Posts Tagged ‘Roger Federer’

U.S. Open 2011: Top Men Contenders

Posted: August 24, 2011 by rjsays in Tennis, U. S. Open
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
1

Rajat Jain
Head of Tennis, The CouchExpert
24 August 2011

 

The U.S. Open series is over, and there is a lot to look forward to in a week from now as the final grand slam of the year begins in New York. The two masters before the Open are usually supposed to give us a fair idea of who are the players to look up to during the Open. Unfortunately, Canada masters is usually the first tournament after a month long layoff (for the top players) and hence are looking to shake off the rust. In Cincinnati, the conditions are extremely hot and humid, and hence the players are cautious to not over exert themselves ahead of the Open. The quality of tennis does take a hit, as was evident by the lackluster performance of all the top-4 this year. So who are the top contenders for the trophy two weeks from now?

Djokovic and Murray are among the top contenders for the Open

Novak Djokovic(1): The sub-optimal form of the Serb was still sufficient to make him end up as the best player of the two masters. Even though he sustained a shoulder injury in the final, it is the mental fatigue that would worry him. He looked disinterested during both tournaments, and this was after he had a month long break post-Wimbledon. How much would that be a factor going into the Open? And what about the shoulder injury? It would have been serious enough to make him pull off a match for the first time since Jan 2009. More importantly, will it effect the confidence on his serve which has become such a potent weapon this year?

Rafael Nadal (2): The five losses to Djokovic has made a huge dent in Nadal’s confidence this year. It is not that he lost early in both tournaments, because he has not done well here historically. It is the way he played in these tournaments–a third set tie-breaker against Dodig after having a break lead twice during the third set, and the error-prone three hour slog against Verdasco. In addition, he faced problems with his foot during Wimbledon, burned fingers here, and some more blisters in the feet. The physical issues, while genuine, will definitely impact him even more. Despite all this, he still managed to reach the semis in 2009, his worst year. I would expect at least a repeat of that if not more.

Roger Federer (3): Federer loves playing in New York … period. And if anything, his form in these masters is not indicative of his performance at the Open. He won Cincinnati in the last two years and failed to make the finish line at Open, while he lost in the first round in 2008 and yet saved his year by beating Murray in the finals. The difference being, during 2008 his losses were brushed off as one-off, while now they are becoming a pattern, like with Berdych and Tsonga. This definitley eases the pressure on the rest of the tour and makes them more confident.

Andy Murray (4): Murray last reached the final here in 2008. He has improved a lot in these three years. The problem for him is that his peers have improved even more. These are his peak years as a player, and with each passing major, the pressure on him to win that elusive one increases exponentially. Historically, he has not played well here in the last two seasons going down to big hitters not afraid to compromise on their shots, but one has to agree this is his best chance to win a major given the possible mental burnout of Djokovic, phsyical problems of Nadal and the natural decline of Federer.

Mardy Fish (6): There is no doubt that Fish is the best American player at present, and he deserves it. His new found all court game is exciting to watch and so is his eagerness to improve. Even with all this, he is miles away from the top-4 as the best game of Fish was still unable to beat a 50 percent Djokovic at Montreal, while he lost yet again to Murray at Cincinnati. Even though the win against Nadal was progressive, even he knows the Nadal he might face at New York will be vastly improved from Cincinnati. More than winning the title, his first step should be to make his maiden semifinal appearance, and given the recent form, he is definitely in contention for the same.

Juan Martin del Potro (19): Given his giant leap in the rankings in the first five months, the summer hard court series was supposed to be a bonanza for this gentle giant from Tandil. However, uncharacteristic losses to Cilic and Gulbis, and the retirement at Cincinnati does not bode well for him going to the Open. If not, it would be a huge disappointment given how the tour desperately needs somebody to step it up and challenge the top-4.

Other players to watch out: Bernard Tomic who showed some real promise during Wimbledon, Jo Wilfried Tsonga who is showing renewed enthusiasm on court, Grigor Dimitrov and the local boy Ryan Harrison.

Cincinnati Masters: Monfils Sparkles Against Djokovic … But Not For Long

Posted: August 20, 2011 by rjsays in Tennis
Tags: , , ,
0

Rajat jain

Head of Tennis, The CouchExpert

20 August 2011

 

“Not a shot from the back of the court that he doesn’t have.” Patrick McEnroe said this about Novak Djokovic just-like-that today, but I suddenly realized how much truth it carried. The lack of any weakness from the back of court, in addition to his incredible defense and supreme movement, makes it virtually impossible for any player, including Federer and Nadal, to trade ground strokes with Novak.

Djokovic came from a set down to beat Monfils in a thrilling contest

Of course, it took a while for the world No. 1 to get into that mode where he becomes impossible to play. Partly because he was down mentally—he just seemed uninterested to compete for the first half of the match—and partly because Monfils knew only a vintage Pete Sampras can compete against Djokovic. Monfils tried to take out the baseline out of the equation as early in any rally as possible. He followed almost all his first serves to the net, tried chipping and charging even when he was a standing duck to Djokovic’s passes, and hit flat, clean, winners from the baseline.

Vintage Monfils. The Monfils we know can come out some times. The Monfils we wish will come out every time.

His quality of the volleys would have even made Sampras, if not Edberg, proud and combined with Djokovic’s lack of mental focus, it seemed it would be the first time since Montreal Masters, 2009, when Federer, Nadal and Djokovic would lose on the same day.

However, this was another one of those matches in which Djokovic reaped the advantages of being …. Novak Djokovic. The world No. 1. Out of nowhere, and I don’t know why, Monfils started trading groundies with the Djoker—the very thing he had avoided till then. He waited for Djokovic’s errors—which didn’t come—and traded two brutal rallies, both exceeding thirty shots. After the second one, he lost his breath, just like it happened to Tsonga and Fish in Montreal, and looked completely out of the match after that. It also gave the necessary impetus to Djokovic to get back his mental focus.

After winning the second of those brutal rallies, he faced the crowd, open chested, with both arms flexed forward and roared loudly. The lion had woken up again, and just came out of his den. And the wolf was panting heavily, waiting to be preyed by the king of the jungle. Djokovic played it easy after that, slowly killing and enjoying the prey, rather than finishing it off in a hurry.

This match further proved his credentials as the top player and why I feel he is going to stay here for some time. Throughout this tournament, I felt Djokovic lacked the physical and mental energy to play at his inhuman level. And it is understandable given how hard he has played, and won, so far. However, it just took him two points to get back his focus. Once the match ended, he let out another roar towards his camp, and sprinted towards the net to complete the formalities. And this is what champions do. This is what they are known for. Djokovic is back in this tournament, and means business. For him, that means going all the way and winning the tournament.

Montreal Masters: Djokovic’s dominance, Tsonga’s resurgence, Fish’s continual success

Posted: August 15, 2011 by rjsays in Tennis
Tags: , , , , , ,
4

Rajat jain

Head of Tennis, The CouchExpert

15 August 2011

 

Is this how predictable the Men’s field has become these days? Yes. Was there any real contender for Montreal Masters apart from Novak Djokovic? No. Nine titles, two majors, five masters and a solitary loss against 51 wins, only 18 sets lost against 122 won; these are numbers that even Roger Federer was not able to conjure up in his glory days of ’05 and ’06.

Novak Djokovic defeated Mardy Fish to win his fifth straight Masters title of the year

Novak Djokovic defeated Mardy Fish to win his fifth straight Masters title of the year

Djokovic is playing like a much improved version of Andre Agassi. The same punisher’s attitude, moving his opponents from side to side and wearing them out. Of course, with a much better first serve, and supremely better movement. In his semis and final against Tsonga and Fish respectively, at a point when the matches were even (4-4 in the first set in the semis, and the opening game of the third set), Djokovic launched his famous assault. He played, and won, a brutal 27 shot rally against Tsonga, and a 33 shot rally Fish. Both players couldn’t continue at the same high level thereafter. The only weakness—if it is indeed a weakness—in Djokovic’s game currently, is that he has managed to lose at least one set in each of his nine titles this year.

Djokovic’s victory was the only predictable event that happened in Montreal. Rafael Nadal bowed out in his opening round, so did Andy Murray. Federer himself could only win a single match before bowing out spectacularly to Tsonga in a match that provided a lot of moments for the highlights. These losses further strengthened the fact that the outrageous consistency at the top is good for the game. If some opponent is to beat these top guys, they have to play out of their skin for three hours—and that means great tennis on offer.

Jo Wilfried Tsonga—the underachiever—has been on a different level after the grass court season started, and he looked in ominous touch in this tournament too. Perhaps breaking up with his coach has given him the license to play tennis in the way he wants to play: good, first strike, aggressive tennis with lots of athleticism and flair. Federer may be the artist, Nadal may be relentless, and Djokovic may be the punisher, but it’s hard to find anybody who pleases and works up the crowd more than Tsonga.

If the Frenchman is slowly starting to live up to his enormous potential—he will be back in the top ten from Monday, Mardy Fish is continuing to surprise us with his success, and making further claims that he deserves to be American’s top baller and a top ten player. If his consistency and fitness shot him into the top-ten last year, it is his intelligent mix of aggression and patience that was paramount to his run here at Montreal. It is not merely that he is serving and volleying every now and then, or approaching the net at the first opportunity that has been enjoyable to watch. It is the fact that he is starting to think like a pure serve and volleyer.

Throughout the tournament, he has shown great variety on serves. An ace down the T is followed by a kick serve off wide, or by a medium paced serve on the body. His opponent is constantly kept honest, which invariable has led to weak replies. Even his volleys are reminiscent of the serve-volley players of the 90s as he constantly throws down punch volleys deep into the mid court to rob his opponent any chance of angles—even for Djokovic. At one point, he had to throw three straight punch volleys at Djokovic, but lack of an angle resulted in a weak reply from Djokovic eventually, as Fish punched it for a winner. Fish has made three straight finals now, and is definitely one of the contenders for the semifinal spot at Arthur Ashe three weeks from now.

Amidst all these success stories, it will be easy to forget the failures of Rafa and Andy. Is this the start of the decline of Nadal, or is this is psychological effect of losing five straight finals to Djokovic? I remember the Rafa of 2008 or 2010 always had the edge once the match went the distance. Yet, Rafa has already lost two matches this year in a third-set tie-breaker. More worrying for him, though, is he is easily relinquishing a lead. Against Dodig, he was up a break twice in the third set and lost 7-6. Against Federer in the final of the French, he was up 4-2 in the third set only to lose five games in a row. Same against Djokovic in the second set of Madrid finals. Whether these patterns continue to affect him in future is something that I will watch with interest.

On to Cincy now.

Australian Open 2011: Rafa Slam, Too Much Too Soon

Posted: January 26, 2011 by rjsays in Australian Open 2011, Tennis
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
1

Rajat jain

Head of Tennis, CouchExpert

26 January 2011

 

When a player as great as Rafael Nadal or Roger Federer loses a Grand Slam match, the event goes beyond being just the matter of a player winning and a player losing. It delves deeper than anyone can imagine. After all, there must be a reason why Rafa lost today in Melbourne, or why Roger lost in Wimbledon last year. These two have a winning percentage of more than 80% and probably much more in a Grand Slam, hence the occurrence of a loss is rare.

 

With this, the winner is almost overshadowed in the process (unless it is the other one of them, of course). As a Rafa fan, it was painful to see Australian Open’s update on facebook with all the depressed looking pictures of Rafa. Just like it would have been for Roger fans at the end of Wimbledon, when this picture was flashed ad infinitum on the several pages of media.

Right since he won the U.S. Open, it was rare that any conversation involving Nadal would not include the term “Rafa Slam.” It is another matter, that this feat has not been achieved in Men’s tennis for over 40 years now. The hype is not without substance—Rafa was clearly the best player in the world till now, and has tasted success before. But then, I see things going too far in trying to compare “Rafa Slam” with Rod Laver’s Career Grand Slam. I saw tonnes of articles on the same, and an entire fan base was busy arguing which one is a greater accomplishment.

And then, the small matter of people considering a possibility of Rafa winning six consecutive slams—French Open is his’ for the taking, and probably Wimbledon too.

Everything, today, makes no sense. What we only know is the winner of this tournament alone will have a possibility to run for a calendar Slam, and that would be too remote.

When Rafa publicly told that winning all four Slams consecutively is next to impossible, and that he is not the favorite going in to the tournament, he had a point. He knows his body is fragile, he was battling with a flu before the tournament began, and he is more prone to being upset on a hard court than Federer. Yet, we pondered all over the news as to who will have the upper hand should they meet in the final—Federer or Nadal. The same happened in the U.S. Open during the semis, and the same happened this time (although, to be frank, Ferrer d. Nadal sounds a lot like Federer d. Nadal).

I believe the reason we saw Rafa sobbing during a changeover was not because he unable to finish the ‘Rafa Slam.’ It was probably because for the second time in a row, his journey at Melbourne was being cut short due to factors outside his control. And a part of it, obviously, was because of the hype surrounding this remote possibility. As much as Rafa downplays these records, greatness, and any kind of statistics, all this talk would have gotten into his head, surely.

And yet, the media has nothing to lose. The title “Rafa Slam?” has been conveniently replaced by “Rafa Slammed!” An already big story turned into an ever bigger one. Media is a necessary evil in everything regarding any profession. And it is a small price to pay for such professionals who earn big bucks, anyway. Or is it?

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Swiss War

Posted: January 25, 2011 by rjsays in Australian Open 2011, Tennis
Tags: , , , , ,
1

Rajat jain

Head of Tennis, CouchExpert

25 January 2011

 

The Swiss War between Roger Federer and Stanislas Wawrinka has never attracted anybody’s attention until today. And for good reason. Wawrinka is considered Federer’s whipping baby just like the herd of Spaniards are for Rafael Nadal. The scoreline, 6-1 in favor of Federer, is ample proof, considering that even the solitary victory for Wawrinka came on clay, and at a time when Federer was most vulnerable.

Today was different, however. Perhaps this was the only time—past or future—that Stan-the-man was considered to challenge Federer; many were touting him to finally topple Federer given Federer’s inconsistent form in the first week, and Stan’s hair raising performance against Andy Roddick. Stan has never been more motivated, more energized and more deadly on court, and he had the added advantage of Peter Lungdren—Federer’s former coach—on his side to help him with the specifics. An upset would have been a perfect story for the little Swiss who has played his entire career under the shadow of the Great Swiss.

There were a couple of caveats, though.

First, Federer usually ups his performance in the second week of the major, especially after the quarters.  Second, Wawrinka was coming after an emotional high after his match against Roddick. Even though Roddick is never in the elite group, he is always one of the biggest scalps for a lesser player. After all, he is a Grand Slam champion, and a former world No. 1—his career is much greater than five of the players (even Novak Djokovic has never attained the world No. 1 ranking) above his ranking. Wawrinka was in the zone against him, he was riding a high wave of confidence, which ended with an emotional high after the match.

A letdown was on the cards. The adrenaline rush was missing today, the yells of “Allez” were absent, and as Steve Tignor wrote, his greatest show of emotion was a broken racquet. And of course, Federer is not the same player as Roddick.

Wawrinka cashed in hugely by nullifying Roddick’s serve with a chipped forehand. While that neutralized the rally against Roddick, it quickly gave the more aggressive Federer and upper hand. While Stan dominated the rallies against Roddick, Federer was always in position to give it back. And when Stan’s down the line backhands were going for clean winners on Sunday, they were meekly dispatched by Federer waiting at the net. Wawrinka simply ran out of answers against the in-form Federer and the high flying Swiss back on the ground.

Of course, Federer has too much respect and concern for his countrymen, and partner-in-crime en  route to his Olympic doubles medal, hence there was no visible sign of emotion or celebration once the match completed. Wawrinka was stunned, but Federer gave comfort in the exit.

As for the others, there is no room for comfort. Federer is back in full form, starting the match with a blitz, cooling down in the middle—without any brain wobbles, though—and ending with a flourish. He is back to the top of the favorite’s list for the Australian Open—again.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Older Entries
Newer Entries