Although the year is not yet over, I’m ready to pick my best match of the year.

I always hate when tennis pundits pick their best match of the year.  Invariably, they pick a Slam, because they figure if it’s some obscure event in Doha, none of the tennis public will know what they are talking about.  Best to pick a match that a reasonable number of folks have seen and can feel happy they saw.

The obvious choice, in that category, is the Isner-Mahut match.  Although this was a historic match, in many ways, it was plain awful.  The fact of the matter is, despite a junior Wimbledon title, Mahut should not be in the same league as Isner.  Mahut’s ranking typically hovers in triple digits.  Almost no other top 30 player would have had any trouble dispatching Mahut.  Sure, Mahut was serving wonderfully, but by the end, Isner was not moving well.

This was a perfect storm match.  Few people can touch Isner’s serve, and Mahut certainly wasn’t one of them.  If Isner has one quality that makes him better than his buddy, Sam Querrey, it’s his mental toughness.  Isner pulls through tough matches better than Querrey.  One reason is a better serve, but the other is just toughness.  Querrey, if he had Isner’s toughness (meaning, hitting the big shots at the big moments), should be ranked higher simply because he’s a much better mover than Isner.   But Isner hides this deficiency better than anyone his height which basically means, better than the now MIA, Ivo Karlovic.

Because Isner was not chasing balls down and had a hard time reading Mahut’s serve, Isner was doing an awful job in return games.  So, both players were basically not trying that hard on return games.  Mahut, because he couldn’t, and Isner because he was too tired and chose to focus only on holding his serve.

So, as far as quality, that match is awful.  As far as history, it’s amazing.

Other than that, it’s hard to recall the great matches of the year.  Murray had a few good wins over Federer.  Federer had a straight set win over Murray in Australia.  As far as good matches go, 2009 was better.

If I had to pick a match from 2009, I’d probably pick the marathon match between Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal in the Madrid semifinals.  Djokovic had battled Nadal all summer long trying to beat him, and getting closer, but not able to get over the hump.  As much as Djokovic gets criticized for his failings at Slams, the man is as versatile as it comes playing on all surfaces.  He’s a top-notch clay courter (unlike Murray) and a top-notch hard courter.  This is why Djokovic’s ranking has generally been better than Murray.  Djokovic is a formidable clay courter.

And in this match, where Djokovic fought tooth and nail to stay even with Nadal, and even reached match point (twice, if I recall), Nadal did what he does best.  He hits the biggest shots at the toughest moments, going for a winner to save match point.  The match was so wearying for both players, that both suffered immensely afterwards.

Nadal lost a close match to Federer in the finals, the first time Federer had beaten Nadal on clay in some number of years.  Nadal then lost in a surprise match to Robin Soderling, at that point, a complete unknown to the tennis public.  Soderling gained so much confidence from that match that he’s been flirting with number 4 most of 2010.  Djokovic did worse.  He lost in the third round to Philipp Kohlschreiber, in a tournament that he had reached the semis two years in a row.

Other matches of note.  Well, there was the Federer-Roddick match.  For my money, not a great match.  It became a serving contest, and mostly Roddick trying to keep his head together in the closest match he’s had against Federer in years.  Roddick lacks the talent of Federer and in recent years has opted to play steady tennis a la Ferrer, but without Ferrer’s speed (but with Roddick’s serve).  This works well against most players outside the top 10, but he struggles against the best players, and occasionally, other Americans, like Fish, Querrey, and Isner.

In term of high quality shot making besides serve, this match didn’t have it.  Tension?  Sure.  Federer was gunning for yet another Wimbledon, and Roddick was wondering if he’d ever reach another Slam final let alone win it.  Roddick, to his credit, is far more cerebral about wins and losses than most Americans would be.  It may be “loser talk” to say reaching a final is great, or losing to the greatest player is OK, but Roddick is at peace with that.  In that respect, despite his competitiveness, he’s come to grips that tennis isn’t a team sport with some coach trying to push your buttons hoping that, despite a lack of talent, you can still pull a miracle and beat the best.

For my money, the best match of the year is.

Well, it is Doha.

Nikolay Davydenko has had a long career and reached a career-high of number 3.  He never had a huge serve, but with his Agassi like skill of playing close to the baseline, he gives many players fits.  He had never reached a Slam final.  His best chance appeared to be the French Open 2009 when Soderling took out Nadal.  Too bad that Davydenko actually had a losing record against the unorthodox Soderling who hits where the directionals tell him not to.

After the US Open in 2009, a year where injury took him off the tour until about halfway through the clay season, Davydenko began to hit his stride including beating both Djokovic and Nadal.  He ended the year on a huge high, beating Federer, Nadal, and del Potro to win the ATP World Tour Finals.  If he had won over Djokovic, he would have had one of the most amazing performances ever.

His hot form continued at the start of 2010 in Doha where he beat Federer in the semifinals of Doha.  Federer said it’s tough to beat a guy who gets every first serve in, as apparently Davydenko did in the opening set.

Meanwhile, due to the humiliation of losing to, well, everyone at the ATP World Tour Finals round robin, Nadal went back to the drawing board with Uncle Toni at the end of 2009.  The goal was to make Nadal more aggressive so he could end matches quicker and reduce the pounding on his knees.  Nadal had been trained to loathe unforced errors.  He would often spin a ball up the center of the court, even though he was clearly capable of whipping winners to every corner of the court.  These shots would only get exposed when, trapped like a wild animal, Nadal would unleash a furious shot because he had no choice.  This ability made Nadal a formidable opponent.  Opposing players knew the key to beating Nadal was taking the game to Nadal, but Nadal can be tough when pressured.

So, despite not having won a tournament since Rome, Nadal came into Doha feeling pretty good and reached the finals.

There, he began with an unbeatable start.  He took a 6-0 first set.  Davydenko could barely catch his breath.  His first goal was to just win a game, and so he began playing lots of shots up the middle, trying to get his rhythm.  He kept the second set even, and even had a break lead, only to lose it, and be forced into a tiebreak.  Davydenko had to fight off match points in the tiebreak, and eventually won this.

But Nadal came back strong in the second set.  He broke early in the third set, and again, it looked like Nadal would take his first title.  But Davydenko not only got the break back, he broke a second time.  Nadal was still playing outstanding tennis, but this is one of the rare matches where both players were just hitting insanely well.  There are few times that Nadal loses where he is playing well, but this is one of those matches.

Watch the clip and see just how well both players were playing in the weeks leading up to the 2010 Australian Open.  It’s somewhat sad that Davydenko broke his wrist and has spent the rest of 2010 trying to find his form.  Meanwhile, Nadal had the best year he’s ever had.