US OPEN 2011: Men's Quarterfinals and R16 Preview

BY MAD PROFESSAH


Due to a complete rain out of play on Tuesday September 7 the men's draw has been thrown into disarray. Because the US Open is the only major which does not have a day off between the semifinals and final, losing a day in which quarterfinals were supposed to be played complicates things dramatically.

Last year I correctly predicted 4 of 4 2010 men's quarterfinals and 4 of 4 2010 women's quarterfinals.
My predictions for the 2011 women's quarterfinals are also available. Below are my predictions for the two of the 2011 men's quarterfinals hat are set (and four of the Round of 16 matches).

The plan for today, Day 10 of the 2011 US Open, is to both finish off playing the last four round of 16 matches (which just happens to feature three American players: John Isner, Donald Young and Andy Roddick) AND the first two men's quarterfinals, on the same day.

Novak Djokovic SRB (1) v. Janko Tipsarevic SRB (20). The World #1 has only lost two matches all year long, and is having one of the all-time great seasons, with a record of 61 win, 9 tournament titles (including 2 majors). It's true that Djokovic almost lost his first set of the tournament in difficult conditions against the funky game of Aleksandr Dologopolov but that does not reflect any diminution in his powers. Tipsarevic is a player whose game Djokovic knows well, since they are from the same country and are fellow Davis Cup team members. Tipsarevic is a very smart player and knows how to be dangerous but it is very doubtful he can end Djokovic's streak in his very first major quarterfinal appearance unless Novak is having a very very bad day. PREDICTION: Djokovic.


 Roger Federer SUI (3) v. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga FRA (11). This is the best potential quarterfinal match up and should probably be the best match of this action-packed day. Federer is in his jaw-dropping 30th consecutive major quarterfinal while Tsonga is in his 6th quarterfinal of his career, and his first in New York City, a major which Federer has won more times (5) than Tsonga has been in the draw (4). Because of his injuries and absences from the sport Federer and Tsonga have only met 7 times, 4 of which have come this year, with 2 wins each. However, Tsonga has won the last two times they played, including an amazing result at Wimbledon where he came from 2-sets down to beat Roger in 5, the first time ANYONE had ever done that at a major tournament, let alone on Roger's best surface of grass (which is probably also Tsonga's best surface). So clearly Tsonga now does have the game to beat Roger and can do it if he is playing his best while Roger is not. Happily for Federer, the Swiss showed that he still has some of his best tennis left in him when he dismantled Juan Monaco 6-1 6-2 6-0 in a late-night match prior to Tuesday's deluge. Federer also enjoys a challenge, as evidenced by his glee in handling Djokovic his first loss of the year in Paris to end the Serb's undefeated season. I believe tonight's match will be very close, almost definitely 4 or 5 sets, with Federer coming through for a rematch with Djokovic in the semifinals on Saturday. PREDICTION: Federer.


The following fourth round matches are also being completed today.

Gilles Simon FRA (12) v. John Isner USA (28). For the second round in a row French counterpuncher Simon is taking on a giant, huge serving player. Simon was able to dismiss 6'6" 2009 US Open champion Juan Martin del Potro in four sets on Sunday (which I watched from the fourth row courside in Armstrong) while 6'9" John Isner was able to overcome stiff resistance from speedy Alex Bogomolov, Jr. Simon is a much better player than Bogomolov and unless Isner plays very well, he will face the same fate as Del Potro.This is the match where Isner needs to prove he is not just (in the words of Roger Federer, about another huge-serving American) "a great server" but a great player. Having also seen Isner play close up (from first row courtside in Armstrong) I would say he is not yet a great player, though he is a great competitor. That might be enough against the Frenchman, but I doubt it. PREDICTION: Simon.


Donald Young USA v. Andy Murray GBR (4). Amazingly, the young African American phenom has a win this year over a player named Andy Murray. However, that Andy Murray was recovering from his 3rd consecutive major final loss and is not the same player who handed new World #1 Novak Djokovic only his second loss of the season a few short weeks ago in Cincinnati. Young has finally lived up to his potential to reach the last 16 of a major tournament for the first time, beating 2 seeded players Juan Ignacio Chela (24) and Stanislas Wawrinka (14). By reaching the 4th round Young will receive the largest paycheck of his career. Hopefully he uses it wisely to invest in his game so that his 2011 US Open results are just the beginning of good results and not a fluke. PREDICTION: Murray.


David Ferrer ESP (5) v. Andy Roddick USA (21). This is the toughest match for me to predict in this round. I have not been that impressed with Roddick'splay and I haven't seen a single point of Ferrer's. But I know the Spaniard is always a rough customer, and against Roddick he leads their career head-to-head 5-3 including two crucial Davis Cup wins for Spain over USA (one from 2011). Presumably, Roddick will try and turn this encounter into a home court advantage Davis Cup match as well, but can his 29-year-old game match up to Ferrer's feistiness? PREDICTION: Ferrer.


Gilles Muller LUX v. Rafael Nadal ESP (2). Nadal will be interested in making a statement about his fitness after the world saw him cramping up after a press conference after his last match. Muller will be lucky to win a handful of games in each of the three sets played. PREDICTION: Nadal.

Monte Carlo: Quantum Fluctuations

7 consecutive MC titles. Takeout: Rafa wins on clay even when he sucks. But you already knew that.




Except it shouldn’t have been that way – not this year.

Whilst its always good to see Rafa “come home” and begin winning again on a surface as organic to him as sunlight is to photosynthesis, I started off the week guessing that he’ll be upset at least once this clay court season. Nothing I saw in MC changed my mind.

Without wishing to get too specific he hasn’t “looked right” since the year began – those who’ve observed him closely (or who’ve heard/read me bleating endlessly about it) know exactly what I mean.

The only reason I keep bringing it up is because it doesn’t seem like its down to any specific technical failing and/or injury. Which, in my mind, makes it worse.

Some of his shot (mis)selection has been straight out of a comic book. The UFEs, meanwhile, have had all of the uncertainty and spontaneity of quantum fluctuations.

We saw it in both the IW/Miami finals, we saw it in the Miami QF vs Berd, we saw it against Murray in the SFs, and we saw it again in the final.

Does it surprise me that Rafa, being Rafa, found a way through on clay – something not possible, just last month, on a hard court vs. Nole? Not in the slightest. But let us please not pretend Daveed didn’t entirely blow his chances (of which there were many).


To put it bluntly, this is about as ineffectual as Rafa gets on a clay court.  A better player (like say Nole or Fed) would almost certainly have called him on it.  A “lesser”but nevertheless solid player like Daveed might be expected to too, but should, in any case, have forced a third set.

And yet, the vast body of reflection and analysis following the final will inevitably be of the “night follows day”, “sun rises in the east”, “Rafa wins on clay” variety.

I’m afraid I simply don’t see it that way. Not quite.

Foolish to argue against a 230-16 [93%] win/loss record on clay forged mostly without resistance over 7 years – as we saw, even playing as badly as he was, Rafa can be relied on to find options on clay which simply don’t  appear to exist anywhere else.

All the same, things don’t appear to me to be as certain this year as they plainly have been in years gone by. And I don’t think I’m alone.


***



One last word on Murray. Well two actually:

1) The SF wasn’t simply the best performance I’ve seen from Murray since before his slump began (things could hardly have gotten any worse). It might even have been the best I’ve seen him play on clay.

Why is this SUCH a big deal?

A Masters-1000 semi final on his “worst” surface (more on that later) and his first ever set off Rafa on clay, all after his poorest spell of tennis since he entered the top ten.

Only, you wouldn’t know just how well Murray played if you read the match reports, all of which were at pains to point out (correctly) that Rafa played like horsesh*t,  particularly in the 2nd set. He did, no point in disputing that – its what I’ve been saying all season.  But not crediting Murray would be like claiming Rafa only won the last set because Murrays elbow began to play up as the cortizone injection wore off.

Strange how some are only willing to recognise Rafa’s poor play when it’s consistent with their attempts to undercut Murray. Else its all “Night follows Day”, “The Sun rises in the East”, “Rafa wins on clay”…

2) I’ve never really understood why clay should be Murrays “worst” surface.

I get why he might prefer hard or even grass, but “worst” seems to carry an additional level of stigma that I don’t feel is warranted for a player as skilled as Murray.

Fed and Nole have the results they do on clay not because of any particular adeptness on the surface – but because of their adeptness at TENNIS.

The same can almost be said to apply to Murray. By the same token, if he loses on clay, it will be for all the same reasons he sometimes loses on hard courts. Namely passivity and a questionable temperament. Yep, those two cretins again. Feel free to rip on him for that (I know I do), but lets stop pretending clay is his “worst” surface.

Lucky No. 7

by Craig Hickman


Getty

Am I suggesting that Rafael Nadal is lucky for winning his historic seventh consecutive title in the French Riviera today? Given the way David Ferrer tossed away an opportunity to at least push the match to a third set, then sure, why not.

Mostly, though, Nadal is lucky to be winning anything at all without being able to rely on his serve. All year, it's been a problem. Only once, when facing triple break point early in the third against Tomas Berdych in Miami, did his serve save ultimately save the day. But in the finals of the three consecutive Masters 1000 events he's contested in 2011, his serve has been woeful. Novak Djokovic got the best of him in the first two, though it took three sets both times, on a surface where having a woeful serve can keep you from winning.

But on this day, on this surface, against this player, Nadal showed once again why clay is his very best friend. Even with a faltering serve and his tentative approach to the match -- there was a Shot Spot graphic that showed him striking his shots from behind the baseline 90% of the time -- he knows the nuances of the clay better than any other, can exploit all the angles with nary a thought. At once impressive and boring. This is nothing new. I wrote about it years ago already.

While it's good to see the world No. 1 finally get a victory under his belt -- he hasn't won a title since Tokyo last October -- I was hoping for a new champion here this year. I remain hopeful that the Red Brick Wall won't run the table on clay this season.

Who's going to stop him?

Quote of the Day

 

"I will try my best. The last two matches I have won against him," he said. "In Paris last year I killed him on clay and hopefully that result is still in the back of his mind.

"After beating Roger Federer there is nothing I can't do."

-- Jurgen Melzer on David Ferrer, whom he plays in the semis

Sony Ericsson Open 2011 Day 1 Open Thread

JD Blom

David Ferrer practice session.

::

ORDER OF PLAY - TUESDAY, MARCH 22, 2011

GRANDSTAND start 11:00 am

[WC] S Cirstea (ROU) vs J Zheng (CHN) - WTA
J Goerges (GER) vs M Oudin (USA) - WTA
P Schnyder (SUI) vs [WC] M Keys (USA) - WTA
[WC] S Lisicki (GER) vs M Czink (HUN) - WTA

COURT 1 start 10:00 am

Qualifying - J Dokic (AUS) vs C Mchale (USA) - WTA
Not Before 11:00 AM
E Baltacha (GBR) vs S Bammer (AUT) - WTA
R Vinci (ITA) vs I Benesova (CZE) - WTA
A Morita (JPN) vs [WC] H Watson (GBR) - WTA
E Makarova (RUS) vs V Dushevina (RUS) - WTA

COURT 2 start 10:00 am

Qualifying - J Hampton (USA) vs K Flipkens (BEL) - WTA
Not Before 11:00 AM
B Jovanovski (SRB) vs M Niculescu (ROU) - WTA
K Barrois (GER) vs [WC] P Martic (CRO) - WTA
U Radwanska (POL) vs S Halep (ROU) - WTA
J Larsson (SWE) vs A Rodionova (AUS) - WTA

COURT 3 start 10:00 am

Qualifying - M Russell (USA) vs M Matosevic (AUS) - ATP
Qualifying - S Bolelli (ITA) vs A Bogomolov Jr. (USA) - ATP
Qualifying - R Kendrick (USA) vs J Reister (GER) - ATP
Qualifying - R Schuettler (GER) or B Reynolds (USA) vs I Navarro (ESP) or G Zemlja (SLO) - ATP
Qualifying - T Smyczek (USA) vs F Cipolla (ITA) or O Rochus (BEL) - ATP

COURT 5 start 10:00 am

Qualifying - Y Meusburger (AUT) vs V Manasieva (RUS) - WTA
Qualifying - R Farah (COL) vs M Ilhan (TUR) - ATP
Qualifying - N Llagostera Vives (ESP) vs A Tatishvili (GEO) or P Mayr-Achleitner (AUT) - WTA
Qualifying - I Kunitsyn (RUS) vs E Prodon (FRA) - ATP

COURT 6 start 10:00 am

Qualifying - [WC] M Larcher de Brito (POR) vs A Rus (NED) - WTA
Qualifying - S Zhang (CHN) vs E Birnerova (CZE) - WTA
Qualifying - L Hradecka (CZE) vs I Falconi (USA) or S Zahlavova (CZE) - WTA
Qualifying - A Hlavackova (CZE) or Y Chan (TPE) vs A Pivovarova (RUS) or A Keothavong (GBR) - WTA

COURT 7 start 10:00 am

Qualifying - P Capdeville (CHI) vs B Phau (GER) - ATP
Qualifying - D Munoz-De La Nava (ESP) vs P Lorenzi (ITA) - ATP
Qualifying - R Sweeting (USA) vs L Rosol (CZE) - ATP
Qualifying - G Dimitrov (BUL) vs [WC] N Massu (CHI) - ATP
Qualifying - F Dancevic (CAN) vs D Young (USA) or A Clement (FRA) - ATP

COURT 8 start 10:00 am

Qualifying - K Pervak (RUS) vs J Namigata (JPN) - WTA
Qualifying - [WC] S Stephens (USA) vs S Ferguson (AUS) - WTA
Qualifying - J Craybas (USA) or [WC] L Davis (USA) vs A Yakimova (BLR) or K Bondarenko (UKR) - WTA
Qualifying - R Voracova (CZE) or C Dentoni (ITA) vs X Han (CHN) or S Mirza (IND) - WTA

Drive By

by Craig Hickman

David Ferrer defended a title. Novak Djokovic, too. Juan Martin del Potro returned to the winner's circle for the first time in his comeback.

Vera Zvonareva toppled the computer's top-ranked player to win her 11th title and Gisela Dulko took a singles title for the first time since 2008.

I don't typically watch any of the events on the calendar this week, finals included. Not even the one in the United States. The timing is all wrong. Not to mention sanctions.

Next up: Davis Cup.

Australian Open 2011 Men's Final Preview

BY MAD PROFESSAH

Here is my prediction for the 2011 Australian Open men's final. I previously predicted the men's semifinals (2 of 2 correctly) and the men's quarterfinals (3 of 4 correctly).


Getty

Andy Murray GBR (5) vs. Novak Djokovic SRB (3). This is not the final everyone expected (or wanted) to see this year. However, everyone has been predicting for years that eventually these two would be competing for major titles. Djokovic and Murray were born one week apart in May 1987 and the two were on the junior circuit contemporaneously, with Murray arguably having the more successful career (winning the 2004 US Open junior title) then. However, Djokovic has had the more successful career on the adult tour so far, winning the 2008 Australian Open and losing two US Open finals (2007 to Roger Federer, 2010 to Rafael Nadal). Murray has only been to two major finals, losing to Federer both times (2008 US Open and 2010 Australian Open). The two have the same number of Masters Series titles (six), with Djokovic's including the end-of-season Masters Cup title in 2008. Djokovic has 18 ATP Tour titles overall to Murray's 16. They have played each other 7 times, with Djokovic leading 4-3 in the career head-to-head. The two times they played in finals, Murray has won, but the last time they played each other was in March 2009. They have split 3-3 the 6 hard court matches they've contested

Okay, so that is how the two have played against each other in the past, but the question everyone wants answered is how will they play against each other in their next match, the 2011 Australian Open men's final? Well, right now Djokovic's results in the tournament to date indicate he has been playing better tennis. His stunning straight-sets dismissal of defending champion Roger Federer in the semifinals demonstrated his ability to take his tennis to stratospheric levels. Similarly, Murray's two 4-set wins in the quarterfinal (over Aleksandr Dolgopolov) and semifinal (over David Ferrer) are indications of the opposite. There's no question that Djokovic will pose much more probing questions to Murray than any of his previous opponents, and the Scot has already illustrated that his games sometimes gets wobbly in those situations, although ultimately he did prevail.

I am not one of the naysayers that says that Murray will never win a major title, (he has too many outstanding aspects of his game to not breakthrough sometime) however I am fairly confident he will not win this one.

PREDICTION: Djokovic (in 4 sets).

Australian Open 2011 Men's Semifinals Preview

BY MAD PROFESSAH

Here are my predictions for the 2011 Australian Open men's semifinals. I had previously correctly predicted 2 of 4 men's quarterfinals.

Rafael Nadal ESP (1) David Ferrer ESP (7) vs. Andy Murray GBR (5). Everyone expected a Murray-Nadal semifinal, and many many tennis fans were salivating at the prospect of seeing a match of the same caliber as their superlative ATP World Tour Championships semifinal in London. Murray did his piece first, by dispatching the extremely talented Aleksandr Dolgopolov of Ukraine who had eliminated Robin Soderling and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in 5-set matches by coming from behind to win those contests. Dolgopolov plays in an unorthodox fashion, with quick, whip-like strokes, but this generates tremendous (and surprising) power on both wings; he also has a truly unusual serve which allows him to get several free points, even from someone as good at returning serve as Andy Murray.

In the first set the younger player had 12 aces to Murray's two and was hitting winners into both corners of the court. Essentially, he was "out-Murraying" Murray. Unfortunately for Dolgopolov his quirky style is sometimes combined with an almost laissez-faire approach to finishing a point which resulted in errors instead of winners on balls that MadProfessah could have put away. These lapses enabled Murray to eke out the first set 7-5 (after blowing a 4-1 lead). The second set featured tremendous serving from Murray, losing only two points on his serve for a 6-3 win. The third set Murray should have closed out the match, but Dogopolov was able to climb back to win the 3rd in a tiebreaker 7-3 after horrendous play by Murray in the decider. The final set was never much in doubt with Murray winning the first fourteen points and the Dogopolov errors accumulating until he was at a total of 77 for the match compared to a showy 57 winners. Murray had a more sedate 33 winners and 34 errors and won the final set 6-3.

The drama of the Murray-Dolgopolov quarterfinal was quickly eclipsed when the two Spaniards took the court. After a quick service hold by Ferrer to start the match, Nadal's first service game lasted 17 minutes and consisted of 22 points with 7 deuces. Ferrer was playing very aggressively, especially with his forehand and service return; he was running down shots which would have been winners against almost anyone else. Eventually Ferrer was able to get the break, which he then immediately gave back through strong play by Nadal. On the changeover it became clear something was very wrong with Nadal, and he left the court to take an injury time out and receive treatment. It looked very much like he would retire at various points in the first set after that. Amazingly he had retired in a match played exactly a year before, in the men's quarterfinal of 2010 against Murray, also played on Australia Day, January 26. However, Nadal soldiered on and Ferrer continued his style of aggressive play, taking advantage of Nadal's clearly limited movement to his forehand side (Nadal's left thigh was heavily strapped) and maintained his composure to complete the stunning 6-4 6-2 6-3 straight sets win over the defending Roland Garros, Wimbledon and US Open champion.

Rafa's quest to be the first man in a generation (or two) to simultaneously hold all 4 major titles was over. The reason I have spent so much time reviewing the quarterfinal matches instead of previewing the semifinal match is because there is not much to say. Head-to-head Ferrer and Murray have met 5 times, (never in a Grand Slam) with Murray winning all their hard court matches relatively easily and Ferrer winning the clay court matches. Murray was able to reach the final last year, and he is playing even better one year later. Ferrer is also playing better, but, barring an injury, the result of their next hard court match will not be any different from the other three they have played before. PREDICTION: Murray in 4 sets.

Roger Federer SUI (2). vs. Novak Djokovic SRB (3). This semifinal match-up is a reprise of the four celebrated grand slam semifinals these two have competed: the 2010 US Open semifinal won by Djokovic after saving two match points in the 5th set; the 2009 US Open semifinal won by Federer which featured the amazing tweener shot by the Swiss great on the penultimate point of the match; the 2008 US Open semifinal won in straight sets by Federer despite trailing in the first two; and the 2008 Australian Open semifinal won by Djokovic on his way to winning his first major title. So, despite Federer's impressive 13-6 head-to-head edge overall, the two have actually split the four hard-court major semifinals they have played in their careers. Bizarrely, they have never played at Wimbledon or at Roland Garros. It should be noted that Federer has won the last three times they have played, and has apparently taken energy from his defeat in New York last year. Djokovic is also playing inspired tennis, having achieved one of his career goals by anchoring his country to a Davis Cup title (something Federer has not done despite having someone as talented as Stan Wawrinka on his team). Of the four players left remaining in the tournament, Djokovic and Murray have both only dropped one tie-break set each. Djokovic in particular has looked the most impressive, taking out the #6 (Tomas Berdych), #14(Nicolas Almagro) and #29 seeds. The highest seed that Federer has had to face was Wawrinka at #19 but Gilles Simon in the first round was playing like a Top 10 player when he stretched the World #2 to 5 sets. To determine my pick, I'm going to try an do some math. There are three possibilities, which I will assume are equally likely to occur (3-set, 4-set and 5-set match with 33% probabilities). If only 3 sets of tennis are played I give Federer a 25-8 edge. In a 4-set match I give Djokovic a 17-16 edge. In a 5-set match I give Djokovic a 25-8 edge. So overall, Djokovic has a 50-49 edge. I split the last point equally and this gets Djokovic slightly ahead to reach his second Australian Open final, and second consecutive major final. PREDICTION: Djokovic (has a 50.5% chance to win).

Grace

by Craig Hickman


Getty

The Rafa Slam will not come to pass.

Imagine my surprise at the scoreline that flashed on the television when I awoke today. Didn't get to see any of the match until the reply on ESPN late this afternoon. Because of my onging love affair with cooking, I was right out straight all day. Had to cook a lunch for 25 people for my community soup kitchen (roasted chicken, beans, kale, salad, homemade biscuits, and marble cake) and cater a private dinner for 9 at my farm (scallops with fennel buerre blanc, organic carrot ginger soup, organic farm-raised roasted leg of lamb with sour cream and leek mashed potatoes and haricot vert, and Hazelle's Mississippi sweet potato pecan pie with homemade vanilla ice cream), and now I'm beat. But I've sat down for the first time all day to write this drive by.

From what I saw of the match in the background, David Ferrer ran the world No. 1 ragged. Rafa's first service game took forever. And in that forever, he injured himself.

He finished the match.

To his credit, he tried not to make any excuses. Tried not to diminish his compatriot's excellent tennis. Tried not to magnify the loss as he expressed gratitude for all he has won.

In the brief bit of his interview I was able to catch, I was reminded of the Rudyard Kipling quote that appears over the player's entrance to Wimbledon's Centre Court:

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;

It takes grace to achieve that. And grace is what I saw in Rafael Nadal today.

Li Na Makes History

by Craig Hickman


AP

Li Na became the first Chinese player to win a Premier event on the WTA tour. The first Chinese player to ever break into the Top 10 and the first to compete in a Slam quarterfinal (Wimbledon 2006), the independent and spirited fighter is poised to make more waves at the Australian Open next week. Last year, she and compatriot Zheng Jie both advanced to the semifinals Down Under. Surely Li will be looking to go at least one step further. She has a draw she can work with, to be sure.

She looked down and out against Svetlana Kuznetsova in the semifinals but fought through. In a blink, she was facing a 0-5 deficit in the finals. Then, almost like clockwork, Kim Clijsters performed one of her characteristic disappearing acts, stinking up the joint with error after error, and in another blink, the set was level at 5-5.

The rest is history.

"I've played here many years. Every time I saw the name of the champion and I would think, 'Oh, when will my name be there?'" Li said. "Also, when you walk to center court, you can see many pictures of champions over there. So after today I talked to me team, saying we will come next year and see my picture.

"But now Sydney is over and I have to focus on Melbourne. After these two hours, I just have to forget everything and start the next day."

The week's other winners.


Getty

Gilles Simon of France holds the trophy after beating Viktor Troicki of Serbia 7-5, 7-6(4) in the 2011 Medibank International final at Sydney Olympic Park Tennis Centre on January 15, 2011 in Sydney, Australia.


AP

David Ferrer of Spain celebrates with his trophy after his 6-3, 6-2 victory over David Nalbandian of Argentina at the final of the Heineken Open men's tennis tournament in Auckland, New Zealand, Saturday, Jan. 15, 2011.

Does the Spanish David play the flute?

AP

Jarmila Groth of Australia celebrates her 6-4, 6-3 victory over Bethanie Mattek-Sands of the United States at the Hobart International women's tennis tournament in Hobart, Australia, Saturday, Jan. 15, 2011.

Is that a trophy, a splay of organ pipes, or some dried driftwood with a shield affixed?

::

On to Melbourne....

::

Best (Men's) Tennis Matches of 2010

Here are my picks for the "best" (or most memorable) tennis matches by men in 2010. These are basically the matches that had the most impact on me while they were occurring, feature some of the best play, had the most impact on the rest of the tennis world or are matches that I would most likely to watch again in the future. You can see my previous lists: Best Men's Tennis Matches of 2009 and Best Men's Tennis Matches of 2006. (There were no men's lists in 2007 or 2008.) I also have posted the Best Women's Tennis Matches of 2010.

1. J. Isner USA d. N. Mahut FRA, 6-4 3-6 6-7(7) 7-6(3) 70-68, Wimbledon 1st Round, London.

A match for the ages. A tennis match that transcends tennis, and possibly sport itself. Two relatively unheralded players played a match which lasted 11 hours and 5 minutes, by far the longest match ever. The final set itself is a marvel, shattering the record for the longest match--in terms of time (8 hours,11 minutes) and number of games (138) played. The list of records broken is a litany of exceptionalism which is unlikely ever to be matched. When the rest of the tennis of 2010 is long-forgotten Isner-Mahut will still be referred to. What was most remarkable that despite playing so long, there was still brilliant tennis for vast portions of the match. This was truly an example of the cliche where it is sad that in every game there has to be a winner.

2.  R. Nadal ESP d. A. Murray GBR, 7-6(5) 3-6 7-6(6), ATP World Tour Finals semifinal, London.

The penultimate match of the 2010 season was one of the most exciting, well-played matches of the year. Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray had met three times before in 2010, with the Briton leading 2-1. However, this semifinal match at the Year-Ending Championships was being held before a British crowd which was considered to be a disadvantage for Murray. Many people do not like Murray's game, feeling that he plays too defensively given the talent, power and mobility he possesses (Gael Monfils suffers from similar complaints), but in this match Murray confounded his critics by being as aggressive as I have ever seen him play. The match was probably decided in the first set. There, both players  played well, with Murray serving exceedingly well but after his serve failed him in the tiebreaker Nadal was able to tuck the set away on his first and only set point. In the second set, things were pretty even until Nadal went through a very bad patch at 3-all and basically donated the second set to Murray. In the third set Nadal got an early break which he was able to nurse into a 5-3 lead. Murray was able to hold serve and when Nadal served for the match at 5-4 he was broken despite holding a match point. In the inevitable tiebreak Murray continued his aggressive play but was rewarded with errors instead of winners. He can take heart that he at least went down slugging away and if he can apply this mentality to future matchups with his higher ranked rivals the results may be different.

3.  N. Djokovic SRB d. R. Federer SUI, 5-7 6-1 5-7 6-2 7-5, U.S. Open semifinal, New York.

The greatest Grand Slam match played this year was the second men's semifinal at Super Saturday at the U.S. Open in New York. For the fourth year in a row Roger Federer faced Novak Djokovic at the last major of the year, having beaten him the first three times in one final and two semifinals. This time, history seemed prepared to repeat itself when Federer earned double match point at 15-40, 4-5 in the final set. The number of times Federer had lost a grand slam match after holding a match point in his career can be counted on one hand (without using all of the fingers). However, the young Serb was able to be very aggressive on these match points and after getting past that near-death experience was able to use the mental momentum gained to immediately break Federer in the very next service game and serve out the win. The match featured long streaks of very high-quality tennis from both sides, with both players displaying impeccable defense and offense. After winning 5 U.S. Opens in a row, Federer has now lost in the last two to younger challengers. Is this a sign of things to come? Only time will tell.

4.  R. Federer SUI d. A. Murray GBR, 6-3 6-4 7-6(11), Australian Open final, Melbourne.

The highest quality grand slam final of the year featured yet another historic performance by Roger Federer as he was able to beat a player who has a career head-to-head edge against him in straight sets. Murray did not play badly, Federer was simply on fire for exactly the optimal time which allowed him to win each set. The third set in particular Federer should have lost but he was able to finally earn the break back and set up one of the classic tie-breaks of all time--a 24-point thriller that ended with Federer winning the match and his record 16th grand slam singles title.

5.  G. Monfils FRA d. R. Federer SUI, 7-6(7) 6-7(1) 7-6(4), Paris ATP Masters semifinal, Paris. 

Gael Monfils is a 6' 4", 180 pound Frenchman of African descent with size 15 feet who has long been predicted to do great things in tennis. He is one of the most dynamic players on tour and easily one of the fleetest of foot. He often responds well to a supportive crowd and has had some of his best results in front of Parisian crowds. Federer had never lost to Monfils and was probably not worried when he somehow lost the first set in a close tie-break. However, even Federer must have been surprised by the Frenchman's tenacity and will-to-win despite being down 4-1 in the 3rd set. Somehow, Monfils was able to save (count 'em) five match points at 4-5 through tremendous defense (his mighty serve basically deserted him on match points down so Monfils had to win those points the hard way). This was the fourth example of a match in 2010 where Federer had a match point and went on to lose the match (l. Djokovic US Open semifinals, l. Berdych Miami Masters 4th Round, l. Baghdatis Indian Wells 3rd Round, l. Monfils Paris Masters semifinals). Hopefully, Federer's new coach Paul Annacone will try to work on raising the level of his charge's aggression on big points (his often-atrocious break-point conversion rate should be another focus of improvement for the Swiss great) and we look forward to seeing the results in 2011. For Monfils, this was an amazing result which hopefully will spur him on to greater results next year and beyond.

6.  R. Nadal ESP d. N. Djokovic SRB, 6-4 5-7 6-4 6-2, U.S. Open final, New York.

 After the fireworks of the men's semifinal between Federer and Djokovic, this final was something of an afterthought, especially since  for the third year in a row it was played on Monday instead of Sunday due to inclement weather (get a roof already, New York!). The tennis quality was reasonably high but Nadal secured his inevitable date with destiny by achieving the career grand slam at the tender age of 24 years old, just 15 months after his great rival had achieved the same feat in Paris. Nadal and Federer both have claims to be the greatest of all time, with Nadal at 9 majors to Federer's 16 but is 5 years younger (and further along at comparable ages). The GOAT question will not be decided until after both men have retired, but without doubt this match was a seminal moment in tennis history, one to be remembered for a long time as Nadal joined the small select group of career grand slam holders.

7.  R. Federer SUI d. R. Nadal ESP, 6-3 3-6 6-1, ATP World Tour Finals final, London.

 Any match between Federer and Nadal is a marquee event, but this contest, following the best match of the year between top players (Nadal-Murray semifinal) was the culmination of the season in which Nadal won 3 consecutive grand slam tournaments. With Nadal sporting a gaudy 14-7 career head-to-head record against Federer some people thought he would cement his dominance with a win here. They were incorrect, however, because on hard courts the two greats are more evenly matched, with a very slight edge to Federer. The actual tennis was high quality, but the sets were somewhat lopsided in score. Even small lapses can be converted into 6-3 sets and a large lapse results in a 6-1 blowout between these two rivals who know each other's games so well. In the end Federer was better on the day and postponed the discussion of which of the two men will be at the top of the heap in history's final estimation.

8.  R. Soderling SWE d. R. Federer SUI, 3-6 6-3 7-5 6-4, French Open quarterfinal, Paris.

One year after engineering the upset of the decade by handing 4-time defending champion Nadal his sole defeat (ever!) at Roland Garros, the tall, strong Robin Soderling repeated the effort by ending Federer's incredible streak of grand slam semifinals at 23 with a 4-set win over the defending champion. History was repeated again a few days later, when, after reaching the French Open final, Soderling lost in a surprisingly non-competitive fashion. However, this match, like last year's defeat of the defending champion will be long remembered by tennis fans. It should be noted that Federer hasn't forgotten either, and hasn't lost to the Swede since (but Nadal has).

9.  T. Berdych CZE d. R. Federer, 4-6 6-3 6-1 6-4, Wimbledon quarterfinal, London.

A few weeks after losing his hold on the #1 ranking and his famous semifinal streak, Federer had his dominance on grass ripped from his grasp as Tomas Berdych showed that his inaugural win over the Swiss player in Miami was not a fluke but a harbinger. The 6' 5", 200 pound Czech simply played a near-perfect match on Federer's home turf of Wimbledon's Centre Court, dismissing the defending champion in 4 crisp sets. Although Berdych was able to follow up his win with a victory over Novak Djokovic in the semifinal, he was unable to compete effectively against Nadal in the final, succumbing in straight sets to the Spaniard while I watched in the stands. Unsuccessfully defending his title in two consecutive grand slams, failing to reach the semifinals twice in a row must have been a dreadful blow to Federer, but he can seek solace in his quarterfinal streak, which now stands at 26 and counting.

10 F. Verdasco ESP d. D. Ferrer ESP, 5-7 6-7(8) 6-3 6-3 7-6(4), U.S. Open 4th Round, New York.

The only other match on this list besides the Isner-Mahut classic which does not feature a grand slam champion was this all-Spaniard showdown between two of the fittest (and best-looking) players on the men's tour in the 4th round of the 2010 US Open. It also happens to feature one of the most amazing match points in the history of Open tennis. It should be noted that this fifth-set tiebreak occurred after nearly 4 1/2 hours of grinding, extended-rally play, after Verdasco had already been down two(!) breaks in the deciding set and fought back to even the match. What happens on match point deserves no words, just your admiration:

Absolutely amazing!

HONORABLE MENTIONS

R. Soderling SWE d. T. Berdych CZE, 6-3 6-3 3-6 5-7 6-3, French Open semifinal, Paris.

A. Murray GBR d. R. Nadal ESP, 6-3 7-6(2) 3-0 ret., Australian Open quarterfinal, Melbourne.

R. Soderling SWE d. M. Llodra FRA, 6-7(0) 7-5 7-6(6), ATP Paris Masters semifinal, Paris.

A. Murray GBR d. R. Federer SUI, 7-5 7-5, Canadian ATP Masters final, Toronto, Canada.

A. Murray GBR d. R. Federer SUI, 6-3 6-2, Shanghai ATP Masters final, Shanghai, China.

R. Nadal ESP d. T. Berdych CZE, 6-3 7-5 6-4, Wimbledon final, London.

R. Federer SUI d. N. Djokovic SRB, 6-4 3-6 6-1, Swiss Indoors final, Basel, Switzerland.

R. Nadal ESP d. R. Soderling SWE, 6-3 7-5 6-4, French Open final, Paris.

R. Nadal ESP d. A. Murray, 6-4 7-6(6) 6-4, Wimbledon semifinal, London.

Y-H. Lu TPE d. A. Roddick USA, 4-6 7-6(3) 7-6(4) 6-7(5) 9-7, Wimbledon 4th Round, London.

T. Berdych CZE d. R. Federer SUI, 6-4 6-7(3) 7-6(6), Miami ATP Masters 4th Round, Miami.

R. Federer SUI d. N. Djokovic SRB, 6-1 6-4, ATP World Tour Finals semifinal, London.

S. Wawrinka SUI d. A. Murray GBR, 6-7(3) 7-6(4) 6-3 6-3, U.S. Open 3rd Round, New York.

J. Melzer AUT d. N. Djokovic SRB, 6-4 3-6 2-6 6-2 7-6(3), French Open quarterfinal, New York.

J-M. Del Potro ARG d. J. Blake USA, 6-4 6-7(3) 5-7 6-3 10-8, Australian Open 2nd Round, Melbourne.

M. Cilic CRO d. J-M Del Potro ARG, 5-7 6-4 5-7 7-5 6-3, Australian Open 4th Round, Melbourne.

L. Hewitt AUS d. R. Federer SUI, 3-6 7-6(4) 6-4, Gerry Weber Open final, Halle, Germany.

J-W. Tsong

London WTF: The Seven Layers of Grunge.

 

 

 

 

A welcome dampener to the wild, euphoric and, frankly, irresponsible British outpourings that followed his Sunday afternoon carving-up of Robin Soderling .

 

No – I’m happy this happened. Maybe now the press will realise that couldn’t actually be sustained. Believe it or not it is possible to get get through this thing without painting the sky seven different shades of argyle.

 

In fact the worst thing you could do in the aftermath of that ‘sub-prime’ performance would be to analyse what went wrong. Don’t even try.

 

Make like sunshine.

 

Announce a royal wedding.

 

Declare your support for the nuclear disarmament of developing countries.

 

Pretend. Nothings. Happened.

 

Coz in the grand scheme of things it might not matter. And in the grander scheme of things it might turn out to be exactly the kind of stimulus package he needs. The stick rather than the carrot.

 

It was nigh-impossible not to be sardonically-totalled by the careless, catatonic, dithering way Muzz began what was undoubtedly his most important match of the RR stage.

 

 

 

His shirt was the wrong colour. His shot selection was iffy. His first serve looked like it was in need of a banking bailout.

 

Like he said, against Fed that’s simply not going to get it done – against a Fed as focused and unforgiving as he was yesterday, it’s ATP hara-kiri – a wonder, really, that he avoided the bagel.

 

Far from being anything tactical, he simply wasn’t present.

 

Which is why I think a tactical analysis is essentially redundant and perhaps even counterproductive – why risk ushering in a double dip recession by focusing on any remaining layers of grunge that might still lurk in the subconscious of his tennis memory banks?

 

 

 

It’s not all bad. He was hardly going to better the euphoria of his first match – the best opener played by anyone this week.

 

Better to detox early on during the RR stages rather than in the midst of a chaotic semi with Novak or Rafa.

 

Fed will, now, only miss out on qualifying if he loses in straights to Sod (stop sniggering) and if Muzz defeats Daveed in straights in which case we have a three way “games-won” face-off.

 

 

 

But I don’t expect they’re thinking about any of that.

 

 

 

Speakin’ of detox….here’s someone that managed to exfoliate all seven layers of grunge remaining from his very tepid opener against Muzz.

 

Which is all the more surprising as Daveed had troubled him throughout the season both at the Slams and, it seemed, everywhere else.

 

Sod will have to beat Fed in straights (STOP SNIGGERING I SAID) and will need Muzz to lose to Ferru to stand a decent chance of qualification.

 

Which leaves me in something of a quandary. You don’t root against Muzz at home – you just don’t do it.

 

So which is it to be?

 

The Mighty Viking or the Celtic Tiger Kitten?

 

The home favourite or my favourite?

 

Faust himself would struggle with this one.

London WTF: ‘Argyle’ Andy

 

 

 

 

Murray d. Soderling 62 64

 

Yep….it was that darn good.

 

Sod never got going, but in truth Muzz ran down everything he did manage to send his way and got him into all sorts of four dimensional knots every time he came to the net.

 

Sometimes you can neither run nor hide. Thankfully Sod has a couple matches to go, but will have to raise his game having come out so scarred and ‘set-less’ from this encounter.

 

 

 

 

There was some talk about why Muzz should change his “passive” style of play when it’s good enough to beat the #4 player in the world so emphatically.

 

Truth is, the #4 player (get used to hearing me say that) could neither buy a first serve  nor any semblance of momentum – most of those other six won’t have those problems and have more options to draw on if and when they do.

 

A spectacular way to come through what was, after all, his opening match – it’d be equally spectacular folly, though, to expect to continue to win playing with the same slicey-dicey economy. A little mix and match never hurt anyone – and there's plenty of wandering monsters lurking in both groups looking to do just that.

 

Have to admit I had my doubts about the argyle vintage wear – but it looks FAR better on court than the pinstriped thing you see in the online brochures.

 

 

 

 

It also has other vintage approval.

 

 

 

Federer d. Ferrer 61 64

 

A straight sets dismissal that went on for at least half a set too long.

 

It’s no surprise, surely, that this would be Ferru’s eleventh consecutive loss to Fed. Far more alarming that he couldn’t buy a first serve and took a full set to enter the match.

 

 

You can cope with seeing Ferru getting comprehensively outplayed – it is, however, jarring to see him so jittery and lacking in confidence. Not the ‘Federer complex’ surely – you have been there ten times, one of which was in the final of this very event.

 

And a far better match it was too.

London WTF: Daveed Cameron unveils a few last minute additions to the coalition.

 

 

 

 

It hasn’t been a good month for David Cameron.

 

 

First there were the student riots  that saw the near-sacking of Tory HQ (a couple of broken window panes) and a fire extinguisher being hurled off its roof that only narrowly missed police.

 

Since then, floods, banking bailouts not to mention the continuing fallout from the the deeply unpopular “austerity” measures – a word that almost sounds like a period themed wallpaper.

 

He was even taken to task for employing a personal photographer on the public payroll – what is a man to do?

 

1. Announce a royal wedding.

 

The scarcely concealed theory being that flooding the public sensibilities with talk of “Kate and Will” & “Will and Kate” will gently assuage the grim public mood so ostensibly damaged by those nasty public cuts.

 

Who has time to worry about your home being repossessed when you might be debating Kate’s bridal wear and the rights and wrongs of Wills presenting her with Diana’s ring? 

 

Or why she hasn’t ever held a proper job (it would seem, disturbingly, that some of us believe privilege has no part to play now that the royals sometimes marry outside of a carefully screened courtly set).

 

Complete the set piece by flooding the airwaves with a series of period romps showing the gentry in a lovingly eccentric and well-meaning light and the working class in a sufficiently reverential one. Sit back and let it simmer.

 

And if that doesn’t work…

 

2. Hobnob with tennis elite inside Downing St.

 

To be fair to him Cameron has actually played tennis before. Though there's no reason to suppose he was any better than Tony Blair who almost had a panic attack before going out for a charity knockabout with Pat Cash & Illi Nastase

 

 

Nice one Ferru. A gauche, awkward Viking has been made to feel even more socially inept and about *this* small.

 

All in all, Sod’s win in Paris has meant I haven’t very strong views about whom I’d like to see win. They all seem to make a compelling case.

 

 

Group A

 

Rafael Nadal.

 

Simply coz, other than this title, he really has won it all (in some cases several times over). Think Fed and RG 2009.

 

Novak Djokovic

 

Simply coz it’d be nice if the revival we saw at Flushing actually turned out to be one, rather than one of the many false starts we’ve seen since winning Indian Wells 2008 – the last title he won playing the way I like him to. Seems fitting for him to win at least something this year – and he has a chance to do that not just here, but to also clean up at Davis Cup and at Aus next year (hat tip @DavidLawTennis). That would be something.

 

 

 

Tomas Berdych

 

Simply coz he ‘s wallowing in doodoo at the moment and I don’t want him to go the way of Marin – for that way lies madness.

 

 

 

Andy Roddick

 

Simply coz this is the 8th time he’s qualified(!) yet has somehow never made it beyond the semis. And because he has a better chance here than at another Slam. And because Elena’s retirement has made me especially protective towards anyone associated with tennis circa 2004-2006. And because I’m still not up to talking about that yet.

 

 

Group B

Roger Federer.

 

Simply coz those blasted 5 unconverted MPs threaten to define what I still maintain was a better ‘one-Slam’ year than 2008. (Side note: how many “declining” players can cite having a ‘one-Slam year’ as an exception to the norm?)

 

 

 

Andy Murray

 

Simply coz having comprehensively scattered his seed on the Masters-1000 scene (read 6 Masters and 0 Slams), there’s a certain justifiable urgency surrounding the need to “step it up”. Winning here isn’t quite a Slam. It is, however, the next best thing – and it’s at home, and it wouldn’t do either him or his street cred any harm. Or, for that matter, David Cameron’s.

 

 

 

Robin Soderling

 

Simply coz “Simply coz” alright?….though I do so wish he hadn’t been drawn with Dave Ferrer.

 

Daveed Ferrer

 

Simply coz he tries so hard. Always.

 

P.S No one seems to have noticed that for the first time in six years Kolya is not part of the draw. Please tell me some one out there cares.