandoned the two-handed backhand for a Federeresque (in my dreams, anyway!) single-handed. I have found that it is more consistent, I feel as though I have far more control of the ball and I find it easier to get into position for it. Also, funnily enough, I can deal with higher balls far better - Roger, give me a call and we'll talk! [Z: HERESY. After all the grief you gave me over the ONE time I tried hitting with two hands...]

So, that would make something of a Born-Again Single-Hander. In light of this, must I now change my nick to BASHer?! However, if we've done away with nicks, then my name is Asad.

OK, well the story so far is...Novak Djokovic is whupping EVERYONE - good night! [Z: No sh*t] Seriously, the guy has come leaps and bounds both on and off the court. For I...uh-oh, humble pie time...used to be quite a critic of Nolé. [Z: Again...no sh*t] I found the impersonations were becoming rather tiring as was dedicating every victory as a tribute to how hard life was a Serb in the 1990s. [Z: ...]Also, on court, he would seem to "lose the will to live" on occasion giving up after a good start or not being able to get started in the first place - particularly against Federer and Nadal.

Now? WHOA! For a start, he is now starting to beat Federer more regularly and convincingly. His groundstrokes have always been strong on both wings but his backhand really is nearly on par with his forehand. [Z: I quite liked his BH, but you're right both strokes equally dependable....] His volleying has improved, though he's always looked more natural at the net than Nadal. [Z: Nadal/Nole have both learnt to volley admirably well - but I still think they both look like a couple of street-hustlers at the net] More natural than Tsonga? Erm, no! Also, he has finally found his rhythm with that new service action and not to mention the new racquet.

I think I used to call him Chokovic! That, too, has now been formally retracted.

And now, I must challenge a few things, if I may. [Z: Uh-oh] I would say that he did play his best tennis in many respects against Nadal, both mentally and mechanically (if that makes sense). His shots during the 1st, 2nd and 4th sets (more about the 3rd set in a bit) were fan-diddly-tastic! He was playing like a man possessed. He destroyed Nadal in the 2nd set (in fact I thought Rafa must have had a bust-up with his girlfriend or something because a significant part of him was not in the game). The way he was mixing up the pace of serves was genius. The way he went after Nadal's backhand was also a brilliant tactic which worked a treat. [Z: Agree..I actually think Nole elicited a lot of Nadals "unforced" errors - my point was he didn't need to be as good as he was say in IW/Miami...but I almost prefer us to disagree :P ]

The 3rd set, Rafa kind of decided to show up and play. However, maybe nerves got to Nolé as he was hitting a lot of balls out and his serve somewhat desserted him. I thought that the old Chokovic Syndrome might start kicking in then. He broke early in the 4th set, but quickly got broken back. This is where he really showed his new-found mental strength: he got it out of his system, dug deep, went for his shots and it paid off. [Z: Rafa thinks this level might not last...I don't get it - relying on his opponents level to fall has never been his style either on court or in a presser :-O ]

Whereas Tsonga showed us the masterclass on how to beat Nadal at the 2008 Aussie Open, which was by and large from the net [Z: I have a bone to pick with Jo...], Nolé has managed a few times now (not to mention on clay!) to beat Nadal at his own game - with high, loopy topspin from the back of the court. This is why I feel rather cheated that they didn't get to meet at RG and in a strange twist of fate, were deprived of a Rafole final at Wimby. I think Nolé believes he can 'bother' Rafa at RG now... [Z: You're right - that would've been something - but I liked Feds win as well.....]

So, Novak has finally come of age and he fully deserves the No. 1 ranking for he is, so far this year, the best player on the planet. He has matured incredibly, OK it came after a few bad seasons and injuries but I take my hat off to him... [Z: Ditto....]

Wimbledon: Parting Shots - The rest

» I hate talk of “guards” (and their replacement) almost as much as I do “goats” – and mostly for the reasons Tignor mentions here, which are that people are apt to use the phrase prematurely.

It’s certainly true that, were Rafa to win the FO and Wimbledon next year, and Novak to win, say, Aus again, and Federer (or someone else?) to win the USO, those who called for the changing of the guards would be forced to change them right back again (or at least to admit they were premature).

Even so, I think Tignor overstates his case a little in characterising Novak’s victory this weekend and ascent to world #1 as, “just a big win”. 

2 Slams, 4 Masters titles and only one loss out of a total of fifty matches played since November last year is (as I suspect Mr Tignor knows full well) a little more than “just a big win”.

And you know what? I wouldn’t be surprised if this does turn out to be the changing of the guards. It has to come at some point (duh!).

» The Wimbledon Mic disaster

For a tournament steeped in such history, prestige and, well, privilege, this was confoundingly bad and utterly unforgivable.

The point about a runner-up (whoever they might be) is that they’re usually hankering to get off court as soon as possible.

The very least you might do is to make the various formalities they must undergo as easy to endure and as smooth as possible.

Instead, most of the comments Rafa made to Sue Barker weren’t heard by anyone. When transmission did return, he (understandably irritable) cursorily thanked his team on a mic that was still so glitchy as to make most of what he said unintelligible.

 

» This may very well be the biggest crisis of Rafa’s very decorated career since his injury/parental-divorce-ridden 2009.

It may just be his post-loss state of mind but, nevertheless, I found this quote worrying:

"My experience says this level is not forever. Even for me when I was last year winning three Grand Slams, my level of last year is not forever. Probably the level of Novak of today is not forever."

Not “I must improve” but that “Novak won’t stay that way forever”.

» Rafa a “cheater”, really? Get a grip.

I’ve obviously missed something.

Why is taking a MTO before a tie-break – not mid game, not on his opponent’s serve, not even on a changeover – but before a tie break (a natural cut off point) evidence of questionable moral fibre?

That’s what Rafa did against Delpo and it caused unchecked, unmitigated outrage on my timeline.

As it turned out, nothing much was wrong – but judging from the reaction you’d think some would prefer that there was – perhaps they’d also prefer him to play through injury, in case there really was a problem?

Drawing attention to his quite irritating idiosyncrasies is one thing. The perception hit he now regularly takes makes addressing it of vital importance.

Using them to malign his character in a desperate (and rather insecure) attempt at “bigging up” one’s own fave (especially when that fave is in no need of “bigging up”) is selling yourself very short indeed.

» As if to compound his perception problems even further there was a release-of-information gaffe on Monday when both Neil Harman and tennis.com reported Rafa as having a “hairline fracture” that could have kept him out for “6 weeks”.

The report was killed by Uncle Toni less than 24 hours later who also confirmed that he was still on to play Montreal. Which is it?

» My own feeling is Rafa has very evident PR issues rather than “moral fibre” issues – and, needless to say, he needs to sort them out – specifically as it relates to the management, treatment and announcement of his injuries.

I’ve no time for those accusing him of cheating (its bigoted and unnecessary), but shit like this doesn’t help his cause. I also don’t think playing a Slam shot up full of anaesthetic is the best way to be going about things but that rant’s for another day.




» Whatever progress Pova may have made (and it’s difficult to deny progress has been made if you properly examine her results since IW), and however disciplined, resolute and hungry she undoubtedly remains, its hard not to feel that she’s often treading water just to keep her serve intact.

It may well define the rest of her career – when it breaks down the rest of her game is sure to follow. She knows it. We know it.

Despite all this, we should be very wary of dismissing her chances of winning a Slam altogether. She’s gotten this close twice in the past two months (one of which was on her worst surface): she only played one poor match at RG (SF), and it’s not difficult, I hope, to see Petra handing away her debut Wimbledon final amidst a flurry of UFEs?

The chips will, of course,  need to land the right way up, and if and when the win comes, it will have been in spite of, rather than because of her serve.

Still not quite the same thing as “never”. 

» Kimiko/Venus week one. Match of the tournament. Match of the year?

Like I said, required viewing for WTA girly-girls under the age of 25.



» After 11 months out, Serena (unsurprisingly) hit the ground running and only came undone by a monumental effort on the part of one of the flattest ball strikers in the sport.

Her fourth round exit will see her drop to #175 in the rankings. At least one top seed is due a very bad day at the office in round one of the USO.

» I’ve learnt to expect fluctuations from Venus Williams and it seems six months out hasn’t changed that

The good news is that she still had it in her to go toe-to-toe with Kimiko. The bad news is that she still hasn’t figured out Tsvetana.



» Seriously, I haven’t figured out Tsvetana either. Nobody has.

9 matches won out of the 22 events she played since Wimbledon last year. Just nine. Yet somehow that's enough to make the the semis of Wimbledon going through the world number three and Venus Williams (again and with the exact scoreline) back to back? Someone explain.

» <Insert threadbare pun about Slam-less world number ones here>

For what it’s worth, I still think Caro can win a Major, but like Pova (actually nothing like Pova) a lot of the chips would have to land the right way up. And the Law of Averages says it’s not nearly as inconceivable as is being suggested that they do land the right way up. At least once.

» Was rather hoping for an end to Fed’s 18-month Slam drought, and when Jo-Wilfried went and did what he did and in the way he did, it made me a little sad – we go back a long way, Fed and I.

And I still say he’s been quite unlucky  – every Slam loss dating back to the USO (and Delpo) in 2009 involves a big hitter playing lights-out tennis – with the type of depth and accuracy no one has an answer for. That, or its been Novak (2.0) or Rafa (on clay).

That’s not me being an apologist, it’s just plain fact.

»  I’m still not done blaming everyone and everything

In Murray’s own words, he’s “15-20% behind Rafa” and those other two. Which will make the win that much sweeter when it does come. Perhaps rather foolishly, I still choose to believe it will come.

» Marion

I only wish she hadn’t played that much tennis in week one :(

» Vika

Bad draws, injury, heat stroke, the return of the Williamses and, now, the emergence of Petra. There appear to be an awful lot of reasons why Vika shouldn’t win a Slam and the list is only going to get bigger.


» Don’t normally talk doubles but Jurgen and Iveta winning mixed is one of the highlights of the fortnight for me. Mainly because we got to see Iveta smile.

And pictures of Iveta smiling are, as we all know, collectors items.

» Sabine

Welcome back. And don’t disappear on me again.

» Jo-Wilfried

I can’t hate on you – especially seeing as you were able to win a set off Novak and took him to two breaks in the semis. But I still think you screwed Fed.

» BREAKING: Sam Stosur still can’t win a match on grass. 

» Aside: Alan Rickman would make a quite EXCELLENT umpire. And it’s not just the equally magnificent voice.

» Unnoticed and unsung: Dominika – 4th round or better at every Slam. Take a bow.

Wimbledon: Parting Shots (Petra edition)

I make no apologies for devoting the first half of these ‘Parting Shots’ to Petra. She’s the best thing that’s happened to women's tennis in years.

» Petra Kvitova is the best WTA Grand Slam ingénue since Maria Sharapova and I hasten to add, Svetlana Kuznetsova.


Its been seven years and no one’s even come close.

In some senses she’s no different from a lot of her generation – a huge backswing, a lasso FH, a tall imposing frame, not the greatest looking mover and someone that looks to out power her opponents.

Then there’s all the little things that set her apart, like the ability to slice/volley, the foibles and curious ticks, like that mild look of annoyance she sometimes wears after an UFE – all of which conspire together to make her ‘Petra’.

» All throughout the fortnight comparisons were being made to Mary Pierce. I have to say I couldn’t really see it.

Not at first. And even though I’ve come round a little since, I think there’s a more valuable comparison to be made with Svetlana Kuznetsova.

You’ll see where I’m going with this.

» Petra’s not in the business of getting down on herself.

If she fires off an UFE, she winces a little, may stare pensively at her frame but then moves on. That furrowed look of minor vexation and bemused disappointment she sometimes wears helps keep her focus rather than detracting from it.



» The effortless winners are, like Sveta, the tennis equivalent of “easy listening”.

Sveta has the shortened backswing which I’m not going to pretend I don’t prefer. The easy flamboyance is common to both.

» The flip side of such easy flamboyance is that neither deems it necessary to take any corrective action when things go awry. As they often do.

They simply have too much faith in the quality of their shotmaking to start doing anything differently. I know I wouldn’t either if I were half as gifted.

But when the wobble doesn’t auto-correct, it often costs them matches rather than mere sets, sets rather than mere games, and games rather than mere points.

» Not gonna lie: Her lanky frame can look a little clumsy chasing down balls along the baseline, yet she’s mostly – mysteriously – in position, and is somehow able to maintain the same depth on the run as she does when lining up for a shot on her terms.

That’s them muscles at work. And it gives rise to an athleticism that is completely beyond someone like Pova – although I adore her all the more for it.

» Let me say that again: Petra maintains the same depth on the run as she does when she’s able to line up for a shot on her own terms.

It won her countless rallies in the final as poor Maria simply wasn’t able to keep up. You just don’t see that very often, except maybe from Venus Williams on a good day. New breed of competitor.



» The easy shotmaking is a function of an even easier temperament.

After seven years of tantrums, chokers and cry-babies, I’m unashamedly in awe of it.

» Make no mistake about it, Petra deplores UFEs (I don’t see how you cannot when you’ve seen the excellence you’re capable of).

But she doesn’t erupt in emotion the way Marat or Bepa used to, or silently burn herself out in seething resentment the way…..many others have done.

Neither does she choke as overtly as a Sam Stosur or an Amelie Mauresmo. No, Petra (and Sveta) occupy a quieter middle ground known as ‘Erratica’, which can lead to downright reckless or maddeningly efficient shotmaking.

» Aside: Born 150 or so years ago and Petra would have made a quite EXCELLENT pre-Raphaelite muse.

» And now, for the clincher: both Sveta and Petra wore braces when they first burst on the scene in a maelstrom of dorkish affability.

What do you mean that’s not relevant?

Face Of The Day

Getty

A thousand words.

Wimbledon: Not the best final, Not his best tennis…

Not, in my mind, a vintage final. Not even close.




But I’m not going to harp on about Rafa’s UFEs – there weren’t, in any case,  as many as it “felt”, perhaps because they all occurred at the most critical moments.

I’m not going to talk about his shoddy forehand, or how I thought this was the worst Slam performance I might have ever seen from him.

I’m not even going to bother pointing out that, as well as he played, I thought that Novak was beatable today, not quite at the heady heights he attained during his streak – a place he hasn’t been in since the beginning of the French Open.

To do so would be disingenuous.

It’s not that I don’t believe in any, or all of the above, or in the validity of pointing it out. It’s just that, in the grand scheme of things, it simply doesn’t matter.

And if you want to get picky about it, many of Rafa’s errors were elicited, if not entirely “forced”. Yes there is a difference.



What we know is this: Novak is now a troublesome squatter in Rafa’s head, and it’s up to Rafa to find a means of evicting him – this really shouldn’t be contentious given he’s admitted as much in his presser, which was as unflinching as it was Yoda-like:

"Today my game don't bother him a lot,” Nadal told reporters. "He's playing better than my level. And find solutions, that's what I have to try. When I was healthy, I only lost against him. Probably the mental part is little bit dangerous for me. To win these kind of matches, I have to play well these kind of points [that] can change the match. I didn't play well these moments. That's what happened in Indian Wells, that's what happened in Miami, and that's what happened here. I don't want to count in Madrid and Rome because he played much better than me. And to change to be little bit less nervous than these times, play more aggressive, and all the time be confident with myself. That's what I gonna try next time. If not, I gonna be here explaining the sixth [loss].”

The problem I have with much of the commentary surrounding Novak’s win is that it’s still being conducted through the prism of the most mindblowing moments of his streak – a place which, if we’re honest, he hasn’t been in since the beginning of the French Open.


There’s nothing deplorable or disingenuous in drawing attention to his record this season, nor in the effusive praise that’s sometimes giving rise to – this win, like many before it, is, in no small sense, a product of that streak, if only in a residual way. But it seems to me that doing that deflects attention from its real merit: that he simply didn’t need to be at that level.

The fact is, Novak was able to put Rafa through the mill performing at barely around 85% – that also happened to be high enough to produce what he called “the best grass court match of his career”.

In other words, he won Wimbledon without playing his best tennis. How many times have we serenaded Rafa and Fed for doing precisely that?

Unhealthy obsession with the streak obscures that very “Big Picture”.

In terms of trajectory, narrative and, dare I say it, “destiny” (an overused word I’ve grown to hate), however, it’s not only valid, but imperative to take note of the streak in its entirety; for only then do you come to a proper understanding of how the best player of the past 7 months came to win the biggest title of his career and position himself atop the rankings.

Even the nerves and issues with confidence Rafa alluded to in his presser are a direct function of what transpired in those 7 months – the seeds of his fear (and resulting UFEs) in the final were laid in those four losses he suffered to Novak earlier this year.

So you see,  it’s really quite irrelevant whether or not Novak played at the height of his powers in what must be considered the crowning victory of his season (and, one must think, his career) to date.



Marathon runners don’t sprint, leap or bound over the finishing line, they sometimes just casually shuffle across, secure in the knowledge of the work they’ve already put in to reach this point – and Novak did a heck of a lot more than that to make world #1.

Novak Djokovic, Wimbledon Champion

Getty


Getty

He played one set of spectacular tennis and captured his first Wimbledon crown. He wanted it so much, had struggled so to find his footing in the past, he ate a blade of grass when it was all over. I had sworn it would take a spectacular effort to defeat defending champion Rafael Nadal, that there was no way the Spaniard would let the Serbian off the hook at any time during the match.

I was wrong.

On either side of trading 6-1 sets, Nadal played two loose service games out of nowhere to drop serve. The first one handed Novak Djokovic the set outright, the second gave him the opportunity to serve for the match. I've seen Nadal choke in Wimbledon finals before (2006 and 2008) but for some silly reason, I didn't think he'd do it again.

I suppose it's time I stop underestimating Djokovic's mental toughness in the face of Nadal. Fans all over the place say the way Nadal submits to Djokovic now reminds them of how Roger Federer submits to Nadal, or how Andy Roddick submits to Federer. But in both of those cases, the man who would become the pigeon never boasted a winning record over the one who would make him so.

In some ways, the reversal of fortune seems more like what Federer did to David Nalbandian. After losing to the Argentine the first 5 times they played, the Swiss figured out a way to win. Thereafter, it seemed Nalbandian forgot how to beat Federer. Are we headed to a period when every match between Djokovic and Nadal will have a predictable outcome?


Getty

In yesterday's final, Nadal mentally went away at the end of the two sets that handed Djokovic the title. He struck his first double fault of the match serving at 3-4 in the fourth, and followed it with two errors off the ground. He saved one break point, but another error allowed Djokovic to serve out the match. At 30-30, Djokovic served and volleyed for the first time in the match, and then won championship point when Nadal struck a passing shot long.

Overall, it wasn't a spectacular effort or a very good match, but Novak Djokovic cements his place today as the new world No. 1 with the most coveted title in tennis.


Getty

Getty

Two Slams, the No. 1 ranking, and an astounding record of 48-1 on the year. If it's true, as pompelmo asserts, that every Pharoah has his Moses, then who's going to float up out of the bullrushes and cut his way through Djokovic's absolute dominance?

Petra Kvitova, Dangerous

Getty


Getty


Getty

It was her first Grand Slam final. She served out both winning sets to love, serving her first ace of the match on championship point. Her foe was a 3-time Grand Slam champion who won her first championship on the lawns of Wimbledon, blasting an anxious Serena Williams off the court in straight sets.

I fell in love with her the first time I looked into them there eyes. Them Bette Davis eyes. It was Fed Cup. 2007. A tie with the United States in the Czech Republic. It wasn't just that she wiped the floor with Bethanie Mattek-Sands and Alexa Glatch to win both her singles rubbers, it was the look in her eyes while she was doing it. Nevermind her great serve, her hard, flat ground strokes and champion-like reflexes, but there was a calmness and intensity at once that exuded from her eyes that made her dangerous in mine.

I just knew Petra Kvitova would be great. Knew it.

So when Serena drew her in the first round of the 2010 Australian Open, I feared her flawless, undefeated record in Slam first rounds would come to an end. Dangerous. Serena got through that match in a lopsided scoreline that didn't tell the whole truth about the points and games played.

So when Serena had to face her in the semifinal of Wimbledon last year, I figured she might fail to advance to defend her third Wimbledon title. Dangerous. Yesterday, after her 6-3 6-4 victory over Maria Sharapova -- in a match that was all about angles and ground missiles and shrieks and barks and breaks and nerves -- when asked about last year, Petra said she didn't believe she could beat Serena then, but knows she can now.

Dangerous.


AP


Getty

We have crowned a new Grand Slam champion. A young woman who can call both Caroline Wozniacki and Victoria Azarenka, two players hyped to the hilt as future champions, her contemporaries. But Petra has gone about her business without any hype at all. And wouldn't you know it, she has leapfrogged her tennis generation to the Winner's Circle with something other than Hollywood good looks and an adoring press.

It's probably a blessing hardly anyone was looking. The biggest victory in her career to date is her fourth title in 2011. She has won an international (Brisbane, outdoor hard), a premier (Paris Indoors, hard), a premier mandatory (Madrid, outdoor red clay), and a Grand Slam on the lawns at Wimbledon. A woman for all seasons.



Dangerous was the first film for which Bette Davis, the greatest actress of her generation, won an Academy Award. She won another a few years later for her lead role in a film entitled Jezebel. I'm not so sure anyone would consider Petra Kvitova a fallen woman, though she's got plenty of power behind her throne, but if the Academy Awards are to film actors what Wimbledon is to tennis players, I'd bet the farm Petra's got another acceptance speech in her somewhere down the road.


AP

Wimbledon 2011: Men's Final Preview

Novak Djokovic SRB (2) vs. Rafael Nadal ESP (1)

by Mad Professah, contributing writer 

This year I correctly predicted 3 of 4 men's quarterfinals, 4 of 4 women's quarterfinals, 1 of 2 men's semifinals, 2 of 2 women's semifinals and the women's final. 

Here are my predictions for the men's final at the Wimbledon Championships for 2011.

How They Got Here. 

Novak Djokovic played the most entertaining match of the fortnight against Jo-Wifried Tsonga, who was trying to repeat the amazing level of play which allowed him to dismiss 6-time Wimbledon champion Roger Federer in 5-sets after dropping the first two by dropping his serve in the first game of the match and holding serve in twenty-four consecutive service games to beat the Swiss great 3-6 6-7(3) 6-4 6-4 6-4. Djokovic was pushed by Tsonga to four sets, eventually winning 7-6(4) 6-2 6-7(9) 6-3. Tsonga mounted a challenge despite being down 4-2 in the 3rd set after winning an amazing exchange where both combatants ended face down on the grass. The crowd applauded ecstatically which caused both players to relax. This was a plus for Tsonga and a minus for Djokovic who was broken in the next service game and then lost a tight tiebrekaer despite having two match points. 

Rafael Nadal has now won 20 matches in a row at Wimbledon dating back to his 2007 five-set  loss in the final to Federer. Although Andy Murray was able to win the first set 7-5 through aggressive play (and an uncharacteristically sloppy sixth service game by Nadal). This was incredibly important moment for the Scot's tennis future to show that he could win a set against Nadal in a crucial match but  Murray had a momentary mental lapse (hitting a sitter overhead meters out of the court) which led to an early break in the second set. That, combined with an apparent groin injury made the result of the match very clear as the third and fourth sets slipped away quckly. The result was a 5-7 6-2 6-2 6-4 win to place the Spaniard in his 5th consecutive Wimbledon final (skipping the 2009 tournament due to injury).

The Match Up

Head-to-head Nadal leads Djokovic 16-11, but the Serbian has played Nadal in 4 finals this year and won every time, including (shockingly!) two wins in clay court finals (in Madrid and Rome). The only person who has beaten Djokovic in over seven months is Roger Federer, after playing some of the best clay court tennis he has ever exhibited in Paris this yearin the semifinals of Roland Garros. Let me repeat that: Djokovic has won 47 matches in 2011 and only lost one. Can he continue his amazing run now that he has had to play at a stratospheric level of near-perfection to reach his lifetime goal of becoming World #1? How long can he possibly maintain this form? Can anyone possibly beat Nadal in five consecutive finals?

The first thing Nadal mention is that this match is played at a major so it is the first time during Djokovic's streak they are playing best-of-five-sets tennis. It is also a historic moment, the winner of the first major of 2011 playing against the winner of the second major of 2011. Nadal unquestionably has more experience at this level; Djokovic is only playing in his 5th major final, where he has won 2 (against Tsonga in the 2008 Australian Open final and against Murray in the 2011 Australian final) and lost two (2007 US Open final to Federer and 2010 US Open final to Nadal). Nadal is in his 13th major final, sporting an impressive 10-2 record, with the two losses in finals coming here at Wimbledon in 2006 and 2007 to the third member of the historic "trivalry," Roger Federer.

Mentally, I believe Djokovic has the edge in Sunday's match. Nadal hasn't even really been close in the last two matches they have played on clay which has got to worry him at important moments, especially if Djokovic gets off to a quick start. The only major finals Nadal has ever lost have been on grass and although Djokovic has never won a set against Nadal on the surface, Nadal knows that person he played then (in the 2007 Wimbledon semifinal and the 2008 Queens club final) is not the same person he will be facing on Sunday. That streak will almost certainly end.

The ATP website has a very interesting summary of the two player's performances at Wimbledon to date which seems to indicate Nadal has played at a slightly higher level. Nadal has an astonishing 113 forehand winners and (a paltry) 29 backhand winners compared to 35 forehand errors and 19 backhand errors. Djokovic has 62 forehand winners and 49 backhand errors compared to 46 forehand errors and 37 backhand errors. Nadal is listed as having had an amazing 244 winners and 60 errors (+184) over 6 rounds while Djokovic has a mere 199 winners and 99 errors (+100).

Their serves are equivalently effective: Nadal is serving at 70% in while Djokovic is at 68%. The Spaniard has served 44 aces to 6 double faults while the Serbian has served 54 aces and 15 double faults, which is basically about even.

Who Will Win

I tend to go with the idea that the person with the more effective serve will win the match unless the serve can be counteracted by superior movement and better service returning. With serves basically at a draw, I give Nadal the slight edge in movement but Djokovic the edge in returning. I believe the match will be very very close, probably on the level of the incredible Wimbledon finals of 2008 (Greatest Match Of All Time won by Nadal over Federer) and 2009 (won by Federer over Andy Roddick). 

MadProfessah's Prediction: Djokovic in 3 or 4 sets OR Nadal in 5 sets.

Wimbledon: Noticeboard

So on twitter, this would be where I retweet, prefixing it with “THIS” (or other similar words to that effect):

“She played here with poise and self-belief, not least her serving out the title with a love game. And notice how she celebrated afterwards: there was no scaling of the stands to hug her box, no dramatic drops to the grass. Kvotiva smiled with satisfaction but the message was: “Yeah, that’s about how I thought it’d go.” She’s now a Wimbledon champion and her profile has changed forever. But it sure looks like she’s up for what’s next.”
-- SI Open Source

No tears. No dramaz. Just a grounded manner that is about as easy, baggage-free and clean as her hitting on court. It probably won’t win her many endorsements. But it makes it, in my eyes, the best Grand Slam ingénue win since Maria Sharapova.

Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Rafa	Muzz	JoW	Tomic,
Fish	Feli	Fed	Novak

Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Domi	Sabine	Paszek	Petra
Maria	Marion	Vika	Tsvetana

 

Legend

Hoity-Toity

Upwardly-Mobile

Sympathy Vote

Ideas above their station

***PICK OF THE DAY: Day thirteen***

Centre

13:00 Rafael Nadal(ESP)[1] vs. Novak Djokovic(SRB)[2]