Rotterdam/San Jose/Brazil Finals

Robin Soderling had requested a wildcard from tournament director and former player, Richard Krajicek.  Krajicek said he was having a difficult time deciding which low-ranked Dutch player should get one of the wildcards left for Rotterdam, so he was relieved when Soderling called him up.  It was a no-brainer to give Soderling a wildcard, especially with Nadal and Murray not there to play.

Rotterdam must be a favorite place for Soderling to play.  In 2008, he reached the finals, losing to Michael Llodra.  Last year, he didn’t play, but this year he came back again.

The first set against Youzhny was up and down.  Youzhny broke early, but Soderling broke back.  Then Soderling got up a break and was serving to win the first set when Youzhny broke back again.  Soderling then broke once more to win the first set, 6-4.  Youzhny appeared to hurt his thigh and retired after going down 2-0 in the second set.

Rotterdam has an interesting history.  In 1984, Lendl was cruising to an easy victory over Connors, 6-0, 1-0.  Then, there was a bomb threat, and play was temporarily halted.  When play was ready to go again, Lendl refused to play.  So, it was decided the two players would be co-winners.

In any case, Soderling wins his fifth ATP title, but it is his first ATP 500 title (the remaining 4 are ATP 250 titles).

Soderling said he came into the tournament struggling with his forehand but his coach said to keep hitting and think positive, and it would come back again.  Soderling said it did come back again and he was happy about that.

On this side of the pond, Andy Roddick was scheduled to play Fernando Verdasco in the finals of the SAP Open held in San Jose.  Head-to-head record strongly favored Roddick.  Roddick had beaten Verdasco 7 straight times, although only once in 2009 and not at all in 2008.  In the last 5 matches they’ve played, at least one set has gone to a tiebreak.

This time, Verdasco found himself the victor, 3-6, 6-4, 6-4.  Apparently, Verdasco did really well holding serve in the last two sets, and Roddick found himself irate at some linecalls.

The third tournament was held in Costa do Sauipe, Bahia, Brazil.  Juan Carlos Ferrero cruised to an easy, 6-1, 6-0 win over Pole, Lukasz Kubot.

Next week, Soderling and Youzhny, finalists at Rotterdam, head to Marseille.  Andy Murray and Juan Martin del Potro were expected to be the top 2 seeds, but both withdrew.  This leaves Robin Soderling as the top seed.  Gael Monfils, Gilles Simon, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga are also expected to play.

Most of the crew that were in San Jose head to Memphis.  This includes finalists, Andy Roddick and Fernando Verdasco.  Sam Querrey, Radek Stepanek, John Isner, and Tommy Haas are scheduled to play.

Those playing in Brazil will move to neighboring Argentina to play in Buenos Aires.  This includes Juan Carlos Ferrero, David Ferrer, Nicolas Almagro, and Juan Monaco.

Juan Martin del Potro said he, like Rafael Nadal, needed to take a month off.  del Potro’s wrist has been bothering him.

The big guns come out to Dubai as 6 of the top 10 players in the world participate in Roger Federer’s second training home.  This includes Roger Federer and Andy Murray, who have not competed since the Australian Open, Novak Djokovic, who recently lost in the semis at Rotterdam, Andy Roddick, who will have played in Memphis the previous week, Nikolay Davydenko, and recent top-10 newcomer, Marin Cilic.

After Dubai, most players will head to the US to play the two big hardcourt events: Indian Wells, in California, and Miami.  Both are 10 day events with first round byes given to the top seeds.  These are the ATP Masters 1000 events.

Historically, Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic have done well.  Rafael Nadal made his first big breakthrough beating Federer in five sets in Miami (back when they played five sets).  Rafael Nadal is still expected to return to play Indian Wells.

Key questions: will Roger Federer be in the same form that won him the Australian Open?  How will Rafa do?  Will Novak Djokovic get his act together?  Will Juan Martin del Potro come to play or will he still be out due to a wrist injury?

Rotterdam Semifinals

With Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray, last year’s finalists, not playing, there were hopes that the top two seeds might meet each other once again, namely, Nikolay Davydenko and Novak Djokovic.

So tournament organizers probably cringed a bit when neither made the final.

If there’s a player that Davydenko doesn’t like playing, it must be Robin Soderling.  Soderling’s big serve and big groundies are tough for anyone to handle, but Soderling, unlike some other players, is willing to play closer in to the baseline, dishing out to Davydenko a bit of what he gives to other players.  Soderling isn’t the baseline hugger that Davydenko is, by any means, but he still gets in enough to bother Davydenko.  It may be that Soderling attacks the Davydenko serve better than most.

For whatever reason, Soderling gives Davydenko trouble and gave him trouble again beating him 7-6, 6-4.  Soderling was not originally scheduled to play Rotterdam, but requested a wildcard from Richard Krajicek who is the pro associated with the tournament (and decides wildcards, apparently).

Novak Djokovic found himself struggling against a resurgent Mikhail Youzhny.  Youzhny was one of those guys that used to give Nadal a lot of trouble, but he faded a bit the last 2 years or so.  Since the US Open, he’s played pretty well.  Djokovic looked like he was going to lose in straight sets when Youzhny got up a break in the second.

Djokovic managed to break back and then push the set into a tiebreak.  Djokovic was up 5-2 in the tiebreak and coming into net.  But each time Djokovic comes to net, he seems to get too cute.  He loves to lob volley (remember the semifinals against Fed at the US Open?) when he gets the chance and he’s really good at it, but he drop-shotted one point which lead to a great Youzhny pickup, a desperate Djokovic pass, a volley to the backhand, and a missed shot into the net.  Youzhny was up 6-5 and match point when Djokovic played a great backhand to save match point, but it wasn’t enough because Youzhny took the next two points and the match.

That leaves Soderling and Youzhny in the final.  The two have met twice and split 1-1.  Soderling beat Youzhny the last time they met which was in Washington DC.  This was an easy straight set win.  However, Youzhny appears to be playing better so expect a tighter match, probably with Soderling favored to win in straight sets.

Where is Roger Federer?

For a long time, Roger Federer struggled against two players: David Nalbandian and Lleyton Hewitt.  Some say that it was Rafael Nadal that pushed Federer to be better, but it was originally Nalbandian and Hewitt that originally pushed Federer.  In the old days, Federer wasn’t the baseliner he is today.  He altered his game so he could become a better baseliner, abandoning the serve and volley style he originally used.

Many people say what a genius Roger Federer is.  How he moves so effortlessly, how his forehand looks like a liquid whip.  The genius is how Federer managed to transform himself, a player that once let anger and impatience lead to losses, that let his emotion burden him more than it should have.  One only has to look at Marat Safin to see someone so talented that didn’t surround himself with the right people, that didn’t reign in his emotions, that didn’t focus himself.  Federer has managed to get rid of anger in his game, get people around him to get him well trained, well balanced, to alter his game to deal with modern players.

Ivan Lendl didn’t invent the inside-out forehand.  But he may have been the first to realize that the forehand was more powerful than the backhand and if you were quick enough, you could leave space opened on the right side of the court, but hitting a powerful shot that robbed your opponent of time was worth the risk of bad court positioning.

Roger Federer certainly didn’t invent the inside-out forehand, but he pushed this idea of hitting everything with your forehand to its limits.  He knew his backhand was a limitation.  There’s no doubt Federer his a very sweet one-handed backhand, but he’s doesn’t generate a lot of winners on that end.  If the post-Lendl era of tennis taught modern pros anything, it was the forehand was a much bigger weapon than the backhand.  Jimmy Connors may go down as the last player whose backhand was a superior shot in every way to his forehand, a shot he couldn’t come over easily.

Although Roger Federer probably didn’t invent the inside-in forehand, he certainly used this shot frequently.  If hitting an inside-out forehand leaves a lot of space open in the deuce court, there is some solace that a well hit inside out forehand puts pressure on an opponent, typically on their backhand, and hitting that shot up the line is a high risk shot.  The inside-in shot, by contrast, typically leaves not only the right side of the court empty, but it also puts the shot to an opposing player’s forehand, and lets them hit that shot crosscourt to that empty spot.

And yet, Federer’s genius is realizing that if you learn to hit that shot hard and deep and consistent, then it’s tough for even top players to angle it to the open court.  Indeed, the inside-in shot is needed as a counter-threat to the inside-out shot.  If Federer’s opponents began to anticipate the inside-out shot, they might power it up the line for a winner.  Federer therefore needs the the threat of the inside-in forehand to prevent players from cheating too far to one side or the other.

Here’s the problem.  Roger is not 21 anymore.  He’s not even 25.  As he nears 30 years of age, Roger must realize that running around his backhand requires superior mobility.  If anything, del Potro’s win over Federer at the US Open must demonstrate to Federer that leaving court space open gives a player like del Potro an invitation to hit that huge forehand.  And although Federer has learned to hit a very good squash shot forehand for just such an emergency, hitting it time and again means a defensive shot.

Roger constructed this strategy to overcome a weakness and to highlight his strength.  However, Roger seems to have rethought how he should play toward the latter parts of his career.

Each winter, Roger Federer, like most savvy players, spends time working on his game.  Most players work on fitness, and either work on a weakness or improve a strength.  In 2008, Roger said he was working on his serve and his volley.  When critics claimed his forehand was an issue, Roger went back to work on a strength.

This past winter, Roger seems to have spent a great deal of time on his backhand.  There are several aspects to this.  First, he’s worked on his slice.  Indeed, during much of the finals, Roger sliced back nearly every return from his backhand.  This was likely a safer return for Federer, but since he sliced it up the middle, Murray was left without many angles to work with.

Second, he’s increased the power off his backhand as well as his steadiness.  Roger needs to be able to use the backhand merely to rally.  It shouldn’t be so slow that players attack his backhand (which Murray tried to do at the beginning of the first set).  Roger has worked on his backhand so he can hit a sharp angle, almost a passing shot with the other player at the baseline.  Finally, to supplement that, Roger needed to get his down-the-line backhand back in shape.  If he only hits good crosscourt backhands, players will adjust by cheating more in that direction.

The best two-handers in the world, players like Djokovic, Davydenko, Murray, Nadal, all hit a very good down-the-line backhand.  If the crosscourt backhand is the bread and butter, you need a reliable down-the-line shot to keep the other player honest.  It seems Roger Federer doesn’t just learn to hit a shot, but sees it as a group of shots.  Thus, it’s not a topspin backhand, but it’s the crosscourt backhand, the down the line backhand, and the slice.  If Federer can hit a reasonable number of winners on his backhand, then he doesn’t need to run around his backhand nearly as much, and can choose more opportune times to do it.

Federer appears to have made a small addition to his forehand as well.  Roger was shanking his forehand a bit the last two years.   He seems to have added a loopier forehand with less pace, but more spin.  You saw this shot mostly in his first round match.  He was back to hitting his normal forehand by the later rounds.  It may be that Federer developed this shot so he could get into rhythm first.

Will these changes pay off?  It’s certainly started off well, with Federer winning the Australian Open.  And it means that the best player in tennis still has more tricks up his sleeve.

A Trio of Tourneys

Here’s a trivia question.  Who is the number 2 player in the world?  Unless you’re an avid tennis fan, you probably wouldn’t have picked Novak Djokovic.

Unless you’re an avid fan, you’ll scratch your head wondering how Djokovic became number 2.  It goes something like this.  What’s the last tournament Nadal won?

You have to go back to May when Nadal won Rome over Novak Djokovic to find the last time Nadal won a tournament.  It’s not that he’s played so badly, really.  When he’s playing, Rafa still reaches the semifinals.  He still reaches the finals.  He’s even come quite close to winning tournaments.

Meanwhile, Djokovic has won tournaments since May.  Djokovic won Beijing.  He won Basel.  He won Paris.  Those are all Masters 1000 events.  The casual tennis fan only cares about the Slams, but that’s three more Slams than Nadal won.

And of course, due to injury, Nadal lost early in the French Open (though Djokovic lost even earlier) and didn’t play Wimbledon (Djokovic reached the quarters, a better result than the previous year), and had his second best result at the US Open (getting to the semis, the same result as Djokovic).  Once Nadal’s Australian Open win came off the books, Djokovic merely had to repeat his effort from the previous year (quarterfinals) to get to number 2, something he hoped to do back in 2008.

Of the top 5 players, only Djokovic and Davydenko (who plays a lot) are playing this week.

Rotterdam has the star players of the three tournaments being played this week.  Davydenko beat veteran Melzer, 6-3, 6-2 and will meet Soderling in the semis who beat Julien Benneteau love and 1.  This is an intriguing match, actually.  When Soderling made his run to the French Open final, he met Davydenko in the quarterfinals.  Many thought Davydenko would beat Soderling because he so easily handled Verdasco.

However, Soderling was the one who had a winning record against Davydenko, and beat him in that quarterfinal match.  They met 3 more times after the French.  At the US Open, Soderling won when Davydenko retired.  In Kuala Lumpur, Davydenko finally got a win, but then lost in Paris.  Finally, Davydenko beat Soderling en route to the ATP World Tour Finals.

There’s no doubt about it.  Soderling gives Davydenko problems.  But Davydenko is also playing pretty good tennis especially with his ATP World Tour Finals title and his Doha win.  Soderling had a bad Australian Open, but is looking to get back into form.  Slight edge to Davydenko.

In the other semifinals, Mikhail Youzhny beat Gael Monfils in three sets.  Monfils has been playing solid tennis, though he has not been winning titles lately.  Youzhny had a pretty good post US Open tournament run, and appears to still be playing well.  Youzhny will play Djokovic who didn’t have to play a match since Florian Mayer didn’t opt to play.

In Costa de Sauipe in Brazil, two of the semifinalists have been determined.  Juan Carlos Ferrero and Igor Andreev are in the semifinals.  This event is played on clay and has primarily attracted clay courters.

In San Jose, only one semifinalist has been determined.  Denis Istomin of Uzbekistan beat Philipp Kohlschreiber in three sets.  Djokovic crushed Istomin at the Australian Open.  Andy Roddick faces Tomas Berdych, Verdasco plays Ricardis Berankis.  Berankis is 19 years old from Lithuania, and bucks the trend to taller and taller players.  At 5’8″, he’s one of the shorter players on tour.

Sam Querrey is on the comeback trail after a freak injury had him recovering during the fall instead of playing tournaments.  Querrey will play fellow American, Michael Russell, who is currently ranked 77.  Russell lost in the first round of the Australian Open in four sets to Juan Martin del Potro.

Fernando Verdasco, who had been using Technifibre racquets, was spotted in the SAP Open in San Jose playing with a Yonex.  It’s reported that he’s playing with the RDiS 200, the successor to the RDS 002.

How They Play (Nadal and Murray)

In American football, it’s said that a good defense beats a good offense.  American football, it seems, is a game of errors.  The defense attempts to make the offense produce errors that cause the ball to go from the opposition’s defense to a favorable position for their own offense.  For a long time, tennis was a game of offense.  The Australians and Americans decided the best way to win games was constant forays to the net.  Get to the net, hit a volley, win the point.

It made sense.  Although the volley came with a fair amount of risk–you can be passed low, passed high, lobbed–its reward was equally high.  By cutting off the amount of time to react to the ball by roughly half, the volleyer has struck a winning blow with minimal effort.  Indeed, the problem of a successful net approach, typically a slice shot aimed down the line, was not successfully solved by players of the wooden era.  With continental grips, flat shots, a low bouncing surface (grass), and a lack of understanding of how to improve footwork and speed, players either sliced their passes, took their chances with a flat shot, or invariably, lobbed their shot.

Although clay courters have been around for a long time, the French Open having been around for decades, many of the playing surfaces around the world were played on grass.  Clay courters of the day never seemed to get grass, and grass courters played just well enough on clay to win the Slam.  Much of the Australian and perhaps American advantage stemmed from a group of highly talented players that played one another and made each other better.  This was how the Swedes, post-Borg, got better.  It was how the Americans got good in the 1990s.  It is how the Spaniards and the French and the Russians have improved.

Perhaps this is why it takes a loner to redefine the game, why Bjorn Borg, who came from a country that was more about table tennis and hockey than tennis, would change how tennis was played.

Borg’s two other favorite pasttimes where hockey, a sport where you used two hands to slap a shot, and table tennis, where loopy shots with topspin were a key skill for success.  Borg was not only in great athletic shape, a guy who could run and run, but he was disciplined and he hit topspin on both sides.  This meant he could hit a passing shot that dipped to the service line.  A player in those days could either try for a sharp flat angle and hope to get the timing just right, or hit it down the line and hope not to hit too deep.  Such was the nature of a flat or slice passing shot.  With his speed and his accuracy, the passing shot meant the baseliner had a chance to beat an attacking player, and this was critical, because it meant a clay courter could now make inroads on grass and eventually on hardcourts.

Even as Connors pushed the notion of a power baseliner to its limits–he was a player that hit hard and flat and on the rise, Connors was still limited by players being able to chase down his shots.  Connors knew that coming to net, whether it be on a punishing shot off a short ball or whether it be a sneak serve and volley play, was still the way to win a point decisively.  It was once said that only four players could beat you from the baseline using power and that was Borg, Connors, Vilas, and Lendl.  But it was only Lendl who routinely (for his day) hit winners from the baseline.

Ken Rosewall was asked, during the Australian Open, whether Roger Federer’s style was a classic one, reminiscent of the way he played.  Tennis reporters have often likened Federer’s shots to the good old days of tennis, but Rosewall, knowing better, said it was not.  And he’s right.  Tennis in Rosewall’s day was about getting to net.  There were no power baseline rallies like there were today.  Federer may look elegantly effortless, but his shots are built from a modern style of play, which is completely different from the mentality of Rosewall’s era.  The only resemblance might be that slice backhand (which Federer uses as a kind of stalling play to get him back into position or to provide a change of pace) or just his smoothness of motion.  Rosewall would not recognize the flurry of winners that Federer could make with his forehand, nor the amazing topspin backhand angles that would normally appear to be passing shots, but are used in baseline exchanges.  Such shots would defy the Rosewallian era of tennis physics.

With all but the best volleyers unable to attack Borg effectively, Borg’s challenges came primarily from other baseliners, players such as Lendl, Vilas, Harold Solomon.  Such players joined the Borgian style.  They used fitness and topspin to create rallies that lasted 20, 30, 40 shots, waiting to see whose steadiness would reign supreme.  It was a neutral style that drove some fans mad, waiting for a bit of offensive.  It’s ironic that this dull style of play came during the peak of tennis popularity in the US, perhaps due to the coatstring effect of Riggs vs. King, effectively the Nancy and Tonya event that brought tennis to the attention of a feminist hungry American public.

Defense in Borg’s era was getting the ball back in a safe manner and passing the attacking volleyer as needed.  Borg was very rarely pressed by attacking players from the baseline because they generally didn’t exist.  Even Lendl would only hit a handful of winners in every match.  Lendl was nearly Borg’s equal in terms of consistency.  He’d only up his risk factor when playing McEnroe, forcing McEnroe to run hard and preventing him easy access to the net.  But by and large, defensive tennis was steady tennis.

That notion of defense has changed a great deal since the 1970s.  Once the power game developed, first with Lendl, then Becker, then Agassi, then players like Ivanisevic, Sampras, and then all the players since Federer, the number of winners started to go up.  Players could hit winners 10 feet behind the baseline.  Passing shots that were rarely made in the past became routine.  Once upon a time, a hard crosscourt approach lead to weak replies.  Sampras was the first to use his reverse forehand and make Agassi pay for hard shots hit crosscourt.  Sampras would whip them the other direction with even more angle, and leave Agassi flustered, wondering how a guy like Sampras was hitting the ball harder than Agassi.

And ever since then, the notion of defense has changed.  Defense means hitting a great shot when your opponent is trying to take the offensive.  In the past, defense was, getting the ball back one more time than your opponent.

The two top players at defense, these days, are Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray.  Although their styles are different, there are some similarities.

Rafa is Borg taken to some extreme that even Borg would not recognize.  Rafa hits the heaviest shots in tennis.  These topspin shots attack you like body blows, the balls kicking up, and kicking up.  When Rafa has gotten a weak shot, he will pound on your weakness over and over again until you toss up a really weak shot in which case he either heads to net and finishes the point, or hits a winner.   For all of Rafa’s power and accuracy, he plays incredibly conservative.  He’s no Fernando Verdasco who is happy to pounce at a chance to hit a winner whenever he gets too bored, which is quite often for Verdasco.

Rafa is also blessed with incredible raw athleticism.  The man can flat out run.  This is important because Rafa has to run.  Rafa’s innate fear of taking the attack to his opponent means he often feeds balls up the middle perhaps more than he should.  Yet, his topspin shots are troublesome enough for most players.  Many players have realized that the best way to play Rafa is to take the game to him, to try to go for big shots before Rafa can go for his big shots.  This high-risk strategy often leads to two results.  First, a player makes more errors, which is fine with Rafa because he’s as content waiting for the error as anyone in the game.  Second, even if the player hits an aggressive shot, Rafa is so good at hitting a powerful shot on defense that he is often at his most dangerous.

This ability to chase down balls ultimately hurts Rafa because he must do a lot of running and must be able to change direction abruptly, all things Rafa excels at, but the kind of style that is ultimately hard on Rafa’s body.  If Rafa played like Verdasco, he’d play quicker points and save his body more, but Verdasco’s go-for-broke style is so counter-intuitive to Rafa that it’s amazing both grew up in the Spanish system.

Rafa’s offense has always seemed more bullish than Murray’s style of play.  With his whipping forehand that swings above his head, the curving ball taking huge bounces off the ground, Rafa plays with a lot of energy.  If his balls appear to lack pace, it’s mostly because all that energy has been expended in service of spin.  And that spin is Rafa’s friend.

Although Rafa and Roger have been cast as rivals of the new millennium, their philosophy of ball striking is amazingly different.  Roger wants to hit winners.  He wants to hit a ball that you can’t touch.  Roger is all about the knockout punch.  Rafa doesn’t mind if you hit the ball.  He’s waiting to hit a shot with a weak reply.  Rafa makes body blows.  It’s much like a better player who hits his groundstrokes just a touch faster than you want to play against.  You’re struggling to get the ball back and do something with it, and eventually, it happens.  You bloop a ball up, and he takes advantage, punishing the ball repeatedly to your weaker side until you either miss or until he mercifully hits a winner.  In a way, it’s much like Borg minus the winners.

Murray’s approach resembles Rafa on the surface.  Just as Rafa is loathe to go for winners, and prefers to wait for errors, or at least, wait for an opportunity to hit you again and again, Murray is also loathe to go for winners.  Murray lacks Rafa’s bullish intensity.  He is not going to pound the ball over and over to a spot waiting for you to give up an easy shot.  He lacks both Rafa’s power and frankly his consistency.  Murray’s offensive shots are flatter in nature and therefore higher risk.

Therefore, Murray adapts to his own strengths, which is the variety of shot.  Murray will hit slice shots, or loop a ball with little pace up.  In a way, Rafa doesn’t mean to hit super loopy shots that land at the service line.  These shots are mostly Rafa playing safe and playing a bit nervous.  Murray, on the other hand, does seem to intentionally play this style of game.  He seems to want you to play a big shot so he can use his foot speed and his passing shots to win points.  Unlike Rafa, Murray’s mixing up of pace and spin are meant to confuse his opponents, who are typically used to hitting the same pace shot over and over and thus get grooved.

Like Rafa’s opponents, Murray’s opponents sometime try the same strategy.  They take the game to Murray, trying to hit inside out winners.  They understand Murray is quick, perhaps quicker than most anyone on tour, but even Murray can only run so fast.   Like Rafa, Murray tends to play from way back.  This means it’s difficult for Murray to play power shots, and indeed, it’s not really his game.  Murray has shown some desire to take shots closer into the baseline, but it seems, at the very highest levels of tennis, pros play in a comfort zone and they are loathe to leave it.

Could Rafa play like Verdasco, going for big shots willy-nilly?  He probably could, but the discomfort at the idea would probably lead to a torrent of errors that Rafa would quickly return to what makes him feel good about his own game.  Similarly, Murray can hit big shots, but he knows it would probably lead to a lot more errors.  His big game isn’t quite like Gonzalez or Verdasco whose effortless power is an outgrowth of a machismo style of play.  Murray going for big shots feels tacked-on, manufactured.  He can do it, and yet, if he had to rely on hitting big shots over and over, he’d likely become just one of the guys, good, but possibly not great.

It’s intriguing that Rafa has been criticized for his playing style, mostly because of the damage Rafa does to his body.  It’s a combination of his whippy groundstrokes with his athletic runs that give fans pause.  Somehow, despite running as much as Rafa, Murray’s style appears more graceful, built more from anticipation and balance than from raw, but unfinished talent.  Once upon a time there was a French-African figure skater by the name of Surya Bonaly.  Formerly a gymnast, Bonaly’s skating lacked elegance, but boy could she jump.  It was not a thing of beauty, but her athletic prowess that gave her power and precision, perhaps not unlike the Williams sisters.

In a way, Rafa is like Bonaly, though certainly better trained at his sport.  Murray, on the other hand, is lighter in his step.  Even so, it’s very difficult for a player to rely on sheer speed for his game.  Federer, for example, while still reasonably fleet of foot, appears to have worked a lot on his backhand, trying to make it a shot that can be, at the very least, modestly feared.  If he can do this, he will have less reason to run around his backhand, and less reason to rely on leaving huge swaths of court free for the taking.  This is an important transition to his game, one that he needs to do if he wants to keep playing into his 30s.

Historically, power players have stayed at the top.  Players like Connors and Agassi.  Lendl might have stayed their longer had he not developed back problems.  Big Bill Tilden and Pancho Gonzalez all continued to have success until past 40.  Quick players like Michael Chang had injuries and began to fade as they got older.  Players like Davydenko have learned to hit on the rise.  Davydenko often plays a lot of shots up the middle until the rally starts moving to big angles in which case he either hits a bigger angle or precisely aims it down the line.  A combination of court positioning and looking for opportunities to end the point have lead to Davydenko’s success.

It seems Murray, for all his defensive prowess, has to think along these lines too.  As he gets older, all that running would seem to catch up to him.  Fortunately, Murray has spent a great deal of his training on staying balanced which presumably leads to fewer injuries and better shots.

Murray and Rafa have produced two distinct forms of defense, but they have similarities.  Both seem more comfortable waiting for the other player to attack before they hit the great shots.  They differ in their style.  Rafa isn’t trying to play a tricky game to goad his opponents for the attack, but his conservative style often leaves balls up high asking to be spanked.  Murray, by contrast, does play a tricky game, providing off-pace shots that also beg to be spanked.  Whether it’s done intentionally or not, both rely a fair bit on their opponents making the first move, and although both are capable of going for big shots, there is a hesitancy to do so.

In this respect, their style is a kind of throwback to Borg, even though Borg to Murray/Nadal is as far a transition as Rosewall to Federer.  Defense is still alive, albeit transmogrified into a defense/offense hybrid, an animal that is at its most dangerous when trapped.

Week of Feb 1 tournaments

It’s the week after the Australian Open and more tournaments are being played.  Consider how many players get to the fourth round of a Slam.  It’s 16.  With 128 players in the original draw, more than 100 players have already failed to reach the fourth round, and are therefore out in the first week of the Australian Open.

Players in the top 10 generally anticipate they will make it into the second week of a Slam and so they budget time off afterwards.  Those outside the top 10 assume they won’t make the second week and sign up for tournaments in the next week.

This week, there are three tournaments held throughout the world on different surfaces.  In Chile is the Movistar Open.  South American players will flock to this tournament especially those from Chile like top-seeded Fernando Gonzalez.  This tournament, not surprisingly, is played in clay.  While those in the northern hemisphere are dealing with winter temperatures, those in the southern have their summer.  In the semifinals are: Gonzalez playing Brazilian Thomaz Bellucci.  Juan Monaco of Argentina has already beaten Brazilian qualifier, Joao Souza, 6-1, 6-4.

Croatia hosts its tournament in the PZB Croatian Indoors.  Top-seeded player and AO semifinalist, Marin Cilic, won his semifinal encounter with tour veteran, Austrian Jurgen Melzer, 7-6(5), 6-4.  Meanwhile, the other semifinals featured two unseeded Germans.  Michael Berrer defeated Philipp Petzchner 7-6(6), 7-5.  Cilic should be favored to win his second tournament of the year (his first was Chennai) and has been playing top-notch tennis.

Finally, the SA Tennis Open in Joberg (Johannesburg), South Africa, is an outdoors tournament.  The semifinals featured Spaniard vs. Frenchman.  One would have expected top seeded Gael Monfils and second seeded David Ferrer to proceed to the final.  Instead, both lost.  Monfils lost in three sets to Feliciano Lopez, the third seed, 3-6, 6-1, 7-6 (1).

Meanwhile speedy David Ferrer lost to eight seeded Frenchman, Stephane Robert, 7-5, 6-4.  That means the finals will be Lopez vs. Robert.

Next week, another trio of tournaments are played: the Brasil Open (on clay, in Brazil), Rotterdam (on hardcourts, presumably indoors), and San Jose (on hardcourts).  The following week, there will be four tournaments played, then two tournaments the next week, then the first Masters 1000 of the year in Indian Wells, followed by the second Masters 1000 of the year in Miami.  And then begins the clay grind.

The beginning of the year is jammed pack with tournaments, but most of the top pros will hold off for a while to recover and get ready for their debut.

The two ATP 500 tournaments on the schedule are Rotterdam, which will be played next week.  The top 8 seeds are Djokovic, Davydenko, Soderling, Monfils, Robredo, Youzhny, Ljubicic, and Troicki.  Nadal would have been top seed, but he has withdrawn due to a knee injury that flared up during the AO quarterfinals against Andy Murray.  Murray is the defending champ at Rotterdam, but has chosen not to defend his title.  Instead, he’ll play an ATP 250 event in Marseille, the following week.

The week after Marseille, there are two ATP 500 events: Dubai and Acapulco.  Although both are of similar rank, Dubai has the stellar field.   Of the top 8 seeds, only 1 is not in the top 10.  Roger Federer will play his first tournament since winning the Australian Open here.  In addition, Djokovic, Murray, del Potro, Davydenko, Roddick, Cilic, and Robredo round out the top 8.  Djokovic is the defending champion.  Dubai is a much stronger field this year than in previous years.   They may have decided to dole out a lot of appearance fees.

Rankings Update

With the Australian Open just concluded, the rankings were shaken up.  Roger Federer increased his lead at world number 1 with his win.  Since Rafa lost in the quarterfinals, he lost 1640 points and moved to 4th, his lowest ranking in years.  The last time he wasn’t in the top 3 was May 23, 2005, almost 5 years ago, when he was ranked 5.

Although Djokovic did not improve on last year’s quarterfinal result, due to Rafa’s loss and Murray being so far behind him, Djokovic becomes number 2.  And because Murray reached the finals, he’s just a fraction ahead of Rafael Nadal and back to being ranked number 3, a position he held in the middle of 2009.

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga’s semifinal run boosted his ranking up from 10 to 9.  Meanwhile, Cilic’s semifinal run put him in the top 10 at 10.  Fernando Verdasco dropped out of the top 10 and is now 12th in the world.

John Isner is now the second ranked American at 25th in the world ahead of Sam Querrey who is now 30th in the world.

A Look Ahead to 2010

With the Australian Open already half a day old, Roger Federer has hoisted yet another trophy adding to his bevy of Slam titles.  He has long since passed Pete Sampras and now eyes the women champs who were, unlike the men, always head and shoulders above their competition.  With each passing Slam, the winds of fortune dictate how Federer is doing.

When Federer won the French, people proclaimed him the GOAT (greatest of all time).  Some snickered at this notion with Rafael Nadal unable to reach the destination that had seemed his birthright, derailed by the rangy Swede, Robin Soderling.  Even so, Federer had captured the career Slam and tied Sampras’s record of 14.   Four weeks later, he’d again hoist up the Wimbledon trophy, his 15th Slam, and again, fans declared Federer, his GOATness.

Entering the US Open, Federer does what he has done so many times.  He reached the finals and played young upstart, Juan Martin del Potro.  del Potro’s ascendancy up to the top of the sport has been meteoric.  If someone had asked you who del Potro was shortly after 2008 Wimbledon, you would have shrugged your shoulders.  From the depths of anonymity, del Potro won four tournaments in a row, two on clay, two on hardcourts, beating Andy Roddick in one, and then making a run to the quarterfinals of the US Open, losing to the fitter Andy Murray.

Like many before him, del Potro struggled against Federer.  If the tall Argentine was seeking to be the best, the best was putting him back in his place.  Federer showed his mastery of del Potro in the 2009 Australian Open in a straight set win so convincing, it made del Potro look like a junior, a boy among men.   But it didn’t take long for the Tandil native to take his huge serve and his huge forehand to bigger heights.  del Potro reached the semifinals of the French Open and took sets off of Federer, something he had never done, but did on the biggest stage.

Federer was under tremendous pressure.  Given Nadal’s early exit, he became the prohibitive favorite to win the French, but worked hard against Acasuso, Tommy Haas, and del Potro to earn his way to the finals and the title.

del Potro’s upward climb reached a crescendo when he took Nadal, coming off of rest and recovery for his knee tendinitis, to the woodshed for a 6-2, 6-2, 6-2 beatdown.  Nadal had probably never felt so lost on a court to a player who had had his first victory over the world number 2 only mere months ago.  Roger also looked to take del Potro down with a one set lead and a 5-4 serve, up 30-0 when Roger made several ill-advised forays to the del Potro forehand.  Those forehands continued to seek its mark and that service lead soon evaporated and with it, the set.

When del Potro won the fifth set convincingly, there were again murmurs that Federer was on his way down, that fresh young talent like del Potro were ready to assume the mantle.  Few remarked just how close Fed was to a small Slam, winning 3 of 4 Slams in a year, for the fourth time in his career.  Had Fed won, it would have been one of those amazing years, piled upon the plethora of amazing years Federer has already had.  And this, in a year where Federer didn’t look supremely dominant in tournaments outside the Slams.

With Federer’s trouncing of Andy Murray, he’s back on top of the world.  The Australian Open had become the Slam title which he had the longest drought.  He lost last year to Nadal and the year before to Djokovic.

How does Federer’s year look ahead?  Barring injury, of course, it depends a bit on a few factors.  Number 1 is “how is Rafael Nadal”?  Nadal again succumbed to knee problems and retired against Andy Murray.  Nadal usually is good for about 6 months of play before his body breaks down and he starts losing to players that generally aren’t competitive against him.   To be out for a month less than a month into the year has to be disconcerting news.  Experts had long predicted Nadal’s bullish style was going to get him into trouble and that he’d cut his career short.   Few wanted this to be true, but with Nadal off the tour again, one has to wonder.

Even had Nadal not retired, even if he had managed to get past Murray and get past Cilic, one gets the sense Roger would have beaten Rafa because Rafa of 2010 is not Rafa of 2009.  That mental dominance that lead the Mallorcan to number 1 seemed fragile after his parent’s divorce and injuries to his knee.  Rafa has shown he can still beat most players most of the times, but when the rankings come out Monday, Rafa will see his rank as low as it’s been in quite some time.  He’ll be number 4 (due to a quarterfinal loss), while Andy Murray is number 3, and Novak Djokovic is number 2.

Would Rafa dare do the unthinkable?  Would he take a year, possibly 6 months off the tour, and try to get back to 100%?  In many violent sports, losing a player to entire seasons is commonplace.   The thought is somewhat preposterous, and yet to stretch out his career longer, it doesn’t seem like such a bad idea.  Realistically, Rafa will do like he’s done and attempt to come back in a month or so.

What about the rest of the competition?  Let’s start with Djokovic.  Djokovic had the kind of career del Potro is having now back in 2007.  He was routinely reaching the late stages of the Slams.  Like Murray, Djokovic made a US Open to the final, in 2007.  Like Murray, Djokovic lost to the hands of Roger Federer.  Unlike Murray, Djokovic went to the next Slam, the 2008 Australian Open, and came out victor.  Since then, Djokovic has had a solid, but not spectacular record at the Slams.  He reached the semis of the 2008 French, then lost early to Safin at Wimbledon, then reached the semifinals of the US Open to lose to, yes, Roger Federer.

In 2009, Djokovic lost in the quarterfinals to Andy Roddick when he retired due to the heat.  He lost surprisingly early to Philipp Kohlschreiber in the 3rd round of the French Open.  He got to the quarterfinals of Wimbledon where he lost to Tommy Haas.  He again reached the semifinals of the US Open losing to, yes, Roger Federer, once again.  All in all, two quarterfinals and a semifinal appearance doesn’t seem too bad.

Starting this year, 2010, Djokovic had a repeat of last year except instead of the heat getting to him, his stomach did.  After securing a two set to one lead over Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Djokovic experienced stomach pains.  He wanted to throw up and took a medical timeout.  Apparently, this left him in no condition to beat Tsonga, and he lost the next two sets handily.   Questions about Djokovic’s health continue to plague him, but as far as results?  He’s done no worse than last year.

So why is Djokovic number 2?  Because there are stretches of time where he plays excellent ball.  He won more matches than anyone in 2009, just not in the Slams.  He had an amazing trifecta of duels against Nadal in the clay court tuneups to the French.  Although he lost all 3 encounters, he came as close as anyone to knocking Nadal off the throne.  Soderling may very well have Djokovic to thank for softening up Nadal.

Djokovic had a pretty good hardcourt year leading up to the US Open, and the Open was again his best Slam of the year.  He also played very well after the US Open and only fizzled at the ATP World Tour Finals.  Clearly, this guy has the talent to beat the best, and yet it seems Djokovic is, well, if not moving backwards, then staying still.  Djokovic acknowledged he played too much last year and it was affecting his motivation.  The big question in 2010 is, can Djokovic come back?

Juan Martin del Potro seems like the guy to beat, except injuries seem to affect him.  del Potro seems to play well in big tournaments, but this year, he went into the Australian Open with no warmup tournament and rumors that his wrist was bothering him.  It seemed good enough to get him to the quarterfinals although not without trouble.  He then faced the “next big guy” in Marin Cilic who won the match in five sets.  If del Potro is healthy, he seems like a genuine threat to do well at Slams, but it’s still rather murky now.

How about Nikolay Davydenko?  Davydenko, at age 28, has built a game that is capable of beating anybody.  This is no small achievement.  Indeed, were we not so fixated on Federer’s amazing performance, we’d truly have to marvel at how Davydenko managed to do this.  He’s got a game that bothers Federer, Nadal, and del Potro.  The one guy that seems to play him pretty even is Novak Djokovic!

With the sheen of Federer’s win not even a day old, it’s easy to proclaim him unbeatable once again.  Certainly, there are aspects of his game that have improved since the last time we saw him in earnest, so this idea isn’t without merits.

But what lies ahead.  Let’s quickly summarize Federer’s top opponents.

Rafael Nadal. The big question mark.  Even if he comes back, will he ever be the same?  He’s now become a solid top 5 player, something most players would give their right arm (despite the immense impracticality of that Faustian bargain) to be a solid top 5 player, but he and we are used to so much more.

Novak Djokovic. He’s going to be number 2 in a few hours.  He plays well for weeks at a time, but can he get his Slam mojo back?  Of the top players, he seems to have progressed the least, but he was at a pretty high level to begin with, so that may still be good enough.

Andy Murray. He’s another big question mark.  It’s clear Murray is getting better, but because he lost to a very aggressive Federer, he may have to re-assess the way he plays the game.  Is he prepared to learn to be a banger?  It seems well within his capabilities, even if it feels unnatural.  If so, it may be a blessing in disguise.  The way Murray has built his game, on speed and court coverage, is doomed to long-term failure unless he has an amazing physio like Federer who can keep his body in high gear even as he ages to 30.  A power game will allow him to play with the big boys, and his versatility should still keep many opponents guessing.

Andy Roddick. Hard to say what Roddick can do.  He’s built a very steady game.  He’s learning to volley at 28.  But he lacks the “wow” factor that leaves opponents breathless when they see him it.  He has a nearly blue collar approach to the game, hitting good steady shots backed up by a big serve.  Good enough to beat anyone outside the top 10, but not impressive enough to beat those in the top 5.

Nikolay Davydenko. A long-time member of the top 10, Davydenko improved his serve, made his volley more reliable, and continues to take balls off the rise and hit big shots to the corner.  If the Aussie Open didn’t leave him rattled, he still seems like a good bet to play well throughout the year.

Marin Cilic. Probably not ready to challenge Federer yet.  His game isn’t as big as del Potro’s but for a big guy he moves silky smooth.   Can he play a few more big matches or does he still need more time to mature?

With question marks surrounding nearly all of Federer’s opponents, Federer goes into 2010 looking pretty good.  However, we’ll see how he’s really doing as the year goes along.   Federer’s big push will be to win the French again, because if he does that, he’s going to make a push to win a Slam.  But the French is still a long way away.