USO: BOSS.

I know how some are serenading this as one of the matches of the year. I didn’t quite see it that way.

Sure, there was some eye-wateringly, magnificent tennis, but if we’re honest, most of that came in set three. Yes, there were some 12-15 minute games (most of which were down to Rafa struggling to hold serve), but outside of that I only saw Novak bossing Rafa around from the back of the court – the only shock was in how easy he made it look.

That doesn’t maketh for a greateth match – however impossibly high Novak’s level was.

For large parts of the match Rafa simply looked utterly defenceless (and “offenceless”) out there;  Novak was raining down blows on him from every angle. At will.

I’ve not seen him brutalised that way since Sod worked him over at RG back in 2009.



To be honest, I’m not putting much stock in the “Nadal has a Djokovic problem” theory right now because, quite frankly, everyone has that same problem – only the most obtuse Rafanatic will pretend he’s not struggling but it’s worth remembering Rafa’s only losing finals to Novak because he’s making those finals in the first place. Let’s wait a little and see how this story unfurls.

"In the previous years, I hadn't changed my game in any big way and my strokes were still the same and was hitting the shots I wanted to hit.

"But I had difficulties approaching semi-finals and finals. I would wait for players to make mistakes. I didn't have the positive attitude. That has changed now - the 2010 US Open [four-set defeat by Nadal] was the turning point.

"I guess it just clicked in my head. It's just that I'm hitting the shots that I maybe wasn't hitting in the last two, three years now. I'm going for it."
-- Novak Djokovic, BBC Tennis.

Quite apart from all the racquet changes, coaching changes, oxygen pod mystique and gluten free paraphernalia, Novak’s simply back to playing aggressive tennis again and with his ability, that tends to win you shedloads of tennis matches – in this case at the highest of levels.  It’s the same unabashed, relentless (if matured) tennis that won him his first Slam.

And when you do that against Nadal on a hard court, he can be made to look very ordinary – and not just by the very best either.

(Pics: Getty)

US OPEN 2011: Men's Final Preview

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

by Mad Professah, contributing writer

For the first time since 1995 the #1 and #2 players in the world will be competing in the U.S. Open men's singles championship match. Amazingly, Djokovic and Nadal have competed as #1 and #2 in 5 finals already this year and all five have been won by then-World #2 Djokovic. One of these was in the 2011 Wimbledon final when it was clear that the next day, regardless of the final result, Djokovic would become World #1, and then he emphasized his position by dismissing Nadal in four sets to win his first Wimbledon title and 2nd major of the year.


Now, Djokovic is World #1 and playing in his first grand slam as the #1 seed. The 2010 U.S. Open singles final was between these two players, and Nadal won relatively easily in a 4-set match, delayed by rain to the third Monday of the tournament.

How They Got Here
N. Djokovic d. R. Federer 6-7(7) 4-6 6-3 6-2 7-5. For the second year in a row Djokovic defeated Federer in a U.S. Open semifinal despite being two match points down. Federer served brilliantly and played aggressive tennis for the first two sets and then his play dipped immediately in the 3rd and Djokovic's rose to win that set. Again in the fourth set Federer quickly went down a break and then another break. It's possible that the Swiss player might have been marshalling his forces to play a 5th set, but in my eyes the reason for Djokovic winning the 3rd and 4th sets was a combination of the Serb playing well and Federer playing not so well. Then in the fifth set Federer managed to get a break in the 8th game of the set and served for the match at 5-3, 40-15. On his first match point down Djokovic hit a go-for-broke first-serve forehand return winner smack on the sideline. On the second match point, at 40-30, Federer hit a good body serve which Djokovic barely managed to get back relatively short in the court, Federer skipped forwarded and attempted to hit a cross-court forehand angle winner behind Djokovic but the ball hit the net cord and bounced out of the court. Deuce. Instead of taking his time and realizing the importance of being two points away from one of the biggest wins of the year, Federer played quickly, mangled a backhand into the net and faced breakpoint. He swiped that away with a quick ace. Back to deuce. Unable to buy a first serve at this point, Djokovic was ahead in the point from the beginning and won that point for a second breakpoint. This time Federer double faulted on breakpoint down to hand Djokovic the lead 6-5. The new #1 quickly served out his service game, reaching match point and Federer responded to a good serve with a weak backhand reply which sailed long. Game, set and match. Djokovic is now 63-2 for 2011. Federer will finish 2011 without winning a major title for the first time since 2002.

R. Nadal d. A. Murray 6-4 6-2 3-6 6-2. Although I incorrectly predicted Murray to make his breakthrough and win this match, he again showed why he is not mentally prepared to win a major. In the first two sets Murray seemed content to just play long rallies with Nadal, refusing to be aggressive and cursing like a pirate. He was also giving a running commentary on his own game, radiating negative energy all over the court that Nadal feasted on, growing more aggressive with every wince and yelp the Brit produced. After being down two sets Murray re-focussed, cut down on the negative energy and ran like a gazelle aroundthe court, winning the 3rd set relatively easily. But in the 4th set he fell way behind early and though he made a push at the end, it was too little too late. Murray becomes only the 7th player in history to reach the semifinals or better in all four majors for the year, but he is 0-3 in major finals so far. Nadal is able to reach the U.S. Open final for the second consecutive year.

My Prediction
I incorrectly predicted the result of the women's final, where the underdog Samantha Stosur beat heavily favored Serena Williams to win her first major title (and 3rd tour title overall). I did, however, correctly predicted Djokovic to beat Federer (in 5 sets) in the semifinal. In the final, it is Novak Djokovic who is going for his first U.S. Open and 4th major title over someone who has one 10 major titles and is the defending champion.

Even with five consecutive losses, Nadal still leads the head-to-head match up 16 to 12 but on hard courts Djokovic leads 9-5. It is Novak's best surface and Nadal's worst. Their games match up even worse on hard courts than they do on other surfaces. Djokovic is untroubles by Nadal's vicious topspin forehand to his backhand side and Nadal can be overpowered on his backhand side by Djokovic's forehand. Mentally, Djokovic has the clear edge and he has superior movement on hard courts as well. There's no question that Djokovic is playing better than he played last year, and that Nadal is not. So clearly the match will be closer than last year's final. Nadal has had difficulty winning sets against Djokovic this year, and grown repeatedly hesitant at "dangerous" moments. Djokovic knows he is playing with house money since he just won a match for only the second time in his career being down two-sets-to-love, and he did it against Roger Federer! It will be hard to over-estimate how confident he will be and how much he wants this title to cement his #1 status for the rest of the year, ending the Federer-Nadal duopoloy for good, and marking the beginning of the Djokovic-Nadal-Federer "trivalry."

MadProfessah's pick: Djokovic.

US OPEN 2011: Men's Semifinals Preview

The Fabulous Four meet again:
Djokovic (1) v Federer (3), Nadal (2) v Murray (4)

by Mad Professah, contributing writer

This year I correctly predicted 3 of 4 men's quarterfinals and 2 of 4 women's quarterfinals. Last year I correctly predicted 2 of 2 women's semifinals and 2 of 2 men's semifinals.

Here are my predictions for the men's semifinals, with the women's semifinals preview also available.


Novak Djokovic SRB (1) v. Roger Federer SUI (3). This is of course a repeat of last year's instant classic Men's semifinal won by Djokovic after saving 2 consecutive match points in the 5th set. The question is, will this year's result be the same as last year's? Arguably, Djokovic is playing much better now than he did then, but so is Federer. (But clearly Djokovic's improvement over 2010 is larger than Federer's.) Is the fact that Federer is one year older (and now over 30, playing someone who is 24) more significant than the fact that he is the only player to have beaten Djokovic in a best of 5 set match all year? Or is the Serb's juggernaut record of 62-2 for the year more salient? Amazingly, Federer and Djokovic have met during the last weekend of the US Open for the last 5 years and Federer is 3-1 so far (including one final, in 2007). In fact, the Swiss great leads their career head-to-head 14-9, but has lost three times to Djokovic on hard courts this year (including the 2011 Australian Open semifinal where Federer was defending champion). In New York, Federer has actually had the toughest draw of the Top 4 players, facing Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (11) and Marin Cilic (27). Djokovic has had a much easier time with two retirements in his first 5 rounds and a double-bagel match.  Djokovic's competition has been Nikolay Davydenko, Aleksandr Dolgopolov and an inspired Janko Tipsarevic. Interestingly, his matches have gotten tighter (in the score) as the tournament progresses, while Federer has basically played at the level he needs to win, relative to whoever is on the other side of the net. As most readers know, I am a decided Federer fan and when I started this write-up I intended to make a clear call for The Greatest Of All Time. I'm convinced he can win this match, but I am unsure as to whether he will. Doing the research for this piece has shown me that Djokovic is more likely to win this match, and the title. However, if Federer comes out early playing the kind of tennis he played against Tsonga and Juan Monaco I believe he can win in straight sets. Regardless, I doubt it will match last year's semifinal's shot-making and drama. MadProfessah's pick: Federer in 3 sets OR Djokovic in 4 or 5.

 Andy Murray GBR (4) v. Rafael Nadal ESP (2). Nadal holds a significant 12-4 career head-to-head over Murray, including a slight 4-3 edge on hard courts. However, their more recent matches on hard courts have been very close, with the most famous being their electric 3-set thriller at the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals in London in 2010, won by Nadal. In matches at the majors, Nadal leads 5-2 but at the 2010 Australian Open Murray was beating the Spaniard like a drum in the quarters when Nadal pulled the ripcord and retired from the match. However, I think what matters most is the match-up today and how they have been playing to date in New York. Nadal has had to get through Andy Roddick (21), David Nalbandian and Gilles Muller. Murray has had to get past John Isner (28), Donald Young and Feliciano Lopez (25). Really both players have had a relatively easy path to the semifinals, although Murray had to survive a 5-set scare against talented Robin Haase in the second round. The Brit is clearly starting to cement his "Fab 4" status, by making the semifinals or better of every major played in 2011(something Djokovic has also managed for the first time this year while Nadal has only done it once, in 2008 and Federer did for five consecutive years in a row from 2005 and 2009). He is showing his consistency and letting his innate talent shine through. Murray also has confidence, being one of two players to have defeated Djokovic in 2011, something Nadal hasn't done. I believe Murray is going to do something he hasn't done before (and which a lot of people don't expect him to do), and beat Nadal in a major semifinal. MadProfessah's pick: Murray in 3 or 4 sets OR Nadal in 5.

USO: Sooper Dooper Saturday.

For all the analysis that you’ll see in the build up to this one, I’m not much convinced anything matters more than their respective form coming into this…which has been sublime.

Both men know how to play on all surfaces. Both rely on a multitude of weapons rather than any single WMD to bring their opponents down. Both have an appetite for victory which is, perhaps, second to none – preferably over each other. 

Sure, Novak might have the slight edge in terms of age and what he’s achieved this year – but how much does that really matter with the day’s rest and both having only dropped a set to get here?

I want five sets. We’ll almost certainly get four.  Broken glass and blood all over the place.

Oh I know he got “medieval” on Roddick’s a*s last night, and I also know how one match like that is sometimes all Rafa needs to light the touch paper. I’m still not much convinced his level of play is quite up there with the rest of the top four – and certainly not comparable with what we’ve seen from Novak and Roger over the past week.

Murray’s made all four Slam semis this year: almost an  academic point now that he’s a regular feature of  the business end of most majors. Even so, that has to count for something, as does the fact that all his wins over Rafa have been on hard courts.

In some ways, an even more loaded match than any of the mens semis.

If Serena plays the way she did in the first set against Vika, Caro will be lucky to get more than a handful of games.

Except that hasn’t quite been the story of the fortnight.

If she plays as loosely as she opened against Ana or Pavlyuchenkova, Caro is well-equipped (perhaps more than anyone) to make her work for it.

What happens from that point on depends largely on Serena’s ability to shorten rallies and keep the UFEs in check. Caro’s only chance lies in doing the precise opposite – if she can move Serena around and lengthen the rallies, she certainly won’t be the first to tire, Serena will.

What will probably take place is something in between those two extremes.

It’s certainly not impossible for Caro to pull through in a tight third set. I think I might even prefer that if only to see her haters squirm. We also need to see an end to the “real number one” debate. I’ve never been one of those that thought the rankings system was at fault – but if she pulls this off, bitchers will continue to bitch and the hatred will be exposed for the vindictive, ideological hoax that it is.

What or who is Angelique Kerber? And since when does Sam Stosur make Slam semis again? On surfaces other than clay?

If you’ve been following the scheduling kerfuffle over the past few days you’ll know that we’re not supposed to be treating either of these two women as serious Slam semi-finalists.

Even now (“Super Saturday”), there’s not a single photo of Stosur in Yahoo’s tennis photostream. Not one. (Hint: The shabby treatment extends further than mere tournament administrators).

I get that the schedulers have had to deal with an insane number of nightmarish factors this time round, including rain delays, a visit by FLOTUS, 911 commemorations and water bubbles appearing on Louis Armstrong. I get that this has sometimes meant those schedulers coming in for an unwarranted shellacking by hot-heads that don’t know or care to understand the competing concerns they face.

I also know straight up disrespect when I see it.

Leaving aside that Sam is a two-time Slam finalist, this might be the one and only time Kerber ever gets to breath the air on Ashe.  These, in short, are the moments players (however lowly) play for and live for – a far cry from a R1 loss to Laura Robson at Wimbledon this year. Heavens knows, she’s earnt the right.

Sam should pull through (you’d think) but heaven hath no fury like a journeywoman scorned.

And boy has she (and Sam) been scorned. Let there be no illusions about that.

 

US OPEN 2011: Men's Quarterfinals Preview

by Mad Professah, contributing writer

The first two quarterfinals have already been completed (following my predictions precisely) so on Friday during the day the second two quarterfinals will be competed, consisting of the four winners of the 4th round matches that were postponed for two days due to rain: John Isner, Andy Roddick, Andy Murray and Rafael Nadal.

Last year I correctly predicted 4 of 4 men's quarterfinal matches and this year I correctly predicted 2 of 4 women's quarterfinals. Below are my predictions for the last two men's quarterfinal matches of the 2011 US Open.

John Isner USA (28) v. Andy Murray GBR (4). Interestingly, these two have only played once before, last year, at the 2010 Australian Open where Murray made it to the final, losing to Federer in straight sets. Frankly, I was surprised that Isner was able to take out Frenchman Gilles Simon in the round before. Although he has (probably) surpassed fellow American Andy Roddick as the most feared server in the world, he also shares the Roddick problem of being considered something of a "one note" wonder.  However, hard courts are definitely the 6'9" American's best surface and he has made his presence felt in 2011. It's difficult to make the quarterfinals of a major tournament without having multiple weapons, or a dollop of good luck. This is Isner's first major quarterfinal and Murray's tenth. Isner will most likely have a very partisan crowd backing him up, and Murray will delight in not having the weight of a nation's hopes weighing on his shoulders. The problem for Isnner is that he is playing Murray, who has been in 3 of  the last 7 hard court major finals (losing in all of them, but demonstrating his hard court bona fides) and is likely to reach his fourth.  PREDICTION: Murray.


Andy Roddick USA (21) v. Rafael Nadal ESP (2). Nadal holds a 6-3 career head-to-head over all but that falls to 3-all on hard courts. They have only played once in a major, back at the 2004 US Open when an 18-year-old Nadal was schooled by the defending US Open champion in three, not very competitive sets 7 years ago. I did not predict Roddick to get this far in the tournament, but I think, now that he has, he really, really wants to get further, and he believes that he can, especially in New York. The shorter the match is, the better it is for Roddick, because if the match goes into four or five sets, Nadal's superior fitness will become more and more of a factor.

However, I do think that Roddick is ready to make another move to get deep in a major, especially here in New York where he had his greatest success. Nadal is still reeling from his unprecedented five consecutive losses to Novak Djokovic earlier this year and really had an undistinguished preparation coming into the Open. He must realize that due to the weather he will be forced to play four best-of-5 set matches in four days in order to defend his title, potentially the last three being against Roddick, then Murray and then the winner of Djokovic/Federer. Even for the indefatigable Spaniard, that might make him want to say "no mas." PREDICTION: Roddick.

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.

Rogers Cup: Bad things happen to good people and to multimillionaire tennis players with high rankings

Losing a few big names in the early rounds is no big deal – it’s almost part of the deal and may even prove beneficial.

Lose Caro, Rafa, Murray, Delpo and Kim in the space of 48 hours and its clear you’re dealing with chaos.

And any post purporting to “explain” chaos is, well, part of the problem.

That doesn’t mean I don’t think there’s any reasons for what’s happening: I don’t think you can dismiss the role of the July layoff, for example – Murray, from what I remember (which is frankly nothing), doesn’t always cope with that type of interval too well.

Rafa losing to a big hitting Croatian on a hard court? Seen that before. Being so horribly predictable under pressure it makes your eyes water? Seen that too. [full credit to Dodig for his muscly double-hander but he shouldn’t have been given so many of them to begin with]  

Injuries, withdrawals? That’s just the fabric of tennis reality.

Perhaps the only real surprise is that it should all happen at once – a statistical anomaly, nothing more, nothing less.

All of which is to say is, the sh*t sometimes hits the fan.

And I don’t even think its that much of a big deal . Nor do I think we should be bending over backwards trying to “explain” it.

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: 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?

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: I will go down with this ship.

DAMN IT ALL TO HELL.

 

I blame Pippa Middleton.

I blame Bjorn Borg and his STOOPID jovialities with Mansour Bahrami being played out between points whilst Murray was out there being flayed alive.

I blame Goran’s quite appalling middle parting.

I blame all those that have the gall to suggest that it all hinged on that one forehand that sailed long at 2-1, 15-30 up in the 2nd set – as if losing the next seven games (that would be three consecutive breaks of the Andy Murray serve) was inextricably tied to one metaphysical moment in space-time.

I blame the BBC and their symbolism overkill in showing a shot of an actual cloud with an actual silver lining.


I blame the anguish, the audacity….


…and the resulting masochistic trauma.

I blame all those who profess the importance of “winning the first set”. Really? Coz in my mind, anyone playing Rafa at Wimbledon (where he’s won his last 20 matches) needs to win not just the 1st, but the 2nd set and possibly even wangle an early break in the third before I even consider breathing easy easier.

I blame Rafa for being too good by half. I blame him for not flinching or ceding an inch.



I blame him for possessing the hand/eye coordination and presence of mind to pull off that ridiculous slide cum racquet-juggle thingimajig, where he somehow avoids injury by landing on his bottom. 

I blame him for committing a grand total of only seven UFEs over the course of the entire match – zero in the second set.

I blame all those that appear all too willing to ignore this (and all too eager to rip on Murray instead).




I blame him for being unbearably gracious in both winning and losing ("Andy didn't win a Grand Slam today, but he is much better player than some who won a Grand Slam in past. This is true”)

I blame all those that say: “This is what champions do…”.  Sorry, but that means *nothing* to me. Is it meant to make me feel better? Champions also have bad days at the office, champions also get “slamdunked” by the likes of Jo-Wilfried, champions also get mono, champions suffer slumps, champions suffer life-threatening illnesses, champions sometimes step on glass, champions have been known to dabble with class-A drugs, champions also use the pooper. In other words they’re sometimes just like the rest of us. But Rafa wasn’t today.



I blame Rafa’s mum for robbing me of what little remaining composure I’d managed to retain with the way she justly applauded what was very evidently Murray’s last stand, mere seconds before he inevitably, inexorably went crashing out.

I blame all those who said Murray displayed “no energy” out there, but would, undoubtedly, in a flash, have crucified him for baring his fangs if he did show more desire.


I blame all those self-loathing Brits who categorise the best player we’ve had since the 2nd world war as “shit”. No really. “Shit”…..for losing to Rafael Nadal – who hasn’t lost a match here since 2007.

I blame all those that continue to bark on about his “passive play” – but are unable, or unwilling, to acknowledge the guts and resolve needed to play with the type of aggression that is, quite frankly, out of his element and against the natural grain of his game and temperament. So much so that, in his words, he “probably got the balance of aggression and patience wrong…”, and “went too aggressive this time…”

I blame them all.

And I continue to believe, even though I honestly don’t know what the phrase “only a matter of time” OR “too good not to win a Slam” mean anymore. Quite frankly, winning a Slam, at this point, seems anything BUT inevitable – and that seems as good a reason as any to back him.



I will go down with this ship EVERY time he falls short of winning one of these things, unless and until he does. :(