ATP Backspin by Todd Spiker

Australian Open Final: 5:53 to History

2012-01-29T16:13:00.003-05:00

Maybe Robert Downey Jr. should play Novak Djokovic in the movie. They could call it "Iron Man Does Melbourne."

For all world #1 Djokovic had accomplished over the past eighteen months -- the 43-match winning streak, Davis Cup title, 9-1 record against Rafael Nadal & Roger Federer and three slam titles -- he didn't have one of THOSE. You know, the sort of epic match that marks a player's career forever, standing as a testament to his abilities and heart. Against Nadal in the singles final of the 100th Australian Open, the Serb, with a whole lot of help from Rafa, more than took care of that.

Coming into the match with one less day to rest after his semifinal match -- a 4:50 marathon against Andy Murray -- than Nadal had to recover from his own four-set win over Federer, AO defending champion Djokovic seemed to be set up to have his back placed firmly against the wall from the outset. But as the two met in an Open era record third straight slam final, the fact that Djokovic compiled a 6-0 (all in finals) record against Rafa in '11, and sported a 9-2 mark against him since the summer of '09, lingered. The opportunity seemed to be there for Nadal, in the 30th meeting between the two, to finally turn the tide of the sport's current top rivalry back in his favor. If he couldn't do it under these circumstances, it seemed, then when would he?

In the early-going, Djokovic didn't seem quite himself, either. His game was spotty and, after winning the opening game of the match, he saw Nadal take four of the next five. Djokovic, his game slowly improving, got his lost break back, but Nadal swept the final three games to take the 1st set. Nadal's 133-1 record in slam matches after winning the opening set stood as another bit of history to contend with.

But Djokovic's ability to outhit and outmanuever Nadal soon proved too much. The Serb grabbed the next two sets 6-4 and 6-2, as no matter how well Rafa played, it didn't seem as if it would be enough to make a dent in Djokovic's ever better game. In the 4th set, as Djokovic went up 4-3, 40/love on Nadal's serve, the match seemed to be on the verge of ending. Only Nadal surged back and turned the match into one for the ages. After holding serve for 4-4, the coming rains caused a short delay as the roof on Rod Laver Arena had to be closed and the court dried. With the match suddenly moving inside for an air-conditioned and less humid atmosphere, the balls began to bounce just a bit higher than before, giving a reinvigorated Rafael an edge as the Aussie crowd spurred him on, wanting to see a five-set final. The set went to a tie-break, and Djokovic again seemed on the way to victory, leading 5-3 and having one serve remaining on his turn in the rotation. But Nadal got the mini-break, preventing Djokovic from reaching match point, then held his own two serves. One point from forcing a 5th, Nadal got another mini-break to take the tie-break at 7-5.

In the deciding set of the first 5th set the two have ever played against each other, Nadal's momentum continued as he took a 4-2, 30/15 lead against the seemingly tiring Serb. At that point, Rafa ran toward the net to reach a short ball and fired a backhand down the line into the open half of the court... and missed. Rather than have two game points for a 5-2 lead, it was 30/30 and Djokovic had been given the gift of life. He didn't turn it down. In fact, one point later it was apparent that his groundstrokes had suddenly regained their previous sting. The Serb's new life would prove deadly for the Spaniard, who was broken to get the set back on serve at 4-3. From there, Djokovic did what he did so often in '11, upping his game in a match's latter stages and taking home the victory. After three consecutive holds by the two, Djokovic got another break to go up 6-5. Serving for the match, he missed an overhead as he tried to quickly slip it into the open court past a charging-from-the-opposite-doubles-alley Nadal. But the momentum would not be turned again. Djokovic held, winning 5-7/6-4/6-2/6-7/7-5 to defend his AO title, collapsing onto his back when it was finally over.

Afterward, the Serbian "Iron Man" ripped off her shirt and howled toward the crowd, transforming from one superhero into another -- "The Incredible Hulk," only without the green body paint (though, I guess there's always one of his post-slam celebratory parties for that later). In the unending (2am was quickly approaching in Melbourne) post-match ceremony, as both players leaned against the net for support, looking as if they were ready to collapse (some kind soul finally gave them chairs and bottles of water), master of ceremonies Sandy Roberts called Djokovic a "man of steel." Keeping in line with the theme, I suppose Superman works just as well, also. But, of course, if Djokovic's performance is akin to a caped superhero, what should be said of Nadal's?

The fact is, Nadal literally willed this match into what it ultimately became, the longest (5:53) slam final in Open era history, as well as the latest (1:37am) to finish. It never really should have gone beyond four sets, and seemed fated to be seen as simply the latest example of Djokovic's mastery over the former #1. In the end, Djokovic DID win his fifth career slam, but the final will now go down as one of those matches where both players, in the eyes of the public, won on some level... even if the reality of the result will cut deeply for Nadal, who must now fully realize how Federer felt when he triumphed over his Swiss rival in "The Greatest Match Ever Played" at Wimbledon in 2008. While the Spaniard has managed to string together four consecutive appearances in slam finals, the current storyline on the ATP Tour revolves around the fact that he's now 0-3 in the last three against Djokovic.

Welcome to the new world where the Serbian former "prince" is threatening to become an all-time king. He'll head to Paris with a chance to make due on his one undelivered '11 promise and win at Roland Garros. It'd complete a Career Slam, string together a non-calender year "NoDjokoSlam" (hey, I keep tryin') and maybe make a TRUE season Grand Slam a possibility.

A month ago, it seemed pretty obvious that Djokovic could never top his ridiculously great '11 season with something even better in '12. I mean, HOW COULD HE? But, umm, well, maybe we should hold off on that sort of talk, huh?

**WON THREE CONSECUTIVE SLAMS**
1969 - Rod Laver, AUS (4 con.)
1993-94 - Pete Sampras, USA
2005-06 - Roger Federer, SUI
2006-07 - Roger Federer, SUI
2010 - Rafael Nadal, ESP
2011-12 - NOVAK DJOKOVIC, SRB

**CAREER SLAM FINALS - ACTIVE**
23...Roger Federer (16-7)
15...RAFAEL NADAL (10-5)
7...NOVAK DJOKOVIC (5-2)
5...Andy Roddick (1-4)
4...Lleyton Hewitt (2-2)
3...Juan Carlos Ferrero (1-2)
3...Andy Murray (0-3)
2...Robin Soderling (0-2)

**DJOKOVIC vs. NADAL IN SLAM FINALS**
2010 US Open - Nadal 6-4/5-7/6-4/6-2
2011 Wmbledon - Djokovic 6-4/6-1/1-6/6-3
2011 US Open - Djokovic 6-2/6-4/6-7/6-1
2012 Australian Open - Djokovic 5-7/6-4/6-2/6-7/7-5

**AO MEN'S TITLES*
[Open era]
4...Andre Agassi
4...Roger Federer
3...NOVAK DJOKOVIC
3...Mats Wilander
2...Boris Becker
2..Jim Courier
2...Stefan Edberg
2...Johan Kriek
2...Ivan Lendl
2...John Newcombe
2...Pete Sampras
2...Guillermo Vilas
[all-time]
6...Roy Emerson
4...Andre Agassi
4...Jack Crawford
4...Roger Federer
4...Ken Rosewall
4...Pat Wood
3...NOVAK DJOKOVIC
3...Rod Laver
3...Adrian Quist
3...Mats Wilander

All for now.

U.S. Open Final: The Perfect Man for the Job

2011-09-13T16:59:00.002-04:00

For four years, from 2007-10, Novak Djokovic finished the year as the #3-ranked player in the world. The would-be prince of men's tennis was the "third man" in a two-man game, looking in on an exceedingly exclusive club from a vantage point that was close, yet so far away, wondering if the game's kings would ever deign to allow him to sit at their table.

But those days are gone. Now, the Serb is the one calling the shots and the deposed former rulers of the sport can only gaze upon HIM from afar, muttering to themselves that "he can't possibly be this good for much longer." Yep, the shoe is now most definitely on the other foot... err, feet.

Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal didn't know the sort of monster they were unwittingly helping to create.

They say necessity is the motherhood of invention, and the height of The Great Wall built between Federer/Nadal and the rest of the men's field over most of the past decade surely called for no stone to go unturned if anyone was truly serious about scaling the monstrous edifice. Andy Murray didn't have the equipment to mount the offensive, while Andy Roddick's best days were behind him, making any concerted effort on his part impossible. Juan Martin del Potro reached the top of The Wall, only to tumble back down its side and be forced to begin his climb once again from Point A. For years, no man seemed up to the challenge. But, as it's turned out, the person closest to the barrier -- Djokovic -- was the perfect man for the job.

A man with a childhood shaped and uprooted by war, whose discovery of and love for a sport changed both his and his family's life, was hardly the sort to give up after seeing his climbing efforts thwarted time and time again. Over the course of 2011, the work that Djokovic has put in to improve each and every aspect of his game, both on court and off, has become more and more apparent. His forehand is bigger, and his serve more stable (no more routinely having more double-faults than aces for him). A great defensive player blessed with supreme quickness during his career, he's improved his stamina (and overall confidence) by improving his fitness via his (now almost humorously "cliched") gluten-free diet, allowing him to go into a potentially long match knowing that he needn't change his approach in order to play quicker points so he'll be physically up to finishing in the end. As a result, he can do battle with the likes of a grinding Nadal in a series of pounding, 25-shot rallies and get the best of the Spaniard as many -- or more -- times as his opponent gets the best of him. Already blessed with a remarkable return of service, this season he's found ways to break down opponents' serves in a way that have allowed him to put forth his most stunning stuff in the most crucial moments of matches (see vs. Federer's serve, down 2 MP in the Open SF). With few exceptions, Djokovic has been at his best when the points have meant the most.

Physically, Djokovic doesn't appear to be an overwhelmingly imposing figure. But with the improvement in literally every area of his game all coming together at the same time, the sum of Djokovic's parts have come to equal something pretty awesome. So much so that even Nadal can't fully believe that the Serb is going to be able to defend his newly-won kingdom as well or for as long as he and Federer did. Maybe Rafa's subtle questions about Djokovic's staying power at #1 will prove to be prescient. But, in the final of this year's U.S. Open, the future was NOW, as Djokovic's many skills culminated in a magnificent match that only served to prove that the Serb is the best tennis player on the planet.

The match wasn't "the greatest match ever played." Rafa had won that one a few years ago. It wasn't even a five-setter. But Djokovic/Nadal was one of the best-played slam finals you'll ever see. On a point-by-point basis, no inch was given. Everything had to be taken. One potential shift in momentum in the action was almost always immediately met by a turn back in the other direction. Even big leads (mostly by Djokovic) were built upon the labor of a series of sustained, bludgeoning groundstroke-filled, defensively-astounding rallies that lasted 20-30 strokes that could have gone in the favorable stat column of either player... until one finally outlasted the other. Personally, I don't think I've ever seen a big match that had more of those sorts of rallies than this one. During CBS's coverage of the final, Mary Carillo joked that the action was, "Just one big salute to physical fitness."

Most of those rallies were ultimately won by Djokovic, as he beat Nadal at his own game, one which got Rafa to #1 in the world and with which he won ten slam titles. A year ago, Nadal, who had focused his entire summer on winning the Open (even talking about his ultimate goal minutes after winning Wimbledon) was a serving machine in Flushing Meadows. His serve was broken just three times the entire tournament en route to the title. In this tournament, Nadal wasn't nearly the unstoppable force he was a year ago, but he improved in every match. In Monday's final, though, Djokovic broke his serve three times... in the 1st set. In the match, he managed to break the Spaniard eleven times. Yet, still, Nadal was legitimately fighting with a belief that he could defend his title into the 4th set.

In the first two sets, Nadal jumped to early 2-0 leads. But, both times, Djokovic immediately broke back one game after Rafa had managed to break HIS serve. In the 1st, the Serb won six games in a row to take the set. In the 2nd, on his sixth break point attempt, he broke Nadal in an eight-deuce, 17:15 game filled with the long, punishing, high-quality rallies that marked the match. Djokovic led the set 4-2, and very nearly 5-2, before Nadal stopped the momentum to hold for 4-3, then break for 4-4. But, again, Djokovic broke back immediately, then served out the stanza at 6-4 for a two-set to none lead.

In the 3rd set, Djokovic grabbed a quick break for a 2-1 lead, only to see Nadal break him to get back on serve one game later. But, again, for the fourth straight time, Djokovic got the break back immediately to get back on top at 3-2. The momentum shifts weren't over, though. After the Serb began Game #6 with a double-fault and fell down love/40 while seeming to be having issues with his back, Nadal broke again to knot the score at 3-3, then finally broke the break-back string by holding for 4-3. With Djokovic serving again, Nadal held another break point, but Djokovic held in a game highlighted by his claiming of a 31-point rally in which Nadal dragged him from side-to-side in the backcourt, only to see the Serb scramble to get every ball back, then punctuate his efforts by smacking a winner down the line. After the point, as he'd done when his huge crosscourt forehand return winner had saved the first of two match points against Federer in the semifinals, Djokovic turned to the crowd with open arms, pleading for a little appreciation for the effort. Once again, he got it. When he served wide, inducing a Nadal forehand error, he officially got the game, too, to knot things at 4-4. Two games later, Nadal smacked his racket with his fist after missing on a wide forehand that would have given him two break points. Djokovic held for 5-5, and the set eventually went to a tie-break. Nadal, as he'd done in the first two games in the previous sets, won the first two points to take a 2-0 lead in the TB. This time, he held on, winning 7-3 and seeming to have turned the match momentum in his favor.

During the changeover, Djokovic had a trainer briefly look at his back, then went out and held serve to start the 4th. He then immediately went to his chair for a medical timeout 3:40 into the match. After a full session while stretched out on his stomach on the court, with the trainer working on his back after the Serb had downed a few pain pills, Djokovic returned to the court and quickly got into another long tussle with Nadal. Was the timing of the medical timeout a bit of gamesmanship, coming just when he'd taken a slight advantage in the set after having lost the momentum of the match in the previous one? At the very least, it forced Nadal to wait to serve, slowed him down and quieted the hopped-up crowd hoping for a five-setter. In the first game after the timeout, Djokovic broke Nadal on his fifth break chance in the game to go up 2-0. He then held for 3-0. It was a lead that Nadal couldn't come back from. Djokovic broke him at love for a 5-1 lead, then closed out the match with a forehand winner one game later. Final score: Djokovic 6-2/6-4/6-7/6-1, in a hearty 4:10, as he claimed his third slam of 2011.

This time, though, Djokovic didn't have to "dance for his supper." In fact, he didn't need to dance at all. Clad in a cap emblazoned with FDNY, one day after the 10th anniversary of 9/11, and dressed in red, white and blue (sure, those are Serbia's colors, as well as the U.S.'s, but the symbolism surely wasn't lost on either him or the crowd), he was finally able to bask in the champion's spotlight in New York City just a few years after he'd first "broken through" the consciousness of American sporting fans with his on-court impressions of the game's greats, and then felt a bit of the crowd's ire when he'd dared to return (slightly) cross words from afar with the top American player at the time, Roddick. In 2011, though, more secure in his position both in and outside the game, Djokovic proved to be a natural at being the center of attention for all the right and pure reasons.

Thus, Djokovic's astounding season continues. At 64-2, he's still in line for the "best" (winning percentage-wise) season in ATP history. He's 9-1 combined against Federer and Nadal, including a undefeated 6-0 mark against Nadal in finals contested on all surfaces. Ah, what the dominance of the two "former Kings" has wrought. Even as the #3 player at the end of '10, the Serb needed to improve at least a bit in every area in order to move past BOTH Nadal and Federer. Against all odds, he's managed to do just that. As we've seen on the hard courts this season, Djokovic's road to the top is becoming more and more physically wearing. And the season is still months from being over. Because of his success in 2011, come 2012, it'll likely be even more difficult for him to maintain such an edge on the field.

Once again after a slam final on Monday, Nadal sent a not-entirely-veiled message to Djokovic about the future, and how tough it'll be for him to live up to what he's done this season. After losing the Wimbledon final to the Serb, the Spaniard admitted that Djokovic was the best player in the world, but threw in the "at the moment" phrase at the tail end of the praise. After the Open, he noted how Djokovic's near-perfect season would likely be "impossible to repeat." Both, technically, were true statements, and maybe Nadal wasn't trying to get into Djokovic's head as he's admitted that Djokovic has sort of gotten into his. But after years of watching Federer's subtle messages about the true hierarchy in the men's game, one can't help think that Nadal has learned something from his friendly rival when it comes to maintaining his own aura, while warning everyone about getting ahead of themselves about another player's ability to be dominant over the long-term, even after a loss (or six) against said player.

While the last nine months haven't allowed Djokovic, in historical terms, to race past the two men who've been involved in the "Greatest of All Time" discussion the last few years, in 2011, the sum of HIS parts equal up to the sum of BOTH their's. Combined. Maybe in a few months, he'll go down as the best there's ever been in a single year. But even if that doesn't happen, it won't matter.

Djokovic is the best there IS. Today. And, right now, that's all that really matters.

...this slam is the seventh straight won by either Djokovic or Nadal, the second-longest such two-headed streak in ATP history. The longest? Eleven in a row... perpetrated by Nadal and Roger Federer from 2005-07.

Combined, the Djokovic/Nadal/Federer trio has now won 26 of the last 27 slam titles. At 64-2 for the season, Djokovic is currently sporting a season win percentage of .9697, slightly ahead of the men's all-time best mark of .9647 by John McEnroe (82-3) in 1984.

**WON THREE SLAMS IN A SEASON**
1933 - Jack Crawford
1934 - Fred Perry
1955 - Tony Trabert
1956 - Lew Hoad
1958 - Ashley Cooper
1964 - Roy Emerson
1974 - Jimmy Connors
1988 - Mats Wilander
2004 - Roger Federer
2006 - Roger Federer
2007 - Roger Federer
2010 - Rafael Nadal
2011 - Novak Djokovic

**CAREER COMBINED SLAM TITLES - active**
18...Bob Bryan
16...Roger Federer
14...Leander Paes
13...Mike Bryan
11...Mahesh Bhupathi
10...Rafael Nadal
8...Max Mirnyi
8...Daniel Nestor
7...Nenad Zimonjic
4...NOVAK DJOKOVIC

**MEN'S SLAM FINALS - ACTIVE**
23...Roger Federer (16-7)
14...RAFAEL NADAL (10-4)
6...NOVAK DJOKOVIC (4-2)
5...Andy Roddick (1-4)

**MOST ATP FINAL MATCH-UPS**
20 - Ivan Lendl vs. John McEnroe
19 - Roger Federer .vs Rafael Nadal
16 - Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
16 - Boris Becker vs. Stefan Edberg
15 - Jimmy Connors vs. John McEnroe
13 - Boris Becker vs. Ivan Lendl
12 - Bjorn Borg vs. Jimmy Connors
--
11 - Novak Djokovic & Rafael Nadal

**MOST ATP SLAM FINAL MATCH-UPS**
8 - Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal
5 - Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
5 - Ivan Lendl vs. Mats Wilander
4 - Bjorn Borg vs. Jimmy Connors
4 - Bjorn Borg vs. John McEnroe
4 - Roger Federer vs. Andy Roddick
--
3 - Novak Djokovic vs. Rafael Nadal

**CONSECUTIVE SLAMS WON BY TWO MEN**
11 - Roger Federer (8) & Rafael Nadal (3), 2005-07
7 - Rafael Nadal (4) & Novak Djokovic (3), 2010-11
6 - Pete Sampras (4) & Sergi Bruguera (2), 1993-94
5 - Jimmy Connors (3) & Bjorn Borg (2), 1974-75

All for now.

Wimbledon Final: The Sweet Taste of Success

2011-07-03T20:53:00.005-04:00

The 2011 version of Wimbledon turned out to be all about players managing to live out their dreams. On Saturday, it was 21-year old Czech Petra Kvitova becoming the Ladies champion and a first-time slam winner. On Sunday, it was all about Serbia's Novak Djokovic.

Two days after advancing to his first SW19 final to assure himself of becoming the twenty-fifth man to reach #1 in the ATP singles rankings, the 24-year old still had some unfinished business to take care. Sure, he stepped onto Centre Court to play the Gentleman's final while sporting the best record in tennis (47-1), more titles (7) than anyone, and a ridiculously brilliant season mark (9-1) against his fellow members of the Top 4 players in the world. But he still had something more to prove. That one loss on his '11 ledger came in the semis in Paris against Roger Federer, a loss which prevented him from tying John McEnroe's record 42-match season-opening winning streak and, more importantly, face off with Rafael Nadal in the Roland Garros final. Djokovic came into today's Wimbledon final with a 4-0 record against the Spaniard in finals this year but, coupled with the loss to Federer, his 0-5 record against Nadal in slams continued to leave an impression that maybe the Serb STILL wasn't quite ready to be declared "the best in the world." Not if he couldn't get the job done in best-of-five battles decided by stamina and grit on the game's grandest stages. While ten-time slam champ Nadal was fated to fall to #2 in the rankings on Monday no matter the outcome of the final, the fact remained that if he won his twenty-first straight Wimbledon match to defend his title he would be able to say he'd claimed five of the last six slams... and it what universe would THAT not make HIM the world's best?

Djokovic wanted his first Wimbledon title to erase those lingering doubts. And he wanted it badly.

Plus, he'd been dreaming about this moment since he was 4. And, numbers aside, in the end, that was the most important thing. Tennis has changed his and his family's life, and the memory of watching his first tournament as a child -- naturally, it took place on the lawns of the All-England Club -- will forever hold a special place in Djokovic's heart. It was the seed that was planted that made him start down the road to what he's become. It's been a hard journey, and all the work is making the success he's experiencing now all the more delicious.

Right from the start today, Djokovic was ready. In Game #1, he defied Nadal's 15/30 lead to hold, and the pair spent the rest of the set routinely locking away their service games. Through nine games, neither had faced a break point. But with Nadal serving down 5-4, with a better than 90% 1st Serve percentage (and he was winning around 80% of those serves), the Spaniard suddenly found himself down set point when Djokovic got the first break point chance of the match. When Nadal sent a forehand wide, Djokovic had managed to jump in and strike with rattler-like quickness, seizing the set at 6-4. As the Serb punched the air and shouted toward his family in the stands, Nadal must have realized what Federer has so often felt when the Spaniard has done similar things to the former Swiss #1 in recent slam finals.

Of course, Djokovic has been doing this sort of thing for more than seven months. Ask Jo-Wilfried Tsonga about the 1st set of this Wimbledon's semifinal, or Andy Murray about that deciding set in the Rome semi. Aside from that match against Federer in Paris, no player has been as mentally tough in 2011 as Djokovic has been each and every time he's stepped onto the court since he bolstered his fitness with a gluten-free diet and his confidence while leading Serbia to it's first Davis Cup title last December, which served as a prelude to his Australian Open crown in January. He carried that confidence in the 2nd set against Nadal, using his tremendous foot speed to get to the Spaniard's drop shot, he hit behind Nadal at the net to garner a break for a 2-0 lead. Racing through the stanza without facing a break point, while converting both of his own on Nadal's serve, he won 6-1 in thirty-three minutes.

A letdown came in the 3rd, though. In the second game, Djokovic had his first double-fault, and soon Nadal held his first break point of the match. A Djokovic error put him behind 2-0, and he was never able to climb out of the hole in what remained of the set. As the pressure seemed to be getting to the Serb, the Spaniard was suddenly invigorated. Djokovic double-faulted on break point to fall behind 5-1, and lost the set 6-1.

But just as Kvitova had risen to the occasion in the most important section of the women's final against Maria Sharapova, Djokovic did so here. He broke Nadal to go up 2-0. After Nadal got the break back in the next game, courtesy of a chip return that dribbled over the net cord, Djokovic seized upon the next big opportunity given to him five games later. Down 3-4, Nadal hit his first double-fault of the match on the first point. Two points later, Djokovic had triple break point. He broke the defending champion at the end of a long rally to take a 5-3 lead and get the chance to serve for the championship. Two points from the match, Djokovic served-and-volleyed his way to a match point. After Nadal's backhand sailed long, Djokovic dropped his racket and immediately collapsed onto his back with a 6-4/6-1/1-6/6-3 victory.

On his way back to his chair, Djokovic paused to pick a few blades of grass from the Centre Court turf, then stuffed them into his mouth and chewed. Whether such an item fits into his new diet is questionable... but I'm betting his nutritionist won't get on him too much about it. After twenty years of effort, it must have tasted like icing on the cake.

Or maybe it just tasted like sweet success.

While they CAN put a roof on Centre Court, they apparently STILL can't get a microphone (or two) that works for a post-match interview, as the BBC's Sue Barker had a difficult time finding a working instrument that would relay the new Wimbledon champion's words to both the people watching on television AND the fans in the stands. But it didn't really matter... Djokovic, after a "couple of good days in the office," shows that just about anything is possible. Even managing to rise above not one, but two, players in the Greatest of All Time" debate.

But if Nadal and Federer are THAT, what is Djokovic? The "Trivalry" between the trio has developed an odd dynamic: Nadal dominates Federer, who manages to trip up Djokovic, who has now come to dominate Nadal this season. It's that last part of the equation that truly puts what the Serb has been doing into tremendous focus, though. So far in '11, against the player generally acknowledged as the best in the world just a few months ago, he's 2-0 on hard court, 2-0 on clay and now 1-0 on grass. After today's match, Nadal made a comment about Djokovic being the best player "at the moment." I don't think he was attempting to send any sort of veiled message, but just the notion that he might have been sets up the next obstacle that the Serb has to hurdle: that his domination can extend over the course of an entire season.

After Djokovic is through celebrating long and heartily with his Serbian cohorts, it'll be time to get back to serious business. Essentially, he's half-way to putting together the best, non-Grand Slam winning, season in men's tennis history. He's got two slams in hand, and he was already arguably the best hard court player in the world even before this year. Winning the Open in September would take his reputation to an even higher level. With eight titles, he's half-way to matching Guillermo Vilas' '77 mark of sixteen. With a 27-match hard court winning streak dating back to last season, he's nearly half-way to Federer's 2005-06 record of 56 in a row, as well. At 48-1 for the season, he's currently on pace to better McEnroe's modern day record for best winning percentage over the course on an ATP season (.965 in his 82-3 1984 campaign). All of that is still quite a ways away, but Djokovic has done nothing this year to make anyone think he CAN'T pull off at least a few, if not all, of those accomplishments. And just that it can even be a topic of debate proves that the Serb has managed to lift himself into the rarified air that was formerly only breathed by a two-man contingent.

No longer categorized as the "Third Man," Djokovic is now the ATP's LEADING man... and his "career role" might still be in his future.

=NOTES=
Meanwhile, if you managed to come back around to hear the very end of NBC's six-hour Wimbledon telecast today -- and I can't imagine many did -- then you have heard Ted Robinson drop the (not exactly bombshell, but still eyebrow-raising) news that the network's 43-year association with the tournament has now officially come to an end. If it hasn't happened already, an announcement seems to be forthcoming that ESPN has bought the rights for the ENTIRE tournament, including the singles finals. Unless live coverage is moved or simulcast on ABC (where some taped weekend action looks to be slated to air), it means starting next year the Wimbledon finals won't be on over-the-air TV for the first time since the 1960s. Of course, ESPN is so pervasion, and has swiped away so many other big-time sporting events, it really doesn't seem like the milestone change that it probably SHOULD be.

Of course, I've sort of been hoping that the Comcast purchase of NBC might lead to this moment (I haven't heard anything about the network's Roland Garros coverage, which has always been the worse of the two, treated like an ugly duckling for as long as I can remember). With the contract with the tournament up, I wondered whether Comcast migth cut its losses and move on, considering the sport's TV numbers aren't what they used to be. But, with Comcast's plan to pump up sports channel Versus, it seems as if the entire situation actually spurred competing cable/network sports entities -- ESPN and Fox -- to make a big run at Wimbledon, largely in order to prevent the soon-to-be-renamed Versus from becoming an even bigger player in sports television acquisitions than it is already expected to become according to Comcast's master plan. I'm glad Fox didn't get Wimbledon. I think that could have been a disaster. While ESPN has its "issues," it knows how to cover a big event, and make it seem even bigger. Of course, that hasn't always translated when it comes to tennis. But the network's U.S. Open coverage has been generally great, so with more at stake, maybe the sometimes-gaping holes in the Wimbledon coverage will be closed in the near future.

Hey, hope should always spring eternal, right?

The news that this tournament is leaving NBC isn't neary as jarring as when HBO stopped telecasting Wimbledon years ago, but it's surely the end of a very long tradition. "Breakfast at Wimbledon," with the first live coverage of the men's final back in 1979, revolutionized tennis-on-TV in America. Over the decades, NBC's tennis production has become shoddy (out with Bud Collins and in with Jimmy Roberts? Really?) and sometimes insulting (the tape-delayed, time-zone scrambling coverage of the SF in recent years, all designed to prevent a pre-emption of the late, worthless hours of the "Today" show), but I know I'll never forget the "good old days" when NBC helped make the sport what it used to be in the U.S. and, in truth, played a huge part in me becoming a tennis fan in the first place. The network's groundbreaking and always-anticipated (boy, did that change over the years) Wimbledon coverage is why this became my favorite slam, and probably plays a large part in why pretty much all of my "most-favored" players -- from Becker to Novotna to Dokic and, now, even Kvitova -- just so happen to have special links to SW19. As Djokovic said today about himself, Wimbledon tennis was the first tennis that I, too, ever watched.

With the finals now in its grasp, ESPN2 will at least be able to call the shots for North American coverage. Allowing NBC to essentially direct ESPN2's broadcast by "embargoing" matches has done nothing but help erode the sport's potential U.S. fan base in recent years. Hopefully, John McEnroe will make the jump from NBC to ESPN2 next year (he's already on board for U.S. Open duties). As with Mary Carillo, American tennis coverage just isn't quite the same without him in the mix. Now, if the network can just get a few more of its studio highlight show hosts to not act as if they should be patted on the back for actually pronouncing a women's tennis player's name correctly and/or adequately feigning interest in or knowledge of the sport they're talking about, maybe it'll be a "good" beginning for a new era in Wimbledon coverage.

Oh, well. Times change, and this is a long-overdue course correction, at that. But, still. One can't help but have a bit of a heavy heart when something that you associated with your youth is suddenly gone. "Breakfast" might ultimately be better at this time next year, but it'll never be the same, either. There's just something sad about that.

*CAREER SLAM FINALS - ACTIVE*
23...Roger Federer (16-7)
13...RAFAEL NADAL (10-3)
5...NOVAK DJOKOVIC (3-2)
5...Andy Roddick (1-4)
4...Lleyton Hewitt (2-2)

*ATP #1-RANKED PLAYERS - BY WEEKS*
[as of July 4]
286...Pete Sampras
285...Roger Federer *
270...Ivan Lendl
268...Jimmy Connors
170...John McEnroe
109...Bjorn Borg
101...Andre Agassi
101...Rafael Nadal *
80...Lleyton Hewitt
72...Stefan Edberg
58...Jim Courier
43...Gustavo Kuerten
40...Ilie Nastase
20...Mats Wilander
13...Andy Roddick *
12...Boris Becker
9...Marat Safin
8...Juan Carlos Ferrero *
8...John Newcombe
6...Yevgeny Kafelnikov
6...Thomas Muster
6...Marcelo Rios
2...Carlos Moya
1...NOVAK DJOKOVIC *
1...Patrick Rafter
--
* - active

*ATP DOUBLES TITLES*
[Slams, Teams, Open era]
11...BOB BRYAN & MIKE BRYAN, 2003-11
11...Todd Woodbridge & Mark Woodforde, 1992-00
[All-time Slams, Teams, AO-RG-WI-US]
12...John Newcombe & Tony Roche, 1965-76 [4-2-5-1]
11...BOB BRYAN & MIKE BRYAN, 2003-11 [5-1-2-3]
11...Todd Woodbridge & Mark Woodforde, 1992-00 [2-1-6-2]
[Career ATP, individual]
83...Todd Woodbridge
78...John McEnroe
78...Tom Okker
75...MIKE BRYAN
74...Frew McMillan
73...BOB BRYAN
73...Daniel Nestor
[Career ATP, teams]
73...BOB BRYAN & MIKE BRYAN
61...Todd Woodbridge & Mark Woodforde
57...Peter Fleming & John McEnroe
57...Bob Hewitt & Frew McMillan

*ATP CAREER SLAM TITLES - ACTIVE*
[Singles/Doubles-Mixed]
18...BOB BRYAN [0/18]
16...Roger Federer [16/0]
14...Leander Paes [0/14]
13...MIKE BRYAN [0/13]
10...Rafael Nadal [10/0]
8...Max Mirnyi [0/8]
8...Daniel Nestor [0/8]
7...Nenad Zimonjic [0/7]

*CAREER SLAM SINGLES FINALS - MEN*
23...Roger Federer *
19...Ivan Lendl
18...Pete Sampras
17...Rod Laver
16...Bjorn Borg
16...Ken Rosewall
15...Andre Agassi
15...Jimmy Connors
15...Roy Emerson
14...Bill Tilden
13...Rafael Nadal *
--
* - active

All for now.

BACKSPIN TIME CAPSULE: 1989 Wimbledon

2011-06-15T21:22:00.002-04:00

Steffi Graf and Boris Becker are two of the greatest players that Wimbledon has ever known. When the West Germans shared the spotlight as singles champions in 1989, fittingly winning titles on the same day, it seemed as if we were about to enter a period in which their shared dance at the All-England Club's Champion's Ball would become an annual rite of summer.

While we are at times surprised by what happens on the court, it's also true that we can be just as astonished by what somehow manages to NOT happen. Nothing is ever a "sure thing" in tennis (well, other than maybe Esther Vergeer winning every match she plays, of course), so the prospect of the same two players who've known each other all their lives combining to win fourteen matches at the same slam in the same year, over and over again, shouldn't have ever seemed to be an easily repeatable feat. But when over the course of their playing days the two individuals in question combine to win 28 slams in 41 slam final appearances, with both shining their brightest at Wimbledon (going 10-6 in championship matches), as was the case with Graf and Becker, one would assume that they would have HAD to have served as "co-champions" in London on several occasions during their Hall of Fame careers.

Both Graf and Becker would go on to great -- and sometimes ever bigger -- things after Wimbledon '89, but that one fortnight turned out to the most "special" for the two West German tots who hit together on practice courts before either had turned 10 years of age. One year after they'd tried and failed to sweep the Wimbledon singles finals in '88, here's what I said as they made their second attempt:

July 1989 - "Graf and Becker Transform Centre Court Into West Germany-for-a-Day"

On a day that is truly unique in Wimbledon history, the tennis world revolved around not only spacious and grand Centre Court -- which is not in the least unusual -- but also an area in southwestern West Germany. It's something which may become more and more commonplace as the years roll by.

Thanks to that annual rite of the Championships (as the British call them) -- no, not the over-priced strawberries and cream, nor the rain -- both the Gentlemen's and Ladies' singles championships were held on the same day for the first time since 1973, and for only the third time ever. But unlike in '73, when American Billie Jean King and Czech Jan Kodes were crowned king and queen of tennis, the 1989 champions can also be dubbed the unofficial King and Queen of West Germany.

In an uncommon twist of fate, West German compatriots Steffi Graf (for the second consecutive year) and Boris Becker (for the third time in five) both emerged from the All-England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Cub's 103rd championships as well-deserving titlists. It's the first time since 1984 that both champs came from the same country (when the USA's Martina Navratilova and John McEnroe won), but oddity added to the mix is the fact that Graf grew up in Bruhl and Becker in Leimen, which are just six miles apart from each other. In fact, the two hit together often (when Becker was 9 and Graf just 7) because, as Becker said, "the worst boy always had to hit with the best girl."

Some things change, and some remain the same.

In the Ladies' final, Graf met 32-year old, eight-time champion Navratilova for the third straight year. It was the first meeting between the world's top two women players since the '88 Wimbledon final in which Graf defeated Navratilova 5-7/6-1/6-2. Since that historic meeting in which Graf affirmed that she was THE star of the women's game, many changes had occurred. Graf went on to achieve the rare Grand Slam at age 19 in a rather easy and mundane manner as she strengthened her already-tight stranglehold on her sport -- a veil of invicibility that did not waver until Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario's victory over her in last month's French Open final.

As a result of the French Open loss, Graf entered this tournament and final with vengeance and redemption on her mind. Graf's drive to re-establish herself (even though this final appearance was her tenth straight in a slam, and that she had only lost seven times in 206 matches over the last three years). Without the pressure of a possible Double Grand Slam, Graf appeared more relaxed all tournament, as she hadn't dropped a set over the course of the fortnight.

For Navratilova, the pressure of the onslaught of Graf made for a trying past year for the former #1 player. She hasn't won a slam event since the U.S. Open in '87 and has concentrated all year on a rematch with the West German. She may have concentrated TOO much, as she often lost to lesser opponents as her thoughts were focused elsewhere on the 20-year old Graf. Navratilova even skipped the French Open and brought in former Wimbledon champ King as an advisor in an attempt to be keyed for Wimbledon and another shot at breaking her tie with Helen Wills-Moody with eight career titles. For Navratilova, this tournament is now the most important of all and the one that she is dying to win just one more time -- for she knows how special that win would be.

At one point in the match, it looked as if Navratilova actually did have a chance to churn one more title out of her body as she dealt Graf her first lost set of the tournament and tied the match at one set apiece. But that glimmer of hope turned to be just that as, reminiscent of the '88 final, Graf's speed, serve (she missed just four 1st serves in the 3rd set), and rumbling forehand wrestled away the match from the Czechoslovakian-born Texan. The final nails were pounded into the coffin when Navratilova, down 1-3 in the 3rd set, had a break point to get the match back on serve. She had the volley to do the deed on her racket, but pushed the ball past the baseline to blow her final chance to walk away with the championship plate. Graf's ace on match point was a fitting ending to a tournament in which she proved once again why she is the ruling dictator of women's tennis. The final scoreline of 6-2/6-7(1)/6-1 told the story of Graf's sixth grand slam win in seven finals. But the tears that she held back after the match tell the even greater story of a young woman who is only beginning to take her place amongst the greats of the game.

After the match, Navratilova admitted, "I did everything I could, and I got beat. She served me off the court." Comments of that nature would have been shocking to hear from Navratilova as little as three or four years ago when she herself was unstoppable, but they are now becoming commonplace where Graf is concerned. It appears as if Navratilova's time to win her ninth crown is fading fast and, possibly, may already be history. In fact, Graf may get to the immortal number #9 before Navratilova does. Oh, say about... 1996?

** ** ** ** **

After compatriot Graf had taken the Ladies' title, 21-year old Boris Becker took on 23-year old Swede Stefan Edberg, the '88 Wimbledon champ, in a repeat of last year's final as he attempted to turn Centre Court into "West Germany-for-a-day."

Other than the fact that they are the two best grass court players in the world, the two finalists have very little in common. Becker, who lives the high life in Monte Carlo and enjoys his place in the spotlight, stands in stark contrast to Edberg, who lives rather anonymously in London despite being the #3 player in the world and having won the biggest tournament in tennis just one year ago. Becker has had numerous run-ins in the past two years with the Wimlbedon establishment concerning the tournament's strict rules of conduct and seeming "unfairness" to lesser-ranked players; while Edberg would rather move quietly through the tournament (which he has done the past two years) and play his matches without much fanfare -- which is why his disparaging comments after the French Open about women's tennis were quite shocking, especially considering they came from HIS mouth. But don't get me wrong, both handle their completely different lives just the way they want to, and do so quite well, in fact.

In the '88 final, Edberg was a human backboard as every shot that Becker put up was pounded back by an Edberg volley. Just one month ago, Edberg ousted Becker in the semis of the French Open. Thus, one would have expected a fine, competitive final since both men had pretty much had their way with the rest of the men's field the past two weeks (except for a brief period for Becker against Ivan Lendl). No one expected that Becker would show up in tights and a cape with a big "S" on his chest -- or at least it seemed as if he did. Too bad there wasn't a phone booth on Centre Court to give the action a final, fitting touch. Unfortunately for Edberg, Kryptonite was nowhere to be found, either.

In a display of tennis that will go down in memory as astonishing, Becker dominated the 1st set like he never has before on such an occasion. Like maybe no one ever has. He was here, there, and everywhere as Edberg's shots were virtually useless against the West German's barrage of power, touch, and maybe a little bit of magic. Becker bashed Edberg 6-0 in just twenty-two minutes as the men's final at Wimbledon started with a love set for the first time since 1923. The Swede won just ten points in the set and, even more incredibly, only four on his own serve. Becker's mastery showed just how good he CAN be on the grass... and it was a scary display indeed.

Becker's almost surreal Wimbledon mystique (30-3 in his career, 17-1 on Centre Court) appeared once again in the 2nd set with Edberg serving up 6-5 and 40/love as Becker ripped off five straight points -- with the help of three consecutive volley errors by Edberg off three blistering Becker groundstrokes -- to steal the game and the set, as he took the proceeding tie-break 7-1, ending the set by winning twelve of the final thirteen points. But Becker not only stole the set with his magical display, he also stole the momentum and, in effect, put the championship on ice as he won the 3rd set to close out the match 6-0/7-6(1)/6-4. Becker thrust his arm in the air after match point and held his finger up stating that he was "#1" for a few seconds. After shaking Edberg's hand, he threw his racket into the stands with a mighty heave. Becker said that his racked was now "gone with the wind." Sounds like the way that Edberg went in this match.

Edberg was always just a few inches off as he could not regain the expertise that he showed in the semis versus John McEnroe, but if he had played better and still lost to the incredible West German he probably would have been more disheartened. This is the second grand slam final Edberg has lost in the past month, though, and it makes one wonder if those rumors of his "lack of heart" (which finally disappeared after last year's Wimbledon title) will start to pop up again. Just a thought.

Becker now joins rather select company as only the fifth (with Bjorn Borg, Rod Laver, John Newcombe and McEnroe) to win three Wimbledon titles since World War II. But Becker may prove to accomplish the most of the lot as, at 21, he's the youngest to achieve that feat. Just think of it. He's barely of U.S. drinking age and he's already appeared in four Wimbledon finals in five years, and if he hadn't met up with Peter Doohan (in '87) and a broken ankle (in '84) he may have already accomplished seemingly unattainable success. How many times will Becker's name go onto the list of champions at Wimbledon is anybody's guess, but since he appears to be getting better each year the best may be yet to come. But Becker's not infallible on Centre Court. He DID manage to drop the championship cup after the match, after all... even if it did look a little bit like a comedy routine gone awry.

Becker stated after the match that he and Graf may not realize how special and rare it is for both to win here in the same year until they are a grandfather and grandmother, and that it may NEVER happen again. Here's a free tip for you, Mr. Rose... don't bet on that happening. This celebration could become as yearly a rite in England as those over-priced strawberries and cream and, of course, the rain have become.

...those last few lines are precisely why, aside from the occasional Triple Crown race, I'm not a gambler.

Over the course of long careers, even the greats of the sport can leave something "on the table" that the imagination had cooked up early on as a realistic outcome. For Graf, off-court issues with her father Peter, the rise of Monica Seles and, ultimately, late-career injuries (including knee surgery that kept her away for nearly a year) advsersely effected a career that STILL ended up garnering twenty-two slam titles. For Becker, Edberg's natural proficiency on the grass, and then later Pete Sampras', along with possibly a lifestyle that sometimes made tennis a "secondary" vocation in his life, ended up keeping his career slam totals slightly lower than they otherwise could have been. But maybe the biggest "what could have been" for this then-West German pair revolves around their inability to repeat the sweep of the Ladies' and Gentlemen's titles they pulled off in '89, which was the first co-opting of both crowns by players from the same European nation since 1925.

There was every reason to believe it'd happen again. It almost did, too. But while Becker achieved arguably his "greatest" career heights after winning Wimbledon in '89, he never won another SW19 title. As I sort of theorized back then, Graf's final crown DID come in 1996, but her fifth title over the following seven years ended up giving her seven championships for her career (she missed out on her shot for #8 in the '99 final). In all, Graf and Becker were both Wimbledon final participants in all eight matches played from 1988-91. 1989 wasn't the last all-German sweep of the titles, though, as Graf and Michael Stich were "co-champions" two years later. But it wasn't the same. Wimbledon turned out to be a truly special place for both kids from Bruhl and Leimen, though, as at least one of the two appeared in either the men's or women's final for nine straight years from 1985-93, and 11-of-12 and 12-of-15 until they both made their final appearances at the tournament in '99. Both won more major titles in London than they did in any of the other three grand slam cities.

As great a Wimbledon champ as Becker was in his youth -- winning at age 17, 18 and 21 -- he was ultimately passed by in the proceeding years by Pete Sampras, who won seven titles (defeating Becker in the '95 final), and Roger Federer, who has so far claimed six. Eras are demarcated at Wimbledon like at no other slam, and Becker's (one he shared with Edberg, really) is nestled in the tight crevice between that of Borg/McEnroe and the later Sampras/Federer-Nadal periods of domination. Graf never caught Navratilova, who finally broke her tie with Wills-Moody's with win #9 in '90, and bowed out one year before the Williams Sisters began their decade-plus domination of the Wimbledon women's final.

Still, nothing can ever dissolve the remarkle occurrence in '89 when the sport's two most dynamic performers, one with a "ruthless dictator"-like forehand that bludgeoned the women's game into submission and the other with a devil-may-care charismatic style, simultaneously rose to the top of their games within the span of a single fortnight. Rather than the start of something bigger, it turned out to be a simple snapshot of a moment in time. So be it. It was still great.

It's interesting to note, as history ultimately changed how one would view what the two West Germans accomplished that July afternoon, so did other things that happened back home change things far more. As the summer, and later fall, wore on in eastern Europe in '89, a tidal wave of political change -- some violent, some shockingly peaceful -- swept across the continent, leading to the collapse of the Communist governments of Eastern Bloc nations such as Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia and Romania. After months of civil unrest, in November, the East German government finally succumbed and announced that citizens in oppressed East Berlin could visit the free streets of West Berlin.

Almost immediately, citizens on both sides of the Berlin Wall scaled the world's most horrific symbol of the Cold War, without reprisal (and, often, death at the hands of East German security guards) for the first time since its construction had divided the city nearly thirty years earlier. It was a wild, joyful scene as many people danced and literally took sledgehammers to the hated, tangible evidence of Soviet-supported totalitarianism. In October '90, the two Germanys were unified once again for the first time since World War II. The next year, the final act in the overall drama came when the U.S.S.R. itself fell, with Boris Yeltsin rising to power after literally standing tall against the forces of the Kremlin from atop a tank.

On a side note, the political developments likely played a large part in tennis. Without the binding restrictions of the state-run sports institutions, the rise the eastern European tennis player -- especially in women's tennis -- was allowed to advance without the limitations of national boundaries, as players could strike out on their own without needing state approval (and some, with the economic growing pains that resulted from the upheaval, used tennis as their best, and sometimes only, way to lift the fortunes of themselves and their families). It's probably no coincidence that within a generation of the summer '89, the tennis rankings have come to be dominated by many players from eastern Europe hailing from places that weren't even official nations twenty-two years ago, or that the Russian tennis revolution completely changed the landscape of the WTA a little more than a decade after the tennis-loving Yeltsin assumed leadership.

But that's a "time capsule" of another nature altogether, isn't it?

As far as Becker and Graf are concerned, 1989 was right in the middle of their primes. That summer turned out to be Becker's greatest, as he followed up his Wimbledon crown by winning the U.S. Open. Graf, after having lost in the Roland Garros final a month earlier, used her seven-match mastery at Wimbledon as a stepping stole for one of the greatest runs in women's tennis history. After winning those seven matches, she'd win her next 59, as well. The 66-match streak is behind only Navratilova's 74-match run in '84 on the WTA's all-time list. Graf's next loss was to Monica Seles in Berlin... in May of 1990. During the same period, she put together an 82-match hard court winning streak from 1988-90 that is still the best ever. After her "Golden Slam" year of '88 when she swept all four slams and won Olympic Gold, going 76-3 overall, Graf was actually BETTER in '89. Her 86-2 mark (.977) is the second-best in terms of winning percentage in the Open era, behind only Navratilova's 86-1 (.989) season in 1983.

After losing to Seles in Berlin, Graf's next defeat came in her following tournament, when she again lost to the Yugoslav in the Roland Garros final in' 90. At that point, the seat of power in women's tennis turned away from Graf, only to turn back to her three years later when Seles was stabbed by a crazed Graf fan during a mid-match changeover in, where else (and unfortunately so), Germany. With Seles removed as a legit threat, though the former #1 was easily at her least effective on the grass (though, like Rafael Nadal successfully did many years after her, Seles was slowly but surely seeming to learn to play on the surface), Graf won half or her 22 slam titles after the attack -- including three of her Wimbledon crowns -- and even followed up her true Grand Slam by pulling off a "SteffiSlam" (though nobody called it that back then) by winning four consecutive non-calendar year majors in 1993-94.

After being the youngest man to ever win Wimbledon -- at 17 years, 227 days -- in '85, then defending the title a year later, Becker ultimately went on to post a 71-12 career mark at the tournament from 1984-99. His next-highest slam match win total was at the U.S. Open, where he won 37 matches. He reached, but lost, the Wimbledon final in '90 and '91 after winning the '89 title, as he'd reached six finals in seven years at that point. He reached one more, losing to Sampras in '95 in the middle of the American's seven-titles-in-eight-years stretch of his own. After '89, Becker had more ultimate success at the other slams. After winning the Open in '89, he twice claimed the title at the Australian ('91 & '96) and briefly replaced Edberg in the #1 ranking after his win in Melbourne in January '91. His career goal met with the top ranking, his drive was never quite the same after that. He didn't push to stay in the spot, and only held it for twelve weeks. In all, he reached ten slams finals, winning six. Following a Wimbledon QF loss to Sampras in '97, Becker privately told him at the net that he'd just played his last match at the tournament, then announced his retirement. He held to it, for a while. He returned for one final slam turn at Wimbledon two years later, losing in the 4th Round to Patrick Rafter. Becker won 49 ATP titles during his career, still good for tenth on the all-time list, finished in the Top 5 eight consecutive years, and was Top 10 for all but one season (#11 in '93) from 1985-96.

As '99 was the year of Becker's last Wimbledon, it was also Graf's. After successfully making a comeback from June '97 knee surgery that kept her off tour for nearly a year, a 29-year old Graf won her final slam -- and her first in two and a half years -- at Roland Garros in '99, then reached the Wimbledon final a month later, losing to Lindsay Davenport. She never played another slam match, retiring two weeks before the start of the U.S. Open after losing a match to Amy Frazier in San Diego. Becker was inducted into the Tennis Hall of Fame in 2003, and Graf followed him there in 2004.

As I said earlier, Navratilova won her record ninth Wimbledon title in 1990, then reached the '94 final at age 37. Stunningly, she played her final Wimbledon singles match ten years later in 2004, at age 47 (and after having notched a 1st Round victory). As it turned out, her 2nd Round loss was her worst at SW19 since she lost in the 1st Round... in 1974, thirty years earlier at age 17.

After Borg/McEnroe, and before Federer/Nadal, the "elegance vs. charisma" match-up between the fluid Edberg's classic serve-and-volley game and Becker's pulverizing version of his own was THE best men's rivalry within the walls of the All-England Club. Even with their dueling serve-and-volley styles, they were polar opposites in nearly every way. While Becker's game was loud and proud, often punctuated by him angrily admonishing himself in German between points, Edberg's was graceful and quiet. I can still remember watching the Swede play and having multiple points go by with hardly a sound being made as his racket struck multiple balls for volley winners, his smooth athleticism making things look beautiful and oh-so-routine at the same time. Probably the player whose game has most resembled his in recent years was that of the now-retired Amelie Mauresmo, a player who also created her most wonderful masterpiece on the grass at Wimbledon (in '06). While Becker led Edberg 25-10 in career meetings, their trilogy of finals at Wimbledon -- they're still tied with Federer/Nadal as the only men to ever meet in the final three straight years at the same slam -- from 1988-90 still stands the test of time. I've already posted a "Time Capsule" for their five-set '90 final, and one for '88 is still "doing push-ups in the corner" and will show up here some day, as well. After he won Wimbledon in 2009, even Roger Federer cited the Edberg/Becker clashes in London as his inspiration for choosing to make his atheltic mark in tennis rather than soccer. In all, Edberg won 41 ATP titles, including two each at the Australian Open, Wimbledon and U.S. Open, and was ranked #1 for a total of 72 weeks. The silhouette of a portion of his unique service motion is currently being used in the logo for the Australian Open.

Personally, for me, Becker was the first tennis star of my own generation. The redhead throwing his body all over the All-England Club's lawns, booming serves and celebrating with a kid's exuberance, changed everything for me and made me truly love the sport, and plug myself into its future. By defending his title at 18, he showed me what a "real champion" does. And his thoughtful, philosophical and often "tortured" utterences both off court and on made me view the sport as something slightly more than just a simple game. In '87, he also introduced me to the crushingly personal nature of an early-round upset that no one saw coming. Peter Doohan... I still curse your name. For me, Becker was my biggest stepping stone into the heart of the sport, and he's the main reason -- well, him and NBC's "Breakfast at Wimbledon" -- why I've always viewed Wimbledon as my favorite of the slams... a notion only backed up by the SW19 climbs of my other two "most-honored" players, Jana Novotna and Jelena Dokic.

It's no surprise that the oldest tennis writings that I have are from when I recapped the '86 Wimbledon at which Becker won his second slam title. In fact, my all-time favorite single shot involved Becker, and it occurred at that tournament. Hoping to find what I said about it back then, I went back and looked, and here's what I found:

"And, of course, there was 'The Shot' by Boris Becker in the men's final just two points before he became a two-time Wimbledon champ by defeating Ivan Lendl. It happened on a rally in which Lendl chased down a shot in the right corner of the court and hit it back to Becker, who jumped for the ball at the net and landed on his stomach, only to see the ball catch the net cord, then also just catch the line. Becker then made what may have been the best shot in Wimbledon history look easy, as he lifted up his racquet while still lying on the ground and, with a short backhand flip, lifted the ball over the net for the winner. He then stood and gave us all his 'Becker Boogie' to show us his delight."

Just thinking about that shot still makes me smile. The Becker "mystique" is still there.

*CAREER SLAM TITLES - WOMEN*
24...Margaret Smith-Court
22...STEFFI GRAF
19...Helen Wills Moody
18...MARTINA NAVRATILOVA
18...Chris Evert
13...Serena Williams
12...Billie Jean King
12...Suzanne Lenglen

*CAREER WIMBLEDON TITLES - WOMEN*
[All-Time]
9...MARTINA NAVRATILOVA
8...Helen Wills Moody
7...Dorothea Douglass Lambert Chambers
7...STEFFI GRAF
[Open Era]
9...MARTINA NAVRATILOVA
7...STEFFI GRAF
5...Venus Williams
4...Billie Jean King
4...Serena Williams

*CAREER WTA TITLES*
167...MARTINA NAVRATILOVA
154...Chris Evert
107...STEFFI GRAF

*LONG WTA MATCH WIN STREAKS*
74...Martina Navratilova, 1984
66...STEFFI GRAF, 1989-90
58...Martina Navratilova, 1986-87
57...Margaret Court, 1972-73
55...Chris Evert, 1974

*GRAF - WIMBLEDON FINALS*
1987 lost to Martina Navratilova
1988 def. Martina Navratilova
1989 def. Martina Navratilova
1991 def. Gabriela Sabatini
1992 def. Monica Seles
1993 def. Jana Novotna
1995 def. Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario
1996 def. Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario
1999 lost to Lindsay Davenport

*BECKER - WIMBLEDON FINALS*
1985 def. Kevin Curren
1986 def. Ivan Lendl
1988 lost to Stefan Edberg
1989 def. Stefan Edberg
1990 lost to Stefan Edberg
1991 lost to Michael Stich
1995 lost to Pete Sampras

*CAREER WIMBLEDON TITLES - MEN*
[Open Era]
7...Pete Sampras
6...Roger Federer
5...Bjorn Borg
3...BORIS BECKER
3...John McEnroe

*MOST ATP FINAL MATCH-UPS*
20...Ivan Lendl vs. John McEnroe
19...Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal
16...Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
16...BORIS BECKER vs. STEFAN EDBERG

*CONSECUTIVE FINAL MATCH-UPS AT SLAM - MEN*
[Open Era]
3...BECKER vs. EDBERG, Wimbledon 1988-90
3...Federer vs. Nadal, Roland Garros 2006-08
3...Federer vs. Nadal, Wimbledon 2006-08

All for now.

PREVIOUS TIME CAPSULES:
1987 Roland Garros (Graf/Navratilova), 1987 Roland Garros (Lendl/Wilander), 1987 Wimbledon (Navratilova-Graf/Cash-Lendl), 1989 Roland Garros (Sanchez Vicario-Graf/Chang-Edberg), 1990 Roland Garros (Seles-Graf/Gomez-Agassi), 1990 Wimbledon (Navratilova/Garrison), 1990 Wimbledon (Edberg/Becker), 1991 Roland Garros (Seles/Sanchez-Vicario), 1991 U.S. Open (Connors), 1993 Australian Open (Seles-Graf/Courier-Edberg), 1993 Wimbledon (Graf/Novotna), 2003 & '05 U.S. Open (Henin-Clijsters/Clijsters-Pierce), 2006 U.S. Open (Day-by-Day & Sharapova-Henin), 2001-09 Australian Open (Dokic Down Under)

Roland Garros Final: Staring into the Sun

2011-06-05T21:17:00.003-04:00

There's good reason to not stare directly into the sun, just as there's good reason to break out in a cold sweat at the notion of facing Rafael Nadal on the terre battue of Roland Garros.

"The more a man can forget, the greater the number of metamorphoses which his life can undergo; the more he can remember, the more divine his life becomes." - Søren Kierkegaard

Both Nadal and Roger Federer arrived in Paris in roles that they haven't been accustomed to in quite some time. For the first time since they became a two-headed slam-winning monster over the last seven years -- they were assured before the singles final of this RG of claiming 24 of 28 slam titles going back to Wimbledon '04 -- they weren't the talk of the men's draw starting on Day 1. At Roland Garros, that honor went to Novak Djokovic, the Serb who came to town undefeated since December, 7-0 against Nadal and Federer this season and within arm's reach of becoming the 25th man ranked #1 on the ATP computer. But Djokovic didn't make it to the final, having seen his 43-match winning streak brought to a stunning halt by Federer in the semifinals, a win that ensured that Nadal would hold onto his #1 ranking for a bit longer.

Well, unless Federer beat him in the final.

After having stunningly been nearly judged an "afterthought" as the #3 seed two weeks ago, Federer entered his fourth career RG final match-up with Nadal harboring the belief that he might be able to pull off the accomplishment. Despite having not played in a slam final in over a year, and not having faced Nadal in Paris since being throttled in the '08 final (a 6-1/6-3/6-0 loss for which Rafa apologized after the match), Federer had reason to believe, too. He'd only lost one set in the tournament, and the faster balls being used at the the '11 event seemed to have played to his strengths. Add to that the notion that Nadal had looked human this clay court season more often than usual -- mostly against Djokovic, against whom he'd gone 0-3, but also while winning his first career five-set match at RG in the 1st Round against John Isner, and at times in the matches that followed. After publicly being resigned weeks ago that his hold on the #1 ranking would soon be relinquished in favor of Djokovic, Nadal said during the tournament that he wasn't playing well enough to tie Bjorn Borg's record and claim his sixth career Roland Garros title. The closer the Spaniard got to the final, though, the better he played. But would it be enough against a reinvigorated 29-year old Federer, embracing his underdog role and looking more and more like his "old self" rather than his "old" self with potentially his career's grandest achievement just one win away from becoming a reality?

Federer jumped out to an early lead on Nadal in the opening set. So much so that he almost seemed to be "coasting" to a 1st set win. Maybe he believed that to be so, too. In retrospect, it might have been just enough to put his lead in jeopardy. In essense, he ventured too close to the sun, only to get burned.

Things looked good for Federer for a while. In Nadal's first service game, the 16-time slam winner from Switzerland finally put away a break on his fourth opportunity when his opponent netted a forehand that put Federer up 2-0. With Nadal's always-troubling lefty forehand not kicking up off the terre battue to Federer's backhand as high as it generally does, and with Federer making a point to step in and take such shots earlier, he sidestepped trouble and went ahead 5-2. In game #8, Federer held a set point on Nadal's serve, but rather than take a clean groundstroke cut at a ball in an attempt for a set-securing winner, Federer attempted a drop shot. It just missed catching the right sideline, and even if it had landed in he likely would have had to return a get from a scrambling Nadal. At the time and afterward, it was easy to wonder why Federer decided to pull out one of the many touch shots in his repertoire when something straightforward might have proven to be more effective. Perhaps because he thought he had enough of a cushion at 5-2 to take the chance? Maybe.

If he did make the wrong choice, he would soon pay dearly for it. It lit Rafa's fire. Nadal held the game to get to 5-3, then carved out his first break point of the match in the next. He converted it with a running down the line forehand from behind the baseline that bounced off a reaching-for-a-volley Federer's racket and into the net for 5-4. After Nadal held for 5-5, Federer's near-servcie ace down the "T" was called wide, then he netted a forehand after getting in a second serve. It gave Nadal the break for 6-5. The Spaniard then served out the "stolen" set at 7-5, winning his fifth straight game when he put away a forehand winner.

Federer was slow to get over the disappointment of the blown set, and fell down an early break at 3-1 in the 2nd. He after he saved three break points to hold for 3-2, with the crowd behind him, he got a break to get back on serve at 4-4 when Nadal couldn't get back a Federer return. But Nadal immediately broke back, going up 5-4 as Federer let out a audible sign as it appeared as if a two sets to none hole was imminent.

But the rain saved him, albeit briefly.

After a nine-minute rain delay, Nadal failed to convert his second set point, and Federer got to break point at the end of a long rally. When Nadal framed a forehand, Federer got the break to knot things at 5-5 as the two headed for an eventual tie-break. There, though, it was Nadal who jumped ahead 3-0. A Federer crosscourt forehand error later and it was 4-0. He closed to within 4-2, but then missed a forehand return. Federer nearly framed an overhead shot that ultimately landed softly in the backcourt, setting up nicely for Nadal to pound a backhand crosscourt winner to go up 6-2. He won the tie-break 7-3 and had a two-set lead.

As the 3rd set progressed, Nadal seemed to be breezily walking to the title. He took a 4-2 lead and the virtual "countdown" began. Only Federer didn't cooperate. He managed to get his foot in the door, stealing away a break to get to 4-3, then carried over his momentum to get another for 6-5. He won the set 7-5 and threatened to make a match of things. But Nadal didn't let it happen.

After having seen Federer take advantage of a slight dip in this play and concentation, Nadal beared down and took care of business in workmanlike fashion. He was quickly up 4-1, and this time Federer never got close to finding an opening. When Federer's backhand fell short of the net, all hope was essentially gone as Nadal went up 5-1. The Spaniard easily served out the final game for a 7-5/7-6/5-7/6-1 win and fell to his knees behind the baseline after Federer's final shot sailed long.

The closeness of the match made it the best of the five played between Nadal and Federer in Paris, but once Nadal gained his footing in the contest his path to extending his career RG mark to 45-1 with six titles over the last seven years was fairly direct. If Federer had won the 1st set that had seemed well within his grasp, things might have been different. But who knows?

Nadal's title ties him with Borg for the most in Roland Garros history, with his sixth crown coming just two days after celebrating his 25th birthday. It's the same age that Borg was when he lifted HIS sixth Coupe des Mousquetaires. While Borg never played another match in Paris after winning his final title in '81, Nadal's career end would seem to be nowhere near being within sight. His tenth career slam makes him the seventh man with double-digit major titles, and brings him to within one of tying Borg and Laver, and two from being behind only Federer and Pete Sampras on the all-time list. With sixteen slams under his belt, Federer will likely spend the rest of his career feeling the hot breath of Nadal on his neck as their respective slam totals get closer and closer. If Nadal does eventually surpass him, today will be a good example of why. For while Federer is no longer a "lock" to win more titles at Wimbledon and will have to scratch out however many more slams he might win, Nadal is still without equal in Paris for the near-future and would seem to have at least two or three more RG titles in the cards before he turns 30 and time (and injuries) finally catch up with him. Djokovic seemed as if he might be capable of rising above him in '11, but it didn't turn out to be the case. Not yet, at least.

However the numbers eventually play out, Nadal and Federer will forever be inextricably linked in tennis lore, measured against each other in historical terms as they have so often been in their primes. Today was their eighth slam final match-up (the most ever), and nineteenth overall final (one off the ATP record). But could this final turn out to be their LAST in a slam? Maybe. But probably not, if we're lucky. We could very well see them face each other again in a month at Wimbledon, where they've met in three finals and shared the last eight titles. But they've only faced off in one of the last nine slam finals, so any one could be the last from here on out. Both have and will continued to undergo changes throughout the next few years, with their statuses likely both rising and falling and maybe rising one final time before they're through. Divine as their presences have been on the tennis landscape, nothing lasts forever.

So savor today, and the reality that neither man seems intent to be going anywhere any time soon. Even when they're no longer together, though, they'll still be together forever... and everyone who attempts to follow them might be the ones forever staring into the sun.

*CAREER SLAM SINGLES TITLES - MEN*
16...ROGER FEDERER
14...Pete Sampras
12...Roy Emerson
11...Bjorn Borg
11...Rod Laver
10...RAFAEL NADAL
10...Bill Tilden

*MOST RG TITLES - SINCE 1925*
6...Bjorn Borg (1974-75,1978-81)
6...RAFAEL NADAL (2005-08,2010-11)
4...Henri Cochet (1926,28,30,32)
3...Gustavo Kuerten (1997,2000-01)
3...Ivan Lendl (1984,1986-87)
3...Rene Lacoste (1925,27,29)
3...Mats Wilander (1982,85,88)

*BEST ALL-TIME RG WIN PERCENTAGE - MEN*
97.8% - RAFAEL NADAL, 2005-11 (45-1)
96.1% - Bjorn Borg, 1973-81 (49-2)

*CAREER RG FINALS*
6...Bjorn Borg
6...RAFAEL NADAL
5...Henri Cochet
5...Jaroslav Drobny
5...ROGER FEDERER
5...Rene Lacoste
5...Ivan Lendl
5...Mats Wilander

*MOST RG FINAL LOSSES IN CAREER*
4...ROGER FEDERER (2006-08,2011)
3...Jaroslav Drobny (1946,1948,1950)
3...Guillermo Vilas (1975,1978,1982)

*CAREER ATP SINGLES TITLES*
109...Jimmy Connors
94...Ivan Lendl
77...John McEnroe
67...ROGER FEDERER
64...Pete Sampras
62...Bjorn Borg
62...Guillermo Vilas
60...Andre Agassi
57...Ilie Nastase
49...Boris Becker
47...Rod Laver
46...RAFAEL NADAL

*2011 ATP FINALS*
7...Novak Djokovic (7-0)
7...RAFAEL NADAL (3-4)
4...Nicolas Almagro (3-1)
4...David Ferrer (2-2)
3...Robin Soderling (3-0)
3...ROGER FEDERER (1-2)

All for now.

The Crowd is Untruth

2011-06-03T18:24:00.002-04:00

Hmmm, first Li Na reaches the women's final, then Francesca Schiavone joins her there. Now, it's Roger Federer in the men's final. Just like everyone thought, right?

Seriously, how stupid were we?

"The crowd is untruth." - Søren Kierkegaard

This 2011 version of Roland Garros has had its share of memorable moments, but few matches came as pre-packaged a keepsake for history than today's men's semifinal match-up between world #2 Novak Djokovic and #3 Roger Federer. The Serb was on a 43-match winning streak stretching back to last December, his 41-0 mark this season was a single victory away from tying John McEnroe's 1984 season-opening men's record (a streak, by the way, that was ended in Paris), and if he could reach the men's final he'd assure himself of becoming the twenty-fifth man to be ranked #1 on the ATP computer. Of course, all Federer has done in his career is win more slam titles than any other man in history. Not that that fact mattered much going into this Roland Garros. All the talk was about either Djokovic or five-time RG champ Rafael Nadal when it came to who'd eventually walk away with the title. Federer was barely an afterthought. He hadn't played in a major final in over a year, had dropped to #3 in the rankings, was 0-3 this year against Djokovic, was "busy" and "content" being a recent father to twins and, as is often the case when tennis players stare down the big 3-oh, he was often being called "old."

But Friday was a case of history winning out over the present-day. And no player's place in history is more secure than Federer's. With Djokovic as his stepping stone, Federer crafted yet another magical entry in his career-long journal. In a match that oh-so-closely resembled some of Federer's slam finals in his dominating heyday, the Swiss Mister outshined his opponent on one of the world's biggest stages... for about two sets. After that, it became a case of Federer trying to outrun his on-the-verge opponent, and beat the encroaching darkness into the lockerroom with a victory.

Federer came into the semi having not lost a set in the tournament, and he wasn't quite ready to put a blemish on his spotless record. He broke Djokovic's service game the first time he faced it. The Serb broke back, then did it again to take a 4-2 lead. But Federer answered with a break of his own to get the set back on serve then, down 5-4, overcame a rash of missed 1st serves and going down 15/40, saving two set points. By winning the eventual tie-break that decided the seventy-minute set, Federer pushed his RG set streak to sixteen. Then, with Djokovic often listless, out of sorts and frustrated in the face of Federer's game, the Swiss vet ran it to seventeen by taking the 2nd at 6-3.

Federer had a 174-0 record in slam matches in which he was up 2-0. But it wasn't going to be that easy.

With his back against the wall, Djokovic finally got pumped up. As Federer's first serve percentage went down, the Serb's fortunes rose. He quickly raced to a 3-0 lead in the 2nd set, and claimed the stanza 6-3. After three sets, Federer was still in the lead, but his 3-for-22 mark in break point attempts was worrisome as 2011's best player seemed to be in the process of once again finding the game that has made him a juggernaut for the last six months.

With the light of Friday fading on Chatrier Court, the 4th set became a case of three forces meeting in one place -- Federer, Djokovic and the oncoming night. Federer still had time to close out the match, but if Djokovic could knot the contest and force a 5th-set-for-the-final meeting on Saturday the advantage would suddenly shift in the Serb's direction if he was going to get one night to charge himself up in order to achieve his life-long goal of becoming #1 just a few hours later. After falling behind earlier, Djokovic got a break to close to within 5-4, then held serve to get to 5-5. With Djokovic serving down 6-5, Federer got to within two points of claiming the match, but the Serb held again to force a tie-break as the clocks read 9:30 pm a short distance away in downtown Paris.

With the crowd decidedly on his side and having chanted his name during the match, Federer got to 3-2 in the tie-break. But when his drop shot attempt fell short to tie the score at 3-3, the feeling that the past and the present might be passing on the edge of night was palpable. Then the still-dependable Swiss luxury liner rammed the Serbian speedboat. Up 4-3, Federer served an ace to go up 5-3, then pounded a service winner to get to 6-3 and triple match point. A Djokovic shot dribbled off the net cord, and a scrambling Federer wasn't able to get it back over the net. Then the Serb smashed an ace to save match point #2.

Standing at the baseline with the final on his racket, Federer was then designated in the fading light to once more try to call up the glory of his legacy. If he could. In Rome a few weeks ago, Andy Murray had had the opportunity to hold serve and halt Djokovic's winning streak at thirty-five. He couldn't do it. Federer stepped up and hit an ace, winning 7-6/6-3/3-6/7-6.

As he walked toward the net, Federer shook his index finger in a knowing, "you should have known better than to count me out" sort of way, then he let loose with a victory scream to relieve himself of any of the pressure he might have felt in the moment. Not that anyone had noticed that he'd been feeling ANY at all. At nearly 30, Federer's obviously not finished his dance with history. Not yet.

Federer's win keeps McEnroe's name in the record books, keeps Guillermo Vilas (and his record 46 straight wins) from having to sweat out the grasscourt season, and preserves Nadal's #1 ranking for at least a few days longer. I guess, even if you've had a pretty good career in your own right, it's not a bad idea to have maybe The Greatest of All Time in your corner, too, whenever your goals intersect with his own.

Awaiting Federer in the final, naturally, will be Nadal. For the fourth time in Paris (a record), the eighth time in a slam (another record) and the nineteenth time (one off the all-time men's mark) in their careers. A win and Federer joins Rod Laver and Roy Emerson as the only men in history with multiple wins at all four slams, but if he could accomplish the feat against Rafa it would be worth even more than that in history's eyes. Previously, the only blank line in Federer's career resume was his lack of a Roland Garros title. He took care of that in '09, but it came without having to face Nadal, who'd lost to Robin Soderling in what is still his only career loss in Paris in forty-five matches. Federer now has the chance to change that, and prevent Nadal from tying Bjorn Borg's mark of six career RG championships, as well.

No one was really pointed toward such a moment two weeks ago... but bring it on.

*CAREER SLAM FINALS - ACTIVE*
23...ROGER FEDERER (16-6)
12...RAFAEL NADAL (9-2)
5...Andy Roddick (1-4)
4...Novak Djokovic (2-2)
4...Lleyton Hewitt (2-2)

*MOST RG TITLES - SINCE 1925*
6...Bjorn Borg (1974-75,1978-81)
5...RAFAEL NADAL (2005-08,2010)
4...Henri Cochet (1926,28,30,32)
3...Gustavo Kuerten (1997,2000-01)
3...Ivan Lendl (1984,1986-87)
3...Rene Lacoste (1925,27,29)
3...Mats Wilander (1982,85,88)

*MOST RG FINAL LOSSES IN CAREER*
3...Jaroslav Drobny (1946,1948,1950)
3...Gullermo Vilas (1975,1978,1982)
3...ROGER FEDERER (2006-08)

*CAREER SLAM MATCH WINS*
232...Jimmy Connors
224...Andre Agassi
222...Ivan Lendl
219...ROGER FEDERER (post-SF)
203...Pete Sampras

*MOST ATP FINAL MATCH-UPS*
[overall]
20...Ivan Lendl vs. John McEnroe
19...ROGER FEDERER vs. RAFAEL NADAL (w/ 2011 RG)
16...Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
16...Boris Becker vs. Stefan Edberg
15...Jimmy Connors vs. John McEnroe
[slams]
8...ROGER FEDERER vs. RAFAEL NADAL (w/ 2011 RG)
5...Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
5...Ivan Lendl vs. Mats Wilander
4...Bjorn Borg vs. Jimmy Connors
4...Bjorn Borg vs. John McEnroe
4...Roger Federer vs. Andy Roddick

*TWO-OR-MORE TITLES AT ALL 4 SLAMS - M/W*
[AO-RG-WI-US, years]
Margaret Smith Court [11-5-3-5, 1960-73]
Roy Emerson [6-2-2-2, 1961-67]
Chris Evert [2-7-3-6, 1974-86]
Steffi Graf [4-6-7-5, 1987-99]
Rod Laver [3-2-4-2, 1960-69]
Martina Navratilova [3-2-9-4, 1978-90]
--
NOTE: Roger Federer [4-1-6-5, 2003-10]

BACKSPIN TIME CAPSULE: 1987 Roland Garros

2011-04-23T18:47:00.002-04:00

Without question, Ivan Lendl was one of the best players of all time. In fact, he was a truly evolutionary figure in the sport's history, both for his game as well as his training techniques. Too bad for him that he came of age and to prominance in the early-to-mid 1980's... a period which can be viewed now as a tennis "golden age," when the personalities, auras and rivalries of the top men's players were just as crackling as their games.

Lendl wasn't "cool" like Bjorn Borg, nor as hot-tempered as Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe (or, later, as dramatic as Boris Becker). On a tennis landscape populated by players whose presence sometimes seemed "bigger" than the game itself, the image of the stiff, "boring" Czech couldn't help but pale in comparison. Additionally, in the early 1980s was still the era of Communism and the Cold War, and Lendl's Czech accent-speckled English (I always liked it, actually) and often unemotional, sometimes "mechanical" (many derisively said "robotic"), style played into quite a few unfortunate stereotypes and left many cold. But, of course, Lendl's worst offense of all was that he quickly garnered a reputation as a player who couldn't win "the big one." He went 0-4 in his first four appearances in slam singles finals, losing to Borg, Connors (twice) and an unseeded Swedish teenager playing in his first slam final. He once appeared on the cover of Sports Illustrated under the provacative headline, "The Champion Nobody Cares About."

Lendl finaly broke through at Roland Garros in 1984, winning his first slam crown after coming back from two sets down to defeat John McEnroe (ranked #1, Mac compiled an 82-3 record that season) in the final, denying the American his best chance at winning the elusive (and never attained, as he STILL so often laments) clay title in Paris that might have garnered him much backing in many "Greatest of All Time" debates. From that moment on, Lendl went about putting together some of the greatest and most consistent numbers in the history of tennis. Lendl's power game of heavy topspin shots from the baseline, a forerunner of the brand of tennis that soon became common in the game as wood rackets became obsolete, and his scientific training practices helped to revolutionize the sport. He was among the first players to use a powerful serve to set up easy inside-out forehand winners.

But even as Lendl rose to the top of the game and surpassed many of his more popular rivals in career achievements, besting Mats Wilander -- that "Swedish teenager" -- when it mattered most proved to be a longer-term project. When the Swede had become the then youngest-ever men's slam champ in' 82 at Roland Garros, the unseeded 17-year old Wilander had climbed over the then-#2 seeded Lendl en route, topping him in the 4th Round. Three years later, Wilander defeated him the '85 RG final, as well. Come 1987, the two met in the third of what would eventually be five meetings in grand slam finals (at the time, the most ever in the Open era). By then, Lendl had claimed four slam crowns, the same number as Wilander.

Here's what a high-school Backspinner-in-waiting said about that meeting:

June 7, 1987 - "Lendl is Supreme Once Again"

Frankly, the French Open men's final started out with a series of interminally long rallies, the "unworthy" result of the consistent topspin backcourt shots from defending champion Ivan Lendl and his opponent, Mats Wilander. Fortunately, Lendl woke up and started to play like the champion he is and forced the Swede to stop lulling the crowd to sleep. In the end, Lendl won the match 7-5/6-2/3-6/7-6 and claimed his third championship in Paris.

Lendl and Wilander, the #1 and #3-ranked ranked players in the world, were both seeking to become the first man other than Bjorn Borg to win three French singles titles in the last fifty-five years. In Czechoslovakia-born Lendl's case, he was trying to become the first to win back-to-back titles since Borg won four straight from 1978-81. Wilander, a consistent ball-striker in the tradition of his countryman Borg, had won seventeen matches in a row going into the final and looked to have a good chance to win on the red clay, most definitely his best surface.

Lendl won the one-hour and twenty minute 1st set 7-5, then the 2nd at 6-3. But at the end of the 2nd set, the usually composed Wilander lost his cool and threw down his racket in frustration. The incident seemed to spark him, and he got the crowd on his side. Of course, such an accomplishment seems to often be quite easy when your opponent is the usually-stoic, somewhat mechanical Lendl.

Near the end of the 3rd, there was a thirty-five minute rain delay. It, too, seemed to help Wilander as he returned to finish off set with a vengeance at 6-3. The delay, along with the long 1st set, made the 4th a contest between two players and a third "participant" -- Mother Nature. As darkness threatened an early ending to the day's play, Lendl and Wilander fought to a tie-break. Lendl took charge, grabbing a 6-3 lead, and when the Swede sailed the first match point beyond the baseline Lendl let out a cheer and leaped high into the air in celebration. It was a rare show of emotion, and the crowd applauded his superb play.

So, the man who has been called "the champion that nobody cares about" won another title to solidify his #1 status in men's tennis. Maybe someday people will learn to appreciate Lendl for what he IS instead of what he isn't. Maybe, someday, they'll realize that he's, quite simply, the best player in the world.

...Lendl's third straight RG title in '87 turned out to be the Czech's final crown in Paris. A few months later, Lendl and Wilander met in their fourth slam final at the U.S. Open. Lendl won that one, too. In 1988, Wilander won another championship rematch at Flushing Meadows. Twenty-three years later, the two's five match-ups in slam finals is still tied for second on the all-time list with that of Andre Agassi & Pete Sampras, behind only the (so far) seven meetings between Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.

Essentially, Lendl was born into the sport. The child of two tennis players (his mother was a Top 10 player in Czechoslovakia, climbing as high a rank as #2, while his father was #15 and later served as president of the Czech Tennis Federation), his talent shone through early. In 1978, he finished as the junior #1 and won Boys titles at both Roland Garros and Wimbledon. Three years later, Lendl reached his first career slam final in Paris, losing to Borg. It would be Borg's final slam championship. In 1982, Lendl won fifteen of the twenty-three events he entered, and at one point won forty-four straight matches, the second-longest streak in ATP history. In February 1983, he became the #1-ranked player in the world, ending the nine-year three-headed hegemony of Borg, Connors and McEnroe in the top spot. While he was never able to surpass any of his formerly top-ranked predecessors in the court of public opinion, his career numbers surely have and will continue to make time Lendl's ultimate friend.

In all, Lendl won eight slam titles -- two AO, three RG and three US -- and reached a record nineteen finals, including eight consecutive at the U.S. Open from 1982-89. Federer surpassed Lendl's slam final total, while Sampras tied his mark of reaching at least one slam final for eleven consecutive seasons. His ninety-four tour singles titles ranks behind only Connors, as does his match win total (1,279) over the course of his seventeen-year career. He held the #1 ranking for 156 consecutive weeks, was year-end #1 four times in the late 1980's, and his total of 270 weeks in the top spot has only been topped by Sampras (286) and Federer (285). In August '90, he dropped out of the #1 ranking for the final time, and when he retired with back problems in '94 he was the all-time prize money leader. A while back, Tennis magazine dubbed Lendl the sport's "greatest overachiever." The honor almost sounds like a backhanded compliment for a player with some of the greatest career numbers in tennis history, but I'm sure it was meant as an appreciative nod to his work ethic.

Lendl's "If I don't practice the way I should then I won't play the way I know I can" quote is just one of many that serves to hint at the tireless mindset on the practice court that came to define his career. A creature of habit and hard work, he even hired the same company who'd put down the courts at the U.S. Open to install an indentical court at his home in Greenwich, Connecticut during his nearly decade-long string of final appearances in New York. Even his practice of reaching into his pocket to grab a handful of sawdust, then rubbing it on his racket's handle to give him a better grip, became something of a habitual/psychological crutch (the mess often had to be swept up on the court, and his famous SI cover shot captured a handful of that sawdust before it hit the court), sort of like Nadal's famous pre-point "tug" and precise lining up of water bottles today.

His attention to detail and attempt at perfection through repetition carried over to his game, as the consistency of his groundstrokes from the baseline was astounding. So much so that it likely played into the "robotic" description of Lendl in an era in which he lined up against such crowd-pleasing, but fabulously "flawed," champions as McEnroe and Connors. Such a game made Lendl the world's most dominant player on clay and hard courts, but on the less true-bouncing grass courts at Wimbledon his greatest asset helped to turn a title run at the All-England Club into his career-long "great white whale." With the choppy baseline surface that developed on the lawns back then (far different from the harder, less-worn surface we see in London today), players HAD to move forward and take balls out of the air at the net. Thing is, Lendl wasn't a great volleyer. And he knew it, too. He tried to avoid the tournament early on, saying that grass was "for cows" and even skipping the event once while saying he was allergic to the green blades. Of course, soon after a photo was snapped of him playing golf and the jig was up. Whoops.

As was his wont, hardly eager to accept defeat, Lendl dove head-first into the Wimbledon challenge. He labored to make himself a decent volleyer, and it worked. Almost. While his game could get him deep into the fortnight, he couldn't find a way around the very BEST grass court players. Five times in eight years he lost to the eventual winner of the Gentlemen's title. He even twice skipped Roland Garros in order to properly prepare for the grass court season. He was the SW19 runner-up on two occasions, losing in the final in '86 and '87 to Becker and Pat Cash, respectively, but wasn't able to take a set off his opponent in either match. While Roger Federer was able to solidify his standing in the "Greatest of All Time" discussion by finally winning in Paris in '09, Lendl (much like Sampras at Roland Garros, though he got far closer than the American ever did) wasn't able to complete HIS career Grand Slam in London. He'll forever remain one of (if not THE) best to never win there.

Like fellow Czech-born star Martina Navratilova, Lendl eventually ran afoul of the Czech Tennis Federation. Both world #1's had news of all their on-court exploits banned in their home country by the Communist-led government. The two ultimately defected to the U.S., but following the form of their respective careers, while Navratilova drew great attention by publicly declaring her independence in New York during the U.S. Open, Lendl chose to "announce" his move by settling in Connecticut in '84 and refusing to play Davis Cup for Czechoslovakia (he'd led the nation to the title in '80). As a permanent resident of the U.S., he got his green card in '87 and tried, but ultimately failed, to have his citizenship fast-tracked so that he could play DC for Team USA and represent his new country in the Olympics in '88. Finally, he became a U.S. citizen in 1992.

While Lendl is probably one of the most overlooked great players in the sport's history, Wilander's career numbers put him in select company that even Lendl was never able to crack. Only five men have won slam titles on hard court, clay and grass. The names of Connors, Federer, Nadal and Andre Agassi are easy to recall, but it's Wilander (who won in Australia in' 83 and '84 when the tournament was still played on grass) who is the fifth on that list. Additionally, only Wilander and Nadal have managed to win two or more slam titles on all three surfaces.

A Boys champ at Roland Garros in '81, Wilander returned one year later (with six-time RG champ and fellow Swede Borg gone after his shocking retirement from the sport at age 25) to become the Men's champion and -- at 17 years, 9 months -- the youngest-ever men's slam champ (he still ranks third on the list). By age 20, he'd already won his fourth slam crown, making him the youngest ever to achieve so much at such as early age.

Over a seven-year stretch from 1982-88, Wilander won seven slam titles (in eleven finals) employing his steady baseline game. In 1987, he worked to greatly improve his serve and developed a one-handed slice backhand. One season later, the additions made the '88 campaign the most successful of his career. He won three of the four slams, missing only at Wimbledon (he reached the QF, tying his best result there). After defeating Lendl in the U.S. Open final that September, he replaced him at #1. But after having reached such a career high point, Wilander seemed to lose focus and interest. His career began to fizzle out in '89, and he often wasn't motivated to enter events even when he was healthy. From '89 until he finally retired in '96, he reached just one more slam semifinal.

Lendl was a member of the Hall of Fame class of 2001, and Wilander followed behind him in 2002. While Lendl has decidedly loosened up over the years, playing celebrity golf (including hosting his own tournament) and recently making appearances in Tennis Channel segments and on the senior tennis circuit. While Lendl's two daughters haven't followed him into tennis, they do share his love of golf. One is a golfer at the University of Florida, while another is set to play on the golf team at Alabama in the fall of this year. Wilander, after being viewed as a polite "good guy" for his entire career, stepped into some controversy with his criticism of Federer and Kim Clijsters' (lack of a) competitive edge to beat their toughest rivals at Roland Garros in '06, saying of Federer after his loss to Nadal, "(He) unfortunately came out with no balls... you don't find too many champions in any sport in the world without heart or balls. He might have them, but against Nadal they shrink to a very small size and it's not once, it's every time."

In 2010, Lendl and Wilander met on the court once again in an exhibition in Atlantic City. It was Lendl's first public match since his '94 retirement. Earlier this year, Lendl faced off against John McEnroe at Madison Square Garden at the annual exhibition bonanza held at the fabled arena. There, as had happened in Paris back in '84 in the match that changed his career forever, Lendl outlasted Johnny Mac when the American was forced to retire with an injury.

And, thus, time and fitness continue to prove to be Lendl's very important friends.

*MOST SLAM SINGLES TITLES*
16...Roger Federer (active)
14...Pete Sampras
12...Roy Emerson
11...Bjorn Borg
11...Rod Laver
10...Bill Tilden
9...Rafael Nadal (active)
8...Andre Agassi
8...Jimmy Connors
8...IVAN LENDL
8...Fred Perry
8...Ken Rosewall

*LENDL - SLAM FINALS*
[AO]
1983 lost to Mats Wilander
1989 def. Miloslav Mecir
1990 def. Stefan Edberg
1991 lost to Boris Becker
[RG]
1981 lost to Bjorn Borg
1984 def. John McEnroe
1985 lost to Mats Wilander
1986 def. Mikael Pernfors
1987 def. Mats Wilander
[WI]
1986 lost to Boris Becker
1987 lost to Pat Cash
[US]
1982 lost to Jimmy Connors
1983 lost to Jimmy Connors
1984 lost to John McEnroe
1985 def. John McEnroe
1986 def. Miloslav Mecir
1987 def. Mats Wilander
1988 lost to Mats Wilander
1989 lost to Boris Becker

*WILANDER - SLAM FINALS*
[AO]
1983 def. Ivan Lendl
1984 def. Kevin Curren
1985 lost to Stefan Edberg
1988 def. Pat Cash
[RG]
1982 def. Guillermo Vilas
1983 lost to Yannick Noah
1985 def. Ivan Lendl
1987 lost to Ivan Lendl
1988 def. Henri Leconte
[US]
1987 lost to Ivan Lendl
1988 def. Ivan Lendl

*MOST ATP SINGLES TITLES*
109...Jimmy Connors
94...IVAN LENDL
77...John McEnroe
67...Roger Federer (active)
64...Pete Sampras

*CONSECUTIVE SLAM SF*
23...Roger Federer
10...Rod Laver
10...IVAN LENDL

*CONSECUTIVE SLAM QF*
27...Roger Federer (active)
27...Jimmy Connors
14...IVAN LENDL

*MOST CAREER SLAM MATCH WINS*
232...Jimmy Connors
224...Andre Agassi
222...IVAN LENDL
213...Roger Federer (active)
203...Pete Sampras

*MOST MEETINGS IN ATP FINALS*
[all events]
20...IVAN LENDL vs. John McEnroe
18...Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal (active)
16...Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
16...Boris Becker vs. Stefan Edberg
15...Jimmy Connors vs. IVAN LENDL
13...Boris Becker vs. IVAN LENDL
[slams]
7...Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal (active)
5...Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
5...IVAN LENDL vs. MATS WILANDER

*LONG ATP MATCH WIN STREAKS*
46...Guillermo Vilas, 1977
44...IVAN LENDL, 1981-82
42...John McEnroe, 1984
41...Roger Federer, 2006-07
41...Bjorn Borg, 1979-80

*MOST SLAM APPEARANCES*
70...Fabrice Santoro
61...Andre Agassi
58...Jonas Bjorkman
57...Andre Agassi
57...Jimmy Connors
57...Wayne Ferreira
57...IVAN LENDL
57...John McEnroe

*WEEKS AT ATP #1*
286...Pete Sampras
285...Roger Federer (active)
270...IVAN LENDL
268...Jimmy Connors
170...John McEnroe
109...Bjorn Borg
101...Andre Agassi
92...Rafael Nadal (active, weeks at #1 as of April 24, 2011)

*YOUNGEST SLAM SINGLES CHAMP - MEN*
17 years, 3 months...Michael Chang (1989 Roland Garros)
17 years, 7 months...Boris Becker (1985 Wimbledon)
17 years, 9 months...MATS WILANDER (1982 Roland Garros)

*WON SLAMS ON THREE SURFACES*
[at least one title on hard, grass & clay]
Andre Agassi, USA
Jimmy Connors, USA
Roger Federer, SUI
Rafael Nadal, ESP
MATS WILANDER, SWE
[two or more titles on all three]
MATS WILANDER, SWE
Rafael Nadal, ESP

All for now.

PREVIOUS TIME CAPSULES:
1987 Roland Garros (Graf), 1987 Wimbledon (Navratilova/Cash), 1989 Roland Garros (Sanchez/Chang), 1990 Roland Garros (Seles/Gomez), 1990 Wimbledon (Navratilova), 1990 Wimbledon (Edberg/Becker), 1991 U.S. Open (Connors), 1993 Australian Open (Seles & Courier), 1993 Wimbledon (Graf/Novotna), 2003 & '05 U.S. Open (Henin/Clijsters), 2006 U.S. Open (Day-by-Day/Sharapova), 2001-09 Australian Open (Dokic Down Under)

A "Third Man" Who Might Be the "Second," and the Emergence of a Potential "Fourth"

2011-02-28T17:37:00.003-05:00

It's a month after the Australian Open, do you know where your Big Two are? How about Three... or is it Four?

*ATP February Awards*
**TOP PLAYERS**
1. Novak Djokovic, SRB: He won Dubai again. He defeated Federer again, too.
=============================
2. Juan Martin del Potro, ARG: Back from the wrist injury that swallowed up his '10 season, he followed up back-to-back SF results by winning in Delray Beach while barely fighting-off exhaustion.
=============================
3. Milos Raonic, CAN: He proved that all that praise he got for reaching the Round of 16 in Melbourne wasn't false hope. Lifting Canada's men's tennis future sky-high all by himself, she won a title in San Jose and nearly another in Memphis, losing in the final to Andy Roddick in what might turn out to the the most entertaining match of the year.
=============================
4. Nicolas Almagro, ESP: He reached three straight finals in February, winning two titles.
=============================
5. Robin Soderling, SWE: With two more titles in February, the Swede leads the tour with three crowns on the season.
=============================
HM- Andy Roddick, USA & David Ferrer, ESP: Roddick announced his Davis Cup comeback, won his 30th career singles title, and pulled off a diving, somersaulting "Shot of the Year" contender on match point against Raonic in the Memphsi final (and now wife Brooklyn Decker is apparently an actress, too). Ferrer's Acapulco win ties him with Almagro for the most titles by a Spanish man in 2011 (that OTHER Spaniard is still looking for his first).

**RISERS**
1. Novak Djokovic
2. Juan Martin del Potro
3. Nicolas Almagro
4. Robin Soderling
5. Marcelo Melo/Bruno Soares
6. Kevin Anderson
7. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
8. Mikhail Youzhny
9. Thomaz Bellucci
10. Tomas Berdych
HM- Florian Mayer & Horia Tecau

**FRESH FACES**
1. Milos Raonic
2. Aleksandr Dolgopolov
3. Kei Nishikori
4. Somdev Devvarman
5. Ryan Sweeting
HM- Richard Berankis & Thiemo de Bakker

**SURPRISES**
1. Ivan Dodig
2. Sergiy Stakhovsky
3. Scott Lipsky/Rajeev Ram
4. Santiago Giraldo
5. Adrian Mannarino
HM- Pablo Andujar & Izak Van der Merwe

**VETERANS**
1. Andy Roddick
2. David Ferrer
3. Tommy Robredo
4. Max Mirnyi/Daniel Nestor
5. Janko Tipsarevic
HM- Juan Ignacio Chela

**COMEBACKS**
1. Juan Martin del Potro
2. Tommy Robredo
3. Lleyton Hewitt

**DOWN**
1. Andy Murray
2. Sam Querrey
3. Fernando Verdasco
4. Nikolay Davydenko
5. Roger Federer & Rafael Nadal

**TOP PERFORMANCE**
AO champ Novak Djokovic wins his third straight Dubai championship, defeating Roger Federer for the second time in '11 and carrying his undefeated season record into March

**TOP MATCH/SHOT/ENDING**
Memphis Final - Roddick d. Raonic 7-6(6)/6-7(11)/7-5
...Roddick dodged a huge bullet when Raonic failed to put away set point in the 1st, but was still stretched to his limit and beyond for career title #30. Raonic saved three match points in the 2nd, then took things to a 3rd. On his fifth match point, Roddick dove for a shot in the backcourt, barely getting a racket on the ball and then somersaulting across the court surface to complete his acrobatic dive. Though the American never actually saw the shot, he managed to push it down the line for a winner past the Canadian to secure a singles title for the eleventh straight season.

**BREAKOUT**
Come on, is there really any question? The hard-serving 20-year old Raonic is coming on so fast that it's downright scary, and his accompanying thoughtful and wryly humerous post-match comments seem destined to make him a huge star very soon. He won his first ATP title in San Jose, becoming the first Canadian man to do so since 1995, and he's already the highest-ranked man EVER from his country. Barring injury, it's hard to envision him not being in at least the Top 15-20, if not Top 10, by the end of the season.

**WHAT'S THE OPPOSITE OF A BREAKOUT?**
While Raonic continued his rise once he left Melbourne, Andy Murray went the other way. After a second straight non-factor appearance in the AO final, the Scot went down quickly in straight sets in the 1st Round of Rotterdam to Marcos Baghdatis. Hey, at least the upcoming royal wedding might take a little of the London tabloid heat off Murray a few months from now.

**A "DO-OVER" MIGHT WELL BE GRANTED**
After picking Juan Martin del Potro to finish '10 at #1 only to see his wrist injury pretty much cost him the entire season, it's great to see him coming on once again with such force. Back-to-back February semis were followed by a title in Delray Beach, his first since winning the U.S. Open in 2009. If Djokovic is the "Third Man," then the Argentine might be the "Fourth." That is, unless Raonic beats him too it, I suppose.

**MEANWHILE, BACK ON THE FARM...**
If nothing else, we DID learn in February that the ATP tour can still be pretty entertaining WITHOUT Federer and Nadal. Nadal didn't play at all, while Federer went down pretty hard in the Dubai final against Djokovic as the Serb showed once again that he's probably the best hardcourter in the world (though a match-up with a rested del Potro in NYC WOULD be intriguing this summer). Truth is, though, the Big Two weren't really missed all that much.

Of course, that wouldn't be the case come slam time... but it's months like this that make you want to start counting the days until EVERYONE is gathered under the same big tent.

All for now.

Australian Open Final: The Third Man

2011-01-30T19:53:00.002-05:00

To paraphrase Harry Lime, "In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, and they had five hundred years of democracy and peace -- and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock"... and Roger Federer. But what Novak Djokovic has done might be even more impressive -- he's managed to carve out two grand slam titles for himself in the Rafa & Roger Era.

Before the season began, I remarked in this space about the ATP's seemingly-eternal search for a definitive "third," a player who would officially declare himself as the man at the head of the class of a field that has been dominated by two players for most of the last decade. Heading into this Australian Open, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal had won four straight slams, ten of the last eleven, twenty-one of twenty-three, and twenty-three of twenty-six over various stretches going all the way back to 2004. Since mid-2005, only two other men had claimed slam titles, Juan Martin del Potro (at the '09 US Open, and he's been dealing with a wrist injury almost ever since) and Djokovic ('08 Australian), while only a few more -- Andy Murray, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Robin Soderling & Tomas Berdych -- had even hinted at something greater in unsuccessful runs to slam finals. With neither Federer nor Nadal having advanced to the '11 AO final -- just the fifth time it's happened in the thirty-one slams dating back to Federer winning his first Wimbledon in '03 -- "the third man" seemed ready to step out of the shadows.

And, thus, on the final day of the 2011 Australian Open, 23-year old Serb Djokovic, playing in his second consecutive slam final, officially became that man by winning his second title in Melbourne in the last four seasons. Not that he got much opposition from his final opponent -- '10 AO runner-up Murray -- beyond a filled-with-long-rallies opening set in Djokovic's fairly matter-of-fact 6-4/6-2/6-3 victory. While the Scot said after the match that he felt he'd performed better than he did when he similarly collapsed in the final against Federer (he actually lost by a closer score, 6-3/6-4/7-6), he is perhaps the only person on earth who could really see any optimistic difference in the two outings.

Of course, considering that Djokovic defeated 16-time slam champ Federer in straight sets in the semis, giving him wins over the Swiss star in back-to-back slams, and lost just one set in the tournament (a 10-8 tie-break in the 2nd Round, leaving him just short of equaling the no-sets-lost Open era AO feats of Ken Rosewall in '71 and Federer in '07), Murray may not have ever had much of a chance on this day. But since it's Murray we're talking about, who'd entered this match having won six straight sets over his Serbian opponent, his final fate would have probably been the same even if Djokovic hadn't been waiting for him in the final.

For when the going gets tough, Murray usually gets going.

Having reached three slam finals in his career, he's still yet to win his first set. Generally, he begins the proceedings fairly well, but then his play quickly unravels into a tight, cover-your-eyes performance punctuated by slump-shouldered stalking of the baseline and a string of whiny, curse-filled outbursts directed as much at no one in particular as to as everyone within earshot. His feet appear glued to the court's surface, his head hangs down, his shots go off and his hopes of success are nil. One good game is followed by a horrid one. A winner one point is quickly neutralized by an error the next. Oh, and did I mention all the "don't-make-that-face, it-might-freeze-that-way" moments along the way? There, now I have. They're all just just par for the course in one of the Scot's now-patented grand slam collapses in which he eventually comes to resemble a jelly fish in tennis shoes.

At this point, is there really any reason to think that Murray will EVER win the slam that so many have seemed to think he was pointed toward for years? I mean, Nikolay Davydenko is a fine in-season player, too, but he's simply never possessed the mental make-up to truly compete for a slam. What makes Murray any different? Now, granted, Murray's game has always sort of put me to sleep, but its effectiveness has never been questioned over the balance of an ATP season. But in the heat of the do-it-now-or-forever-hold-your-peace battle for a slam title, Murray has so far been nothing short of a disaster. The fact is, no matter how many coaches he works with, unless the Scot changes something essential within himself he's going to end up winning precisely as many slam titles as Davydenko, as well as the previously most recent "new hope" for the first British men's slam champ since Fred Perry in 1936, Tim Henman. Murray and Djokovic might have been born only a week apart, but while the Serb positively glows with red-hot desire to succeed in the slam spotlight, his British counterpart appears to be painted head-to-toe in something akin to a boring beige.

From here, Perry's ghost has nothing to worry about. At least not for a while.

Nothing could be further from the truth when it comes to Djokovic. He seems to have fully come into his own. He's no longer quite the joker of years ago, but he's also not the somewhat-defensive individual who seemed to close down large parts of his one-man entertainment show after word got around that a few players (well, at least one from Mallorca) might not have liked his crowd-pleasing impressionist act, and then even felt a few New York crowds turning on him when he got into a verbal off-court jousting match with Andy Roddick a while back. In 2011, he's happily somewhere in the middle. Maybe now the best hard court player in the world, he's as confident as ever as the unquestioned leader of Serbia's first Davis Cup championship-winning team, and he's also back to being one of the most unique personalities in the sport. Watching him cutting a rug -- well, at least a practice court service line -- with Aussie pro dancer Kym Johnson in Melbourne, and his near-strip tease awarding of most of his clothes to fans in the stands after this AO final prove that. So did his rather sober post-match ceremony speech, in which he actually trumped the usually-on-these-things-like-a-dingo-on-a-baby women's champ Kim Clijsters' by being the only of this weekend's singles champs to make on-court mention of the victims of the massive floods that struck Australia just before the start of the tournament. It was a nice, mature touch.

With the ATP's "third man" now identified (and, hardly shocking, he turned out to be the candidate most likely to succeed all along, having been entrenched as the world #3 for the last four years), the story now evolves into one in which Djokovic attempts to up his station in the tour's hierachy, possibly even over the course of 2011. Thus, the clock officially begins now for the next adventure of the Serbian Prince Who Could One Day Be King.

Tick-tock. Tick-tock.

*SLAM SINGLES TITLES - ACTIVE*
[active]
16...Roger Federer, SUI
9...Rafael Nadal, ESP
2...NOVAK DJOKOVIC, SRB
2...Lleyton Hewitt, AUS
1...Juan Martin del Potro, ARG
1...Juan Carlos Ferrero, ESP
1...Andy Roddick, USA
[Australian Open - active]
4...Roger Federer - 2004,06-07,10
2...NOVAK DJOKOVIC - 2008,11
1...Rafael Nadal - 2009

*MOST SLAMS PLAYED AFTER WON 1st SLAM BEFORE WON 2nd SLAM*
[Men - Open era]
14...Marat Safin, RUS (2000 US Open / 2005 Australian Open)
12...NOVAK DJOKOVIC, SRB (2008 Australian Open / 2011 Australian Open)

*DJOKOVIC - MAJOR FINALS*
[slams]
2007 U.S. Open - lost to Roger Federer
2008 Australian Open - def. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
2010 U.S. Open - lost to Rafael Nadal
2011 Australian Open - def. Andy Murray
[Tour Championships]
2008 def. Nikolay Davydenko
[Olympics]
2008 Bronze Medal Match - def. James Blake
[Davis Cup]
2010 Serbia def. France

*MEN'S SLAMS - NO RAFA or ROGER...*
[as champ...since 2005 Roland Garros]
2008 AO: Novak Djokovic
2009 US: Juan Martin del Potro
2011 AO: Novak Djokovic
[in final...since 2003 Wimbledon]
2003 U.S. Open - Andy Roddick d. Juan Carlos Ferrero
2004 Roland Garros - Gaston Gaudio d. Guillermo Coria
2005 Australian Open - Marat Safin d. Lleyton Hewitt
2008 Australian Open - Novak Djokovic d. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
2011 Australian Open - Novak Djokovic d. Andy Murray

All for now.

2011 ATP Top 10 Predictions: Looking for a Third

2010-12-14T09:17:00.000-05:00

As the ATP tour prepares to kick-off its 2011 season, the leading story is pretty much the same one that has shaped the last few: Rafa vs. Roger.

The two have swapped the #1 ranking multiple times the last three seasons and, even though the Spaniard has opened up a bit of a gap between them over the past year, the same situation could very well arise again this coming season. Rafael Nadal had the superior overall season in '10, winning three straight slams (he's going for a non-calendar "RafaSlam" in Melbourne); but after dealing with new fatherhood, a rare spate of injuries and a few very unFedereresque losses for much of the season, Federer ended the year on a 21-2 run after the U.S. Open, winning three titles, defeating Nadal in the ATP World Tour Finals by aggressively taking the initiative like he hadn't in a couple of years, and moving into position to make his recent naysayers eat their words yet again.

The pair have now won four straight slams, but their big event dominance goes far deeper than that. Of the past twenty-three slams, they've won twenty-one. Of the last twenty-six, they've claimed twenty-three. From this pre-season vantage point, little looks to change in '11.

For brief moments the last few seasons, the likes of Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray and Juan Martin del Potro have occasionally risen to challenge the Big Two (the Serb and Argentine even won a single slam title each), but none has been able to solidify themselves as anything other than a minor barnacle attached to the Rafa/Roger leviathan. Robin Soderling has promisingly reached multiple slam finals, even beating Nadal and Federer along the way, but has yet to put everything together on a final Sunday in one of the season's four biggest events. Last year, Tomas Berdych added his name to the list of "others" and "almosts" battling to be the best player ranked #3 or lower.

In all likelihood, it'll be age, physical/mental wear-and-tear and injuries that will eventually remove the Spanish and Swiss stars from atop the ATP roost (in ranking mathematics, even if not public perception) rather than the culprit being a TRUE "third" who manages to outhit, outhustle and outthink the two best players in the world. Right now, that "inheritor" of the top spot might exist on the tour landscape, but he's currently an "anonymous" face who seems fated to continue to play a supporting role in the ATP drama for at least a few more seasons.

Here's an early prediction for the year-end 2011 Top 10ers (with '10 rank in parenthesis), listed alphabetically:

Marin Cilic, CRO (14): he's been inching toward a big breakout campaign for a couple of seasons now. Last year's semifinal in Melbourne needs to just be the beginning.
=============================
Juan Martin del Potro, ARG (259): I'm still feeling guilty for inadvertantly putting a "curse" on him by picking him to finish at #1 a season ago. He finished '09 at #5 after winning the U.S. Open, then missed almost all of 2010 with a wrist injury (playing just six total matches). If he can get fully healthy -- he says his wrist is now "perfect" -- and in full form by mid-season, he could still put up enough good results to sneak back into the Top 10.
=============================
Novak Djokovic, SRB (3): he wins his fair share of titles, and gets his fair share of big wins, too. But it's looking more and more like that '08 Australian Open title was an anomaly rather than a sign of things to come.
=============================
Roger Federer, SUI (2): the big question is whether the "renewed" Federer we saw at the end of '10 will be the one we'll see throughout the entire '11 campaign. If so, all those past reports of his slam-winning demise were (once again) greatly exaggerated.
=============================
David Ferrer, ESP (7): he had a largely overlooked great season in '10 (his five finals were bested by only Nadal and Federer), but one wonders if he can continue to be such a consistent force as he approaches his 30th birthday (he'll turn 29 in April).
=============================
Rafael Nadal, ESP (1): could he ever top his '10 season? Back-to-back-to-back slams wil be difficult to replicate, but getting a fourth straight in Oz would make him the first man to do so since 1969, calendar or non-calendar.
=============================
Andy Murray, GBR (4): he's proven he can beat Federer and Nadal, but not that he's EVER going to be a grand slam champion.
=============================
Sam Querrey, USA (18): you'd think a player with four titles in five appearances in finals in '10 wouldn't have just barely managed to finish the season in the Top 20, but that's what happened to Querrey last year. A little more big event consistency (he managed just two Round of 16 results in the slams in '10) could move him up.
=============================
Andy Roddick, USA (8): he's not really a slam contender anymore (though a good draw in London could give him one final chance before it's over), but he'll likely put up enough good results to hold onto a spot in the bottom of the Top 10.
=============================
Robin Soderling, SWE (5): he's been the best non-Big 2 player in Paris the last two years, but still went 0-2 in Roland Garros finals against Roger and Rafa.
=============================

*3 MORE TO CONSIDER*
Tomas Berdych, CZE (6): he's got the talent to win a slam, but that was the case before he finally reached his first career slam final at Wimbledon last season, too. He could rise still higher, or completely fall out of the running in '11. A clue to what might be about to come could possibly be found in his overall 9-14 record in '10 AFTER having reached the SW19 final.
=============================
Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, FRA (13): if he could stay healthy, he'd be a virtual Top 10 lock. Thing is, he's had a hard time doing that of late.
=============================
Fernando Verdasco, ESP (9): it'd be easy to simply flip him with another Top 10 Spaniard -- Ferrer -- on this list and feel totally fine about it.
=============================

*EARLY SLAM OUTLOOKS*
=AO=
Federer d. Nadal (Alternates: Djokovic, Murray & Soderling)
=RG=
Nadal d. Soderling (Alt: Djokovic, Federer & a player no one predicts)
=WI=
Nadal d. Federer (Alt.: Berdych, Cilic & Murray)
=US=
Federer d. del Potro (Alt.: Djokovic, Murray & Nadal)

All for now.

U.S. Open Final: Building the Perfect Rafa

2010-09-14T19:40:00.000-04:00

Rafael Nadal's tennis career will never again be diminished by any discussion of something that he supposedly CAN'T do.

In 2010, the Spaniard has made quick work of everyone who ever questioned him, making them all look a bit naive, and maybe even a tad foolish for doubting him. Years ago, when he first won Roland Garros on the clay, it was said that he couldn't possibly ever win on the grass at Wimbledon. When he won at the All-England Club, claiming "The Greatest Match Ever Played" against Grass King Roger Federer, hard court was said to be his weakness. Then he won in Melbourne. At that point, the U.S. Open was his "new" Achilles' heel. Just as was the case for Bjorn Borg, it was said, New York would prove to be the one slam city when victory would forever elude him. The season was too long. His body wouldn't hold up. His game just didn't translate to the fast hard courts of Flushing Meadows.

All the speculation proved to be dead wrong. Again. For the one thing that can't be measured by what is seemingly apparent in a single moment in time, as were all the reasonable-at-the-time pronouncements about Nadal's career, is the heart of an athlete who wants to climb every mountain. Each phase of Nadal's career had served as a stepping stone to the next. His defense and physicality on the clay made him a force to contend with on other surfaces, then his willingness to shorten his groundstrokes and develop his volley allowed his game to flourish on the grass, leading to him taking still more topspin off his shots and turning his serve into a powerful weapon in order to contend on the hard courts in New York. Step by step, Nadal has turned himself into a complete player... and the last two weeks -- plus a few extra days due to the rain -- gives him all the ammunition necessary to be included in each and every "greatest ever" debate from here on out.

Of course, it didn't appear that that was going to be the case right before the '10 Open began. Andy Murray had just won the U.S. Open Series and Federer appeared as healthy and honed as ever, while Nadal's lackluster North American summer results seemed to signal that he would produce yet another result that came up short on tennis' biggest stage. There was no reason to think that the Open wasn't going to continue to be the sole chink in the Spaniard's armor. He had to have one, and the odds were that this tournament was it.

Wrong. Once again.

Who'd have thought that all of Nadal's work would come together so perfectly this late in the summer? Who'd have thought that he'd serve better than he ever has in his life (bumping up his average speed about 10 mph throughout the event)? Who'd have believed he'd enter the final having been broken just once in ninety-one service games, or be within three sets of becoming the first man in the Open era to win in New York without dropping a single set?

Poor Novak Djokovic. Even after Mother Nature gave the Serb a Sunday reprieve, and an extra day to recover from his marathon five-set semifinal win over Federer (in which he saved two match points) and rest the ankle he turned during the match, he was still facing an uphill struggle against the world's #1 player in monstrously good form.

In the 1st game of the match, Djokovic's ankle was tested. It held up. But it didn't prevent Nadal from breaking the Serb with a forehand winner (on his sixth break point attempt of the game) to grab a 3-2 lead. Djokovic destroyed his racket on the Ashe Stadium court in response, knowing that in order to have a shot in the match he would need to grab an early advantage and then hope to fight like hell just to stay a half-step ahead. By falling behind, he robbed himself of any hope to get to the soft underbelly of the Spaniard's game, if it indeed even existed after Nadal had yet to be pushed to the limit in Flushing Meadows and walked onto the court on Monday afternoon with a great deal more in the proverbial tank than his opponent.

Nadal won the set at 6-4 in fifty minutes... and the knowledge that he was 106-1 in slam matches after taking the opening set was just one more imposing impediment standing in Djokovic's way on the day.

After breaking his racket, Djokovic's game picked up. Although he lost the 1st set, he got an early break of Nadal's serve in the 2nd. At one point, on the way to taking a 4-1 lead, he even won eleven straight points. Still, knotting the match wasn't going to be easy against a player without an ounce of quit in his bones. Nadal righted himself in time to break and tie the score at 4-4, but at 30/30 in the next game the rains returned to Queens and play was suspended. When the two returned to action hours later under the lights (at about 8pm), Djokovic managed to do what he hadn't in the 1st. He jumped ahead early, getting another break and claiming the first set Nadal had lost all tournament at 7-5.

But, although Djokovic's play was commendable after that point, it was Nadal who completed his mission of rounding himself into "the perfect tennis beast." The Serb held on for as long as he could, saving break point after break point in the 3rd set (nine of ten over just two service games), but the Spaniard took the stanza at 6-4. In the 4th, while Djokovic's game never flatlined, he was still forced to shake his head at the brilliance of some of Nadal's shots at the end of long, competitive rallies as he sprinted toward the finish line in his race for tennis immortality.

The Serb gets immeasurable credit for never giving up or giving in, but in the end he was forced to succumb to the notion that he now may have fully replaced Andy Roddick as the unluckiest man in tennis. The promising American won his first slam title at the Open in 2003, becoming the first man to take a slam after Federer had won his first at Wimbledon two months earlier. As it turned out, Roddick was also the last man to win one before the Federer Era was officially ushed in the following January when he won his second slam in Melbourne. Federer would win eleven of sixteen slams after the '03 Open, and Roddick is STILL seeking his second. Djokovic, who's been #3 in the rankings for most of the last three years, managed to sneak in an Australian Open title in 2008, but has still managed to find himself in an even worse predicament than Roddick -- in his prime at a time when Federer was still in the latter stages of his own, as well as when Nadal was making his ascent (the pair has now won 21 of the last 23 slam titles, and 23 of 26). Now, even as Federer plays out the tail end of his slam-contending career, Nadal seems to hitting HIS peak. The Serb might never be able to crack the code for slam #2... and he won't even be able to blame himself, just his unlucky date of birth.

After he won for the second time at Wimbledon in July, Nadal seemed to be more focused on trying to win in New York than celebrating career slam #8. The Open was the biggest goal on his immediate radar. At around 10pm New York time on Monday night, he achieved that goal, collapsing on his back and rolling over onto his stomach just behind the baseline at the end of his 6-4/5-7/6-4/6-2 triumph. Moments later, on his knees and with his fists to the sky, Nadal basked in the knowledge that he had indeed built "the perfect Rafa."

The wins means that Nadal has become the seventh man to complete the career slam. There'll be no late-career quest for the final piece to HIS legacy's puzzle. From here on out, it'll be about adding layers to his legend. This win alone puts him in a few other select groups: he's the first in thirty-six years to win three straight slams in a single season (Jimmy Connors, when he won the December-held Australian Open in '74), the first since Rod Laver in '69 to win Roland Garros, Wimbledon and the U.S. Open in succession, and he joins only Andre Agassi and Steffi Graf in professional tennis as winners of all four slams AND Olympic singles Gold.

At 24, only Bjorn Borg (a few months younger than Rafa, actually) stands as Nadal's equal when it comes to winning nine slam crowns at such a young age. And the Spaniard, unlike the Swede, isn't likely to retire long before he can wring all the possible major victories out of his playing days as he humanly can. With #9 in his column, he's now more than half-way to Federer's record of sixteen, and is ahead of the Swiss Mister's pace at the same age. As long as Nadal stays reasonably healthy, Federer might be feeling his breath on his neck in a few years. Methinks Roger had better get a couple more slams while he still can if he doesn't want to make Pete Sampras' relatively short reign as the all-time slam king seem long in comparison to his own.

So, after winning on clay. Then grass. Then hard court. Then in New York. What's next?

It could be that Nadal will never be better than he is at this moment. His view from the mountaintop today could very well represent what will be THE zenith of his career. But if we've learned anything this year it's that, much as it always was with Federer during the height of his dominance (he won six of eight slams starting at the age that Rafa finds himself now), it's simply not very wise to say that Nadal CAN'T do something.

Is a "Rafa Slam" next up in Melbourne, with a fourth straight slam win? No one's done that since Laver in '69. What about a TRUE calendar-year Grand Slam? Ditto, Laver forty-one years ago. Sure, such heights aren't likely. Not for anyone. Even Federer has never been able to scale those particular skyscrapers of possibility.

But after believing that Nadal COULDN'T do something in the past, then seeing him do just that. Multiple times, in fact. Maybe the sky IS the limit.

Talk about a game of hot potato. Yesterday, with the long rain delay, CBS passed off the Men's final to ESPN2, which began to broadcast at around 8pm. With the second game of the Monday Night Football doubleheader scheduled to begin on ESPN2 at 10:15, viewers would have been forced to move to a third network -- ESPN Classic -- to watch the conclusion of the match had it gone past that time. Thankfully, Nadal and Djokovic obliged and got things over quickly... then you could just feel the rushed-along nature of the post-match trophy presentation. If Bill MacAtee had put his earplug up to the microphone, I'm sure we would have heard a director yelling, "Shut up and let Rafa grab the trophy before we run out of time!!!" Sure enough, as soon as Nadal lifted the trophy above his head, the network feed from Flushing Meadows was cut off and ESPN2 went to the game in Kansas City at 10:15.

Whew! Talk about by the skin of their teeth.

*CAREER SLAM SINGLES TITLES - MEN*
16...Roger Federer
14...Pete Sampras
12...Roy Emerson
11...Bjorn Borg
11...Rod Laver
10...Bill Tilden
9...RAFAEL NADAL

*CAREER SLAMS - MEN*
[AO-RG-WI-US]
Fred Perry (1-1-3-3), 1933-36
Don Budge (1-1-2-2), 1937-38
Roy Emerson (6-2-2-2), 1961-67
Rod Laver (3-2-4-2), 1960-69
Andre Agassi (4-1-1-2), 1992-03
Roger Federer (4-1-6-5), 2003-10
RAFAEL NADAL (1-5-2-1), 2005-10

*WON THREE STRAIGHT SLAMS - OPEN ERA/MEN*
1969 Rod Laver, AUS (won all 4)
1974 Jimmy Connors, USA (single season)
1993-94 Pete Sampras, USA
2005-06 Roger Federer, SUI
2006-07 Roger Federer, SUI
2010 RAFAEL NADAL, SUI (single season)
[won Roland Garros-Wimbledon-US Open]
1969 Rod Laver
2010 RAFAEL NADAL

*WON ALL FOUR SLAMS, OLYMPICS SINGLES, GOLD*
Andre Agassi, USA (also won SEC)
Steffi Graf, GER (also won SEC)
RAFAEL NADAL, ESP
--
NOTE #1: Serena Williams & Roger Federer have won all 4 slams and Olympic Doubles Gold (as well as SEC)
NOTE #2: Justine Henin needs only Wimbledon title for all 4 slams (& has won Singles Gold and SEC)

All for now.

Wimbledon Final: The King of Clay... and Grass?

2010-07-05T00:12:00.003-04:00

Second verse, same as the first.

Until a few months ago, Rafael Nadal had had a pretty tough year or so. Family issues. Knee problems. The inability to defend his Wimbledon title. Real questions about the length and overall scope of his career. He even went a year without winning a title.

Ever since he turned 24 on the third of June, though, the Spaniard has been golden.

Still, there was some reason to believe that Nadal might have a battle on his hands in the Gentlemen's singles final against Tomas Berdych. The Czech fit the casting call for an "old time" SW19 champ to a "t." Six-foot-five, and armed with a big serve and powerful ground game, he'd the spent the last few weeks finally making good on his long-time potential. He reached his first grand slam semifinal in Paris, then came to London and simply ended Roger Federer's seven-year run of appearances in the final by dispatching the six-time and defending champ in the quarterfinals en route to his own first slam final.

Berdych's countrymen and women have a long history of success at the All-England Club. But save for Martina Navratilova (who actually only won two of her nine Ladies titles as a Czech citizen) and Jan Kodes ('73 champ, but an early-round loser in twelve of his fifteen trips to SW19), they've often been star-crossed, as well. Hana Mandlikova had a game built for grass, but had to contend with Navratilova and Chris Evert (she lost to both in finals) thoughout her career. Ivan Lendl reached two finals, but never won. Jana Novotna had one of the most fabled major final collapses in tennis history, and will probably always be remembered for that more than her eventual Wimbledon title five years later.

In the final match of an historic Championships, Berdych was positioned to end a slam as one had never ended one before. Last fall, Juan Martin del Potro became the first man to defeat both Federer and Nadal on his way to a slam crown at the U.S. Open, but a win by the Czech over #1 Nadal would complete an unprecedented sweep in a single slam of all three of the top-ranked men's players in the game, following wins over #2 Federer and #3 Novak Djokovic.

But it wasn't meant to be.

Coming into the final on a thirteen-match Wimbledon winning streak, Nadal's serve was never broken on the afternoon (Berdych was 0-for-4 on break point attempts), while the Spaniard managed to break his opponent's serve four times in the match (4-for-6 on BP), three times in the final game of a set to put the stanza in his own personal victory column. Nadal won 6-3/7-5/6-4, blazing a forehand passing shot past the Czech on match point and then collapsing on his back in exultation at the Centre Court baseline.

Rarely has Rafa, by now a definitive Wimbledon crowd favorite (even after drumming Andy Murray out of the tournament in the SF), had a better sense of the moment. This time around, he even added a celebratory somersault in front of the net to his usual post-slam rituals, which once again included him taking a "good luck bite" out of the trophy while the photog's cameras flash. While his previous Gentlemen's title was treated as the reward at the end of a concerted effort to transform himself into a fine grass court player, this one took on a far different feel. It's significance is potentially monumental.

Nadal has reached the Wimbledon final in his last four appearances, and won in his last two. In the 2008 final, he bested Federer in "The Greatest Match Ever Played," and is currently sporting a 25-2 record at the All-England Club since 2006. Has the "King of Clay" become "The King of Grass," as well?

If he has, it places one more check mark in Nadal's career column when it comes to judging the "ultimate champ" in the long-running, but good-natured, rivalry between Rafa and Federer, a "contest" in which a "winner" won't be declared until both have hung up their rackets. With a 14-7 head-to-head advantage versus Federer, and already the acknowledged better of the two on clay, Nadal's grass court accomplishments are catching up, as well. Now comes the hard part. Literally.

Seven times in the Open era, men has won back-to-back titles at Roland Garros and Wimbledon, including Nadal ('08/'10) and Federer ('09) the last three seasons, but none have been able to add a third slam win at the U.S. Open since Rod Laver did it in his Grand Slam season in 1969. Nadal is still declaring his quest for a title in New York to be the biggest goal for the rest of his career, just as his singular pursuits of a Wimbledon title ('08) and hard court slam (AO '09) were in the past.

After claiming his eighth career slam title (half-way to Federer's 16) in just his twenty-fifth slam (RF had five at the same stage), the long-term success over the remainder of Nadal's career will rest on how well his body holds up and his ability to alter his game enough in order to conserve himself and take pressure off his ailing knees. So far, he's managed to win on grass while flattening out his shots and moving forward more often, shortening the points on a faster surface and giving himself a better shot to win. There's a reason why he has a two-handed grasp on the #1 ranking these days, and it's not because he's the best clay courter in the world.

Next up is NYC.

Nadal might not lift the Open trophy come September, but a case can be made that he has as good or better a shot to do it as Federer had to complete HIS career slam with a win at Roland Garros. After all, Nadal has no equivalent, as Federer faced, to himself-in-Paris to contend with at Flushing Meadows. Plus, defending champ del Potro won't be there, Murray still doesn't look slam-worthy (and, truthfully, neither does Djokovic), and Federer's health and form will have to be sured up if he's to "rise from the dead" in the face of the many probably-premature career epitaphs that are once again being uttered about his already-legendary athletic life's work. Federer finally got his RG title last year when Nadal's health made him something "less" than his usual self, and Nadal might just find a similar situation awaiting him in the Big Apple at the end of the summer.

Actually, as long as Nadal makes it to late August without a recurrence of his knee tendinitis (which isn't a lock, considering he had a minor flare-up when he was twice forcerd to five sets in the opening week of the London fortnight), Federer might still be the best bet to be the "last line of defense" against a true Rafa run at matching Laver's accomplishment. The Swiss Mister has less than two months to get fully healthy and round his game into form. If he can, maybe the one grand stage where he and Nadal have never met could provide yet another epic moment on the biggest stage of them all.

We can only hope.

But that's a story for September. Today, Rafa is the King... yes, of grass..

*CAREER SLAM TITLES - ALL-TIME*
16 - Roger Federer
14 - Pete Sampras
12 - Roy Emerson
11 - Bjorn Borg
11 - Rod Laver
10 - Bill Tilden
8 - Andre Agassi
8 - Jimmy Connors
8 - Ivan Lendl
8 - RAFAEL NADAL
8 - Fred Perry
8 - Ken Rosewall

*BACK-TO-BACK ROLAND GARROS/WIMBLEDON TITLES*
[Open era]
1969 Rod Laver, AUS
1978 Bjorn Borg, SWE
1979 Bjorn Borg, SWE
1980 Bjorn Borg, SWE
2008 Rafael Nadal, ESP
2009 Roger Federer, SUI
2010 Rafael Nadal, ESP

*BACK-TO-BACK WIMBLEDON/U.S. OPEN TITLES*
[Open era]
1969 Rod Laver, AUS
1974 Jimmy Connors, USA
1981 John McEnroe, USA
1982 Jimmy Connors, USA
1984 John McEnroe, USA
1989 Boris Becker, GER
1993 Pete Sampras, USA
1995 Pete Sampras, USA
2004 Roger Federer, SUI
2005 Roger Federer, SUI
2006 Roger Federer, SUI
2007 Roger Federer, SUI

*CONSECUTIVE SLAM SF - SINCE 2000*
[non-Federer/Nadal]
=5=
Novak Djokovic - 2007-08 RG/WI/US/AO/RG
=3=
Marat Safin - 2001-02 US/AO/RG
=2=
Magnus Norman - 2000 AO/RG
Pete Sampras - 2000 WI/US
Sebastien Grosjean - 2001 AO/RG
Lleyton Hewitt - 2002 WI/US
Andre Agassi - 2002-03 US/AO
Andre Agassi - 2003-04 US/AO
Juan Carlos Ferrero - 2003-04 US/AO
Lleyton Hewitt - 2004-05 US/AO
Lleyton Hewitt - 2005 WI/US
David Nalbandian - 2006 AO/RG
Andy Roddick - 2006-07 US/AO
TOMAS BERDYCH - 2010 RG/WI

All for now.

They'll Always Have Court 18

2010-06-26T17:43:00.000-04:00

[June 23 - "The Match on the Edge of Forever"]

There's a point in some seemingly (and gloriously) never-ending moments in athletic competition when sport effortlessly transforms into spectacle. Today was one of those days.

When American John Isner and Frenchman Nicolas Mahut returned to Court 18 on Day 3 to complete the 5th set of their suspended match from yesterday, they had no idea that history had a special corner of immortality reserved specifically for them.

The All-England Club has given us many men's tennis memories over the years, and they just keep on being presented to us on a silver serving tray. In 1980, Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe combined to produce what many have long considered the greatest tie-break ever in their 18-16 4th set battle in the final. In 2008, Wimbledon gave us "The Greatest Match Ever Played" between Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer for the Men's title. A year ago, Federer and Andy Roddick played the "Greatest Set Ever" in that 16-14 5th in the championship match. Today, it was "The Longest Match Ever Played."

There were times today when you looked at the scoreboard in the 5th set and were briefly overtaken by a fit of giddy laugher. You hardly believed what you saw, and part of you never wanted it to end. 16-16. 28-28. 39-39. 47-47. 59-59. You just had to shake your head.

Oh, things could have taken a different turn. Isner held four match points today, including two in a row at 33-32. Mahut held two break points at 50-50, his first in the match since yesterday. Isner had MP #4 at 59-58, exactly twenty-four hours after this match had been suspended for darkness on Tuesday. Isner didn't allow a break of HIS serve, and Mahut hit an ace of his own to extend the match on the American's fourth match point. At 9:10pm London time, the match was suspended yet again with the score knotted at 59-59 in the 5th. The crowd's chant of "we want more" went unaddressed. But we WILL get more... only it'll be tomorrow..

More of Mahut leaping and crashing to the ground. More of Isner digging himself out of trouble with his pulverizing serve. More holds of serve. More exceptional sportsmanship. More of a little taste of everything that can be right and good in sport. Round and round they'll go. When they'll stop, no one really knows.

Is the century mark in games being necessary to win even remotely possible? It's easy to laugh at the thought, but so was the notion that this match would be suspended again for darkness when there were two and a half hours of light left earlier today. Yet, here we are.

The numbers, so far, are staggering:

* - Isner and Mahut's two-day match has now lasted nine hours and fifty-eight mintues. Previously, the longest match ever played was 6:33, in the 1st Round of Roland Garros between Fabrice Santoro and Arnaud Clement. Today's 5th set alone was over 7:00.

* - a 36-34 set between two guys named Brown in the 3rd Round of a tournament in Kansas City in 1969 had been the all-time record for games in a singles set. With Isner/Mahut already at 59-59, the sky's the limit here.

* - before today, the most games ever played in a single match was 112, in a 1969 Wimbledon 1st Rounder between Pancho Gonzalez and Charlie Passarell. There were 118 in today's 5th set alone, and there have been 163 in the match.

* - both Isner (98) and Mahut (95) broke Ivo Karlovic's single match record (78) for aces. Isner had 70, and Mahut 69, in the 5th set today. The previous COMBINED record for aces by two players had been 84. They've both INDIVIDUALLY passed that mark, combined for 139 in the 5th set, and have more than doubled the past mark with 193 for the match.

* - so far, Isner has produced 218 winners, while Mahut has 217.

And the match STILL isn't over. Needless to say, it's understandable that the court-side scoreboard literally broke down at 47-47 in the final set. Even technology was at this match's mercy today. If tomorrow never comes, we'll always have Day 3 on Court 18.

Of course, it WILL come. And when it's all finally over, read the scoreboard and weap. Giggle, too. Even stare at it in awe.

We won't be seeing something like this ever again.

June 24 - "Forever and Three Days... plus Eleven Hours, Five Mintues, One-Hundred Eighty-Three Games, Two-Hundred Fifteen Aces and Nine-Hundred Eighty-Two Points"

Well, Court 18's long international moment in the sun finally ended on Day 4. "The Match on the Edge of Forever" was actually completed today.

Hey, all it took was three days, eleven hours and five minutes of match play (1:05 today), 183 games, 215 total aces and 980 points for John Isner to defeat Nicolas Mahut in the 1st Round of Wimbledon.

The end came in game #183, just minutes after #182 had seen Isner serve his way out of a love/30 hole at 68-68 in the 5th set. After having failed earlier in the game to convert his fifth match point of the contest, Isner strung together back-to-back winners to etch his name in the tennis history book when he won on match point #6 to claim the deciding set at 70-68. The final stats say that Mahut won twenty-four more total points than Isner over the course of the twice-suspended marathon, but the American's record-setting 112 aces (compared to the Frenchman's second-most ever 103) provided the edge that got him the victory.

After posing for photos with the once-in-several-lifetimes scoreboard and accepting gifts and momentos from the likes of British past champions Ann Jones and Tim Henman, the two men walked off the court and into immortality. Isner's "activity" page will always say that he was the only official "winner" today, but that's not really true. Mahut, like Isner, won a great many fans over the last few days. But, maybe more importantly, tennis once again showed why a "funny little game" played with stringed rackets and fuzzy balls can be as compelling as just about any other competition you'll likely to find.

See you in another life, brothers.

June 25 - Day 5 Notes

Proving that no good deed goes unpunished, John Isner returned to the All-England Club to play his 2nd Round match today against Thiemo de Bakker. Sporting shoulder and neck injuries, plus a nasty blister on his foot, he followed up his longest-ever eleven-hour-plus match and record-breaking 112-ace performance in Round 1 with a straight sets loss (the shortest men's match so far at this Wimbledon) and his first career ace-less match. It goes without saying, though, that we sort of saw this one coming. It tarnishes nothing.

June 26 - Day 6 Notes

It's just the match that keeps on giving.

Even while John Isner had no aces in his 2nd Round loss to Thiemo de Bakker, on the same day, he miraculously picked up one more in his 1st Round match. Further intensive study of "The Match on the Edge of Forever" uncovered that he'd actually tossed in 113 aces rather than the piddling number of 112 that he'd been credited with at the end of the eleven hour, five minute marathon.

All for now.

BACKSPIN TIME CAPSULE: 1987 Wimbledon

2010-06-16T13:41:00.002-04:00

A would-be star whose career prospects would forever be hampered either by destructively raging emotions or a succession of injuries that never allowed him to fully explore the possibilties of his talent brilliantly putting all his natural gifts together for one two-week stretch versus an established champion with a stoic and/or so-called boring persona in comparison to his flashier opponents attempting to claim the final elusive piece of tennis hardware which would at once both silence his critics and secure a leading place in the sport's history.

At its heart, that was the match-up in the 1987 Wimbledon final between Pat Cash and Ivan Lendl.

22-year old Australian Cash was a former Wimbledon boys champ and #1-ranked junior in the world, but a succession of injuries had prevented him from ever living up to his early potential. For one twelve-month period, though, he came close. From January '87 to January '88, he reached three out of five slam finals (Wimbledon was the second in the stretch). Thing is, when he played all four slam events in '87 it turned out to be the only time after his 19th birthday that he managed to do it in a career that saw him play his last slam match at age 32. Czechoslovakia's Lendl, on the other hand, reached EIGHT consecutive U.S. Open finals, lifted three of the four men's title cups (taking multiple titles at each), won nearly one hundred tour titles and spent 270 weeks at #1. But his career-long difficulties on grass courts forever left him underrated by many, as his perceived failure in London overshadowed his success everywhere else, and his off-putting persona and "boring" game (remember, he was playing in an era when personality-plus people named McEnroe and Connors led the way) resulted in Sports Illustrated placing him on the cover under the headline "The Champion That Nobody Cares About."

On that July afternoon at the All-England Club, the historical perception of one's career was set to change forever.

July 5, 1987 - "The Czech was Bounced by Cash"

This was a match that was heartbreaking for one man while it was a dream come true for another. Patrick Hart Cash, Jr., 22, the Aussie who admits he would rather lie on the beach, drink, get a tan and weigh 270 pounds defeated Ivan Lendl for his first Wimbledon championship 7-6(5)/6-2/7-5.

Even though Cash lost only one set in the fortnight this victory would have to be considered something of a comeback. On June 24, 1985 he was ranked #7 in the world, but he began to have back problems and eventually would be out of action for seven months after surgery on a herniated disk. He then had an emergency appendectomy seventeen days before last year's Wimbledon. With his world ranking having plummeted to #413, he accepted a wild card entry into the '86 Championships that was offered mainly because of his popularity with the London punk rocker girls who screamed at every move he made. He ended up making the quarterfinals before his legs tired.

Before this fortnight, Pat Cash was known chiefly for his temper (even though he had made the Wimbledon semis in 1984 and lost the final of the Australian Open in January) and being severely criticized by former Aussie players and the Australian press for his antics on the court that were so different from the reserved champions from Down Under in the past. He was so angry at the '84 U.S. Open that he threw his racket into the crowd and then claimed that he was just tossing it to a fan. And even though he says he matured during his long absence from the game, he threw a punch at a TV cameraman after a Davis Cup practice in December. What can you expect from a man who says his favorite tennis player has always been John McEnroe?

Cash's remarks about women's tennis following the French Open lost him many of his young fans, so he advanced through the rounds this year without much fanfare. He reportedly called the women's game "rubbish," and "overpaid junk" and wondered aloud why anyone would bother to watch it. He has since said he was misquoted. But, by then, the damage has already been done.

No matter how people feel about Cash, you have to commend him for his performance here. He kept his temper under control and played the tournament of his life. In winning he became only the second Wimbledon junior champ (Bjorn Borg is the other) to win the Gentlemen's crown, and the first Australian man to win the title since John Newcombe in 1971. He was also the first Aussie man to win a slam event of any kind since Mark Edmondson won the Australian Open in 1976.

The 1st set was on serve at 6-6. Cash had breezed through his service games, while Lendl had struggled. Cash took a 6-1 lead in the tie-break, and went on to win it 7-5 to claim the set. In the 2nd set, Cash broke Lendl in game #3, then again in #5 after Lendl double-faulted three times. The Czech slammed down his racket after he had a second DF in a row. Cash was up 4-1. He won the 2nd at 6-2, but the most amazing fact was that he allowed Lendl zero points on his serve in the entire set.

In game #4 of the 3rd set, Lendl had his first break point opportunity of the by-then two-hour long match. He locked away the break and eventually took 4-1 and 5-3 leads. But in game #9, Lendl once again double-faulted, this time on break point, and it was 5-4. Cash would get a break once again two games later, then easily held his own serve at love to claim the set at 7-5 and take the title. He raised his arms in triumph after a brilliant performance.

But then Cash broke Wimbledon tradition, as you could expect from a man with a diamond stud in his ear. He immediately ran off Centre Court and into the stands. He climbed up ten rows and over the television booth, into the friends box, to share his victory with the people closest to him. The first person he hugged was his dad, Pat Sr., and it was a truly touching moment. To coach Ian Barclay, he said, "We f---ing showed them."

"To be honest, holding the cup up to photographers wasn't what I wanted to do then. I just wanted to get off the court and see the people that meant the most to me." - Cash

Through all of this, Lendl, 27, had to sit and watch and ponder another loss in a Wimbledon final, his second in a row. He lost to Boris Becker in three sets last year, and vowed that he would win in '87. He played well this time around, and when two-time defending champ Becker was stunned by Peter Doohan in the 2nd Round it seemed as if this would be the year he would do it. But it wasn't meant to be, as he ran into a steamroller named Cash. Lendl has yet to win a major tournament on grass and today he once again showed that even though he is the #1 player in the world he is just an above average player on grass, as his "manufactured" grass court game was totally outclassed by Cash's more natural moves. Lendl has gone through this type of adversity before -- it took him four slam final losses before he won his first three years ago in Paris -- and it seems as if it's happening all over again at Wimbledon. Whether it be his personality or his failure to win big matches there always seems to be something in his way that prevents him from being what he CAN be -- one of the greatest players of all time.

"I believe at presentations the second one shouldn't be there. He should just be allowed to leave. It's a miserable feeling." - Lendl

Lendl made the Wimbledon semis in '83 and '84, then the final the last two seasons, and is making slow but steady progress on the grass. He so desperately wants to win here because he feels that he must in order to be considered one of the best in the game's history. But, as Lendl notes, "(Ken) Rosewall didn't win here, but everyone would agree that he was a great." He offered to give up every other match win in 1987 for a victory at Wimbledon. He says he will "win it or die first," and you can believe that he will push himself even more next year than he did the last to achieve his lofty dream.

But even though you can feel sorry for Lendl, you can also feel good for Cash. For he deserved to be the Wimbledon champion this year. No doubt about it.

...Cash, who lost a single set while winning the Wimbledon title, is still remembered for his famous checkered headband and groundbreaking climb into the stands. It's become tennis' version of the Gatorade bucket dump that originated with the New York Giants' Super Bowl run around the same period, and both have become victorious traditions in the twenty-plus years since. Both were born in spur-of-the-moment fits of jubilation, but now seem rote, obligatory and often tired, going-through-the-motions celebrations (Schiavone at Roland Garros being a rare exception.) I suppose those climbs will continue forever... or at least until a player falls and breaks a leg/separates a shoulder en route to the friends box.

As far as his actual tennis accomplishments, Cash's junior career was sterling. He was the world #1 and the Boys runner-up at the Australian Open in 1981, then won both junior slams at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open in '82. Aside from his '87 Wimbledon final, his other two slam final appearances both came at the Australian Open in 1987 and '88, the former the last time the event was played on grass courts and the latter the first at the current Melbourne Park hard court site. Both were five-set losses, to Stefan Edberg in '87 and Mats Wilander a year later in an 8-6 final set that was (and still is) the longest in a Men's final in Oz since Rod Laver defeated Neale Fraser in another 8-6 final set in 1960. That same match was the first grand slam final contested indoors, as well, when the stadium roof was closed during the match because of rain.

Cash reached a career-high of #4 during the '88 season, but he only finished in the year-end Top 10 twice ('84 & '87) in his career. After reaching the QF during his Wimbledon title defense in '88, he never advanced that far in a slam again. Due to a succession of injuries that included the aforementioned back injury, knee problems and an Achilles' tendon tear, Cash's career will forever be one riddled with "what if's." He only won seven singles titles during his career, the last coming in 1990. After Wimbledon in '88, Cash was able to appear in only thirteen more slams until he retired for good in 1997. His final slam match came at Wimbledon that season, ten years after his career had reached its ultimate zenith. He suffered a 1st Round loss.

Since his career ended, Cash has lived mostly in London. He has been a coach, a television commentator (always opinionated, and usually ruffling feathers), a rock musician, and even was the tennis instructor for actors Kirsten Dunst and Paul Bettany during the filming of the "Wimbledon" movie.

Cash may have been a Wimbledon champion, but Lendl's career surpassed the Aussie's by miles and miles.

The Czech-born Lendl won eight career slams, played in nineteen slam finals (at least one in eleven consecutive seasons from 1981-91), won 94 tour singles titles (second all-time), reached ten consecutive slam SF from 1985-88 (behind only Federer's just-ended string of twenty-three), won forty-four straight matches in 1981-82 (second to Guillermo Vilas' record of 46), appeared in nine consecutive Masters Cup finals (winning five), was ranked #1 for a then-record 270 weeks and retired as the all-time leader in career earnings.

Lendl is still alive and well, but in spite of his "win it or die first" promise, he never did win Wimbledon. After at first being put off-balance by the bad bounces (on the softer and more worn lawns compared to the more-true All-England Club lawns of today) of grass courts, his less-than-natural volleys, sometimes-inconsistent (though often big) serve and his own inclination to resent the surface (he said it was for cows, and alleged that he was allergic to grass -- then was seen soon after playing golf), Lendl worked hard to make himself a good grass court player. He even skipped Roland Garros twice in order to get extra practice time in preparation for the grass season. But there was always someone better than him at SW19... and usually ONLY one. From 1983-90, Lendl was defeated five times by the eventual champion. After his back-to-back finals in '86-'87, he reached the semis from '88-'90, but lost each year to either Boris Becker (twice) or Edberg as that duo faced off in three consecutive finals (I did a "Time Capsule" on their third meeting, by the way).

Unfortunately, that bad luck of the draw has served to help make Lendl one of the more forgotten great players of the past twenty-five years. He was never as brash and/or entertaining as Connors or McEnroe, nor as engaging/exciting as Becker, and he probably-unfairly developed a reputation for coming up short in big matches. Even arguably his most famous victory, in the '84 Roland Garros final, is known more for the fact that McEnroe lost a two sets to none lead on the only surface on which the American never won a slam rather than for the fact that Lendl came back from 0-2 down to claim his first slam title after going winless in his first four attempts. No matter that his big-hitting baseline game and training techniques paved the way for the generation of players that followed, he was destined to pale in comparison to the bigger "stars" in the sport even while he was the dominant figure on tour. If he'd been able to complete a career grand slam by winning Wimbledon he might have been able to outlive and outrun those comparisons and win out over them in the end, but it never quite happened for him. He finally retired due to back problems in 1994.

Lendl was elected to the Tennis Hall of Fame in 2001. Cash has not been, and likely never will be... but the imitation-is-the-most-sincere-form-of-flattery reminders of his climb into the Centre Court stands, replicated at the conclusion of nearly every slam final, continues to stand as one of the coolest of sports legacies, don't you think?

And that, plus a Wimbledon title, ain't so bad.

*WIMBLEDON TITLES - AUSTRALIAN MEN*
[Open era]
1968 Rod Laver
1969 Rod Laver
1970 John Newcombe
1971 John Newcombe
1987 PAT CASH
2002 Lleyton Hewitt

*CAREER ATP TITLES*
109...Jimmy Connors
94...IVAN LENDL
77...John McEnroe
64...Pete Sampras
62...Roger Federer
62...Bjorn Borg
62...Guillermo Vilas
60...Andre Agassi

*WEEKS AT ATP #1*
286...Pete Sampras
285...Roger Federer
270...IVAN LENDL
268...Jimmy Connors
170...John McEnroe

*CONSECUTIVE WEEKS AT ATP #1*
237...Roger Federer, 2004-08
160...Jimmy Connors, 1974-77
157...IVAN LENDL, 1983-88
102...Pete Sampras, 1993-95

All for now.

PREVIOUS TIME CAPSULES:
1987 Roland Garros (Graf), 1989 Roland Garros (Sanchez/Chang), 1990 Roland Garros (Seles/Gomez), 1990 Wimbledon (Navratilova), 1990 Wimbledon (Edberg/Becker), 1991 U.S. Open (Connors), 1993 Australian Open (Seles & Courier), 1993 Wimbledon (Graf/Novotna), 2003 & '05 U.S. Open (Henin/Clijsters), 2001-09 Australian Open (Dokic Down Under)

2010 Clay Court Awards: Rafa Runs Rampant

2010-06-11T01:49:00.000-04:00

Back in January, Roger Federer was once again the unquestioned #1 in the world. My, how times have changed... again.

**2010 Clay Court (2Q) Awards**
*TOP PLAYERS*
1. Rafael Nadal, ESP
...a year ago, Nadal's aura was damaged, he was fighting against the breakup of his parents' marriage, and his knee tendinitis was threatening to shorten and blunt the effectiveness of his career. Flashforward to 2010 and he's unbeatable again on clay (22-0 this season), is the Roland Garros champion for a fifth time and is back in the #1 ranking. But what's on his mind is trying to find a way to win the U.S. Open. Between the attempt to reach that goal and now? Oh, just Wimbledon and his return to the All-England Club for the first time since "The Greatest Match Ever Played," where the defending champ -- a certain Swiss gentleman -- is once again trying to hold onto as much of his power as superhumanly as possible. Really, this summer's ATP storyline just writes itself, doesn't it?
2. Robin Soderling, SWE
...a guy could have a worse career resume than being known as the first (and, so far, only) player to defeat Rafa in Paris AND the man responsible for ending Federer's run of twenty-three straight slam semifinals.
3. Daniel Nestor & Nenad Zimonjic, CAN/SRB
...they're back at #1 in the points race, so let the year-long battle with the Bryan twins commence once more.
4. Fernando Verdasco, ESP
...he made three finals, but was overshadowed by that OTHER Spaniard.
5. Jurgen Melzer, AUT & Tomas Berdych, CZE
...sure to be future answers to a trivia question about past Roland Garros semifinalists.
HM- David Ferrer, ESP

**RISERS**
1. Robin Soderling, SWE
2. Fernando Verdasco, ESP
3. Tomas Berdych, CZE
4. Mikhail Youzhny, RUS
5. Sam Querrey, USA
6. John Isner, USA
7. Nicolas Almagro, ESP
8. Thomaz Bellucci, BRA
9. Marin Cilic, CRO
10. Stanislas Wawrinka, SUI
HM- Guillermo Garcia-Lopez, ESP

**NEW FACES**
1. Thiemo de Bakker, NED
2. Ernests Gulbis, LAT
3. Leonardo Mayer, ARG
4. Santiago Giraldo, COL
5. Rohan Bopanna/Aisam-Ul-Haq Qureshi, IND/PAK
6. Philip Petzschner, GER
7. Agustin Velotti, ARG (jr.)
8. Andrea Collarini, USA (jr.)
9. Filip Krajinovic, SRB
10. Lukas Lacko, SVK
HM- Bradley Klahn, Stanford University

**SURPRISES**
1. Albert Montanes, ESP
2. Teimuraz Gabashvili, RUS
3. Frederico Gil, POR
4. Potito Starace, ITA
5. HoraCio Zeballos, ARG
6. Florent Serra, FRA
7. Oleksandr Dolgopolov Jr., UKR
8. Marc Lopez, ESP
9. Fabio Fognini, ITA
10. Julian Reister, GER
HM- Albert Ramos-Vinolas, ESP

**VETERANS**
1. Daniel Nestor & Nenad Zimonjic, CAN/SRB
2. David Ferrer, ESP
3. Jurgen Melzer, AUT
4. Nenad Zimonjic, SRB
5. Bob & Mike Bryan, USA
6. Fabio Fognini, ITA
7. Juan Ignacio Chela, ARG
8. Wesley Moodie & Dick Norman, RSA/BEL
9. Lukas Dlouhy & Leander Paes, CZE/IND
10. Robby Ginepri, USA
HM- Julian Knowle & Andy Ram, AUT/ISR

**COMEBACKS**
1. Richard Gasquet, FRA
2. Robby Ginepri, USA
3. Marcos Baghdatis, CYP
4. Lleyton Hewitt, AUS
5. Nicolas Massu, CHI
HM- David Nalbandian, ARG

**DOWN**
1. Roger Federer, SUI
2. Juan Carlos Ferrero, ESP
3. Novak Djokovic, SRB
4. Andy Murray, GBR
5. Nikolay Davydenko, RUS
HM- Fernando Gonzalez, CHI

**BEST PERFORMANCES**
Seriously? SERIOUSLY?
...Rafael Nadal's clay season couldn't have been more astounding. He went 22-0, won four titles (including a fifth RG), became the first man in the Open Era to win the same tournament six years in a row when he once again was crowned Monte Carlo champ, broke Andre Agassi's ATP record with his eighteenth career Masters title in Madrid and lost just TWO sets all spring. Whew!
Sixty-One Down, One to Go
...the Bryan twins win in Madrid for their sixty-first career title as a team, tying Todd Woodbridge & Mark Woodforde's all-time ATP mark
When Losing is Sorta Like "Winning"
...in Rome, Ernests Gulbis got a win over Roger Federer and won a set off Rafael Nadal in the semifinal. It turned out to be one of those two sets that Rafa lost out of the fifty-one he played this spring.
When Just One Won't Do
...Nenad Zimonjic swept both the Men's Doubles and Mixed Doubles titles at Roland Garros

**TOP MATCHES**
[I Went to a Tennis Match and the World Cup Broke Out]
Roland Garros 2nd Rd. - Fognini d. Monfils
...2-6/4-6/7-5/6-4/9-7. A Frenchman blowing a two sets to none lead. An Italian fails to convert three match points in near-nighttime conditions, arguing with officials in front of an unruly crowd as he tried to get the match suspended for darkness. It finally was, at 5-5 in the 5th after 10pm. The next day, Fognini finally won on his fourth MP.
[An Uncommon Occurrence]
Belgrade Final - Querrey d. Isner
...3-6/7-6/6-4. Two Americans in a clay final... and it wasn't even the green kind, either. Querrey saved a match point against his doubles partner to get the title.
[Old Gray Rivalry Ain't What It Used To Be... well, this time]
Madrid Final - Nadal d. Federer
...6-4/7-6. In their first meeting in a year, the match ends when Federer whiffs on a forehand. Sure, it was a bad bounce and understandable... but the image was damning, especially after what happened later in Paris.
[The Blind Scottish Squirrel Finds a Nut]
Roland Garros 1st Rd. - Murray d. Gasquet
...4-6/6-7/6-4/6-2/6-1. Sure, Murray gets credit for finding something good during his awful spring when he won this 4:00 match after falling down two sets to none. Of course, that this wasn't even the FIRST time that Gasquet had blown a two-set lead to Murray in a slam match tends to hang much of the "credit" on the Frenchman's shoulders.
[History, Smistory]
Roland Garros QF - Soderling d. Federer
...3-6/6-3/7-5/6-4. Twenty-three straight slam semifinals is PRETTY good, I guess. Of course, so was that 12-0 career record against Soderling.

=THE GOOD=
Richard Gasquet wins in Nice. It's his first singles title since 2007.

=THE BAD=
Both Gasquet and Gael Monfils blow two sets to none leads and lose in front of their home nations fans at Roland Garros
=============================
Speaking of blowing two sets to none leads, Novak Djokovic did it for the first time in his career. As a result of that QF match at Roland Garros, Jurgen Melzer reached his first career slam SF.
=============================
Roger Federer loses the #1 ranking following his 285th career week in the spot, just one week behind Pete Sampras' ATP record

=AND THE UGLY=
Juan Martin del Potro's wrist injury kept him out of Roland Garros, and he'll miss Wimbledon and the U.S. Open, too

And, now, the next battleground awaits on the grass.

The last time Nadal was at Wimbledon, he was winning "The Greatest Match Ever Played." In 2009, Federer went into a Rafa-less All-England Club and won his sixth title in seven years, running his grass court record to an absurd 72-1 since '03 and following up his "GMEP" loss with a win in arguably "The Greatest Set Ever Played" against Andy Roddick in the final.

What could they possibly do as an encore to the encore? Let your mind explore the possibilities.

All for now.

Roland Garros Final: The Superiority of the Long-Distance Rafa

2010-06-06T20:13:00.005-04:00

When his body is accomodating, Rafael Nadal is tennis' equivalent of a record-shattering long-distance runner. If a player seeks to go the long way around him to achieve a win, their chances are slim. If they try to do it on clay, they're even less. At Roland Garros? The chances keep getting smaller.

So why did some think that the Spaniard might be challenged today in the Roland Garros final against Robin Soderling?

Well, surprisingly, there WAS reason to believe. Or at least the mirage proved tempting. After all, the hard-hitting Swede HAD defeated Nadal in Paris a year ago, making him the only man in Nadal's previous thirty-eight career RG matches who'd ever managed to defeat him. Soderling defeated defending champion Roger Federer in the quarterfinals earlier this week, too, ending his record of twenty-three straight appearances in slam semifinals. Even John McEnroe, while picking Nadal to win, had thought the match would go five sets.

Like I said, though, Nadal's "vulnerability" was just a figment of everyone's imagination.

Of course, Soderling DID have a few chances to possibly make a match of this men's final, but his inability to grab any advantage when it presented itself only served to make his chances tinier and tinier until they entirely disappeared from existence. In the 1st set, he had a break point on Nadal's serve in the fourth game, then two more in game #7. In the 2nd set, he had four in game #2 alone (the third of which the Spaniard turned away by playing miraculous defense, wrestling control of the point away from the Swede, then winning the point with a volley winner). Nadal held in that game, then turned his position deep in the backcourt, seemingly out of the point, into an honest-to-goodness winner when he stretched as far as he could and still managed to hit a backhand crosscourt winner to get to triple break point on Soderling's serve. He broke him at love for 3-2, and never lost another game in the set.

Trailing two sets to none, Soderling, already down a break at 1-0, got one final chance to get something resembling a foothold in the match. He had yet another break point in game #2, but failed to convert. He wouldn't get another. Nadal won 6-4/6-2/6-4, and when a Soderling backhand landed helplessly in the net, the Spaniard slid into the baseline on his back, then did a double-fisted clench in celebration of his seventh career slam title.

After shaking hands at the net, Nadal fell to his back on the terre battue once again, officially ending a year of discontent that not only had included the RG loss to Soderling, but also not being able to defend his Wimbledon title, seeing his ranking dropping outside the Top 2, his parents split up and his career's future be questioned due to his lingering knee issues.

Nadal's straight sets win today means he's won Roland Garros twice without dropping a set in the last three years. Only Bjorn Borg has achieved the feat more than once, doing so three times (twice in Paris). His fifth Roland Garros crown leaves Rafa behind only Borg (who turned 54 today) for Open Era championships at the French. Oh, and he's back at #1 in the rankings, too.

What happened in Paris and the EuroClay season that preceded it served to remind us that when Nadal is himself, of sound mindset and body, he's fairly well impossible to defeat on the red stuff at this point in his career. If he isn't already the "best claycourter ever," then he might be less than two years (and one more RG title than Borg) from making it "official."

But what comes next?

After the match, Nadal told McEnroe that he'd "see (him) at the U.S. Open," hardly hiding his goal for the upcoming summer season. Already a hard court slam winner in Melbourne, Nadal's hard-driving style has usually left him somewhat broken and worn by the time things wrap up in New York. After a less-heavy clay schedule in '10, though, might he finally play out the North American hardcourt circuit at full power for the first time this year? If so, this summer could be historic.

The last person to complete a sweep of the championships at Roland Garros, Wimbledon and the U.S. Open in the same year was Rod Laver during his second Grand Slam season of 1969. Borg never did it. Neither has Federer. Could Rafa? If his knees stay intact through early September, why not?

Stay tuned. After all, we are talking about the best "long-distance runner" in the game.

*THE RELEVANT NUMBERS*

> Soderling was 0-for-8 on break points (Nadal was 4-of-12), and committed 45 unforced errors (to Nadal's 16).

>> Nadal has now won twenty-four consecutive matches on clay. He already holds the all-time record with an 81-match streak from 2005-07. Second place is Guillermo Vilas' 53 in 1977. Nadal could be bearing down on moving into second place behind himself by this time in 2011.

>>> The Nadal/Federer combo has started a new streak, with Rafa's title meaning they've won back-to-back slams. The pair shared eleven consecutive (Federer-8, Nadal-3) from 2005-07. They've claimed the crown at nineteen of the last twenty-one slams dating back to Roland Garros '05, and twenty-one of twenty-four since Wimbledon '04.

>>>>Want a ridiculous stat? Well, when Nadal wins the 1st set of a match on clay, he is now 185-4. In grand slams, he's 95-1. From 2006-10, he's a combined 117-1.

>>>>> As Nadal moves back to #1 in the rankings on Monday it intriguingly stalls out Roger Federer at just one week away from tying Pete Sampras' all-time mark of 286 total weeks at #1. With Nadal having missed Wimbledon in '09, which Federer won, there would seem to be little chance for Federer to reclaim the position anytime soon. Hmmm, what if he never gets it's back? Seriously, what are the odds that he'll end his career a few years from now and STILL be a single week from that record?

*ATP SLAM TITLES - ACTIVE*
16...Roger Federer
7...RAFAEL NADAL
2...Lleyton Hewitt
1...Juan Martin del Potro
1...Novak Djokovic
1...Juan Carlos Ferrero
1...Gaston Gaudio
1...Andy Roddick

*MOST ATP SLAM FINALS - ACTIVE*
22...Roger Federer (16-6)
9...RAFAEL NADAL (7-2)
5...Andy Roddick (1-4)
4...Lleyton Hewitt (2-2)
3...Juan Carlos Ferrero (1-2)
2...Novak Djokovic (1-1)
2...Andy Murray (0-2)
2...ROBIN SODERLING (0-2)

*CAREER SLAM TITLES - ACTIVE*
[singles + doubles + mixed]
16...Roger Federer
15...Bob Bryan
13...Leander Paes
11...Mahesh Bhupathi
11...Mike Bryan
7...RAFAEL NADAL
7...Max Mirnyi
7...NENAD ZIMONJIC
6...DANIEL NESTOR

*WON SLAM WITHOUT LOSING A SET - OPEN ERA*
1971 Ken Rosewall (Australian Open)
1973 Ilie Nastase (Roland Garros)
1976 Bjorn Borg (Wimbledon)
1978 Bjorn Borg (Roland Garros)
1980 Bjorn Borg (Roland Garros)
2007 Roger Federer (Australian Open)
2008 Rafael Nadal (Roland Garros)
2010 Rafael Nadal (Roland Garros)

*ROLAND GARROS TITLES*
[Open Era]
6...Bjorn Borg, SWE (1974-75, 1978-81)
5...RAFAEL NADAL, ESP (2005-08, 2010)
3...Gustavo Kuerten, BRA (1997, 2000-01)
3...Ivan Lendl, CZE (1984, 1986-87)
3...Mats Wilander, SWE (1982, 1985, 1988)
[All-Time]
8...Max Decugis (1903-04, 1907-09, 1912-14)
6...Bjorn Borg
5...RAFAEL NADAL
5...Henri Cochet (1922, 1926, 1928, 1930, 1932)
5...A.Vacherot (1894-96, 1901-02)

*ATP SLAM TITLES - CAREER*
16...Roger Federer *
14...Pete Sampras
12...Roy Emerson
11...Bjorn Borg
11...Rod Laver
10...Bill Tilden
8...Andre Agassi
8...Jimmy Connors
8...Ivan Lendl
8...Fred Perry
8...Ken Rosewall
7...Henri Cochet
7...Rene Lacoste
7...Bill Larned
7...John McEnroe
7...RAFAEL NADAL *
7...John Newcombe
7...William Renshaw
7...Richard Sears
7...Mats Wilander
-
* - active

*ATP WEEKS AT #1 - as of June 7*
286...Pete Sampras
285...Roger Federer *
270...Ivan Lendl
268...Jimmy Connors
170...John McEnroe
109...Bjorn Borg
101...Andre Agassi
80...Lleyton Hewitt *
72...Stefan Edberg
58...Jim Courier
46...RAFAEL NADAL *
43...Gustavo Kuerten
40...Ilie Nastase
20...Mats Wilander
13...Andy Roddick *
12...Boris Becker
9...Marat Safin
8...Juan Carlos Ferrero
8...John Newcombe
6...Yevgeny Kafelnikov
6...Thomas Muster
6...Marcelo Rios
2...Carlos Moya
1...Patrick Rafter
-
* - active

All for now.

BACKSPIN TIME CAPSULE: 1990 Roland Garros

2010-05-19T12:07:00.000-04:00

June 11, 1990 - "Andres the Giant"

In The French Open men's final, Andres defeated Andre. I guess it was the extra "s" that did it. Maybe it stood for "serve," for that is what Andres Gomez rode heavily during his 3-6/6-2/6-4/6-4 victory over Andre Agassi in a battle of totally contrasting individuals.

The stoic and somewhat anonymous six-foot-four Gomez has been playing on the pro tour for twelve years without even reaching a grand slam final before this French Open (including ten previous trips to Paris, four of which ended with losses to Ivan Lendl). Agassi, on the other hand, is tennis' answer to the immature Hollywood child prodigy. In his four pro seasons, the appropriately Las Vegas-born Agassi has built quite a reputation -- not all of which centers on his tennis talents.

The Nick Bollettieri Tennis Academy-trained American is not someone who one could say would be an anonymous individual either on or off the court. Whether it be his blond-over-black mane of hair or his hot pink-and-black with tights tennis outfit (which drew rumblings from French Tennis Federation President Phillipe Chatrier about adopting a predominantly-white rule on outfits -- Agassi called him a "bozo"), Agassi can be a sight to behold. His behavior has been questionable at times, also. Tempter tantrums, seeming nonchalance on the court, a running feud with U.S. Davis Cup coach Tom Gorman, taunting of opponents and hints of arrogance have all contributed to giving Agassi the reputation as one of the least-liked players on tour (which his Muhammad Ali-like entourage does not help to put to bed).

But even though Agassi still refuses to practice between matches or play Wimbledon, he seems to have matured at least a little in the past year. After bursting onto the scene in 1988, 1989 saw Agassi win just one tournament in what he now looks at as a "burnout" year where the pressure got to him. Agassi & Co. went heavily into an intensive weight training program to help end the endurance problems which had caused him to tank some sets at love in the past. He gained ten pounds of muscle and was rewarded with a fine French Open performance which included an easy win over Michael Chang and his first grand slam final appearance. Agassi got down to business in the second week in Paris and concentrated. The result was the best tennis of his career. Amazing what a little drive can do. Now he must continue to devote himself to playing championship tennis rather than clowning and vogueing.

The 1st set in the final was dominated by the powerful and finally consistent serve of Gomez as he started on a quest that would eventually result in ten aces by match's end. The 2nd set, though, saw the return of the thing that had kept the Ecuadorian veteran out of all of those finals in the past. That, of course, being inconsistency in his service game. After dominating the initial set with his serve, Gomez was broken an incredible four straight times by a fastly improving Agassi. But the rest of the match would be different.

Seeing that this may end up being his only real shot at a grand slam title, Gomez settled down and reached for the one thing that has eluded him in his long career -- glory. Showing that he DID possess the will to win that some, at times, have doubted, he used his once again powerful serve to take Agassi out in the final two sets to win the French Open championship. In all, Gomez produced an impressive fifty-eight winners on the red clay. Good thing, too, since he had an equally umimpressive seventy-two errors. But this time, the luck was with him along with that "s" as he climbed into the stand ala Pat Cash to celebrate with his wife and young son. The newly-ranked #4 player in the world (after dropping to #28 after last year's French) almost retired in the past year, but he dedicated himself to winning this title after his nemesis Lendl announced he would skip Paris to prepare for Wimbledon. It's safe to say that he owes a big thanks to Ivan, too.

As for Agassi, he wasn't satisfied with second place, but he's happy with the progress he's made in the past year. He may not have been able to become the second straight American men's winner in Paris after the long drought from 1956 to '88 that Chang ended a year ago, but he is still the U.S.'s best hope for the present and future in the men's game. With a little more maturity, he could even become a merchandising giant (he's already getting there without having won a big title).

I guess that's good, isn't it?

*NOTES*

Of course, the newsy tidbit that would have blown everyone's mind back in 1990 was that the two 20-year olds who lost the Roland Garros singles finals -- Agassi and Steffi Graf -- would end up marrying in 2001 and having two children, Jaden and Jaz, now 8 and 6.

Gomez's best slam results other than his '90 Roland Garros title included three QF in Paris, and one each at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. In 1984, he was a quarterfinalist in Paris, London and New York. In all, he won twenty-one career ATP singles titles, but only one (in '91) after winning his only slam crown (after which his #4 ranking on June 11, 1990 was his career high). Gomez won just one slam match the remainder of his career after defeating Agassi -- in '92 in Paris, after missing the tournament in '91. For his career, the Ecuadorian notched thirty-one match wins at Roland Garros, but had only thirty at the other three slam tournaments combined.

Agassi ended up winning sixty career tour titles (tied for 7th all-time), and rose to #1 for the first time in 1995 (he was later the oldest-ever #1 at 33 in June '03). After refusing to play Wimbledon for so long early in her career, he finally did in 1991. A year later, he grabbed his first career slam title in London. After reaching two of his first three career slam finals at Roland Garros in 1990-91 (along with the '90 U.S. Open), Agassi didn't finally win the title in Paris until 1999. The title made him only the fifth man (now sixth, with Federer) to ever achieve a career Grand Slam, winning at least one crown at each of the four slams. In all, he won eight slam titles in his career.

Off the court, Agassi's personal (and visual, of course) transformation was miraculous. By the time he retired due to persistent back/nerve pain folloiwng the U.S. Open in 2006, after having reached the final at age 35 a year earlier, he was arguably the most beloved and respected player in the game. His recent autobiography, in which he took swipes at Pete Sampras and admitted to using crystal meth and failing an ATP-sanctioned drug test (and lying his way out of a suspension), threatened to tear down some of the good will he'd built up over the previous twenty years with his good off-court work, including his charitable Andre Agassi Foundation and charter school in Las Vegas. But his reputuation seems to have weathered that temporary storm, and in the end the furor that resulted because of the book's release will eventually serve to allow everyone to see Agassi for what he's been over the ENTIRE course of his time in the spotlight, not just the defiantly unlikable person he appeared to be in his younger days, nor the "seemingly irreproachable" person he appeared to be later. He's the sum of all his parts, and all his years... and that's not such a bad legacy for him when everything is weighed out.

All for now.

*CAREER SLAM TITLES - MEN*
16...Roger Federer
14...Pete Sampras
12...Roy Emerson
11...Bjorn Borg
11...Rod Laver
10...Bill Tilden
8...ANDRE AGASSI
8...Jimmy Connors
8...Ivan Lendl
8...Fred Perry
8...Ken Rosewall

*CAREER ATP TITLES*
109...Jimmy Connors
94...Ivan Lendl
77...John McEnroe
64...Pete Sampras
62...Roger Federer
62...Bjorn Borg
62...Guillermo Vilas
60...ANDRE AGASSI

*WON ALL FOUR SLAMS - MEN*
[in chronological order]
Fred Perry
Don Budge
Roy Emerson
Rod Laver
ANDRE AGASSI
Roger Federer

PREVIOUS TIME CAPSULES:
1987 Roland Garros (Graf), 1989 Roland Garros (Sanchez/Chang), 1990 Roland Garros (Seles/Graf), 1990 Wimbledon (Navratilova), 1990 Wimbledon (Edberg/Becker), 1991 U.S. Open (Connors), 1993 Australian Open (Seles & Courier), 1993 Wimbledon (Graf/Novotna), 2003 & '05 U.S. Open (Henin/Clijsters), 2001-09 Australian Open (Dokic Down Under)

NEXT: 1987 Wimbledon (Cash climbs into history... literally)

The Taxman Cometh: 2010... so far

2010-04-14T12:58:00.001-04:00

Knock, knock. Who's there? It's the Taxman, and it's time for an ATP accounting.

"Let me tell you
How it will be.
There's one for you,
Sixteen for me,

'Cause I'm the Swiss taxman.
Yeah, I'm the Swiss taxman.

Should five percent
Appear too small,
Be thankful I don't
Take it all.

'Cause I'm the Swiss taxman.
Yeah, I'm the Swiss taxman."

-- lyrics from "Taxman," written by George Harrison, recorded by the Beatles (1966)

Well, sort of

**2010 Player-of-the-Year... so far**
*TOP PLAYERS*
1. Roger Federer, SUI
...he's been a disappointment in his two post-Melbourne appearances, but the 16th career slam (and 23rd straight slam SF) in Oz more than puts him ahead of the field. Defending in Paris, though, especially if Rafael Nadal is finally healthy, might be a whole different -- and dicier -- jar of dastardly Vegemite.
2. Marin Cilic, CRO
...climbing above the rest of the NextGen of non-Roger/Rafa contenders on the ATP ladder this season, the Croat has been the most consistent young star through 2010's first three-plus months.
3. Juan Carlos Ferrero, ESP
...for a while there, it was 2002-03 again as Ferrero was routinely appearing in tour finals. Three in a row, to be precise.
4. Andy Roddick, USA
...he leads the tour in '10 finals (four), is tied for the lead in titles (two) and has an S.I. swimsuit cover model for a wife. What's next? A Sports Illustrated cover all his own? He'll have two chances to stake a claim this summer.
5. Bob & Mike Bryan, USA
...the twins won two more titles to inch closer to the Hall of Fame-bound Woodbridge & Woodforde's ATP record, AND were profiled on "60 Minutes." Not bad.
6. Nikolay Davydenko, RUS
...he defeated Federer and Nadal AGAIN in Doha, but still came up short in Melbourne when he had the chance to re-write the first line in his tennis bio.
7. Robin Soderling, SWE
...two finals and a pair of semifinal appearances in Indian Wells and Miami shows that the Swede's upward trajectory hasn't yet leveled off.
8. Andy Murray, GBR
...he thought he could win his first slam in Melbourne, but his near no-show in the Men's Final against Federer seems like it's something that he's yet to put behind him.
9. Novak Djokovic, SRB
...he won in Dubai, but he hasn't grabbed the proverbial bull by the horns and rightly justified in everyone's mind his current #2 ranking on the computer.
10. Daniel Nestor & Nenad Zimonjic, CAN/SRB
...they grabbed two titles and moved back into the #1 ranking, then immediately slipped back to #2 a week later.
HM- Ivan Ljubicic, CRO
...not done yet, the former Top 10er (2005-06) popped out of the shadows and won Indian Wells with a serve that put distance between him and both Nadal and Roddick when it mattered on the final weekend.

**RISERS**
1. Marin Cilic, CRO
2. Robin Soderling, SWE
3. Sam Querrey, USA
4. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, FRA
5. Fernando Verdasco, ESP
6. John Isner, USA
7. Thomaz Bellucci, BRA
8. Nicolas Almagro, ESP
9. Lukasz Kubot & Oliver Marach, POL/AUT
10. MIkhail Youzhny, RUS
HM- Juan Monaco, ARG

**NEW FACES**
1. Ernests Gulbis, LAT
2. Philipp Petzschner, GER
3. Jeremy Chardy, FRA
4. Thiemo De Bakker, NED
5. Lu Yen-Hsun, TPE
6. Tiago Fernandes, BRA
7. Kevin Anderson, RSA
8. Sean Berman, AUS
9. Somdev Devvarman, IND
10. Rohan Bopanna & Aisam-Ul-Haq Qureshi, IND/PAK
HM- Leonardo Mayer, ARG

**SURPRISES**
1. Lukasz Kubot, POL
2. Horacio Zeballos, ARG
3. Michael Berrer, GER
4. Stephane Robert, FRA
5. Lukas Lacko, SVK
6. Mischa Zverev, GER
7. Marcelo Melo, BRA
8. Dudi Sela, ISR
9. Philipp Marx & Igor Zelanay, GER/SVK
10. Ivan Dodig, CRO
HM- Wayne Odesnik, USA

**VETERANS**
1. Roger Federer, SUI
2. Juan Carlos Ferrero, ESP
3. Andy Roddick, USA
4. Nikolay Davydenko, RUS
5. Bob & Mike Bryan, USA
6. Daniel Nestor & Nenad Zimonjic, CAN/SRB
7. Ivan Ljubicic, CRO
8. Juan Ignacio Chela, ARG
9. Michael Llodra, FRA
10. David Ferrer, ESP
HM- Leander Paes, IND

**COMEBACKS**
1. Ivan Ljubicic, CRO
2. Marcos Baghdatis, CYP
3. Juan Ignacio Chela, ARG
4. Mardy Fish, USA
5. Richard Gasquet, FRA
HM- Xavier Malisse, BEL

**DOWN**
1. Andy Murray, GBR (since Australian Open SF)
2. Gilles Simon, FRA
3. Novak Djokovic, SRB
HM- Juan Martin del Potro, ARG

"Sometimes you're winning easily; sometimes you're finding a way to win. That's being a champion, I guess." - Roger Federer

**BEST PERFORMANCES**
A 16th Slam... and a Tie-Break to Remember
...Roger Federer, in his eighteenth final in the last nineteen slams, wins the Australian Open, defeating Andy Murray in straight sets. But it's the 3rd set tie-break that will endure, as the Swiss Mister wins 13-11 on his third match point after turning away five Murray set point chances. Murray hasn't been the same since.
The Storm Before the Calm
...Nikolay Davydenko wins in Doha, defeating both Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal to do it (just like he did in last season's Masters Cup). Not that either helped him pull a great slam performance out of his racket bag in Melbourne soon after.
Hot Tub Time Machine, Spanish Style
...Juan Carlos Ferrero reaches back to his glory days of nearly a decade ago, dominating the tour for three weeks with fourteen straight wins and two titles. It's his best string of results since winning sixteen consecutive in 2002, the season before he rose to #1.
Mr. Brooklyn De-... err, check that. It's Mr. Roddick again.
... Andy Roddick reaches back-to-back Masters Series finals in Indian Wells and Miami, winning the latter for his first Masters crown since 2006.
The Croat Also Rises
...Ivan Ljubicic returns to prominance, winning the Indian Wells title (his first-ever Masters win) in a 7-6/7-6 final against Roddick

**TOP MATCHES**
Doha Final - Davydenko d. Nadal
...0-6/7-6/6-4. The Russian saved two match points.
Australian Open 2nd Rd - Del Potro d. Blake
...6-4/6-7/5-7/6-3/10-8. The U.S. Open champion survived an early-round scare here, but not the Croat who'd meet him a few rounds later,
Australian Open 4th Rd - Cilic d. Del Potro
...5-7/6-4/7-5/5-7/6-3. After winning in 4:40, Cilic was off and eventually on his way to his first slam SF. Meanwhile, del Potro's injured wrist has since put him out of action... giving teeth to the unintentional hex SOMEONE put on his '10 season when he was predicted to be the year-end #1.

"It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt." - Andre Agassi, during a Hit for Haiti exhibtion with Federer and Nadal, when a public, and increasingly personal, verbal sparring battle with Pete Sampras broke out in the middle of play. It began with Sampras' imitation of Agassi's pigeon-toed walk, heated up when Agassi re-iterated his autobiography's claims about Sampras' "cheapness," and reached a whole different level when Sampras "playfully (maybe)" fired a serve at Agassi's head.

**BREAKOUTS**
Marin Cilic wins Brisbane to open the '10 season, reaches the Australian Open SF, is the first player on tour this season to win two titles (after Zagreb) and climbs into the Top 10.
Latvia's Ernests Gulbis wins his first career title in Del Ray Beach

**COUGH, COUGH... CHOKE, CHOKE**
Nikolay Davydenko dominates Roger Federer for a set and a half at the Australian Open QF, then crumbles and fails to live up to his talent in a slam all over again.
Andy Murray once again fails to rise to the occasion against Roger Federer in a slam final, losing in Melbourne in straight sets after waiting until late in the 3rd set to raise his game. By then, it was too late. Ever since, he's failed to advance past the QF in any tournament (and suffered two 2nd Round upsets).

"I can cry like Roger. It's a shame I can't play like him." - Andy Murray, after wiping tears from his eyes during the Australian Open final post-match ceremony

**TWO-HEADED UPSET SPECIAL**
Indian Wells 3rd Rd - Baghdatis d. Federer 5-7/7-5/7-6
Miami 4th Rd - Berdych d. Federer 6-4/6-7/7-6
...Roger Federer blows a combined four match points in two losses in Indian Wells and Miami to Marcos Baghdatis (Federer was up 4-1 in the 3rd set) and Tomas Berdych.

=AS ANDY's WORLD TURNED=

Roddick opens season with a title in Brisbane in Week 1, his first ever in Australia
=============================
Roddick announces that he won't play Davis Cup in 2010
=============================
During practice, on a bet, Roddick playfully hits James Blake in the butt with his serve

=============================
During a filmed interview, two koalas are seen having set in the background over Roddick's shoulder

=============================
Brooklyn Decker, Roddick's wife, appears on the cover of the latest Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue

=============================
In Miami, Roddick takes part in a game of H-O-R-S-E with Miami Heat star Dwyane Wade, who then reciprocated by attempting to return a Roddick serve

=============================
Roddick, his lost mojo now fully intact, completes his back-to-back finals runs in Indian Wells and Miami with his first Masters Series title in four seasons
=============================

"You're too good not to win a slam. Don't worry about it." - Roger Federer, one year after he cried on court after losing the '09 Australian Open final to Rafael Nadal, after Andy Murray did the same thing after losing to Federer in the AO final

*2010 ATP FINALS*
4...Andy Roddick (2-2)
3...Juan Carlos Ferrero (2-1)
2...Marin Cilic (2-0)
2...David Ferrer (1-1)
2...John Isner (1-1)
2...Sam Querrey (1-1)
2...Stanislas Wawrinka (1-1)
2...Mikhail Youzhny (0-2)

All for now.

ATP February Awards: While the Cats Were Away

2010-03-02T14:59:00.001-05:00

Old ones. Young ones. They all feasted in February.

With the "big cat" (hey, is that a sly Miloslav Mecir reference?) likes of Roger and Rafa out of commission after the Australian Open, February was a time for the mice to inherit the ATP earth: a veteran and former #1 emerged from the shadows, an Aussie Open semifinalist from Croatia was the first man to notch two titles on the season, a Latvian lived up to his advance billing, a Serb took a tentative step toward reclaiming his vacated role as the ATP's "Prince," and a pair of twin brothers inched closer to becoming the all-time winningest doubles team in men's tennis history.

A thumbnail sketch of the past month:

**2010 February Awards**
*TOP PLAYERS*
1. Juan Carlos Ferrero/ESP
...by the end of the 2003 season, JCF had notched eleven career titles and spent time at #1 in the rankings. Since then, until a month ago, he'd added just one more singles crown (last year in Casablanca) in eight trips to finals from 2004-09. In the final three weeks of February, though, he won fourteen straight matches (his best run since a career-best sixteen straight in '02), reached three finals and won two titles. Who saw that coming?
2. David Ferrer/ESP
...with Nadal away, Ferrer joined JCF to give the tour a two-headed Spanish monster in February. He faced off with JCF in the finals of both Buenos Aires and Acapulco, and reached an additional SF at the start of the month.
3. Novak Djokovic/SRB
...with Murray a virtual non-entity since Oz (he lost early in the U.A.E. to Janko Tipsarevic), Djokovic defended his Dubai title, solidified his #2 ranking and made a case for being the top non-Roger/Rafa force on tour... if he could just find a way to not wilt away in the latter stages of the slams, that is.
4. Bob & Mike Bryan/USA
...the twins won their 58th title as a duo in Dubai and stand behind only Woodbridge & Woodforde on the all-time ATP title list.
5. Ernests Gulbis/LAT
...the 21-year old Latvian finally won his first career title in Delray Beach, vexing Ivo Karlovic in the final to grab the first of many tangible prizes after flashing such intriguing talent on occasion in the past.
==========
HM- Marin Cilic (CRO), Sam Querrey (USA), Lukasz Kubot & Oliver Marach (POL/AUT)

**RISERS**
1. Marin Cilic, CRO
2. Sam Querrey, USA
3. Lukasz Kubot & Oliver Marach, POL/AUT
4. Fernando Verdasco, ESP
5. Robin Soderling, SWE
6. Julien Benneteau, FRA
7. John Isner, USA
8. Mikhail Youzhny, RUS
9. Juan Monaco, ARG
10. Jurgen Melzer, AUT
HM- Albert Montanes, ESP

**FRESH FACES**
1. Ernests Gulbis, LAT
2. Philipp Petzschner, GER
3. Rohan Bopanna & Aisam-Ul-Haq Qureshi, IND/PAK
4. Leonardo Mayer, ARG
5. Somdev Devvarman, IND
6. Ivan Dodig, CRO
7. Guillaume Rufin, FRA
8. Jeremy Chardy, FRA
9. Josselin Ouanna, FRA
10. Eduardo Schwank, ARG
HM- Daniel Brands, GER & Lu Yen-Hsun, TPE

**SURPRISES**
1. Thomasz Bellucci, BRA
2. Michael Berrer, GER
3. Lukasz Kubot, POL (singles)
4. Joao Souza, BRA
5. Marcelo Melo, BRA (singles)
6. Mischa Zverev, GER
7. Denis Istomin, UZB
8. Horacio Zeballos, ARG
9. Lukas Lacko, SVK
10. Stephane Robert, FRA
HM- Philipp Marx & Igor Zelanay, GER/SVK

**VETERANS**
1. Juan Carlos Ferrero, ESP
2. David Ferrer, ESP
3. Bob & Mike Bryan, USA
4. Michael Llodra, FRA
5. Feliciano Lopez, ESP
HM- Simon Aspelin/Paul Hanley (SWE/AUS) & Daniel Nestor/Nenad Zimonjic (CAN/SRB)

**COMEBACKS**
1. Juan Carlos Ferrero, ESP
2. Marcos Baghdatis, CYP
3. Mardy Fish, USA
4. James Blake, USA
5. Taylor Dent, USA

**DOWN**
1. Andy Murray, GBR
2. Andy Roddick, USA
3. Nikolay Davydenko, RUS
4. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, FRA
5. Juan Martin del Potro, ARG
HM- Gilles Simon, FRA & Radek Stepanek, CZE

**BEST PERFORMANCES**
History Repeats Itself
...Juan Carlos Ferrero reaches back to his glory days of nearly a decade ago, dominating the tour for three weeks with fourteen straight wins and two titles.
A Good Year's Work in Less Than Two Months
...Marin Cilic followed up his AO semifinal run and Top 10 ranking by becoming the first man to win two titles in 2010 when he claimed the Zagreb crown.
No Longer Simply "The Best American Player Not Married to Brooklyn Decker"

(hey, eyes down here)
...Sam Querrey sweeps the singles and doubles titles in Memphis. All right, you can let your eyes wander again.

**TOP MATCH-UP**
Spaniard vs. Spaniard (Non-Rafa Division)
... Juan Carlos Ferrero and David Ferrer matched up in back-to-back finals to end the month. JCF won in Buenos Aires, then Ferrer ended his countryman's 14-match win streak in Acapulco a week later.

=DON'T I KNOW YOU?=
Querrey & Friend Do Memphis
...no, Sam didn't marry Jessica Gomes outside Graceland or anything. But he DID experience something exceptional in Memphis, though. He defeated countryman John Isner in the singles final, but also teamed with the rangy American to win the doubles title. Is that considered a "friendship-saving" outcome?

And, finally...

"Sometimes you're winning easily; sometimes you're finding a way to win. That's being a champion, I guess." - Roger Federer

Yeah, he didn't play in February (and he uttered that gem in January). But, come now, we can't have an ATP update without a word from Roger, right?

All for now.

ATP January Awards: He is Risen... again.

2010-02-05T23:57:00.001-05:00

As 2010 began, everyone gathered Down Under and wondered if a member of the ATP's talented corps of young would-be champions, in the wake of Juan Martin del Potro's U.S. Open victory last September, was ready to rise up and claim a second straight slam, thereby officially ushering the tour into a period where every major title was up for grabs for the first time in nearly a decade.

The environment seemed right for the movement to begin.

Not only did del Potro become a rare major "interloper" in the Roger/Rafa Era in New York, but as the Australian open began Nikolay Davydenko had also done his part in the ATP field's ongoing attempt to "dymystify" Federer and Nadal for everyone else's well being, knocking both men off in back-to-back events to end '09 and begin '10. Melbourne seemed to present the perfect opportunity for someone -- anyone -- to step up and seize the moment.

If not now, then when?

But then Novak Djokovic, the original "interloper" two years ago at the Australian Open, went down in flames while raising more questions about his fitness/intestinal fortitude. del Potro couldn't survive a second consecutive marathon match. Davydenko folded in a slam yet again. Then Andy Murray put up too little and too late a fight, as well. Meanwhile, Nadal's knees limited his effectiveness and his hopes to defend his AO title went down the drain.

When the dust settled, only Federer was left standing. Again. Some things just never seem to change. Sure, there are still three more slams to go this season... but, for some reason, it's easy to believe that more of the same could be the ATP's immediate future.

**2010 January Awards**
*TOP PLAYERS*
1. Roger Federer/SUI
...he could have lost his #1 ranking to Djokovic in Melbourne, but slam title #16 ended up adding the notion that he could end up being the "sole survivor" of the Rafa/Roger War to his career bio.
2. Nikolay Davydenko/RUS
...ATP watchers wonder why so many either don't know much or, frankly, care at all about Davydenko? Well, one look at how the Russian squandered all his momentum/belief in Melbourne should answer any lingering questions about that.
3. Andy Murray/GBR
...so, he's supposed to be "The One," huh? Well, if that's the case, when is he going to learn that he has to take that power position rather than just wait for it to fall in his lap?
4. Marin Cilic/CRO
...2010 was set up to be the Croat's breakthrough slam year, and he didn't disappoint with his first career slam SF in Melbourne. He won a title in Week 1, too.
5. Bob Bryan/Mike Bryan, USA
...like Federer, the brothers were again the last men standing in Melbourne.
HM- Daniel Nestor/Nenad Zimonjic, CAN/SRB
...they seem to be fated to forever be the SECOND-best doubles team in the world.

**RISERS**
1. Andy Murray, GBR
2. Marin Cilic, CRO
3. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, FRA
4. John Isner, USA
5. Stanislas Wawrinka, SUI
6. Gael Monfils, FRA
7. Tomas Berdych, CZE
8. Philipp Kolhschreiber, GER
9. Nicolas Almagro, ESP
10. Thomaz Bellucci, BRA

**FRESH FACES**
1. Tiago Fernandes, BRA
2. Sean Berman, AUS
3. Marton Fucsovics, HUN
4. Gianni Mina, FRA
5. Somdev Devvarman, IND
HM- Lukas Lacko, SVK

**SURPRISES**
1. Lukasz Kubot, POL
2. Kevin Anderson, RSA
3. Dudi Sela, ISR
4. Alejandro Falla, COL
5. Ivan Dodig, CRO
HM- Louk Sorensen, IRL

**VETERANS**
1. Roger Federer, SUI
2. Nikolay Davydenko, RUS
3. Andy Roddick, USA

**DOUBLES**
1. Bob Bryan & Mike Bryan, USA
2. Daniel Nestor & Nenad Zimonjic, CAN/SRB
3. Leander Paes, IND

**COMEBACKS**
1. Marcos Baghdatis, CYP
2. Arnaud Clement, FRA
3. Richard Gasquet, FRA
4. Xavier Malisse, BEL
5. Mardy Fish, USA

**DOWN**
1. Rafael Nadal, ESP
2. Novak Djokovic, SRB
3. Sam Querrey, USA
4. James Blake, USA
5. Robin Soderling, SWE

**BEST PERFORMANCES**
The Federer Express Rolls Deeper into History
...at the Australian Open, Federer extended his consecutive slam SF streak to twenty-three, reached his eighteenth slam final in nineteen events and won his sixteenth major title.
Still, Who in Their Right Mind Would Ever Bet Money on This Guy?
...after sweeping through both Nadal and Federer at the Masters Cup, Nikolay Davydenko did it again in Doha.

**TOP MATCHES**
Doha Final - Davydenko def. Nadal
...0-6/7-6/6-4. The Russian saved two match points. Not that the experience helped his match toughness in Melbourne.
Australian Open 4th Rd. - Cilic def. del Potro
...5-7/6-4/7-5/5-7/6-3in winning this 4:40+ clash, the Croat earned the right to be mentioned amongst the "NextGen" stars looking to crack through the Rafa/Roger fortress.
[Tie-Break]
Australian Open Final - Federer def. Murray
...(3rd set tie-break) Federer 13-11. Murray holds five set points. Federer takes three match points to finally win. If the Scot had played like this all final, the match might have been as good as billed. Then again, even when he DID raise his level of aggression, he still couldn't put away the set despite having multiple opportunties.
[5th Set]
Australian Open Final - del Potro def. Blake
...(5th set) del Potro 10-8. Blake has made a career of being just good enough to lose close.

"I can cry like Roger. It's a shame I can't play like him." - Andy Murray, after choking up during his post-match comments following the Australian Open final

=BREAKOUT=
Goran Would Be Proud
...Marin Cilic moved into the Top 10 with a Week 1 title in Brisbane and his first career slam SF appearance in Melbourne.

=CHOKING IN TWO-PART HARMONY
Murray's First Set and a Half vs. Federer in AO Final
Davydenko after the First Set and a Half vs. Federer in AO Quarterfinal
...put them together and they actually played a full match. In reality, though, they both were presented with grand opportunities, yet wasted them yet again.

"You're too good to not win a slam. Don't worry about it." - Roger Federer, to Murray during the post-match Australian Open final ceremony

*THE GOOD*
Davydenko defeats Federer and Nadal in Doha
==========
Roddick wins his first career title in Australia
==========
Murray reaches his second slam final
==========
Malisse's WADA suspension is lifted by a Belgian court
==========

*THE BAD*
Davydenko leads Federer in the Australian Open QF, only to fold like a broken lawn chair
==========
Roddick experiences more injury questions and exits Melbourne in the QF
==========
Murray again falls victim to tension in a major final
==========
Nadal's lingering and increasingly worrisome knee problems
==========

*THE UGLY*
A ball boy wet himself during an Australian Open match, causing a forty-minute clean-up delay

*THE SO ODD IT'S PROBABLY TRUE*
Murray's girlfriend apparently broke up with him because he played too many video games

*AND THE... ummm, WELL, THE X-RATED*
During a television interview with Andy Roddick in Australia, two koalas in the background were clearly seen having sex in a tree

All for now... unlike the koalas, I have a headache.

Australian Open Final: What a Difference a Year Makes

2010-01-31T16:56:00.003-05:00

One year ago, Roger Federer was standing in a puddle of tears on Rod Laver Arena after have been bested once again by Rafael Nadal. With his throne of power having been chiseled away over time by the Spaniard, it was easy to write King Roger's epitaph -- at least in pencil -- as the lead actor in the ATP tour's drama.

What a difference a year makes. Now, Roger Federer is willing to take on the entire world... again.

After that January '09 night in Melbourne, all Federer did was reach the finals at all three of the season's remaining slams, win his first Roland Garros title, reclaim the Wimbledon seat of power in yet another classic final while also passing Pete Sampras on the all-time slam champions list, and narrowly miss winning another U.S. Open en route to ending the season as the #1-ranked player in the world. Oh, yeah... and he got married and became the father of twin daughters, too. It was quite a year.

After what Federer did to Andy Murray in the Australian Open men's final on Sunday night, 2010 hasn't gotten off to a shabby start, either.

According to some, in a sentiment surely hoped for by the Scot, this final was supposed to be when everything changed for Murray. It was the start of "something big." After all, he was 22 years of age and in his seventeenth grand slam -- the precise combination that Federer brought to the table when he won HIS first slam title at Wimbledon in 2003. Problem is, Murray isn't Federer. Not yet, if ever.

Federer made no bones about reminding him of that, either. Mere minutes after he'd advanced past Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in the semifinals to reach the men's final, Federer was deftly spinning his unique brand of "gentlemanly" (but not-so-subtle) digs against his next opponent, noting how while Murray might have a winning career record against him (6-4 going into Sunday) he hadn't managed to take him out in a major. While Federer himself was the all-time men's slam title leader, with fifteen championships under his belt, Murray had still yet to notch his first. Winning the 1st set was important for Murray, the Swiss Mister noted... for his confidence. If he lost it, he might just realize how Everest-like the climb would be to reach the Australian Open summit at Federer's expense.

Murray Mount would do him no good in Melbourne.

Maybe Murray was listening. For while he's been hailed for years now as the man who'll finally erase the phrase "no British man has won a slam crown since Fred Perry in 1936" from the sport's lexicon, he's still yet to come through with the goods when it's mattered. Not only that, his "Generation Andy" counterparts Novak Djokovic and Juan Martin del Potro have managed to lift slam title before him (del Potro even defeated Federer to do it in New York last summer), Tsonga and Marin Cilic are breathing down the Scot's neck, and even the tour's OTHER Andy -- Roddick -- came closer to claiming a second major at last year's Wimbledon than Murray himself has come to just one.

Still, on the opening point of the opening game of the opening set of the final, Murray LOOKED like he was ready to assume his overdue place in the slam winner's circle. Displaying the aggressive in-point mindset that is so often absent from this game, he hit a backhand winner down the line to take a 15/love lead. He'd effectively never again be in the lead in the match, as Federer held serve and established the leader/follower roles that neither would ever fully relinquish in the contest.

Murray was broken in his first service game. He retrieved the break in the very next game, but the victory failed to remove the obvious tension from his body and actions. Federer saved three break points to hold and take a 3-2 lead, then broke Murray's serve again to go up 5-3. While his opponent's serve numbers were poor (a 45% first serve percentage), Federer wasn't hindered. He served out the set at 6-3. Was the advantage as important to Murray as Federer theorized it was? Well, maybe, as he proceeded to carry his roll into the 2nd. There, he broke Murray yet again to take a 2-1 lead, then seized upon the Scot's passive play, which continued even though he did have multiple in-point opportunities to seize an advantage. When Federer took a 3-1 lead, he'd won twelve of the previous fifteen points, and even put together at least one of the classic points of old that saw him drag Murray from one side of the court to the other, like a puppet on a string, before putting away a winner as if the whole thing was mere child's play.

Murray momentarily stemmed the Federer tide by saving two break points and holding for 2-3, then dug out of a love/40 to hold serve again for 3-4. But Federer's own easy hold (with two aces and a simple volley) to take a 5-3 lead was soon followed up by a routine game that enabled him to serve out the set at 6-4 to go up two sets to none. In his previous 155 slam matches in which he'd won the first two sets, Federer was 155-0.

But, to his credit, Murray didn't go into the fetal position and pray for the madness to end.

Instead, after playing his usual mostly passive, wait-for-the-mistake style of game for two sets after having started the match with an aggressive point, with nothing left to lose, Murray returned to his opening point mindset in the 3rd set. In the end, it would at least allow him room to one day be able to attempt to convince himself that HE was to blame for his ultimate defeat in the match, as his results against Federer greatly improved, but it was a tactic that came to the fore not only far too late, but it even managed to be far too little to extend the match beyond a minimal three-set limit.

Even while occasionally grabbing his right leg and seeming to slightly hobble from one spot to another, Murray finally put pressure on Federer's game. Moving forward more often and going for winners rather than rally-continuing returns, Murray went up 40/love on Federer's serve in the sixth game of the set. After winning a face-to-face exchange at the net, he broke to take a 4-2 lead. In the next game, he blasted a running crosscourt forehand winner. Serving at 5-3, Murray was within reach of making a match of things. But Federer got the service break in game #9 and the pair were soon in a tie -break.

Taken on it's own, the tie-break would border on being a classic. If it'd taken place in the 5th set of the U.S. Open, it'd been fated to be replayed for a generation. Instead, it'll turn out to be lost gem that hints at what Murray is CAPABLE of, but also highlight why he has yet to live up to his advance billing in the slams.

Murray grabbed an early 3-1 lead, but a backhand error immediately donated the mini-break he'd earned. More backhand errors allowed Federer to move ahead at 4-3, only to see Murray surge back to 6-4 and entertain his first set point. After failing to convert it, rather than push the match to the 4th with a winner, Murray netted a relatively open forehand down the line on SP #2. On SP #3 at 7-6, he missed a volley. It was then Federer's turn to surge back.

Federer's ace for 8-7 gave him his first match point, which he only narrowly missed smacking down the line with a passing shot by Murray, whose crowding of the net had given Federer only a sliver of open space through which to slide the potentially championship-winning shot. Soon after, following a Federer backhand that failed to clear the net, Murray's fourth set point was squandered when his lob attempt carried past the baseline. 9-9. Federer's drop volley have him his second match point, but Murray wonderfully saved it when he showcased his great speed by scrambling to reach a poor-choice Federer drop shot and flicking a half volley winner into the back court to knot the tie-break at 10-10.

As the tension mounted, Federer's netted forehand gave Murray a fifth set point, but the world #1's big serve bailed him out and kept alive his hopes of closing things out in the tie-break. After wrongfooting Murray with a deep shot to gain a third match point, the twenty-minute tie-break finally ended when the Scot's backhand failed to make it over the net. In a tie-break that deserved more importance than it ultimately held, Federer won 13-11.

In 2:41, Federer def. Murray 6-3/6-4/7-6(11).

If Murray had managed to employ the same aggressive tactics he used in the 3rd set from the start (as he did in the QF vs. Rafael Nadal), this might have been a different match. If, if, if, if, if. That's why some players win slams by the trophy case-full, while others never do. Even while playing the way he SHOULD have been the previous two hours, Murray still managed to fail to convert the five set points he had in the 3rd and force Federer to play a 4th set. The Scot has now lost both his career slam finals in straight sets, joining Cedric Pioline as the only other player to do so in his first two career appearances in slam finals.

"You're too good to never win a slam. Don't worry about it." - Federer, to Murray, in the post-match ceremony

Thus, Federer, firmly entrenched once again in the #1 ranking (he's just a few months away from breaking Sampras' record for total weeks in the position), proves yet again that the tennis nation has not yet been declared "no country for old men," even in a neighborhood where a 28-year old man can be considered "old." If del Potro's U.S. Open win -- which made him the only man other than Nadal to defeat Fed in his now 22 slam finals -- ushered in the "Federer vs. the World" aspect of the back half of his Hall of Fame career, then consider the 2010 scoreline to read, "Federer 1, World 0."

Thing is, after Federer took the match away from a faltering Nikolay Davydenko in the QF after the Russian had dominated the contest for the first set-plus, he often resembled the renowned Federer of old. He schooled Davydenko for nearly two lightning-fast sets like he so often used to Lleyton Hewitt in the "glory years." After how he seemed to out-psyche Murray on the big stage, could we be at the start of a second "Golden Age of Roger?" With sixteen slams, might the new number to keep an eye on be twenty-four? As in Margaret Court's all-time professional tennis record for career slam wins. Remember, Andre Agassi reached a slam singles final (losing to Federer, naturally) at age 35, even with back problems. Federer is still seven years away from his mid-thirties.

"I can cry like Roger. It's a shame I can't play like him." - Murray, after choking up during his post-match address to the crowd

Just look at the field at the moment. While his contemporary rivals are battling injuries, and the younger contenders have yet to prove themselves worthy for the long haul, Federer, after having survived a few slow periods in recent seasons, keeps on going. Nadal (now at #4 in the rankings) has a small tear in his knee and will be absent for at least a month (a disappearing act that might happen more than once this season, if his out-of-the-blue re-injury in Melbourne is any indication). Djovokic once again was bounced from Oz with "mysterious" stomach issues. Davydenko, for all his good points, just isn't a Ready-For-Prime-Time player. Roddick's last best slam shot might have come in that 16-14 5th set at SW19 last year (and niggling injuries are cropping up more and more often where he's concerned, too). Murray failed to step up his game in time here. Heck, even Hewitt, long since bypassed as a slam threat, is having another hip surgery... further stressing the miraculousness of Federer's mostly injury-free career. Del Potro is so far the only player without a demerit when it comes to consistently challenging Federer's leading role, but even the Argentine hasn't yet been able to stay healthy and play at his U.S. Open level for an entire season.

With his confidence restored, the possible slow-motion fade of the Nadal threat that is really the only chink in his "Greatest of All Time" armor, and the removal of the pressure of the Sampras Chase and all the off-court familial "distractions" that took place in '09, Federer might be uniquely positioned to have a "career-year" in what is already one of the greatest careers ever. A season ago, he came within two five-set defeats of pulling off a calendar year Grand Slam. Might 2010 offer the chance to fill in the only remaining blank in his all-timer resume?

Come one. Come all. Mister Federer is accepting challenges again. Everyone is free to apply for the honor.

*NOTES*
......I doubt that adidas was all that thrilled with ESPN2's close-ups of Murray's feet as he was walking around the court with a hole worn in the toe of his shoe. Great shot, though.

...what exactly was ESPN2's fascination with the group in Murray's box, anyway? Over the years, we've come to expect many shots of the friends box during matches, but what happened during the men's final was ridiculous. It was hard to tell if the main attraction was supposed to be the MATCH or the reaction TO THE MATCH by Murray's backers. Really, was it absolutely necessary to show slow-motion REPLAYS of the group's reactions to shots, including TWO different shots following one of the points in the tie-break?

If I have to see Murray's mum, in her tiny glasses, clench her fist and give her son encouragement once more it'll one time too many.

*ALL-TIME SLAM TITLES - MEN & WOMEN*
24...Margaret Smith-Court, AUS
22...Steffi Graf, GER
19...Helen Wills-Moody, USA
18...Martina Navratilova, CZE/USA
18...Chris Evert, USA
16...ROGER FEDERER, SUI
14...Pete Sampras, USA

*CAREER SLAM TITLES - MEN - ACTIVE*
[singles+doubles+mixed]
16...Roger Federer, SUI ('10 AO Singles W)
15...Bob Bryan, USA ('10 AO Doubles W)
13...Leander Paes, IND ('10 AO Mixed W)
11...Mike Bryan, USA ('10 AO Doubles W)
11...Mahesh Bhupathi, IND

*CAREER ATP SINGLES TITLES*
109...Jimmy Connors, USA
94...Ivan Lendl, CZE
77...John McEnroe, USA
64...Pete Sampras, USA
63...Bjorn Borg, SWE
62...ROGER FEDERER, SUI
62...Guillermo Vilas, ARG
60...Andre Agassi, USA

*CAREER ATP DOUBLES TITLES - TEAMS*
61...Todd Woodbridge & Mark Woodforde
57...Peter Fleming & John McEnroe
57...Bob Hewitt & Frew McMillian
56...BOB BRYAN & MIKE BRYAN

*WEEKS AT ATP SINGLES #1*
[as of February 1, 2010]
286...Pete Sampras, USA
270...Ivan Lendl, CZE
268...ROGER FEDERER, SUI
268...Jimmy Connors, USA
170...John McEnroe, USA
109...Bjorn Borg, SWE
101...Andre Agassi, USA

*MOST AUSTRALIAN OPEN SINGLES TITLES - MEN*
6...Roy Emerson
4...ROGER FEDERER
4...Andre Agassi
4...Jack Crawford
4...Ken Rosewall
4...Pat Wood
3...Rod Laver
3...Adrian Quist
3...Mats Wilander

*FEDERER vs. SLAM FINAL OPPONENTS*
[overall: 16-6]
4-0...Andy Roddick
2-0...ANDY MURRAY
2-5...Rafael Nadal
1-0...Andre Agassi
1-0...Marcos Baghdatis
1-0...Novak Djokovic
1-0...Fernando Gonzalez
1-0...Leyton Hewitt
1-0...Mark Philippoussis
1-0...Marat Safin
1-0...Robin Soderling
0-1...Juan Martin del Potro

*MEN'S SINGLES FINAL*
#1 Roger Federer/SUI def. #5 Andy Murray/GBR 6-3/6-4/7-6

*MEN'S DOUBLES FINAL*
#1 Bryan/Bryan (USA/USA) def. #2 Nestor/Zimonjic (CAN/SRB) 6-3/6-7/6-3

*MIXED DOUBLES FINAL*
#1 Paes/Black (IND/ZIM) def. Levinsky/Makarova (CZE/RUS) 7-5/6-3

*BOYS SINGLES FINAL*
#14 Tiago Fernandes/BRA def. Sean Berman/AUS 7-5/6-3

*BOYS DOUBLES FINAL*
Eleveld/Lupescu (NED/NED) def.. #2 Krawietz/Schulz (GER/GER) 6-4/6-4

All for now.

Australian Open Preview: Once More, with Feeling?

2010-01-17T00:55:00.001-05:00

The men's side of the Australian Open competition finds itself in a somewhat unfamiliar position this year -- it's most decidedly the "undercard" of the first slam of 2010, with the women's field being the must-see main event.

With the return of the likes of Henin and Sharapova, Clijsters seeking to follow-up her U.S. Open win and Serena's defense of her '09 Oz title secondary in the minds of many in comparison to how she'll do in her first slam since her little "tiff" in New York, the women's action has more stories than there are delicious flavors of Tim Tams (which are FINALLY being sold in the U.S. through Pepperidge Farm brands, by the way -- finally all my silent prayers have been answered!), while the men's field almost feels like an afterthought that's almost as hard to digest as Vegemite.

I said, "almost" of course. After all, anyone not born in Australia knows that NOTHING goes does harder than Vegemite.

Surely, everything could change if the men's big guns pull through to the latter stages and the suddenly-crowded men's field gets its first official sorting-out of the season. But, still, it says something that Roger Federer's reporting of his recent telephone conversation with Tiger Woods created far more headlines than anything regarding his and his fellow ATP stars' preparation for the Australian Open has in recent days.

Federer is just twenty weeks at #1 from matching Pete Sampras' all-time mark for total time in the top spot, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who'd consider him the favorite to win this title. With Juan Martin del Potro now a slam champion, Nikolay Davydenko showing signs of MAYBE finally making a mark on the slam stage, Novak Djokovic lurking once again and -- oh, yeah, HIM -- defending Oz champ Rafael Nadal looking ready, willing and able to reclaim his position atop the ATP pyramid, Federer is no longer even an semi-safe choice to reach the final (the SF are a different story, though... as of now) anywhere other than in London.

The times are a-changin' on the ATP tour. Well, at least a little. In two weeks, we actually might be seeing a FAMILAR sight after the final match of this Australian Open.

*ATP Pre-Australian Open Awards*
=TOP PLAYER=
1. Nikolay Davydenko, RUS
2. Rafael Nadal, ESP
3. Andy Roddick, USA
4. Marin Cilic, CRO (Riser)
5. Daniel Nestor/Nenad Zimonjic, CAN/SRB (Veterans)
HM- John Isner, USA (Fresh Face)
=COMEBACK=
Marcos Baghdatis, CYP
=SURPRISE=
Arnaud Clement, FRA
=DOWN=
Roger Federer, SUI
=TOP MATCH=
Doha Final - Davydenko def. Nadal 0-6/7-6/6-4

**ROUND OF 16**
#1 Federer d. #17 Ferrer
#6 Davydenko d. #9 Verdasco
#3 Djokovic d. Gasquet
#8 Soderling d. #10 Tsonga
#9 Roddick d. #21 Berdych
#14 Cilic d. #4 del Potro
#5 Murray d. #12 Monfils
#2 Nadal d. #13 Stepanek

...I'd wanted to advance del Potro deeper into the draw than this. But he's at his best when he's on a roll and playing on a week-in, week-out basis. That hasn't been the case so far in '10, and he was bothered by a wrist injury in Kooyang. Anyway, Cilic is bound to have a big slam soon, so I'll pick him through here, even though I'd rather wait until Wimbledon. Roddick just won his first title in Australia the other week, but it's no given that he gets past Sam Querrey and into the Round of 16. Nadal is looking good, even with his loss to Davydenko after holding match point in Doha.

**QUARTERFINALS**
#1 Federer d. #6 Davydenko
#3 Djokovic d. #8 Soderling
#14 Cilic d. #9 Roddick
#2 Nadal d. #5 Murray

...Davydenko surely has Federer's number of late. Plus, Federer was pretty miserable on hard courts for most of '09. Still, he's reached 22 consecutive grand slam semifinals, while the reason so few people know of Davydenko beyond that questionable match that drew the attention of the authorites a few years back is because he never comes through in the slams. Speaking of not coming through in the slams, has the field of other young contenders caught Murray? Of course, losing to Nadal would be no embarrassment.

**SEMIFINALS**
#3 Djokovic d. #1 Federer
#2 Nadal d. #14 Cilic

...before Davydenko won the Masters Cup to end the '09 season, Djokovic has actually been the best 4th Quarter men's player on tour. He's already a past Australian Open champion. A healthy Nadal, a year after proving a point by winning his first hard court slam, might be too much for anyone to handle in Melbourne.

**FINAL**
#2 Nadal d. #3 Djokovic

...as long as he can stay on the court, it's hard to believe any scenario that doesn't see Nadal back in the #1 spot by, at the latest, the time the U.S. Open Series begins this summer.

All for now.

Dead Canary in a Cage?: 2010 ATP Top 10 Predictions

2009-12-26T15:43:00.004-05:00

Was the 2009 season the men's tennis version of the canary in the coal mine?

While this past year saw some semblence of a "return to order," as Roger Federer reclaimed the #1 ranking and a bit of his old aura during the European summer, it also was loaded with the sort of signposts that point to major change on the horizon. After a slow start, then strong middle, Federer's (once again) leading role on the tour was pretty much left vacant by the Swiss Mister/New Pop & Hubby, as he pointed to exhaustion being the culprit in his criminally-absent lack of a strong finish. Meanwhile, though Rafael Nadal helped Spain win another Davis Cup in December, his influence on the regular tour waned considerably after his knees forced his exit from Wimbledon following his failure to defend his Roland Garros crown, as the general wear and tear on his body as a result of his ultra-physical game once again made him a 4th Quarter shadow of the player who opened the season by winning his first hard court slam in Melbourne.

While both Nadal and Federer will still be considered the dominant forces on clay and grass leading up to the slams in Paris and London in 2010, might we be facing a very near future in which we could see one -- or even both?) -- overtaken over the course of the season by one of the younger, healthier upstarts who have been gathering titles and confidence over the past twelve months (often by defeating one or both of the Big Two along the way)?

Juan Martin del Potro won the U.S. Open in '09, defeating Nadal and Federer in consecutive days. Novak Djokovic knocked off both during his sterling last quarter of the season, too. Robin Soderling proved to be a big event star, ending Nadal's run in Paris and showing great promise at Wimbledon immediately afterward. Even Andy Roddick nearly mustered a title at SW19 with Federer on the other side of the net. Throw in that slight dip in the big stage prominance of Andy Murray, who led the tour in titles (six) but failed to make a dent in the slams (only advancing to one SF) as he fell behind Djokovic in the season-ending rankings, and the environment would seem to be ripe for a major shake-up at the top of the ATP rankings in 2010.

2004 was the last season that the Federer-Nadal combo didn't fill both the top two spots in men's tennis at year's end. Since the '04 Wimbledon, they've won eighteen of twenty-one slams, and seventeen of nineteen since Roland Garros '05. They could finish on top and divy up the slams once again in 2010, but for the first time in ages a great argument can be made that they could be "had" this season.

At the very least, the canary that is the Federer/Nadal dominance is looking a pit peaked as the calendar is flipped over. The question is whether or not the yellow birdie just ate a bad bag of seed, or if everything REALLY IS about to change.

Here's an early prediction for the year-end 2010 Top 10 (with '09 rank in parenthesis):

10. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, FRA (10): injuries have been keeping the 2008 Australian Open runner-up down, but he still managed to go 3-0 in finals and finish in the Top 10 in '09.
=============================
9. Andy Roddick, USA (7): was last season's Wimbledon final his last best chance to win another slam? Close losses to Federer and del Potro last summer might have dented his big match confidence enough to take away whatever good he accomplished with his new physique and more varied game.
=============================
8. Marin Cilic, CRO (14): the Croat defeated Nadal in Beijing, but he's yet to have a great slam run (a QF at the U.S. Open was his best in '09). The Croatian men have tended to rise in London, though, so he might be worth watching there this summer.
=============================
7. Nikolay Davydenko, RUS (6): was his Masters Cup title a prelude to him finally being a major player in the slams? Yeah, probably not. Still, his 5-0 finals record and wins over Federer and del Potro en route to the MC title was mightily impressive for a player who'll likely never get his due unless he pulls a slam out of his bag.
=============================
6. Robin Soderling, SWE (8): he was at his best in the slams, especially when he ended Nadal's 31-match RG win streak in Paris. He'll have much to live up to in 2010.
=============================
5. Andy Murray, GBR (4): his six titles speak to his in-season consistency, but is it possible that he might have missed out on a small window during which he SHOULD have ended all that "no British man has won a slam since Fred Perry" talk? He lost in his final two meetings with Federer in '09, and was surpassed by del Potro and Djokovic down the stretch. The trip up Murray Mount to a slam title surely looks steeper now than it did a season ago.
=============================
4. Novak Djokovic, SRB (3): he's yet to live up to his '08 Oz title promise again in a slam, but as the Big Two's stranglehold lessened in '09 he got stronger in the season's closing months. Djokovic defeated Federer three times last season, and took out Nadal three consecutive times in straight sets during the back half of the year. His time could come again in Melbourne.
=============================
3. Roger Federer, SUI (1): a horrid start, a grand middle and a nonexistent end made for a very uneven '09 campaign for the old/new #1 in men's tennis, who pretty much put a period at the end of his career legacy with his Roland Garros/Wimbledon two-fer last summer. Federer's still capable of winning a slam or two, but the season-long dominance of old looks to be gone for good (which might mean he fails to catch Pete Sampras' record of 286 weeks in the top spot, as he'll be twenty-two weeks from matching it as play begins in Week 1. Anyone can beat him on a bad day now. Much like with the late-career Venus Williams, his SW19 performance will tell the tale of whether or not his '10 is successful.
=============================
2. Rafael Nadal, ESP (2): even with his triumph in Australia, 2009 was a trying year for Nadal both on (thanks to his knees) and off (largely due to his parents' divorce) court. Maybe the Davis Cup title sent him into the offseason ready to bust heads and take names again in '10, but maybe the grinder of old will never be again. Could Nadal maintain his place at the top of the sport by changing his game enough to ensure that his career won't flame out far too early because the physical nature of his game prevents his body from lasting long enough to have a long career? Maybe. But there IS a question, and that might be enough to open the door for doubt... about him in the mind of his opponents, and himself. Still, I think it's more likely that Rafa will return to #1 than Federer will be able to hold onto it in 2010.
=============================
1. Juan Martin del Potro, ARG (5): hey, why not? I was going to pick Nadal #1 and del Potro #2, but I figured, "Why not just let the canary die in 2010?" So, there it is. Surely, his defeat of both Nadal and Federer en route to his U.S. Open title speaks well for what the Argentine is capable of accomplishing this season. He became the world's best hard courter in '09, and the high-level version of his game would seem to be able to be transferred to other surfaces, as well. At 21, he hasn't yet reached his prime. If he does in '10, he might just rise above everyone.
=============================

*6 MORE TO WATCH*
Sam Querrey, USA (25): 1-4 in finals last season, if he could just turn around a few of those results he'll be closing in on the Top 10.
=============================
Gael Monfils, FRA (13): really, who knows what to expect from Monfils? But you'd never dare ignore him.
=============================
Fernando Verdasco, ESP (9): he's not likely to top his career year of '09 in 2010.
=============================
Richard Gasquet, FRA (52): cocaine kisses for everyone! The Frenchman's talent is much like that Miami club incident -- the evidence says he might be legit, but something keeps you from fully committing to the notion of it all.
=============================
Gilles Simon, FRA (15): he took a mini-step back in 2009.
=============================
Jeremy Chardy, FRA (32): after grabbing his first title in '09, the youngest of the Frenchies is ready to rise.

=EARLY SLAM OUTLOOKS=
AO: Djokovic d. del Potro (Alternates: Nadal, Soderling, Federer)
...the Serb was on fire late in the season, and has won in Oz before. del Potro knows how to win a slam now, though... and he won't have to worry about Dick Enberg trying to keep the microphone to himself again.

RG: Nadal d. Federer (Alt: Soderling, Davydenko, Djokovic)
...was '09 just an aberration, or the beginning of the end of Nadal's Paris hegemony? Sometimes it happens that fast.

W: Federer d. Nadal (Alt.: Roddick, del Potro, Cilic)
...as it should be? Still, Roddick's near-win in '09 means that a first-time SW19 champion could be crowned at the All-England Club in '10.

US: del Potro d. Nadal (Alt.: Murray, Federer, Djokovic)
...only the strong survive and thrive and NYC. Of course, Nadal getting even this close would likely have to be the result of some re-thinking of his usually-grueling pre-North American schedule which usually leaves him a longshot at the Open.

All for now.

U.S. Open Final: Six-foot-Six ≠ 6

2009-09-15T14:28:00.001-04:00

We used to be able to take some things for granted when it came to Roger Federer. But this U.S. Open had one final dramatic event left to imprint on the tennis world's collective memory... and it starred Juan Martin del Potro.

In the past, when the all-time slam champ grabbed the opening set against a nervous slam final novice and was but two points away from taking a two-set lead, as was the case against the Argentine del Potro on Monday, the proceedings were all but over. Even if he flinched for a moment, Federer would right himself quickly and go on to make an example of an opponent who'd made the mistake of challenging his dominance. Then Rafael Nadal came along, and everything changed. His aura damaged, Federer had to rebuild his image.

As 2009 has gone along, after a rough start that saw him unable to top Nadal in the Australian Open final in Melbourne, Federer has managed to do just that. Going into this U.S. Open final, he was looking to tie Bill Tilden's record with a sixth straight crown in New York and set himself up to head Down Under next January with a shot at a "RogerSlam" and a fourth straight slam title. For a bit, it looked as if he might just pull off the feat, but his opponent would have nothing of it.

Of course, not every opponent is as physically imposing as the 6-foot-6 del Potro. Nor do that have as pulverizing a forehand as del Potro, or the intelligence to pull back at times on a powerful serve to keep Federer off balance as he did on Monday. Once del Potro got his game going, Federer simply could not hold off his forward motion toward the title for five full sets. Last summer, del Potro ruled the North American hard courts but flamed out at the Open. A year later, having left his teenage years behind and grown into his large frame, removing all traces of the physical awkwardness most players his size always seem to be hindered by on the court, he entered this tournament with the knowledge that he had the ability to beat anyone in the draw. In the semifinals, he smashed Nadal, allowing just six games in three sets. Next up was Federer.

Federer got off to a strong start, taking the opening set 6-2 and having break points for a 4-1 2nd set lead on del Potro's serve. The Argentine held, but when Federer served at 5-4, 30/love he seemed well on his way to a sixth straight defeat of a sixth different man in the U.S. Open final. But after questioning a replay decision (after a late del Potro challenge) that awarded del Potro a point, and seeming to not be able to get the moment out of his head (after arguing with the umpire during a changeover), Federer began a long, subtle descent toward defeat. He lost the 2nd set tie-break, but grabbed the lead again by taking the 3rd set at 6-4 after overcoming a break up, 4-3 del Potro lead.

In the 4th, del Potro again led with a break at 4-3, but Federer couldn't overcome yet again. He pushed things to a tie-break, but the Argentine claimed another set-decider to send the final of the U.S. Open men's final to a fifth set for the first time since 1999. In the final set, after struggling with his first serve for the entire match, Federer simply couldn't find his way. With his serve flagging, his groundstrokes went off, as well. He never seemed to be able to get a handle on del Potro's powerful forehands, framing returns of serve and in-point shots often. Del Potro raced to a 5-2 lead. Federer managed to save two match points, but he could only hold back his opponent for so long on this day. A backhand shot that sailed long was immediately followed by del Potro crumpling to the ground in the back court, stretched out on his back in amazement at his accomplishment.

Del Potro won 3-6/7-6/4-6/7-6/6-2 in 4:06.

So, while 2009 didn't turn out to be Federer's "greatest" season, four slam finals, including a first at Roland Garros and a return to the throne at Wimbledon (even though he didn't have to defeat Nadal for either), not to mention the re-claiming of the #1 ranking, it certainly ranks amongst them. Not too shabby in a calendar year in which he became a husband and the father of twin girls, as well.

As for del Potro, he's hardly a "shocking" slam champion considering his Top 5 ranking and North American hard court exploits the last two years. No matter what he does the rest of his career, which could be much considering his young age (20) and still-improving game, it'll be difficult to top a 30-hour span in which he defeated both Nadal and Federer on the biggest court in the world to earn this U.S. Open title.

"I have two dreams in this sport, one is the U.S. Open," del Potro said after the match. "The other is to be like Roger. One is done."

2009's slam season began with the sight of Federer's tears after losing a fifth set in Melbourne to Nadal, and now ends with del Potro's watery eyes after his own five-set win over Federer. It's not exactly the fairytale bookends to the season that Federer likely envisioned, but they're surely memorable moments for everyone else.

All for now.

U.S. Open Preview: The Joy of Six?

2009-08-27T17:35:00.003-04:00

Here I was ready to throw Roger Federer off the Statue of Liberty (ah, another good thing about the re-opening of Lady Liberty's crown to visitors for the first time in eight years -- a whole new batch of "homicidal" metaphors).

Can you say, "stupid?"

Earlier this year, Federer left Australia with his head down and tears in his eyes, commenting about how glad he was that the hard court season was over (remember, this is the same person who once set an ATP record with 56 consecutive hard court victories during 2005-06). A year after he was dethroned as the king of men's tennis, it was yet another moment that raised eyebrows.

But I guess we should have known how dangerous it was to question the logic of a mono-free former King.

Federer found his footing on the clay, winning his first Roland Garros title to complete a career Grand Slam. Then he outlasted Andy Roddick in a 16-14 5th set to re-claim his Wimbledon throne, stepped back into the #1 ranking in place of the injured and/or absent Rafael Nadal, and passed Pete Sampras on the all-time slam title list (with #15).

But then, earlier this month, Federer returned to the hard courts and choked away a 5-1 3rd set lead over Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in Montreal, double-faulting on match point. He arrived in Cincinnati with new #2-ranked player Andy Murray (on a four-match winning streak over Federer, plus an exhibition match victory) looming in his path in the semifinals, and it was so easy to mentally put one's foot down and believe that Federer's five consecutive U.S. Open titles was more than likely going to be enough.

But then he defeated Murray in the SF, and Novak Djokovic in the Cincy final, in straights sets to win his second Masters title of the season and move to within one of tying Andre Agassi with seventeen career Series crowns.

Now, Federer heads to New York with his aura re-established, or at least as intact as it can be without a 100% Nadal there to challenge it, for the first time in more than a year. After a brilliant summer run of 26 victories in his last 27 matches, riding a 34-match U.S. Open winning streak, Federer is the favorite to set an Open Era men's record with a sixth consecutive title at a single grand slam (and match big Bill Tilden's U.S. Open run from 1920-25).

I didn't really want to pick Federer to win the Open yet again... but he may have left me no choice.

**ROUND OF 16**
#1 Federer d. #21 Blake
#22 Querrey d. #8 Davydenko
#4 Djokovic d. #27 Kohlschreiber
#5 Roddick d. #20 Haas
#7 Tsonga d. #17 Berdych
#3 Nadal d. Chardy
#6 del Potro d. #24 Ferrero
#2 Murray d. #19 Wawrinka

...during ESPNEWS' coverage of the unveiling of the Open draw, Patrick McEnroe called Blake's early potential match-ups a "dream draw" for the recently-injured-and-traditionally-always-prepared-to-choke American. Translation: Blake could very easily lose in the 1st Round. Anyway, I'll pick him to make it this far. But I really don't believe it'll happen. Del Potro would be a cool slightly-under-the-radar (compared to the "Big 4 or 5") pick to win this title, by the way.

**QUARTERFINALS**
#1 Federer d. #22 Querrey
#5 Roddick d. #4 Djokovic
#7 Tsonga d. #3 Nadal
#2 Murray d. #6 del Potro

...Djokovic might just have to stare down his Open nemesis Roddick, now with a whole new fan base after his near-miss at SW19 (not to mention those "fans" who latched onto him when he became "Mr. Brooklyn Decker"... of course, come to think of it, those "fans" might root against him now on principle, just for jealousy-inspired spite). Nadal did win in Melbourne, proving his hard court slam mettle. But that was many months, wear-and-tear and aching knees ago. The returning-to-action Rafa might not be prepared to go at full speed on this surface for two weeks... not yet.

**SEMIFINALS**
#1 Federer d. #5 Roddick
#2 Murray d. #7 Tsonga

...Murray has passed Nadal for #2 on the computer, but he's still yet to fulfill his potential in the clutch in a slam. Whether it's been at the Open or Wimbledon, he's been bested in the biggest matches against players he's had fine records against in the past. Still, I'll pick him to reach his second consecutive U.S. final. Roddick needs to face Federer again, just to erase that Wimbledon final from his memory banks. Ever since failing to top Federer there, he's shown a nagging inability to win close matches (twice losing tight ones to del Potro, then dropping a pair of tie-breaks against Querrey, during his U.S. Open lead-up schedule). Of course, that doesn't mean he'd succeed in given a second chance at Flushing Meadows.

**FINAL**
#2 Federer d. #2 Murray

...Federer beat Murray here a year ago, and he's not trying to "save" his season this time around. A win here would make 2009 one of his "classic" campaigns, if not his best ever.

All for now.

Wimbledon Final: Mr. European Cool vs. Yankee Doodle Dandy (or, "An English Classic, Pt.II")

2009-07-05T23:46:00.005-04:00

Apparently, there's a new tennis law that says that anytime Roger Federer plays in a slam final, one of the competitors has to shed tears when it's all over.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

The 2009 Wimbledon Gentlemen's singles final was expected to be something of a coronation ceremony, with a revamped and reinvigorated Andy Roddick quite possibly providing enough decent competition to not be considered a pushover. But no one was expecting what actually happened on Centre Court today. One year after "The Greatest Match Ever Played," Federer and Roddick conspired to cobble together a fitting sequel. The end product might not have been QUITE as groundbreaking as the duel between Federer and Nadal of 2008, but it was more than special is so many ways all its own.

Ironically, the opening shot of NBC's coverage of the final today didn't exactly inspire anyone to think big.

There was the fidgety Roddick, waiting impatiently while dressed in his familiar cap and on-court short-sleeved shirt and shorts attire. He looked just so... well, for lack of a better term, "American," a virtual Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court who resembled an unknown kid who might have just been pulled off a neighborhood tennis court and given the chance of a lifetime -- to face the kingly gentleman champion of a more stately age on the sport's grandest stage.

It was like they were of two entirely different ages.

Standing behind Roddick, Federer was oozing European "cool"... or maybe it was something akin to a royal air. Dressed in impeccable cream slacks and tailored military style long-sleeved jacket, he sported a countenance as calm as still water. Hands casually, but regally, resting in his pockets, he appeared to be waiting for the call to civilized battle. Of course, when you reach seven consecutive Wimbledon finals, and the final of sixteen of the last seventeen slams, you tend to have an unbreakable routine that makes even the impending moment during which you are expected to be officially "crowned" seem like a walk into the kitchen to grab a drink of water.

Then again, while this day wasn't supposed to be easy, it would have been hard to imagine that Federer's path to his record-breaking fifteenth slam title would be as hard to traverse as it was versus a player against which he had an 18-2 career head-to-head advantage heading into the match. But that's exactly what it was.

Once play began, it took three games for the true reason this match had an historical angle to become sufficiently apparent. When all-time slam champ Pete Sampras arrived -- fashionably late -- to the Royal Box and took his seat alongside the likes of Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg to complete tennis' version of an Elder's Council, there was no question how serious this would-be coronation was supposed to be.

Thing is, Roddick wasn't playing along with the ceremonial aspects of this final. He believed this was HIS day to shine. At 5-5, he denied Federer four break point opportunities. What we didn't know at the time was that it would be nearly four hours before Federer would have as good a chance to break Roddick's serve, and that his inability to get one here would very nearly cost him the championship. Then again, maybe he DID know, for one game later, after having previously lost only three points on serve, Federer lost four as Roddick converted a break to take the 1st set 7-5.

The 2nd set was about Federer holding on for dear life. Roddick's backhands down the line and deep, penetrating shots kept Federer off balance in the back of the court, unable to get into an aggressive position (somewhat similar to how Maria Sharapova took down Serena Williams in the '04 Ladies' Final). In the set's concluding tie-break, Roddick jumped to a 6-2 lead and held four set points for a two sets to none lead, but Federer survived by outplaying him on five of the next six points (the American's miss at a high backhand volley at 6-5, while a difficult shot, was all on him) to steal away the breaker 8-6.

Roddick rightly believed he could win, but Federer was not ready to lose. Not on Centre Court. Not again.

Federer won the 3rd set in another tie-break at 7-5, while Roddick seized control of the 4th and won it outright 6-3. But both sets were just a prelude to an epic 5th set that lasted more than an hour-and-a-half and is destined to go down in grand slam history.

Truthfully, the final set wasn't filled with a handful of great, thrilling, heart-stopping moments ala the Rafa/Roger final of a year ago. Both Federer and Roddick were largely routinely holding serve. It was tennis' version of a marathon race, and everyone was waiting to see which player would suffer the single unfortunate stumble down the final stretch that would lead them to be beaten out while "leaning for the tape." One of them HAD to do so, because otherwise the match would NEVER end. They played on, and on. 7-7, the same point at which Nadal broke Federer's serve before serving out the 9-7 final set in '08, went by without either player grabbing an advantage.

Throughout the set, there were brief moments of truth. The first came at 8-8. Roddick went up 40/15 on Federer's serve, but the five-time Wimbledon champ hit a service winner, then used a wide serve to set up an easy put-away volley. He held for 9-8. At 9-9 a new Wimbledon final 5th set record was achieved. 10-10. 11-11, as the grand slam final 5th set record was surpassed after Roddick held serve despite Federer having pushed him to a deuce point. 12-12, as Federer climbed out of a 15/30 hole on his own serve. 13-13, as Roddick again was forced to play a deuce game. 14-14.

And then it happened. Roddick stumbled ever so slightly, and Federer pounced.

Down love/30 on his serve, Roddick scrambled to stay ahead, but Federer could smell the finish line and his calling to history. At deuce, Federer's short return led to a Roddick shot that Federer promptly pushed into an open court. After 4:16, behind only last year's match in terms of lengths of a Wimbledon final, 76 games, and 435 points, Federer reached match point.

When Roddick framed a bad-bouncing Federer shot off the chopped up earth on the baseline, Federer exploded with the joy he'd missed out on a year ago in the fading light at the All-England Club. For the first time all day, after failing to convert his first six opportunities, Federer broke Roddick's serve on his seventh break chance. For his reward he received the match, 5-7/7-6/7-6/3-6/16-14, and the honor of being the new all-time slam king.

EPA/G.Penny

In the end, for all the greatness of Roddick's serve, Federer put away 50 aces (to the American's 27) and had a remarkable 89% 1st serve win percentage (to Roddick's 83%).

For as good as it was, Federer/Roddick is destined to somewhat live in the shadow of the '08 match, which had all the intangible elements of two players in an epic struggle to possibly become not just the Wimbledon champion but also the best of their generation, and maybe all-time. It provided a tangible changing of the guard moment in near-darkness in the final match at a roofless Centre Court, with Federer's long-held position at the top of the game suddenly being questioned while Nadal's greatness was simultaneously being recognized.

None of that can be said about the '09 final, but one gets the feeling that the legend of THIS final will grow over time (some might even attempt to maintain that it was quite possibly superior to the Rafa/Roger classic, just to be contrary). It won't have an entire book written about it like the '08 match, but it WILL provide a rather snappy chapter in the careers of both Federer and Roddick... not to mention some beaming smiles from all those who watched it. THIS match was just plain fun, pure and simple, even if Roddick (who shed tears on the court, then was his usual blunt self after the match when it came to drawing the stark line between winning and losing a slam final, fully believing at least for this one day that he's never been more hurt by a single loss in his entire career) might not be capable of seeing it right now.

Recognizing in Roddick the same hurt that he'd felt on Centre Court a year ago, Federer tried to console him at he took the microphone during the trophy presentaton, saying essentially that one match lost doesn't make a career. I'm not sure that Roddick totally bought it, considering one slam that slipped away means far more to a one-time winner than it might a fifteen-time champ, but at least at that moment, the two players who'd seemed from such different worlds not five hours before had at least found some common ground. Sort of.

In the light of this latest Wimbledon five-set final, the third straight at SW19, could Federer's position be more different than it was twelve months ago? Last July, his "reign" seemed to be over. Now, he's the reigning champ (again) at three of the four slams, will be looking to win a third straight in New York with a sixth consecutive Open crown and, of course, is once again the subject of "Is He the Greatest Ever?" discussions in all corners of the sport.

After the post-match ceremony, Federer exited the court and entered the All-England Club with the champion's cup. He proceeded to shake hands with the entire Elder's Council (with three-time Wimbledon champ John McEnroe standing nearby, microphone in hand, as well) awaiting him there. It was a quite a meeting of tennis greats, and everyone was careful not to slight another while pondering Federer's place in the game's historical hierarchy, of which each person in that room was himself a powerful member. But, interestingly, if you looked closely, you could see the sunlight peeking through a window and shining directly on Federer in that gathering of greats. And ONLY him.

I'm not saying that the Tennis Gods were making THEIR choice obvious... I'm just pointing out a little detail that I noticed.

After so many years living in the long shadows of the other, greater players of his generation, Roddick proved up to the task of standing along side the best of them all today. Well, almost.

While Roddick might have lost this final, he could still get the last laugh, or at least a satisfying smile of TOTAL redemption soon enough. His new lease on tennis life suddenly makes him a real contender at Flushing Meadows.

Remember, Nadal's health is unknown heading into the North American hard court season, and the Spaniard has yet to make a great Open run. Plus, Federer has won five straight U.S. titles, and might be due to lose (well, maybe) before lifting the trophy again. Might an Andy vs. Andy final be possible, or another Roddick shot at Federer in the American's back yard?

Could be. Could be.

Hmmm, as happened the Sunday on which Federer won Roland Garros, did anyone notice that his fellow march-toward-history comrade -- Tiger Woods -- also won a PGA tour title today (not far from Backspin HQ, actually, at Congressional Country Club in Washington, D.C.)?

Sometimes, everything just lines up perfectly. Of course, where Federer is concerned, "sometimes" happens fifteen times... and counting.

*ALL-TIME MEN'S SLAM TITLES*
15...ROGER FEDERER, SUI
14...Pete Sampras, USA
12...Roy Emerson, USA
11...Bjorn Borg, SWE
11...Rod Laver, AUS
10...Bill Tilden, USA

*WIMBLEDON SINGLES TITLES*
[all-time]
7...Pete Sampars
7...William Renshaw
6...ROGER FEDERER
5...Bjorn Borg
5...Laurence Doherty
[Open Era]
7...Pete Sampras
6...ROGER FEDERER
5...Bjorn Borg
3...Boris Becker
3...John McEnroe

*LONG WIMBLEDON FINALS*
4:48 - 2008: Nadal def. Federer
4:16 - 2009: FEDERER def. RODDICK
4:16 - 1982: Connors def. McEnroe

*SLAM FINALS - ACTIVE*
20...ROGER FEDERER (15-5)
8...Rafael Nadal (6-2)
5...ANDY RODDICK (1-4)
4...Lleyton Hewitt (2-2)
4...Marat Safin (2-2)

*ALL-TIME ATP SINGLES TITLES*
109...Jimmy Connors
94...Ivan Lendl
77...John McEnroe
64...Pete Sampras
62...Bjorn Borg
62...Guillermo Vilas
60...ROGER FEDERER
60...Andre Agassi

*2009 ATP SINGLES FINALS*
7...Rafael Nadal (5-2)
6...Novak Djokovic (2-4)
5...Andy Murray (4-1)
4...ROGER FEDERER (3-1)
3...Radek Stepanek (2-1)
3...ANDY RODDICK (1-2)

*MOST SLAM FINAL MEETINGS*
7...Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal
5...Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
5...Ivan Lendl vs. Mats Wilander
4...Bjorn Borg vs. Jimmy Connors
4...Bjorn Borg vs. John McEnroe
4...ROGER FEDERER vs. ANDY RODDICK

*CONSECUTIVE SLAM FINALS*
10...Roger Federer (2005-07)
7...Jack Crawford (1932-34)
6...ROGER FEDERER (2008-CURRENT)

*"RODDICK IN SLAM FINALS*
[vs. Federer, 0-4]
2004 lost Wimbledon final
2005 lost Wimbledon final
2006 lost U.S. Open final
2009 lost Wimbledon final
[vs. anyone else, 1-0]
2003 won U.S. Open over Juan Carlos Ferrero

All for now.

Wimbledon Day 11: Everything Old is New Again

2009-07-03T17:06:00.001-04:00

So, the Federer vs. Murray final that so many Brits were hoping for won't come off after all. Honestly, I'm really not at all broken up about it.

Displaying a more varied game than he ever has in all his years of play at Wimbledon, Andy Roddick took out Andy Murray in four close sets on Day 11, reaching his third SW19 final and his first at any slam since the 2006 U.S. Open. With his usual solid serve, great net play and better fitness allowing him to play the ENTIRE court, after for too many years being a better version of Ivo Karlovic -- all serve, but with little else to call upon in a pinch if things started to go against him -- Roddick was without question the best player on the court in this day's matchup. I'm glad he was able to pull off this run, too. And not just because I predicted him to do it two weeks ago, either.

I've got nothing against Murray, but to this point I've just never been able to "get" him. I don't DISLIKE him or his game, but I have so far found myself with zero excitement to see him play since he climbed into the upper echelon in the ATP rankings. That'll probably change, as I often tend to take a while to warm up to certain men's players. For a long time, I actively disliked Lleyton Hewitt. Now, though, I found myself pulling for him at this Wimbledon. Roddick, too, has often been the object of slight disdain in the eyes of Your Friendly Neighborhood Backspinner.

Roddick was unlucky enough to be born into the same tennis generation as a pair of all-time greats in Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, virtually swiping away at least two or three additional slams he might have won since his '03 U.S. Open victory six years ago had the landscape been slightly less crowded. Hard to believe TWO players could make it seem crowded, but they surely have... and it's no coincidence that he's reached another slam final once one of them was taken out of the equation before the tournament began.

Still, while it's often been easy to feel bad about Roddick's predicament, he's sometimes made it difficult to do so. For years, he's been ever-present in ads on American television while winning nothing of true significance, and so often coming up very small when he played Federer. Add to that a certain smart-ass quality to his press conferences and interviews (such as the tiff that developed a while back when he started griping about Novak Djokovic), and it was easier to semi-sneer at his not-unexpected failures than pull for him to find his way back to something resembling relevance in the men's game.

Finally, though, that seems to have changed. Maybe it was his coaching switch to Larry Stefanki, altered game or long-overdue committment to fitness that did it. Maybe it was a settling down in his off-court life, courtesy of Brooklyn Decker. Whatever it was, it's worked.

As far as how I view Roddick, though, it was something else that was the catalyst. Ever since Roddick became the ONLY player to actually speak out in defense of Shahar Peer during the Dubai debacle earlier this year, I've viewed him differently. He pulled out of the men's event in the U.A.E., citing Peer's treatment as the reason, while so many others remained silent or played on. Even players who didn't play Dubai after the fiasco, like Federer and Nadal, listed injuries as their reasons for withdrawing and otherwise kept mum. Not Roddick, though. He stood up, and I think deserved to be given a large amount of respect for his position.

Ever since then, as his results have gradually improved, and I've found myself rooting for him, too.

While I still want Federer to win the title on Sunday, for history's sake, I wouldn't feel bad at all if Roddick took the crown. I never like rooting for a player simply because of them being an American -- I think it's akin to mindlessly voting for a straight ticket on election day -- but I do feel at least a small amount of pride that on Independence Day weekend, the only player who actually stood their ground when one of his or her fellow players was publicly wronged, was an American. And if he were to win Wimbledon, it'd probably make me smile.

Corny? Yeah, probably. But sometimes that's not so bad.

All for now.

Wimbledon Preview: Back to the Federer

2009-06-20T20:47:00.003-04:00

All right, everybody into the De Lorean. We're about to take a trip... back to the future.

With defending champion Rafael Nadal's withdrawal from the Wimbledon draw, the entire landscape of the happenings at the All-England Club changes. Why, it's going to be like we've jumped into a time machine, but ended up back in the current day. Roger Federer is the top seed. Andy Roddick is a legitimate threat to reach the final (as he did from 2004-05, before the run of three straight Roger/Rafa matchups). And a Brit (now named Andy, not Tim) will be carrying the hopes of a nation on his back.

Keeping with the theme, the crowning of an old-but-also-new champion that would set yet another all-time slam record would seem to be in the cards. Hmmm, do I sense a well-worn prediction coming on?

**ROUND OF 16**
Hewitt d. #23 Stepanek
#6 Roddick d. Mathieu
#3 Murray d. #19 Wawrinka
#10 Gonzalez d. #8 Simon
#24 Haas d. #17 Blake
#4 Djokovic d. #18 Schuettler
#9 Tsonga d. #7 Verdasco
#2 Federer d. #13 Soderling

...Blake usually disappoints, but I'll save his vanishing act until this round rather than earlier. The absence of Nadal really opens up the top section for the likes of Hewitt. Federer meet a familiar Roland Garros foe... but his name is Robin, not Rafael.

**QUARTERFINALS**
#6 Roddick d. Hewitt
#3 Murray d. #10 Gonzalez
#24 Haas d. #4 Djokovic
#2 Federer d. #9 Tsonga

...maybe Haas' recent title is pushing a too-deep pick here, but so be it. Britain's hopes are still afloat.

**SEMIFINALS**
#6 Roddick d. #3 Murray
#2 Federer d. #24 Haas

...if we're going back to the future, then we have to go back to the last time we didn't have a Roger/Rafa final, right? And that would mean the American, possibly the most helped by Nadal's absence here, returns to the final Sunday, preventing "Murray McFly" (who, even now with a grass title under his belt, isn't a sure thing at Wimbledon) from commandeering the De Lorean and turning the Gentleman's Championship into something to behold.

**FINAL**
#2 Federer d. #6 Roddick

...if anyone didn't see this one coming, they weren't paying attention. Really, Murray is the only "second pick" for this title, and I just can't see everything lining up to allow that to become a reality. Federer seems destined to finally overtake Pete Sampras on the career grand slam list at the end of the fortnight. Unless, of course, the PSEUDO-Roger returns. But, especially after RG and the career Grand Slam, will that happen at SW19? Probably not.

Back to THE Federer... and away we go.

All for now.

The People's Champion

2009-06-08T17:39:00.004-04:00

After so many years of placing Roger Federer upon a high pedestal, the past year has been particularly disconcerting. Federer went from being called "The Greatest of All Time" to being considered possibly the SECOND-best of his GENERATION in the blink of an eye.

Over a twelve-month span, wrapped around his fifth straight U.S. Open title run, we saw Federer beat down in Paris, shellshocked in London, and brought to dejected tears in Melbourne. In March, the weight of the combined experiences seemed to come to a head in Miami when he furiously crushed his racket on the court and talked about being "glad the hard court season was over." Mind you, this is the same man who used to rule the hard courts, setting the all-time mark with fifty-six straight surface victories in 2005-06.

Apparently, though, there was a method to the former King Roger's madness. As the weekend ended in Paris yesterday, Federer was brought to tears once again. But this people time didn't feel the need to turn away from the sight of a "broken man." Instead, they cried tears of joy with him.

Three weeks ago, when Federer knocked off Rafael Nadal on the clay in Madrid, it was a much-needed confidence boost for a man who'd been the epitome of self-assurance not that long ago. But, still, it was hard to tell how much the victory would mean in Paris. After all, Federer had ended Nadal's record 81-match clay streak in Hamburg in '07, but it didn't stop the Spaniard from winning in Paris again and then extending his consecutive victory mark over Federer at Roland Garros to four in the final a year ago in a fashion so discouraging to Federer.

But then Nadal lost.

The four-time champion's upset at the hands of Sweden's Robin Soderling last weekend was one of those moments that opened the door wide for history to pass through. At its core, it elminated the biggest obsacle in the path of the rebirth of the Federer legend. But it didn't assure it.

For half of this Roland Garros, Federer had to withstand possibly the heaviest burden of his career, as likely his best chance to complete the career Grand Slam and tie Pete Sampras' all-time slam title mark of fourteen was there, plain as day, for all to see. Especially Federer himself. If he failed to do it this time, the sense of loss and disappointment might have been crushing. He nearly lost twice, having to come back from two sets down against Tommy Haas on Monday, then from a two-sets-to-one deficit against Juan Martin del Potro in the semifinals on Friday. Ultimatley, he survived and lived to stare down history once again.

But that's why Federer is Federer, or maybe I should say, that's why Federer is STILL Federer, recent evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

Sunday's final was one of those rare instances where nearly everyone on hand at Court Chatrier (or watching from afar), save for a few stalwart Swedes in the corner of Rafa-conquering finalist Soderling, yearned to see the same result. They wanted to see Federer win, as even Nadal had expressed a week ago a wish to see his hard-working and deserving rival raise the Coupe des Mousquetaires for which his quest has been such an arduous and previously fruitless endeavor, but everyone was holding his or her breath. It was as if millions around the world had planned for a big celebratory parade, but a slight threat of rain planted a seed of doubt that grew into a worry that everything would be ruined.

But there was on reason to despair, for the revelry went off without a hitch.

Of course, it wasn't going to be a TOTALLY easy day for Federer, even if his first-time slam finalist opponent didn't come lose to replicating his play against Nadal. The elements wind, rain and cold were conspiring to make calamitous this day of expected bliss, toying with the idea of becoming factors if the match lasted long into the day.

But it didn't.

Resembling the Federer who, when he was at the top of his game, could create a quick victim of an opponent in a slam final (ask Lleyton Hewitt), the Swiss Mister was more than ready for his re-introduction to immortality.

Federer broke Soderling to take a 1-0 lead in the 1st set, then again to go up 3-0. He won the set 6-1 and it seemed like we could just fast forward to the post-match ceremony. During the fourth game of the 2nd set, though, some yahoo rushed out of the stands, waving a flag and trying to put his hat on Federer's head before leaping the net in a mad scramble away from security forces. (Seriously, even the flying wedge-like tackle from one guard in no way made up for such a lapse sixteen years after Monica Seles' life and career, as well as WTA history, were altered forever in Hamburg.)

Federer was visibly rattled. The crowd was uneasy. How much the closeness of the proceeding set had to do with the incident, or whether it was more a case of Soderling slowly getting his footing, is hard to tell. But the moment had no long-term deleterious effect on the match, as it was still all-Federer. He handily won the 2nd set tie-break. After badly overhitting a volley that briefly gave Soderling a break point at 5-4 in the 3rd set, Federer promptly served out the game to win 6-1/7-6/6-4.

It was never in doubt.

AP / Christophe Ena

Thus, Soderling became the eleventh different victim in Federer's fourteen career slam wins. Meanwhile, Federer (the "anti-Ivan Lendl," the former Czech #1 that a Sports Illustrated cover once dubbed "The Champion Nobody Cares About") re-entered the discussion he used to dominate concerning who is the greatest player of all time.

Which brings to mind the question of what it is that defines athletic greatest. Winning, of course. But also consistency, endurance and gameday dependability that no one will ever question a player's desire to win.

Remind you of anyone?

As there is now talk about Nadal's knee possibly preventing him from attempting to defend his Wimbledon title, it's even more important to note that Federer has played in thirty-eight straight slams, reached nineteen career slam finals and twenty consecutive slam semifinals. He's not only tied with Sampras as the winningest slam champion ever, but he's also just the sixth man to win all four slam crowns and the second (with Andre Agassi) to do so on three different surfaces. Greatness pretty much describes Federer to a "service T."

Against other Open era contenders, Federer's versatility pushes him past Sampras, and his depth and dimension of accomplishments spirit him past the likes of Agassi, John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg. There'll always be an argument from those who saw Rod Laver play just who is THE best player ever, but this win means that Federer is assured of being no worse than #2 in the mythical all-time rankings.

But Federer's not just one more slam victory from unquestionably being "history's numerical champion," he's become the "people's champion," too.

He's emerged as the most human of all the great men's champions in recent years. Oddly, unlike players such as Agassi and McEnroe who became "beloved" as they shared so much of themselves (good and bad) through the years, Federer has always played the part of the reserved gentleman of the game. Oddly, Federer was once a player about whom it was so easy to make only half-joking comments about his omniscience and God-like traits (an original Federerism: "Bono asks Roger Federer for his advice on how to cure all the world's ills "). Also, the irony that THIS Federer is the same person who once managed to so routinely flash such an all-knowing, imperiousness before he was surpassed by Nadal is quite a feat. Or maybe not. After all, Federer's old persona, in spite of it all, never projected arrogance (though it would have been seen as only that if sported by almost anyone else) because he pulled it off with such class and panache that he came off as supremely polite even while casually agreeing that yes, he just might be the best tennis player who's ever lived.

What is it that they say? It's not being cocky if it's true? For a while, it was. And it might be again.

As he's recently seemed more vulnerable than any other superiorly gifted athlete in any sport, he's gone from the exalted, untouchable FEDERER to the likable man being brought down to the level of a mere mortal as his humanity was uncovered by way of his defeats at the hands of Nadal.

After seeing his aura of invincibility crack, becoming confused and sometimes seemingly helpless to do anything about it, Federer's triumphant trek back to the top on the surface and at the tournament that had been his most vexing, has not only added yet another level to his legend but also allowed tennis fans to embrace him as an individual as much as tennis luminaries always have as a player, before he edges into the late stages of a career when the intervals between big wins begin to get longer and longer.

The only thing missing from the equation on Sunday was Nadal himself. But, then again, none of what happened to Federer in Paris this year would have been possible, or meant as much, were it not for Nadal denying him of it for so many years.

In the end, what we recaptured at this Roland Garros was our preferred image of Federer. Fully recovered from his bout with mono that might have played a larger role in this drama than we'll ever know, newly married with a baby on the way, and now the reigning RG champion. On this day, Federer has it all. THAT'S the Federer who fits so neatly into our collective memory banks, and now it's the Federer who'll forever remian there.

I guess we were a bit premature to even consider writing off or revising the man's place in tennis history, huh?

Of course, the signs of Federer's place in the sports landscape were everywhere on Sunday. His partner-in-the-crime-of-greatness, Tiger Woods, took his friend's cue and won a title this weekend, too. (All that we needed was Derek Jeter or that soccer guy and we'd have a Gillette commercial.)

Then, during the post-match ceremony in which Federer effortlessly drifted between French and English during his acceptance speech and tears fell down his cheeks as the Swiss national anthem played while the newly-crowned Roland Garros champion stood shoulder-to-shoulder with presenter and fellow career Slam achiever Agassi, the rain came down harder than it had all day long.

Could it have been the tears of the tennis Gods? Maybe. After all, they only weep for their own.

All for now.

RG.9- Five Points from Oblivion

2009-06-01T17:06:00.002-04:00

The House of Federer very nearly imploded on Court Chatrier today.

With neither Rafa Nadal nor Novak Djokovic around anymore, Roger Federer came into his Day 9 Round of 16 match against Tommy Haas as the player under a magnifying glass. As the new "favorite" to win Roland Garros, even he had to know that every point he played today took on additional importance in the grand scheme of things.

And, at the start, he played just as one would expect an all-time great staring history in the face to play. His tennis, at least on serve, was nearly spotless. Through twelve games in the 1st set, he'd yet to lose a solitary point on serve. Thing is, the score was 6-6. In the tie-break, he lost his first two service points. A few minutes later, he was a set down.

Pow! Talk about a shock to the system. So much so that it must have caused him to lose focus. After going up 4-3, 30/15 in the 2nd set, he must have seen his Roland Garros life -- and maybe his ultimate place in history -- flash before his eyes.

Down two sets to love, and battling to keep his head above water in the 3rd set, one couldn't help but wonder whether the Nadal upset had managed to infect the entire tournament, putting crushing pressure on all the potential champions left in the draw as they fully realize in the light of day the opportunity with which they've been presented. Even Federer, thirteen-time grand slam winner, is susceptible... and it looked like his incredibly lucky weekend might go for nothing.

But then Federer realized who he was, and Haas looked around and did the same. The German got within five points of bringing down the House of Federer in the 4th Round, but that was as close as he got. This Roland Garros could still go down the road of a final that will drive people away from their televisions -- Davydenko vs. Robredo, anyone? -- but it will go on from today with Federer still with an eye on tying Pete Sampras' slam record before heading off to SW19.

Federer won 6-7/5-7/6-4/6-0/6-2.

Federer's 2009 Roland Garros quest might end earlier than he'd wish when all is said and done, but it wasn't meant to end like this. Not today.

Whew!

Next up... Gael Monfils

All for now.

RG.8- Mister Federer's Lucky Weekend

2009-06-01T02:04:00.006-04:00

And on the final weekend of May 2009, Roger Federer smiled.

Or at least he should have, as one day after Novak Djokovic was sent packing at Roland Garros... gulp... so was Rafael Nadal.

Yes, it's true. After four years, thirty-one straight wins, four RG title runs with just seven sets lost before Sunday, Nadal was out-hit, outstretched and outplayed by big #23-seed Robin Soderling of Sweden, who won 6-2/6-7/6-4/7-6 on a windy Paris day when everything we thought we knew about this tournament turned out to be wrong.

So, apparently, Nadal's Madrid loss to Federer, two near-misses against Novak Djokovic and (too?) heavy pre-RG schedule DID mean something. Or not. After all, as the Spaniard noted after the match, he played the same sort of schedule the last four years and he WON Roland Garros. This time, he lost. There's probably no deep, dark secret to take from this single result.

One thing that MIGHT have some meaning, though, could be Soderling's attitude toward Nadal. Much as Rafa's takedown of Federer can partly be attributed to his total lack of fear of him (not hatred toward him, mind you, as he's now stated he'd like to see Federer win this title), Soderling certainly arrived without any feelings of awe toward Nadal... you'd never mock and/or mimic Rafa to his face as he did at Wimbledon two years ago if you felt that.

Nadal is used to getting respect from his opponents, but Soderling didn't have a lot to spare. Based on prior actions, bowing down in such a way just isn't in the Swede's make-up. Not that we can or should expect, or would ever want, future Nadal opponents to follow this path, but it does show that... well, it's A WAY to go.

Even in a sport of "ladies" and "gentlemen," a few "bitches" and "bastards" can make things interesting. I'm just sayin', you know.

Who'll now emerge from the Rafa-less top half is a discussion for another day, as now all eyes fall on Federer.

He now has the best opportunity he'll ever have to get his first Roland Garros title, complete a career Grand Slam, tie Pete Sampras' all-time slam mark... and spend the summer trying to get history TOTALLY on his side in either London or New York. Sure, if he wins now without Nadal around, there'll be something of an urge to declare him a RG champion with an asterisk. But he HAS been the second-best claycourter in Paris the last three years, so we wouldn't exactly be talking about a pauper-to-king situation.

Of course, Rafa or no Rafa, Federer still has to win four more matches to claim this title. Imagine if he DOESN'T win the title now. Whew! Talk about another can of worms.

Needless to say, he'd BETTER win.

All for now.

Roland Garros Preview: Intrigue in Paris, or an Elaborate Fake-Out?

2009-05-23T19:04:00.002-04:00

The general rule for quite a few years now has been that Rafa Nadal rules Roland Garros. It's probably still the case as he's set to begin to attempt to claim his fifth straight French title.

But is it really?

While he once again dominated the European clay season this year, his results against his two biggest challengers -- Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic -- at least leave the door open a tiny crack when it comes to ruminating on whether or not the Spaniard winning another slam title, and getting half-way to a Grand Slam, truly is a fait accompli.

Djokovic played Nadal as close as anyone could in their three clay meetings this spring. Or at least as close as a player could get without actually winning one of the matches. Djokovic went 0-3, but showed no fear and even held match points against Rafa in Madrid in that instantly classic semifinal. The day after that match, Federer took down Nadal in straight sets in the final, ending his 33-match clay winning streak and finally shutting down Nadal's personal five-match dominance over the newly-married/new-father Swiss Mister.

But did Federer's triumph in a match in which he played as perfectly as he USED to play have as much to do with Djokovic wearing down Nadal as it did with Federer himself? On the heels of the great Sports Illustrated article that detailed how Nadal overtook Federer not just mentally and emotionally, but also physically and technically, the win in Madrid had to feel like a full dinner plate to a starving man when it comes to Federer's psyche.

How much of his old swagger has been restored? Did his "ruining of the party" in Madrid serve to return the luster to his lost aura, at least in his OWN head...which might be the most important aspect of the victory as this rivalry marches forward?

In Paris, Nadal faces the possibility of facing the likes of David Ferrer, Fernando Verdasco and Andy Murray en route to the final. But not Djokovic again. Would those men be enough to wear Nadal down enough again for Federer to have a shot at another clay victory? Will Federer, who might face Djokovic himself in the semis, even make it to the final?

A couple of weeks ago, the answers to those questions might have been simple. After Madrid, maybe not. There's at least a tiny SEED of doubt that Nadal's Paris mastery is destined to continue. And with Rafa riding a 28-0 career mark at Roland Garros, and a 43-0 one in best-of-five clay matches that's about all that the rest of the field can hope for.

**ROUND OF 16**
#1 Nadal d. #14 Ferrer
#8 Verdasco d. #17 Wawrinka
#3 Murray d. #18 Stepanek
#7 Simon d. #12 Gonzalez
#5 Del Potro d. #9 Tsonga
#4 Djokovic d. #16 Robredo
#11 Monfils d. #6 Roddick
#2 Federer d. #19 Berdych

... Roddick actually has a decent draw up until this point, and who knows if Monfils will be consistent enough to get this far. The American hasn't won a match in Paris since 2005, and has never reached the Round of 16... so it's a real reach to see him lasting even this long.

**QUARTERFINALS**
#1 Nadal d. #8 Verdasco
#3 Murray d. #7 Simon
#4 Djokovic d. #5 Del Potro
#2 Federer d. #11 Monfils

...of the Big Four, Murray's the most likely to be tripped up (maybe by Stepanek in the 4th Round?) on the red clay before reaching the semis. Hmmm, but there is the possibliy of Djokovic's fitness coming into question in a long match against someone like Del Potro.

**SEMIFINALS**
#1 Nadal d. #3 Murray
#2 Federer d. #4 Djokovic

...it's be easy to take Djokovic here, but if Madrid meant anything at all for Federer he'll find a way past the Serb and get another crack at Rafa.

**FINAL**
#1 Nadal d. #2 Federer

...but that second crack probably won't matter. Beating Nadal in Madrid at the end of the regular ATP clay season before Roland Garros is one thing, doing it in Paris is another. Seven matches over two weeks shouldn't leave Nadal winded, let alone ready to be dethroned. Still, at least the result in Spain would make this matchup an intriguing one going in. Just hanging close might be enough to allow Federer's Madrid momentum/confidence to continue and carry him through London and into NYC with a shot at making history.

HERE's Pierre Cantin's second opinion:

4th Rd
Rafael Nadal(1) def David Ferrer(14)
Fernando Verdasco(8) def Stanislas Wawrinka(17)
Andy Murray(3) def Marin Cilic(13)
Victor Hanescu(30) def Marcel Granollers
Juan Martin Del Potro(5) def Juan Monaco
Novak Djokovic(4) def Tommy Robredo(16)
Gael Monfils(11) def Ivan Navarro
Roger Federer(2) def Thomas Berdych

QF
Rafael Nadal(1) def Fernando Verdasco(8)
Andy Murray(3) def Victor Hanescu(30)
Novak Djokovic(4) def Juan Martin Del Potro(5)
Roger Federer(2) def Gael Monfils(11)

SF
Rafael Nadal(1) def Andy Murray(3)
Novak Djokovic(4) def Roger Federer(2)

Final
Rafael Nadal def Novak Djokovic

All for now.

BACKSPIN TIME CAPSULE: 1989 Roland Garros

2009-05-22T17:33:00.004-04:00

I've always thought there's one aspect of the slams that has traditionally made them so fun to follow, and provides an answer to why you keep an eye on seeming mismatches... just to see if something memorable might happen. Call it "the power of the unexpected."

Cynical and jaded attitudes are often no where to be found during the four biggest two-week tennis festivals each season. Through it all over the years, we're still capable of being shocked by an ultimate outcome of an event that can make a sudden, history-making star out of a player many people weren't paying any legitimate attention to before the start of play. From Iva Majoli in Paris in 1997 to Anastasia Myskina there seven years later (and even, on a smaller scale, Maria Sharapova's early run to a Wimbledon crown that same Russian-dominated summer), these, "Hi, my name is..." moments occur on a somewhat regular basis.

But no matter what shockers happen in the future, they'll likely have nothing on what happened at Roland Garros twenty years ago.

In 1989, a single mind-blowing slam champion wasn't hatched in Paris -- twins were born! In the form of a pair of 17-year old first-time champions -- Spain's Arantxa Sanchez and the U.S.'s Michael Chang -- who claimed the women's and men's titles, respectively, to become the youngest Roland Garros champions ever while beating back more established opponents with guts and guile, producing the most unpredictable final weekend of any slam. Ever.

Going into that year's tournament, a Spanish woman hadn't appeared in a slam singles final in sixty-one years. But the fiery sparkplug that was Sanchez -- "The Barcelona Bumblebee" -- changed all that, and altered the women's tennis history of her country.

Meanwhile, American men's tennis was deemed to be in dire straights, too... or so it seemed. It'd been five years since there'd been an American men's slam champ (John McEnroe at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open in '84), and over the previous decade the only American to win a slam other than McEnroe or Jimmy Connors was Brian Teacher at the Australian in '80. Neither McEnroe nor Connors would win another slam in their careers, reaching four total slam semifinals from 1989-91.

The new corps of American Generation X'ers were simply not progressing quickly enough for everyone's tastes. Eventually, the group would become arguably the most successful ever in U.S. tennis. But in '89, the natives were restless. We were still a year away from Pete Sampras' U.S. Open win and two from the start of Jim Courier's drive to the #1 ranking, while Andre Agassi was existing in the "image is everything"/highlighted long hair/cover boy/neon bike shorts phase of his early career. Chang, even after winning an ATP title a season earlier at age 16, wasn't even under consideration to be the first to truly emerge... let alone become the first American man to triumph in Paris in thirty-four years.

Of course, who ever could have foreseen the Chinese-American teenager's upset of #1-ranked Ivan Lendl in the 4th Round in a come-from-behind (two sets down) four-hour marathon? In the match, coming one day after the violent government crackdown by Communist China on student protesters in Tiananmen Square in Beijing, Chang suffered severe leg cramps that caused him to refuse to sit down during changeovers, as he paced back and forth while drinking water and hoping to avoid having his leg muscles lock up. Forced to go deep into his bag of tricks to win the match, Chang resorted to throwing in quick underhand serves to catch a peeved Lendl off-guard, and standing right at the service box to return the Czech's serve at match point. Angry and exasperated, and receiving no help from the chair umpire against the odd (some called them unsportsmanlike) tactics, Lendl double-faulted and Chang's place in grand slam history was secure... even before he played a five-set final against Stefan Edberg.

Sanchez's run wasn't nearly as Shakespearean, but it was just as invigorating. The Spaniard had shown herself to be a player to watch in Paris before, reaching the quarterfinals as a 15 and 16-year old in 1987-88 and upsetting Chris Evert. But with just one WTA tour title to her credit coming in, the #7-seed wasn't deemed "ready" to become a grand slam champ. Not yet. Not with world #1 Steffi Graf arriving in Paris a season after her Golden Slam and having won five straight slam titles.

But there the pair were on the final weekend after making dual runs-of-a-lifetime through their respective main draws while sporting identical new striped Reebok shirts, outdoing each other's heroics with unexpected wins over the sport's greats until it became apparent that BOTH might actually win the whole thing.

Here's how your friendly neighborhood (pre-)Backspinner saw it back then.

"A Revolution on the Clay of Roland Garros" (June 1989)

The breeze rolled in like a sudden storm off a bay. The kind of storm that pops up in the middle of a serene afternoon. But this storm was different from the normal storm which comes and goes and is forgotten within moments. This storm will be remembered for years to come.

This storm brought with it a gust of fresh air and a feeling that things will be fine in the future after all. This storm, a storm of talent and promise, was led by two 17-year olds who arrived in Paris as kids and left as, though still kids, unexpected champions. Tennis has been given a much-needed transfusion, and none too soon.

With the upset singles championship wins by Spain's Arantxa Sanchez (7-6/3-6/7-5 over #1 Steffi Graf) and the U.S.'s Michael Chang (6-1/3-6/4-6/6-4/6-2 over #3 Stefan Edberg), the tourney's #15-seed and the first American male to win the French Open since Tony Trabert in 1954-55, the sport's playing surfaces were finally shown to be a competitive arena (especially on the women's side) where dreams can come true and where great talent amongst the up-and-comers is abundant.

The women's tour was starting to resemble an old "B"-movie. The kind of flick where Godzilla or some other overpowering force rampages through a city whose inhabitants are rendered helpless. Until recently, it looked as if the carnage left in the wake of soon-to-be-20 year old Graf was beginning to pile up to an unimaginable height. Graf came into Paris having won the Golden Slam (all four slams plus Olympic Gold in Seoul) and finding herself one-quarter of the way to an unprecedented Double Slam after winning the Australian Open in January. She looked seemingly invincible.

Graf's stranglehold on the women's game appeared to become even tighter when it was learned that Chris Evert, who skipped the French, would retire before the year ends and that Martina Navratilova, who was also absent in Paris, would soon follow the American into the world of TV tennis commentating, especially if Martina can somehow pull off a record-breaking ninth Wimbledon crown next month.

Eighteen-year old Argentine Gabriela Sabatini, Graf's doubles partner, looked to be the only player who could challenge Graf over the long haul the next few years after the two aforementioned queens of the game call it a career. Only Soviet Natalia Zvereva, 17, seemed additionally capable of improving enough to possibly break into the group of women challenging regularly for tennis' four slam titles.

With Graf continuing to improve her already imposing game it, at times, appeared as if a time would come when she would not lose. Not at all. Maybe for a year or longer. True, it is nice for the game to have a superior champion, but for tennis to fully benefit from a great champion that champion must have one or more foils to make the going a little bit more interesting. Graf's dominance was starting to make the women's game a sometimes-boring (she has made nine straight slam finals) display of her awesome talent. It's unfortunate, but also true.

Jack Nicklaus had Arnold Palmer. Bill Russell had Wilt Chamberlain. The Yankees had the Dodgers. Billie Jean King had Evert. Evert had Navratilova. All were great, but each was made greater by the competition from the other. Graf has no one. Yet. Just look at Mike Tyson and the (yawn) heavyweight boxing division to see the impact that a lack of competition can have on even one of the best.

Over the course of two weeks on the red clay of Stade Roland Garros, this dearth of top-notch competition seems to have been replaced by a bevy of young(er) challengers to Graf's throne who appeared like magic out of the rains and have, in effect, raised the level of women's tennis astonishingly quickly.

The average age of the women's semifinalists was just seventeen at this tournament, with Graf, the young phenom of three years ago, being the elder stateswoman of the group. 15-year old giggling Yugoslav Monica Seles won the hearts of many and very nearly ousted Graf in a hotly contested semifinal match which proved that the German (especially when she's cramping) could very well be beaten.

Seventeen-year old American Mary Joe Fernandez, newly graduated and ready to devote herself to the game, booted Sabatini early in the tournament and was showing that her long-talked-about potential was no joke. Baseliner Fernandez eventually lost to Sanchez in the semis, but she would seem most certainly to continue to improve the more time she works on her game. With the history of U.S. teenagers burning out well in her mind, Fernandez showed her smarts by getting her diploma and not pushing herself into something that she was not ready for (being a full-time pro). If she uses that intelligence to its fullest she should succeed at whatever she pursues in or out of tennis.

But it was the young, gutsy, confident and determined Sanchez who pulled off possibly the biggest upset in women's tennis in many a year when she knocked off Graf in the final. The 17-year old is built low to the ground and possesses great speed. The fact that she is most at home on clay (just like brother Emilio) only added to the confidence the Spaniard displayed before the match, as her potency on the dirt was glimpsed a season ago when she knocked off Evert in what will now turn out to be the seven-time champion's final Roland Garros match.

Sanchez, the youngest women's French titleholder ever, was certainly helped by Graf's much-talked-about "feminine cramps," made worse by the grueling three-hour length of the match, but who's to say that the German would not have slowed down in the second of back-to-back long contests anyway? She certainly hasn't recently been used to being tested even once, let alone as she was in consecutive matches by both Seles and Sanchez. The fact that Sanchez broke Graf's serve twice at love after being down 5-3 in the 3rd set proved two things -- Graf is indeed human (surprise), and Sanchez never gives up. It is this Connorsesque grit and heart of a fighter which would seem to indicate a bright future for the hard-nosed teenager.

The field is starting to catch up to Graf, even if only slightly. But even THAT is progress that should make the coming decade a competitive and exciting one for the women's game. Sanchez's victory was the best thing that could have happened in Paris. It will give the other women a reason to press on, and should enable us to see many a fine slam final in the future.

While Sanchez gave us one of the biggest wins in recent memory, fellow 17-year old Michael Chang gave us an entire tournament of memories that will live forever.

Chang came into this tournament with little chance of winning and thereby ending the long American male French Open title drought of thirty-four years. Most figured if any U.S. man could win in Paris it would be 18-year old Andre Agassi. But when Agassi was ousted by countryman Jim Courier early most assumed the winless streak would be extended to thirty-five years.

Chang captured the Parisians' attention when he upset top-ranked Ivan Lendl in a marathon five-setter in which the American suffered through severe leg cramps. Chang could barely run and was forced to serve underhanded at one point. But when Lendl double-faulted on match point, as the American stood daringly just a few feet from the service line, the normally calm Chang fell to the ground in jubilation (and one must think, relief) as tears welled up in his eyes.

If Chang's journey had ended in the next round he still would have been remembered. But with hard-fought wins over Ronald Agenor, Andrei Chesnokov and Stefan Edberg in the final he will go down in history as a testament that anything can happen -- and sometimes does.

With his victory, which makes him the youngest men's slam champion ever, Chang adds his name to the list of young American males who are starting to pop up who can challenge for top titles. Chang, Agassi (who will not be truly respected until he stops worrying about damaging his ranking and decides to play Wimbledon) and Courier head the impressive list of young Americans poised for additional breakthroughs.

In this age of stoic champions such as Lendl, Mats Wilander and, to a lesser extent, Edberg, it's nice to see an infectious presence arrive on the men's circuit. Not since Boris Becker's triumphs at Wimbledon in 1985-86 has the men's tour had a current slam winner with that quality. With Jimmy Connors ready to retire soon and John McEnroe only now starting to make a comeback, U.S. tennis and, for that matter, all of men's tennis needs as many Changs as it can find.

After what may well be the best French Open in history we can now look forward to Wimbledon's start in two weeks time. But before we turn our attention to that sedate spectacle we should take a look at what is truly important in the grand scheme of things. When the young Chang wished luck to those in China following the past week's Beijing bloodshed, it was obvious that he does indeed have his head set squarely on his shoulders. So, to prove that we all do, we should follow Mr. Chang's lead.

Good luck.

*SANCHEZ-VICARIO SLAM FINALS*
6...Roland Garros ('89, '94, '98 champ)
2...U.S. Open ('94 champ)
2...Australian Open
2...Wimbledon

*ALL-TIME WTA WINS*
1442...Martina Navratilova
1304...Chris Evert
900...Steffi Graf
839...Virginia Wade
759...ARANTXA SANCHEZ-VICARIO

*ALL-TIME WTA MATCHES*
1661...Martina Navratilova
1448...Chris Evert
1168...Virginia Wade
1054...ARANTXA SANCHEZ-VICARIO

*SANCHEZ-VICARIO - SLAM FINALS vs...*
2-5...vs. Steffi Graf
1-1...vs. Mary Pierce
1-2...vs. Monica Seles

*OLYMPIC TENNIS MEDALS - MODERN ERA*
4...ARANTXA SANCHEZ-VICARIO, ESP
3...Mary Joe Fernandez, USA
3...Fernando Gonzalez, CHI
3...Conchita Martinez, ESP
3...Jana Novotna, CZE
3...Venus Williams, USA

*MOST WTA/ATP TITLES - BROTHER/SISTER*
48...SANCHEZ (Arantxa, Emilio & Javier)
32...Richey (Nancy & Cliff)
31...Austrin (Tracy & Jeff)
26...Safina/Safin (Dinara & Marat)

*MOST WTA DOUBLES TITLES*
177...Martina Navratilova
112...Rosie Casals
106...Pam Shriver
101...Billie Jean King
80...Natasha Zvereva
76...Jana Novotna
69...ARANTXA SANCHEZ-VICARIO

*SIMULTANEOUS WTA SINGLES/DOUBLES #1*
[weeks]
102...Martina Navratilova, 1984/85/86-87
29...Martina Hingis, 1998/99/00
7...ARANTXA SANCHEZ-VICARIO, 1995
3...Lindsay Davenport, 2000
3...Kim Clijsters, 2003

*CHANG SLAM FINALS*
Roland Garros (2) - Edberg 1-0, Muster 0-1
Australian (1) - Becker 0-1
U.S. Open (1) - Sampras 0-1

*MOST SLAM APPEARANCES - MEN*
66...Fabrice Santoro
61...Andre Agassi
58...Jonas Bjorkman
57...Jimmy Connors
57...MICHAEL CHANG
57...Ivan Lendl
57...Wayne Ferreira

*MOST MASTERS SERIES TITLES*
17...Andre Agassi
15...Rafael Nadal
15...Roger Federer
11...Pete Sampras
8...Thomas Muster
7...MICHAEL CHANG

Chang is still the youngest men's slam winner ever, while Sanchez-Vicario's (she added her mother's maiden name in '98) Roland Garros youngest-ever mark was broken just one year later by 16-year old 1990 champion Seles. While both the then-17 year olds grew into eventual Hall of Famers, Sanchez's career ultimately far outpaced Chang's.

Roland Garros '89 was but a prelude to a great, twenty-year (1985-05) career for ASV. Along with Conchita Martinez, she led a golden era for Spanish women's tennis. Together the pair reached a total of fifteen slam singles finals from 1989-2000. Their only other countrywoman to do so has been Lili de Alvarez, who played in three Wimbledon finals from 1926-28.

Even in an era of power-hitters such as Graf, Seles, Lindsay Davenport and the Williams sisters, the battling five-foot-six Sanchez-Vicario carved out quite a place for herself in women's tennis. She won four slam singles, six doubles and four mixed crowns in her career. She reached twelve slam singles finals, including at least two at each of the four events, and played in eight out of eleven finals from 1994-96. She won the U.S. Open in '94, and claimed two more French titles in '94 and '98. Sanchez won a total of 29 tour singles titles from 1988-01, ranks fifth all-time in career wins, fourth in matches and fifth in prize money. Her 69 doubles titles ranks her seventh on the all-time list. She's won more Olympic tennis medals (four - two silvers, two bronzes) than any other player in the modern era, and is Spain's all-time Olympic Medal winner. Sanchez-Vicario played in ten Fed Cup finals, including six consecutive, while leading Spain to five championships (four of five from 1991-95), and is the all-time Fed Cup wins leader.

ASV was #1 in the world for twelve weeks in 1995, and is one of only five women to simultaneously hold the top ranking in both singles and doubles. She first became doubles #1 in 1992, and held the spot for seventeen consecutive months from 1995-97, the fourth-longest streak in WTA history behind Martina Navratilova and the current world #1's Cara Black and Liezel Huber.

Sanchez-Vicario retired from singles in 2002, but was still playing doubles in 2004, winning her final title that season and playing on her fifth Olympic team in Athens. She played her final doubles match, fittingly, at Roland Garros in 2005.

The five-foot-seven Chang rose to #2 in 1996, was a member of the Davis Cup champion U.S. team in '90, and even reached three more slam finals (all over a fifteen-month span in 1995-96), but the Hoboken-born '89 surprise Prince of Paris was never really viewed again as a true threat to win another slam crown. After '97, he didn't advance past the 3rd Round in twenty-one slam appearances and saw his career end in '03 after a string of meek seasons that stood in marked contrast to his spectacular introduction to the world fourteen years earlier.

In all, Chang claimed 34 ATP titles, the last in Los Angeles in '00. He was known for his quickness, heart and fitness, but his lack of power in a game that became increasingly dominated by more physical, larger players caused him to get lost in the proverbial shuffle despite his status as the first of his American generation to win a slam crown. He never won another, and was passed over by Courier (four slam titles, including two at RG, and a #1 ranking) and two of the all-time greats in Agassi (who claimed at least one title at all four slams) and Sampras (the men's leader with 14 slams) when it comes to career achievement.

In an attempt to keep up with the power crowd, Chang famously switched to a longer racket to get more pop on his serve. He got it, and experienced short-term gains, but couldn't sustain his upswing and, as his career wore on, he even began to surrender the advantage that his teenaged legs once gave him as he lost more than a step to time.

Chang's starring moment was over quite quickly, but what a moment it was.

A generation later, American men's tennis finds itself in a position very similar to the one it held before Chang's Paris exploits. Since the Chang/Sampras/Agassi/Courier gang moved on, the only other U.S. man to win a slam has been Andy Roddick (in 2003), and the current longest-ever Open era six-year drought has thus now exceeded the gap between McEnroe and Chang's slam wins. Is there a Chang out there that will kick-start a new cycle of American success? Probably not, especially in the Nadal-Federer (Djokovic-Murray) era in which we now reside.

Sanchez-Vicario was elected to the Tennis Hall of Fame in 2007, while Chang followed her into the fold in 2008.

While ASV continues to help run the Sanchez-Casal Tennis Academy, the devout Chang's Chang Family Foundation seeks to spread Christian values all over the world. He also started a "Tennis Stars of the Future" program in Hong Kong. Chang's family heritage has helped him make many inroads for the sport in China, and for a time he coached Peng Shuai (he recently married playing protégé Amber Liu, by the way). Sanchez-Vicario has married twice, and in March gave birth to her first child, a daughter also named Arantxa.

Even as ASV climbed higher after her Paris win, while Chang never quite reached the same heights again, they're still linked by those two glorious weeks twenty years ago when they were a pair of 17-year olds introducing themselves to the world by becoming the most stunning dual champions at a single slam in history... and maybe forever after, as well.

It's hard to imagine that their feat could ever be topped... but, then again, the possibility of it happening is precisely why we always come back for more.

All for now.

PREVIOUS TIME CAPSULES: 1987 Roland Garros (Graf), 1990 Wimbledon (Navratilova), 1990 Wimbledon (Edberg/Becker), 1991 U.S. Open (Connors), 1993 Australian Open (Seles & Courier)

"SuperRafa!!" (co-starring roger federer)

2009-02-01T14:28:00.003-05:00

You know you're thinking it, and some people are probably saying it after the 2009 Australian Open men's final. Yes, at this point, it looks like Roger Federer might just be Rafael Nadal's female dog.

I just can't bring myself to use the "unedited" version of that sentence. It'd just be too disrespectful of a great champion and good person. But it's pretty certain that such a harsh, bush-league declaration will be made by some after Nadal's 7-5/3-6/7-6/3-6/6-2 victory, and Federer's going to have to find a way to counter and upend the notion if he's to avoid going from "The Greatest of All Time" to "Not Even the Greatest of HIS Time" in such lightning speed that it makes your head spin.

Getty Images

Except for that two-set aberration against Tomas Berdych, Federer came into this final in fine form after two weeks of play in Melbourne. But maybe that bad start against the Czech was enough to plant a seed in the Swiss Mister's head that he really WASN'T the same player he was a few seasons ago. In the past, he would never have had to come back from two sets down against an opponent he's dominated. And he knew it.

Even when Federer was on top of the tennis world, he had trouble with a young Nadal whose best surface by far was clay. And while Federer was making his way to yet another slam final (the eighteenth of his career), Nadal was tearing up opponents on the hard courts of Melbourne Park. Oh, Nadal was tested once, by countryman Fernando Verdasco in the SF. But after fighting for 5:14, Nadal won that one, too.

Now, after being bested by the Spaniard on his favored grass at the All-England Club last July, the only home base left for Federer to defend was a hard court slam. So, while Federer was looking to match Pete Sampras' record fourteen slam titles with an Australian Open title here, he knew that a loss would mean all sorts of things he simply didn't want to even contemplate.

This record seventh meeting in a grand slam final wasn't so much about Federer trying to catch Sampras, it was about whether Nadal's rise in 2008 was going to turn out to be a temporary reign, or whether the Era of Federer really HAD come to a close. Federer's battle with mono last season gave him a convenient "out" to explain away his sudden difficulties. And it might do just that when it comes to his out-of-character losses to the likes of Roddick, Blake, Fish and Karlovic in '08. But Nadal? No, it's now apparent that there is nothing that washes away what has now become the Rafa's dominance over Federer -- he's simply a better, tougher and more resilient player.

End of sentence. End of era. And this time there are no questions left to answer.

Still, even though it's a role that Federer never wished for or thought he'd ever be relegated to, the former #1 is a perfect foil for Nadal (sort of like when Bjorn Borg met John McEnroe). They just can't help it. Whenever they meet on the court, thrilling tennis is a given and the final result is akin to something being carved into the granite tableau of the game's history. This final was no different. While the matchup is a dream for the sport, it's quickly becoming a nightmare for Federer. As Nadal is filling out his career resume, it's happening at the expense of Federer's -- and it's threatening to "ruin" the bio and legacy of the player everyone was dubbing the "Greatest of All-Time" just a short while ago.

As during the classic Wimbledon final last year, Federer had his chances to seize control of this match. But he simply could not do it. In the 3rd set, with Nadal seeming to tire, Federer was looking to go up two sets to one. He had six break points -- including a triple break point on Nadal's serve -- to go up 6-5 and have a chance to serve for the set. Nadal survived, then got a second wind in the 3rd set tie break, which he won to push Federer's back against the wall.

Federer fought back to send the match to a fifth set, but then collapsed under the pressure in the deciding stanza. Why did it happen to a great champion? Was it the pressure of the moment? Of history? Of his disappointment over his failure to meet his own lofty expectations? Or just of Rafa himself, and the knowledge that even after Nadal had played nine-plus hours of tennis in his last two matches, and had one less day of rest than the relatively lightly-tested Federer, that he STILL didn't have as much inner reserve as the Spaniard? Ummm, the answer is likely yes, yes, yes and yes.

Rather than wilt, Nadal got stronger down the stretch. The match was over. You might even say that Nadal intimidated Federer into capitulating in the clutch... which is what Federer used to do to everyone else.

Four years ago, Federer was brought to tears by the sight of Rod Laver at Laver Arena, handing him his championship trophy. This time around, again with Laver nearby, Federer broke up again while addressing the crowd, and had to take a break before going on. Previously, the tears were of joy and awe of his idol being there to witness his triumph. This time... who's to be sure? Maybe it was because of the failure to do what he thought he would in the match, or maybe the realization that he really ISN'T what he once was (or that if he is, it's not enough to defeat Nadal). Few players enjoyed being the best player in the world more than Federer. He loved being the King, and didn't question it when people called him the best player to ever live.

But it's difficult to be "the best ever" when you're no longer even "the best now." A week ago, Bud Collins said he'd rank Federer in the "Top 10" of all-time. A great honor, but not the one that Federer wants or, maybe more importantly, had come to expect after so many years at the top.

For all of Nadal's current greatness, and make no mistake that he now owns the men's game in both heart AND mind just as he currently hold three of the four slam titles, the odd thing is that his rise has made Federer the truly compelling character in this story. What does he do now? Does he change his approach to playing Nadal, as Brad Gilbert suggested on ESPN2 after the match? Does he re-think his close friendship with Nadal, which one could argue might have humanized him a little TOO much in Rafa's eyes and removed all chance to claim any sort of aura or hint of intimidation when they meet on the court.

Would Roger's good buddy Tiger Woods ever become close with a true rival? No, because he would be "giving up" much more than he'd get in return. "If you want to have a close friend, make it the #100 player in the world," might be Tiger's advice. When intimidation is such a part of your game -- and it certainly was for Federer for years, as opponents seemed to genuflect at his mere presence in a tight match -- losing even a little of it can prove to produce a severe shift in expectations, as far as his opponents AND the "top dog" are concerned.

Federer seems to be trapped between that rock and a hard place.

In a way, the once-dominant Steffi Graf found herself in the same position in the early 1990's as Federer does now. After ruling the sport, her power was suddenly usurped by Monica Seles. The Yugoslav was inside her head, and she couldn't find a way to beat her. The German was either going to have to change something about her game and approach, or be fated to going from possibly the "best" player to the "second-best of her era," forever altering how she would be viewed by tennis history. Of course, as things turned out, the incident in Hamburg took Seles -- literally for a few years, then in spirit if not in actual reality -- out of the equation. Without her nemesis to overcome, Graf continued doing what she'd always done, never trying to add new facets (such as a net game) to her arsenal, and simply picked up where she'd left off before Seles arrived on the scene. Without a true rival, she was the easy #1 again.

Waiting and hoping for Nadal to burn brightly and then flame out would not seem to be the recommended course of action for Federer. So, what he'll do next will be the most interesting story to follow the rest of this season.

Well, unless you count what will surely become a drumbeat of excitement about a possible "Rafa Slam" when and if Nadal wins his fifth Roland Garros crown in June, that is. After proving he can win a hard court slam, after having already done the same on grass last year, there's no reason to think anyone can prevent Nadal from winning all four slam titles in 2009.

Right now, it surely doesn't look as if Federer is capable. And, really, who else is there? We shall see.

*RAFAEL NADAL SLAM TITLES*
Australian Open (1): 2009
Roland Garros (4): 2005-08
Wimbledon (1): 2008
U.S. Open (0): none

*MOST SLAM FINAL MEETINGS - MEN*
7 - ROGER FEDERER vs. RAFAEL NADAL
5 - Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
5 - Ivan Lendl vs. Mats Wilander
4 - Bjorn Borg vs. Jimmy Connors
4 - Bjorn Borg vs. John McEnroe

*MOST MEETINGS IN ATP FINALS*
20 - Ivan Lendl vs. John McEnroe
16 - Andre Agassi vs. Pete Sampras
16 - Boris Becker vs. Stefan Edberg
15 - ROGER FEDERER vs. RAFAEL NADAL
15 - Jimmy Connors vs. John McEnroe
13 - Boris Becker vs. Ivan Lendl
12 - Bjorn Borg vs. Jimmy Connors

All for now.

BACKSPIN TIME CAPSULE: 1993 Australian Open

2009-01-23T15:32:00.001-05:00

"Seles is within range of the Grand Slam which eluded her the last two years. Only Graf and Wimbledon truly stand in her way. And even those two potent forces may not be able to stop her in 1993."

On occasion, you can be both entirely correct AND horrifically wrong... at the same time. Unfortunately, this was one of those times.

It's hard to believe it's been sixteen years since Monica Seles won her third straight Australian Open title in 1993 in what turned out to be her final grand slam appearance before her career and tennis history-altering stabbing in Hamburg in April of that year. But, at the time of the writing of this "Backspin Time Capsule," all things great seemed possible -- inevitable, actually -- for the career of the nineteen year-old then-Yugoslav.

She'd surpassed Steffi Graf to become the top player in the women's game, and had such a lethal stranglehold on the sport (she'd won eight of the last eleven slam titles) that she seemed well on her way to shattering all sorts of long-held records. As Seles had usurped Graf's throne, much as is the case on the men's tour these days with Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer, everyone was waiting to see what the German's response was going to be. A great, long-standing rivalry seemed to be ready to unfold before our eyes.

Then came Hamburg.

I already covered the possibilities of what might have happened had Seles not been attacked in the original "What If?" back in 2004, and it's still a tantalizing scenario that can't help but be tinged with a touch of sadness and lost opportunity.

Seles finally "officially" closed the book on her Hall of Fame-worthy career last Valentine's Day after having not actually played a tour match in nearly five years while battling to overcome a foot injury. But in 1993, none of that was part of the story. So, here's the great Monica Seles... trapped in amber, the best player in the world:

"It's Deja Vu All Over Again" (January 1993)

Is it just me, or is this just a tad bit familiar? Monica Seles vs. Steffi Graf. Jim Courier vs. Stefan Edberg. Oh, well. Maybe it's just me.

The first grand slam to fall into the college bowl game mindset, the FORD Australian Open, was without Andre Agassi and Martina Navratilova; Boris Becker and Ivan Lendl bowed out in the 1st Round; and the oppressive heat threatened to wilt even the hardiest of competitors. Still, the same thing happened at Flinders Park in Melbourne that had happened in Paris and Flushing Meadows recently. For all the talk of the great tennis being played nowadays on the pro level, it still seems as if the same four players appear on a regular basis in most grand slam finals.

#1-seed Monica Seles' 4-6/6-3/6-2 triumph over #2 Steffi Graf was the third slam final between the two in the last four; while #1 Jim Courier's 6-2/6-1/2-6/7-5 demolition of #2 Stefan Edberg was their fourth slam final meeting in the last six.

At least in Seles' case, the events are THIS CLOSE to becoming monotonous. But, in the process, THE new Great Tennis Rivalry may have been born.

In the mid-1980's, tennis gurus were touting Graf and Gabriela Sabatini as the duo which would inevitably replace Navratilova and Chris Evert's dominating matchups. Navratilova and Evert met in fourteen grand slam finals (with Martina holding a 10-4 advantage) in their eighty-match series (Navratilova won forty-three) which stretched from 1973 to '88. But the Graf-Gaby rivalry never really materialized due to Sabatini's slow development and Graf's early overpowering dominance.

Now, more than four years after the Chrissie-Martina Era ended with Evert's retirement, we have unwittingly stumbled into the Monica-Steffi Era. And, this time, the rivalry may have some legs.

Since 1989, Graf holds a 6-4 advantage in the series, but in the four slam final matchups it's Seles who leads 3-1 (including the scintillating 6-2/3-6/10-8 win in the '92 French Open final). Graf, though, has held onto her mastery over Seles at Wimbledon and has thereby prevented her from matching Graf's '88 sweep of the four grand slam titles. THAT is what rivalries are made of.

Seles and Graf came into this final with the German, 23, looking as good as she has in years, and disconcertingly within striking range of Seles' #1 computer ranking despite the 19-year old transplanted Yugoslav's tight grip on the women's tour over the past year and a half.

Going into the match, Graf said that she felt that it would be a "special" final. Well, it WAS special -- but for Seles.

With her famed heart and power, Seles overcame a 1st set loss to trample Graf for her twenty-first consecutive Aussie win (she's undefeated there for her career), her third straight title (tying Graf's 1988-90 run), her seventh slam win in the past nine, and her eighth slam (with a mark of 8-1 in finals) championship overall.

Dominance? You bet. Boring? Not yet, but it's getting close.

When Graf was steamrolling over everyone in the late '80's, women's tennis was a "bore." A bore, that is, until the rest of the field finally caught up to Graf's level of play. Now, the women's game finds itself in the same position. Seles was the woman who caught and surpassed Graf. And the cycle must now begin again.

Can anyone catch Seles?

Sabatini may have peaked already. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario is getting better but not a threat for #1. Navratilova is only concentrating on half the grand slams. Mary Joe Fernandez lacks one big weapon. Jennifer Capriati is still experiencing growing pains. And the list goes on and on.

In fact, only Graf appears to have a chance to take the #1 ranking away, and that may be wishful thinking when one considers what got Seles to the top to begin with.

Graf, still living in Bruhl, but without her suffocating father always present to make things difficult for her, is having more fun playing tennis now than she has in years. She's in great shape (over the string of injuries and illnesses, including a case of rubella which kept her out of the Australian Open in '92) and playing her best tennis since she was ranked #1. But, still, she hasn't fully regained the confidence that she once had in spades when the rest in the women's field were simply sacrificial lambs for her slaughterhouse forehand.

Guts and steel-like mental confidence -- that's what has separated Seles from the pack. And no one seems to have the guns to compete in those two very important areas (and that's assuming anyone can come close to matching the fireball power of her groundstrokes -- which isn't likely as of now).

The scary thing is that Seles still thinks she can improve. She wants to develop a more all-court game in which she can become more comfortable at the net.

This match was a microcosm of how quickly Seles has risen to the top.

Graf came out firing in the 1st set as Seles committed nineteen unforced errors, and Graf won 6-4. But, as Graf continued to play very well, it was quite obvious that Seles was playing herself into the match slowly but surely in the 2nd set. The errors became less frequent, Graf started uncharacteristically questioning calls (knowing the importance of EVERY point against Seles), Seles' grunt came out of hibernation and the match was turned. Seles won the set 6-3, and she wasn't looking back.

In the 3rd set, Seles' errors had all but vanished along with Graf's chances. There was nothing Graf could do. Only Seles can beat Seles outside Centre Court Wimbledon, and unless she gives an opponent a break (which is extremely rare) no one has much of a chance. With Graf's final over-anxious forehand, Seles won the set 6-2 and the match was over.

Once more, the Seles guts had prevailed. It's becoming all too common these days.

Seles is within range of the Grand Slam which eluded her the last two years. Only Graf and Wimbledon truly stand in her way. And even those two potent forces may not be able to stop her in 1993.

Courier celebrates with a dip in the Yarra River

Over on the men's side, the familiarity was almost as apparent. But, unlike the women's tour, it wasn't quite so oppressive.

No, the only thing about this match that was oppressive was the heat. It reached upwards of 150-degrees (F) on the court during the match, and even 22-year old, #1-ranked American Jim Courier's notable stamina was questioned.

While the women's side of the tour seems limited to two players fighting it out for #1, the men's side is extremely crowded despite the fact that Courier and 27-year old #2-seed Stefan Edberg have met in four of the last six grand slam finals. Courier is #1, but Edberg is right on his heels along with #3 American Pete Sampras. And that's not even counting Wimbledon champ Andre Agassi, resurfacing Boris Becker, Goran Ivanisevic and a host of other rising stars. The men's tour is thriving like it has not in years. But, still, with Sampras just missing out on his shots to play for #1, Courier and Edberg are left to pound it out in the finals.

In this Aussie final, Courier looked like Edberg.

When Edberg is hot, no one will defeat him. He becomes a wall at the net which cannot be passed. THAT was Courier in this match. The American cruised to 6-2/6-1 wins in the first two sets before Edberg attempted a comeback in the sweltering heat, winning the 3rd at 6-2.

But Courier, playing like the champion that he has become, came back to take the 4th set 7-5 for his second straight Aussie title and his fourth slam championship.

Agassi pulled off the miracle and won Wimbledon last year. Sampras won the U.S. Open three years ago. Michael Chang took the French four years ago. But it is Jim Courier who is the class of the new American battalion -- and he's just settling into that #1 ranking.

The best may still be yet to come.

I find it interesting that I termed Seles' tour-dominating reign somewhat "boring" back then, but the hope WAS there that Graf would find a way to surge again, change the dynamic, and raise the entire sport as a result.

Needless to say, neither Graf or Wimbledon was able to prevent Seles from pulling off a Grand Slam in '93... but a German lathe operator did. After the stabbing, Seles didn't play another slam event for thirty-one months, and didn't play at all for twenty-seven. After having won eight of the first fourteen slams she entered (and seven of the last nine she'd played), she won just one of the final twenty-four in which she appeared after her comeback.

She reached the U.S. Open final in her first slam back in '95, and won the Australian Open in 1996, but she never really came remotely close to being the consistent force she'd been in her previous incarnation. Power players were more abundant and Seles and Graf weren't nearly as unique. while she was never able to get into the sort of athletic shape she'd been in previously, as her body had changed as she'd matured, out-growing the physique her leaner teen-aged years. More importantly, though, the trauma of the attack seemed to steal away the incredible difference-making heart and desire Seles had shown while rising to #1 in the world. After previously knowing no fear, she'd come all too face-to-face with it... and there was no going back in time.

Seles was 19 when she won her eighth slam in Melbourne. Graf had won eleven at the time. Without Seles around as a rival, Graf won the next four slam titles, and ten of thirteen. She ended her career in 1999 having won twenty-two. In the going-on sixteen years since Seles won Oz in '93 (and again three years later), only Serena Williams has managed to catch her on the all-time career slam title list -- when she won her ninth at the U.S. Open last September, at age 27.

Seles returned to the spotlight, at least somewhat, when she was a contestant on "Dancing with the Stars" last year. It was nice to see her compete. It's too bad she's wasn't more proficient, but then she'd never really been what anyone would call a "graceful" player even in her prime. She was more like a loud freight train barreling down a hill. The dance floor was just too small for her to flourish.

She's currently writing an autobiography, which should be an illuminating read when it's published. The most recent chapter? Well, Seles WAS announced as a 2009 Hall of Fame inductee the very day of this Capsule's posting. Congratulations to her.

As for the men... I said back then that the ATP tour was more exciting at the time because of the chances for so many different players to contend for slam titles (hmmm, sort of sounds like the WTA tour today, doesn't it?). Many of them were Americans.

In fact, 1993 was the start of a golden era for U.S. men's tennis. After being derided early on for not living up to the previous McEnroe/Connors generation, the young men rising to the top in the early 1990's eventually earned the right to be called the BEST group of American players ever.

In 1993, it looked as if Courier was the class of the generation. He'd become #1 and had won four slams before any of the other Americans had won a second. His grinding, physical style shot him to the top first, but it eventually wore him down (maybe even BURNED him out) and made his stay at the elite level a short one. The 1993 Australian Open title turned out to be his final slam win. He reached the finals of both Roland Garros and Wimbledon that season, but never played in another slam final after that. He stuck around until 1999, and reached the Hall of Fame in 2005.

His American contemporaries both outdistanced and outlasted him.

Michael Chang (HOF '08) never won a second slam, but reached #2 in 1996 and appeared in three slam finals (at every slam but Wimbledon) in 1995-96 before his attempt to add more power to his game (remember the extra-long racket?) ultimately began to limit his effectiveness.

Sampras and Agassi, though, became ALL-TIMERS. Agassi won seven more slams from 1994-03 and played until he was 36, reaching the U.S. Open SF in '05 at 35. Sampras won both Wimbledon and U.S. Open titles in 1993, and claimed thirteen of his all-time record fourteen slam crowns from 1993-02.

The following generation, consisting of the likes or Roddick, Blake, Dent and others, has turned out to be a disappointment. To date, they've won just one slam title -- Roddick's U.S. Open win almost six years ago. The next group of American players, currently led by Sam Querrey, is just beginning to reach the point where their careers will go down the path toward success or disappointment.

While a Hall of Famer, Courier might actually be somewhat underrated and forgotten now. These days, he's known as much as a sometimes-irritating-sometimes-effective tennis commentator as a former #1. His workman-like game might be a good prototype for young American players to try to emulate, though. Rather than relying on one big weapon (ala Roddick), Courier survived on defense and groundstrokes. Rather than wilting in big moments (ala Blake), Courier stood up. Rather than only being a threat on hard courts or grass, Courier was an all-surface player in tremendous condition who might have been at his best on red clay. Needless to say, there aren't very many American men who even come close to being able to say the same at the moment.

But in 1993, Courier and Seles were on top of the tennis world. Their best days seemed ahead of them... but, little did they know, they were actually BEHIND them once they raised their most recent Australian Open trophies. There's NO WAY anyone would have believed it at that moment, either.

Shows you just how fast things can change in the tennis world, doesn't it?

All for now.

PREVIOUS TIME CAPSULES: 1987 Roland Garros (Graf), 1990 Wimbledon (Navratilova), 1990 Wimbledon (Edberg/Becker), 1991 U.S. Open (Connors)

NEXT UP IN 2009: 1989 Roland Garros - Sanchez & Chang shock the world & 1993 Wimbledon - Novotna's collapse

2009 Australian Open Picks

2009-01-18T01:53:00.002-05:00

Roger is healthy! Rafa just isn't right (again... in January... on hard courts... imagine that.)! Novak has the pressure to defend pushing down on him from every angle! And then there's Murray, who's playing better than anyone and might just make all other arguments meaningless. Could we actually have a grand slam final without EITHER Roger or Rafa?

Well, now let's not get carried away.

**ROUND OF 16**
#1 Nadal def. #24 Gasquet
#12 Monfils d. #6 Simon
#4 Murray d. #14 Verdasco
#5 Tsonga d. #9 Blake
#10 Nalbandian d. #7 Roddick
#3 Djokovic d. #16 Soderling
#19 Cilic d. #8 del Potro
#2 Federer d. 15 Wawrinka

...ugh, I hate picking both Roddick and Blake to make it this far. Maybe Querrey and Gulbis would be more paletable picks? After hearing so much about it the last two years, it's weird how little is being said right now about how Federer could tie Sampras' record of 14 career slams by winning this title.

**QUARTERFINALS**
#12 Monfils d. #1 Nadal
#4 Murray d. #5 Tsonga
#3 Djokovic d. #10 Nalbandian
#2 Federer d. #19 Cilic

...Monfils has already beaten Nadal once this season. Will Melbourne re-light the fire under Djokovic?

**SEMIFINALS**
#4 Murray d. #12 Monfils
#2 Federer d. #3 Djokovic

...the moment of truth is about to arrive, for both Federer AND Murray.

**FINAL**
#4 Murray d. #1 Federer

...a rematch of the U.S. Open final, but with a different Murray in attendance. He'd beaten Federer before, but ever since losing to him in New York he's REALLY had his number, beating him four straight times -- twice already in '09. Federer's date with history might have to wait until Wimbledon, while Murray can finally erase the phrase "no British man has won a slam since Fred Perry in 1936" from the sports lexicon.

All for now.