Nadal wins 7th Barcelona title with close win over Ferrer

Four times David Ferrer has made the Barcelona finals and four times he’s met Rafael Nadal.  Nadal is to Ferrer as Federer is to Roddick except occasionally you get glimpses that maybe Ferrer could break through.  In all respects except possibly heart, Ferrer comes up second best against Nadal.  His serve is comparable, but with Nadal’s spin, perhaps Nadal’s serve is more effective.  Nadal hits harder off the ground, when he wants to, and can open up big angles.

But Ferrer plugs away.  He knows he’s steady, that he can move the ball around, and chase a lot of balls down, and that he has just enough power that he can occasionally bother Nadal especially if Nadal isn’t at the top of his game.

Ferrer’s normal straetgy is to play moderately aggressive against Nadal, which is roughly the strategy he plays against everyone.  Ferrer even started off well with an early break in the first set, but relinquished that break almost immediately when he sprayed several errors in a row.  He played solid tennis and had chances to break Nadal to take the first set, but Nadal weathered the storm to hold.  The first set went to a tiebreak, but Ferrer played poorly in the tiebreak to lose 7-1 in the tiebreak.

Things didn’t look much better in the second set when Ferrer got broken to start off the set, but he eventually broke back not once but twice and tried to serve out the set at 5-4.  This didn’t go Ferrer’s way as Nadal broke, then held, and broke again, to take the second set, 7-5.

Final score: 76(1), 75

Ferrer can look at himself as the second best Spaniard to perhaps the best clay court player ever, but he’s oh-so-close to making a breakthrough, but it’s tough against the king of clay.

Nadal and Ferrer to meet in Barcelona finals

If Monte Carlo is Nadal’s most successful tournament, then Barcelona has to be number 2.  Nadal recently won his 8th consecutive title at Monte Carlo.  He might be going for the same feat now had he not, in 2010, skipped the event, presumably to save his fragile knees.  But, for whatever reason, Nadal changed his mind last year and returned back to Barcelona.

Barcelona generally attracts mostly Spanish players and lower tier players.  Obviously, Nada’s presence and his success shows he’s the number 1 Spanish player in Spain.  Last year, he played the number 2 player in David Ferrer.  Turns out he’ll do the same this year.

But let’s rewind back,  Andy Murray, who has admitted clay is his weakest surface, decided to play Barcelona this year.  Murray lost to Berdych in Monte Carlo showing he’s still vulnerable to big hitting clay courters.  Murray lost to Berdych back in 2010 when Berdych made a run to the semis of the French.

Murray normally skips Barcelona.  This is the first time he’s played in some time.  Murray was thumped by Raonic’s big serve.  For his part, Murray kept the match close but lost 64 in the first.  It looked like he might lose by the same score in the second when he broke back at 54 down and forced a tiebreak, only to see the aggressive Raonic take the tiebreak.

They talk about the top 4 in Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray, although some argue it’s top 3, then Murray, then Ferrer.  It’s true that Tsonga is up there too, but his inconsistency means that you can sometimes knockout the Ali-lookalike.  Ferrer is a more solid number 5 who rarely loses to those below him, and that’s pretty solid.   Ferrer once again showed that he can beat the big boys, taking down Raonic in two tiebreaks.

Nadal who had to pull out of the Miami semis with knee issues, has shown that everything is back to normal on clay.  He played Fernando Verdasco in the semis.  Verdasco won this title back in 2010 when Nadal skipped the tourney.  Verdasco had a great 2009, but has been rather disappointing for the last two years.  His head doesn’t seem to keep in matches and he has a tendency to melt down despite a huge forehand.

So this leaves Nadal playing Ferrer, who he has a great record against.  No one expects Ferrer to beat Nadal, at least, not on clay.  Ferrer is likely to say that he’ll do what he can, but hard to beat the best player on clay.  Raonic might have produced an interesting final, but Ferrer is still too tough for these big hitters.

Nadal is likely to win a 7th title over Ferrer because Ferrer lacks big weapons.  He’s solid enough to pressure, and that’s why he does better than, say, Lleyton Hewitt (and Ferrer’s body holds up a lot better than the venerable Aussie), but not solid enough to hit winners from wherever that would make him dangerous enough to be a top 4 player.

Nadal crushes Djokovic, 6-3, 6-1, to win eighth consecutive Monte Carlo title

It was close for a few games, then not so much.  In their past matches, Djokovic has often stayed toe to toe with Nadal off the ground.  Today, not so much.  Nadal had chances in nearly every one of Djokovic’s serve to break.  Djokovic didn’t seem able to keep up in long rallies.  He went for bigger shots, but routinely missed them.  Meanwhile, Rafa played pretty good defense making Djokovic hitting many shots.

So the losing streak to Djokovic ends, but Nadal’s record at Monte Carlo is intact.

I think Djokovic will have a bit of soul-searching to do.  Certainly, he’s had a tough week emotionally, and he’ll take some time off to visit family, but he’ll have to work on getting his rhythm back.  The one positive?  It’s not Monte Carlo that Djokovic wants to win.

Surprisingly, this is Rafa’s first title since he won last year’s French Open.  Djokovic’s stranglehold in 2011 meant Nadal could never quite get to the finish line.

Nadal to face Djokovic in Monte Carlo finals

Rafael Nadal is the acknowledged king of clay.  If tennis was clay. Nadal would be the greatest of all time.  He puts more spin on the ball than any other player.  He’s quick, tenacious, and patient: three skills that are invaluable on clay.  He’s lost on clay fewer than 20 times, and most of it, at the start of his career.  When you think of other kings of clay, Borg, Vilas, and Wilander, well, they don’t match up with Nadal.

Nadal is nowhere more comfortable than at Monte Carlo where is 7-time defending champ.  Nadal was worried about whether he could play.  He dropped out of the Miami semis against Andy Murray, but maybe he wanted to preserve his chance to win the Monte Carlo title for an eighth time.

He would have had a similar streak in Barcelona had he not, two years ago, opted not to play Barcelona.  Nadal normally plays four clay court events ahead of the French: Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Madrid, and Rome.  Of course, over the years, Madrid had been replaced by Hamburg as the Masters 1000 event.

But he now faces his greatest challenge: Novak Djokovic.  Djokovic had been dealing with a personal issue of his own: his grandfather’s death.  But Djokovic is the number one player in the world.  Last year, Djokovic had a win streak from the start of the year.  He won Indian Wells.  He won Miami.  Both titles over Nadal.  They say the proof is in the pudding, so the proof, for Nole, was beating Rafa on clay.

Last year, Djokovic skipped Monte Carlo and opted to start his clay season on home soil: at Belgrade.  He won that event, and would meet Nadal in successive finals at Madrid and Rome and did something he, and few others, have ever done: beat Nadal on clay.  And that was when you knew his streak was meaningful.  Novak would, alas, be unable to win the clay title that meant the most: the French Open, when GOAT, Roger Federer, knocked him out of the semis at Roland Garros.

Djokovic also has a streak.  He’s beaten Rafa 7 times in a row.  The last time was in Melbourne where Rafa had a break up in the fifth set, but immediately surrendered the break, then lost another serve to lose to Nole once again, in the longest finals of Australian Open history.

So now, we ask, can Rafa beat Nole?  I’m inclined to pick Djokovic.  A win streak is a win streak.  Even if Djokovic isn’t 100% due to a recent loss, he would have lost already if that was bothering him.  Djokovic is, at the very least, going to try to honor the memory of his grandfather by winning.  Nadal is trying to get into a positive frame of mind.  He wants to believe the pressure is all on Djokovic, that he has nothing to lose.  But he does have something to lose.  As 7 time defending champ, a loss would mean that his claim to the mantle of king of clay might be loosening.  That would be tough for him, especially leading to Roland Garros.

Andy Murray, once again, had struggles on clay.  He lost to Tomas Berdych who beat him at Roland Garros as well back in 2010 en route to a semifinal finish.  Roger Federer opted to skip Monte Carlo as he often does.

So with Nadal’s straight set victory over Gilles Simon and Djokovic’s 3-set victory over Tomas Berdych, we’re to the final everyone expected.  And we’ll see whether Nadal can muster the toughness to beat the world number one.

Miami: Djokovic edges Murray 6-1, 7-6

In the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode, “Peak Performance”, Data is asked to compete against against Sirma Kolrami, an expert at the game of Strategema.  When he loses, Data questions if he is flawed and this bothers him for the entire episode.  Eventually, he schedules a re-match.  In it, he “beats” Kolrami by playing for a stalemate.  Rather than attempt to win, he tries for a draw.

In a sense, this is how Djokovic is playing these days.  Djokovic has become a wall.  He runs down so many shots and places them in positions where the other player can’t easily attack that they are left gambling, trying to hit hard, and hoping not to miss too often.  John Isner managed to beat Djokovic mostly by serving huge and taking big risks off the ground.  Neither is a strong suit for Andy Murray.  Murray serves big, but he doesn’t do it frequently enough.  Murray can hit big groundstrokes, but it’s not the way he prefers to win.

He has sometimes played very well and hit big.  The most notable match was when he beat Nadal last year in Tokyo.  However, if Murray is not feeling it, he has to play more conservatively.  Murray already prefers not to aim too close to the lines unless he’s hitting crosscourt.  If he has to play too conservatively, then he runs the risk of losing because his opponent can take advantage.

Meanwhile, Djokovic has learned to be a practice wall.  He’s patient enough to outwait his opponent.  In case he plays a guy like Nadal, he’s willing to pull the trigger after about the 15th shot.

The stats will tell you that Murray lost because he made too many unforced errors.  And this is true.  That is exactly how he lost.  He didn’t have time to hit big shots nor the confidence to do it.  But he was playing a lot of shots.  Those unforced errors didn’t come 10 shots into the rally, but 20 shots.  Ideally, Murray would like to end the points sooner.

What helped Djokovic win was his ability to hold serve more easily than Murray.  Djokovic had plenty of chances to break.  In the first, he broke plenty.  However, Murray managed to hold serve more often in the second set, and didn’t get broken, but it was quite a task, and he had few opportunities to break.  All things considered, Djokovic was in control of the second set.  However, given they kept it even, Murray just needed one good game to force the third set.

The match went into tiebreak and Djokovic got too far ahead for Murray to catch up.

While Murray didn’t win, he did better than the last two years, where he lost in the opening round of Miami.  The positive news is this will add to his point total while Djokovic was “merely” defending his points from winning the title last year.

Now, we head to clay and will pretty much stay in Europe for 3-4 months.  Clay runs until early-mid June, then grass at Wimbledon and Olympics.

Meanwhile, much like Data, Djokovic can say he “busted him up” to his finals opponent.

Miami (3R): Roddick upsets Federer 7-6, 1-6, 6-4

There was a brief period, sometime around 2003, when Andy Roddick must have felt he was escaping from Pete Sampras’s long shadow, that he would be the American heir apparent, the next in a long line of American tennis players that had dominated world tennis since the early 1990s.

Little would he know that this was a brief respite in the coming storm of Roger Federer, then Rafael Nadal, and Novak Djokovic.  Federer, however, was a contemporary of Roddick, someone close to his age.  As Federer stacked up the Slams, sometimes at the expense of Roddick, Roddick began to realize that he was not going to be the world’s greatest player.  He would have to scale back his expectations.  It had to be touch, in 23 meetings to have only eked out 2 wins.  Federer had Roddick’s number and Roddick knew it.  He tried things.  Serve and volley.  Hit hard.  Hit soft.  Each thing he tried was deflected by the mighty Federer.

He had his best chance at a Slam in 2009 when he, improbably upset Lleyton Hewitt and Andy Roddick, and met Federer in the finals.  Roddick was expected to roll over easily, but somehow, Federer didn’t see Roddick’s serve that day.  Roddick held and held and held.  Like the previous year, Federer feasted on tiebreaks because he couldn’t break Roddick’s serve.  Then, deep in the fifth set, Roddick’s serve wavered and that break, that solitary break, was enough for Federer to claim yet another Slam.

At that time, Roddick had tempered his game.  He played steady ball.  He wasn’t ready to take big swipes at the ball for fear of missing.  He was reluctant to hit down the line, and this made his shots predictable.  But with his big serve and his steadiness, he generally beat players ranked lower than him at the expense of beating players ranked above him.

Today was a different Roddick, one that was finally tired of losing, one that was tired of playing passively.  Roddick would take a close set in a tiebreak.  The second set easily went to Federer.  Roddick, however, broke early, and clung onto this one break.  Federer, for his part, seemed to struggle to stay with Andy off the ground.  It’s rare that Andy keeps up with Federer, mostly because he used to play so passively.  He’s clearly spent time learning to hit harder again, being more aggressive, hitting shots up the line.

Federer had been the hottest player on tour, aside from Djokovic’s win in the Australian Open.  He’s won three titles this year (Dubai, Indian Wells, and Rotterdam), one fewer title than he won all of last year.

Up next for Roddick is the winner of Monfils and Monaco.

Earlier in the day, defending champ, Novak Djokovic beat Viktor Troicki, 63 64.

Indian Wells (SF): Federer dominates Nadal in straight set win to reach final against Isner

The score says 63 64.  This would show a comfortable win over a difficult opponent.  It looks like one break a set, but it was actually four breaks, two in the first, two in the second, with Rafa getting one break back in each set.

The match was delayed a few hours because of rain that occurred just after the upset of Djokovic by Isner.  The two semis were supposed to be shown back-to-back with the hope that both could be covered in prime time on ABC in the United States.  It’s too bad the old major broadcast networks still control when matches are aired especially when they care less about tennis than the sports-centered stations like ESPN or Tennis Channel.

The match appeared to boil down to serve.  Federer was able to win as many first serves as second serves, both in the mid 60%.  Nadal won less on both first and second serve.  Federer was able to attack the net effectively as well.  Federer didn’t appear to slice the ball very much, and was moving well enough to his right to keep in rallies.  Nadal’s big shot is to hit to the Federer forehand.  With Federer cheating to his backhand so often (so he can hit more forehands), he leaves that side open.

This is a bit surprising.  Nadal took some time off to get his head straight, and while he started the tournament well, when it came to crunch time, Nadal has not looked much better than before.  He struggled a bit to get past Nalbandian.  Give credit to Nalbandian–he played well, but Nadal’s desire to be more aggressive is coming at a price: making more unforced errors.  Give credit to a player like Isner who hits big and makes just few enough unforced errors to make his game dangerous.

These days, Nadal is finding himself in longer rallies and not winning the lion’s share.  One wonders how he’s faring mentally.

I favored Nadal heading into the match because I felt it was a similar scenario to Australia.  Federer came into the semis playing good tennis, perhaps as good as anyone in the field, and yet he couldn’t get past Nadal.  To be fair, Federer has looked awfully sharp since Australia, especially in his first encounter against del Potro in Dubai and against Murray.  Federer talked about getting back to number 1, and he’s starting to look like his game may come together to make a threat.

To be sure, it’s a long road ahead.  First, as much as Nadal might have wanted to win Indian Wells, he focuses on the Slams.  Once he gets on clay, that’s when his season really begins.  Still, with Nadal’s showing some doubts, will that make him vulnerable when the clay season starts.  Nadal has been the most dominant clay courter ever.  He loses maybe twice a year on clay, if that.  Reality says that only a handful of players really have a chance to bother Nadal.  If Nadal is vulnerable to Djokovic and Federer, he’s not vulnerable to Almagro or Bellucci.

In any case, this is a huge victory for Federer.  He hasn’t beaten Nadal on an outdoor court since 2005, and that was their second meeting ever back in Miami.  Since then, Nadal has beaten Federer at the Australian Open in 2009 and 2012, in Dubai in 2006, and in Miami last year.  Federer has done a lot better indoors where the lack of conditions works to his favor.

The final is an improbable one.  Federer has already played a big server in Raonic earlier on, and he faces another in Isner.  He’ll probably be slightly favored despite Isner beating Federer on clay.  At least on hard courts, Federer can hit with more pace and the ball sits up less, though Indian Wells sits up more than most.

If Federer wins, he’ll be within 1000 points of Nadal.  Djokovic would lose about 600 points and is still about 3000 points ahead of Nadal.  Djokovic will only come back to the field if he fails to win some Slams and comes back.  Right now, as defending champ of 3 of 4 Slams, he has a hefty lead.

2012 could shape up to be an interesting year for men’s tennis.

Indian Wells (SF): Isner upsets Djokovic in three set thriller

Not going to say too much here, but that when you have a big serve and can hit big off the ground, you give yourself a chance.  Isner has improved his ability to run down shots.  One difference between Isner and Querrey is Isner’s fight.  He can hit big when he needs to.

Djokovic wasn’t playing too bad, but he did play nervous tennis.  Apparently, a few double faults caused enough of a difference at Djokovic in the first set.  Djokovic broke in the second set and held on.  The third stayed even until late when Isner had a break chance to win the match, but Djokovic held on.  However, Isner got an early mini-break and served huge to serve out the match.

Final score: 76 46 76

Up next, Roger Federer face Rafael Nadal in the other semifinals.

Isner should move into the top ten with this win (he is currently ranked 11).  Djokovic will have no pressure to create an undefeated season with his second loss of the year.  His goal will be to play up to the majors.

Indian Wells (QF): Nadal wins thriller over Nalbandian to set up semifinal meeting against Federer

Rewind the clock back to 2001, in the fourth round of Wimbledon, and you may recall a match between Pete Sampras and Roger Federer.  By today’s standards, it was a strange match.  Both men served and volleyed extensively.  Pete did so because his body couldn’t take the pounding of playing at the baseline for any length of time, and with a serve as big as his, it made sense to end points at the net.  Federer learned to play tennis during the era of Pete Sampras.  He has no idea that serve and volley was in decline.  When a player ranked in the 30s can pass you with ease, you know serve and volley isn’t viable.

Federer would often say that he went to net against some opponents because he was afraid of their ground game.  In particular, Lleyton Hewitt and David Nalbandian.  Federer worked hard to improve his ground game so he could compete against these two and beat them from the backcourt.  This change lead to a string of Slam victories that is currently unequaled.   Wimbledon, as it turn out, would be the site of those two players duking it out in the finals of the 2002 Wimbledon final.

Since about the mid 2000s, neither player has played all that well, mostly due to injuries.  Hewitt reached the Wimbledon quarterfinals in 2009, and that was his best Slam result, but since then, he’s been on-and-off injured since then.

Nalbandian has been in the same boat as well.  Of the players of Federer’s generation, he’s considered the best to never have won a Slam, and injuries as well as an older style of play has been to blame.  Nalbandian hits a bit harder than Hewitt, but Hewitt has had a bit better success the last few years.  Nalbandian had a decent run back in 2010 when he helped Argentina upset Russia in Davis Cup without del Potro’s help (del Potro was injured most of that year).  He went on to win the Legg Mason Tennis Classic in Washington DC.

No one expected, when Nalbandian played Nadal, that he would have a chance to win.  The last time they met was last year’s US Open which Rafa won in straight sets, though two sets were close.  Rafa had been playing the best of the top four in Indian Wells.  Even so, Nalbandian did upset Tsonga, so he was playing decent tennis.

Nalbandian took the first set, 64, and he was looking pretty solid in the second set.  Nadal was hitting his fair share of errors, while Nalbandian was hitting shots deep, and moving the ball around well.  Nalbandian is often credited with the best backhand in the game.  Certainly, this was true five or so years ago, and it was in full evidence today.

Late in the second set, Nalbandian was close to breaking and winning in straight sets, but Nadal held firm, broke and took the second set, 75.  You have to give credit to Nadal for fighting.  Nalbandian was starting to make errors he hadn’t.

Nadal opened the third set with a break while Nalbandian seemed unable to bother Nadal and threatened to lose a second serve which he eventually did.  Down 52, it looked over for Nalbandian, but Nadal made a few errors and gave a break back.  This seemed to rejuvenate Nalbandian who held serve.  Nalbandian then had chances to break Nadal again, but Nadal hung tough.  Nadal hit a drop shot that Nalbandian appeared to chase down but it had bounced twice, and the match was over.

Nadal wins 46, 75, 64.

Federer’s quarterfinal was against the resurgent Juan Martin del Potro who spent 2011 trying to get into the top ten and reached a rank off 11.  Since 2012 started, del Potro has made it into the top ten ranked 9 and very close to becoming 8.

Federer started off a little shaky with del Potro threatening to break.  At one point, Federer had apparently missed a first serve, but it was called in.  del Potro challenged, but Hawkeye failed to work and the call stood.  del Potro seemed to be peeved for the next few games and was broken immediately.  Although he settled down, Federer was able to move the ball around as he normally does.  Federer has spent the last few years trying to be more aggressive, coming to net, and he often did so after drop shots because del Potro is a bit slow and stands a fair bit back.

The match ended being much more lopsided than expected with a 63, 62 win.

So that means Federer will meet Nadal for the first time since the Australian Open.  Since the Australian Open, Federer has won two titles: Rotterdam and Dubai.  Despite this, I’m leaning a bit to Nadal.  Nadal still has the psychological edge.  To Federer’s credit, he is hitting the ball very cleanly.  He did struggle in back-to-back matches beating Raonic and Bellucci, but both might have been beneficial to him, especially Bellucci who is a lefty.  And even knowing that Nadal struggled in his match over Nalbandian, I have to give the edge to Federer unless Nadal recently caught the bug that’s been going around.

The other semifinal is Djokovic vs. Isner.  I gotta say I’m very surprised that Isner might break into the top ten.  He’s already at 11, and one has to wonder if Fish can stay in the top ten.

Indian Wells (4R): del Potro wins a tough one over Istomin to reach QF against Federer

The last three matches of the day were all pretty tough.  Gilles Simon kept even in the first set, but ran away with the first set tiebreak over Ryan Harrison as Harrison got frustrated.  He was up 5-2 in the second set, but Harrison won a series of games and took the second set.  Because Simon tends to grind out points very long, he was testing Harrison’s fitness.  Simon got several breaks and closed it out 76 57 61.

Federer was up next and had a tough time with Bellucci.  He also needed 3 sets, 36 63 64.  del Potro had the closest match, though the third set wasn’t so close in his win over Denis Istomin: 76 67 62

del Potro vs Federer will the star quarterfinal match.  There’s also Djokovic-Almagro, Nadal-Nalbandian, and Simon-Isner.  Isner beat Simon in last year’s US Open.