Foot Fault!

Calling all the lines of professional tennis

Category Archives: ATP

Has Professional Tennis Peaked?

Since the dawn of the Open Era, the greatest of greats have filtered into the world of tennis in a steady and unbroken flow. The likes of Laver, Newcombe, Ashe were quickly replaced by names like Borg, Connors, McEnroe and more. Then came Wilander, Becker, Lendl and Edberg who were eventually usurped by the supreme dominance of Sampras and Agassi. The year of Agassi’s final slam doubled as the season of Federer’s first as the Swiss began his unrivalled dominance, before he was slowly joined by the final three pieces of the jigsaw.

The exact same can be said of the women. The years of King, Court and Goolagong were quickly annexed by the legendary rivalry that was Evert and Navratilova. Graf would then rise and dominated until a woman by the name of Monica Seles strolled in as her equal. Eventually, a 16 year-old called Martina rose to prominence and ushered in an era which included the likes of the Williamses, the Belgians and even the Russians as they stamped their names indelibly into the history books.

What made these different eras special was that, as the technology accelerated and the game was irreversibly transformed, each new group of players remained one step ahead of the rapid change surrounding them. With every generation came a new focal point in tennis – greater athleticism, more destructive serving, increasingly breathtaking returns or simply the baseline. Even during the numerous transitional lulls, there was always the heart-pumping anticipation and expectation of a bright, new supernova to save the day.

Not anymore.

Presently, professional tennis paints a whole different picture. Whether or not today is truly the “golden era” remains a hotly-contested point, but undeniable is the fact that – with the combined athleticism, ability and talent they possess – Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray have pushed tennis to levels unseen. It’s difficult to imagine any other player as perfectly complete, naturally talented and efficient as Federer, as supremely athletic as Nadal or as scarily machine-like as Djokovic, or anything even remotely close.

But that’s the least of our worries. More concerning is that the drop-off between the level of this generation and the next appears to be the equivalent of tumbling off Mount Everest. The current rising generation spearheaded by Tomic, Raonic and Dimitrov are hardly the most convincing bunch themselves, but beyond them is a damning dark pit of nothingness. For the first time in history, not a single teenager inhabits the top 240. Unless the youngsters of the next few years make the transition onto the main tour, and complete it with haste, the ATP’s future appears woefully bleak.

The WTA’s so-called golden days can be traced back to around decade ago, between the end of the 90s and perhaps 2007 or 2008. These times were also characterized largely by hybrid-type elite players who possessed a combination of incredible athleticism, weaponry, variety and ability in all areas of the court. There was something for everyone. The Williams Sisters with their unrivalled athleticism, power and ability in the forecourt; Hingis and her perfectly-timed early ballstriking, unmatched intelligence and variety or the modern-day dynamic variety utilized by Henin and Mauresmo.

In contrast to the ATP’s startling drop, the women’s tour has been on a slow but steady demise for half a decade. As most players from the previous generation have bowed out, they have slowly been replaced by more one dimensional players. Some are capable of attacking, others specialize in defence, the rest can execute both to a limited extent, but how many are truly great? The rising stars have been the hot topic so far in 2013, spearheaded by Sloane Stephens’ Australian Open semifinal and 16 year-old Donna Vekic comfortably establishing herself in the top 100, but so far the young players too appear to fall straight into the same mould.

It just appears tennis has collided into a brick wall and is slowly moving in reverse. The sport remains enthralling and the players impressive, but ultimately almost every up-and-coming player appears to lack the quality required to make them truly memorable. When this and similar topics are brought up, many are quick to toss around phrases like “age eligibility rule” and “increased physicality”, but the issues are likely far more complicated and inherent. For example, the talent pool is probably smaller than ever before, as the best athletes make a bee-line for easier, cheaper and more popular sports.

So, as the new generations rise and we scan the derelict and broken landscape for a bright spark to guide us thorough the scarily imminent post-Williams and post-Federer eras, at least for now, I won’t be holding my breath.

Rafa flexes his muscles on and off-court in Chile

Yesterday saw the much-awaited return of Rafael Nadal in Vina Del Mar after seven months out, as he and Juan Monaco took to court for their doubles match and brushed aside second seeds Frantisek Cermak and Lukas Dlouhy 6-3 6-2 with consummate ease. In what will come as the least surprising piece of information ever written, Nadal afterwards fielded questions on the condition of his knee.

“It was a great feeling to play again and I’m very happy for doing it with a friend like Monaco in a great atmosphere that we had on the court. I’m very grateful for everything that has happened since I arrived.”

“I said the first day in the press conference when I arrived and I’ll say it again. Doctors say (the knee) is okay, in terms of image the tendon is fine, no risk of breaking. Some days it still hurts, and I said that for me the fact of playing is a joy and progression to the right path, towards being one hundred percent” he added.

“I need weeks of tennis in the circuit, the knee is stronger, more comfortable playing at the highest level. I will not talk more about the knee.”

More interestingly, however, the tournament had apparently initially scheduled Nadal’s matches during prime-time in order satisfy the sponsors and, of course, earn back the obscene appearance fee he undoubtedly received. His match was to be played at 22:30, but Nadal refused due to the colder conditions possibly affecting his knee or else leading to other injuries. The two camps allegedly entered into intense meetings until the tournament finally succumbed and were forced to schedule his matches for 6 PM.

It’s understandable in this instance that Rafa would want to ensure that the conditions are perfect for his singles return, but this is also a regular occurrence for him and other players in tennis. It immediately took me back to Lindsay Davenport’s comments during her Sports Illustrated podcast last month. She spoke about how terrible it is, as a former player who too benefited from preferential treatment, that the top players hold such power in the scheduling of their matches. Not only would such a thing never happen in other sports (see: MCILROY, Rory), it’s a completely unfair advantage the top players – or rather the top players with influence and power – hold over the rest of the field, amongst countless others.

Grigor Dimitrov – When Style Is Mistaken For Substance

Fact. Regardless of the channel, country or tournament in question, Grigor Dimitrov’s tennis receives more love than most seasoned pros. Commentators bow to his image, comparing the Bulgarian to the greatest player of all time, essentially professing their undying love for his game whilst seemingly wanting nothing more than to take his forehand, backhand or serve out on a lavish date. This was certainly the case during last week’s Brisbane final, in which the Aussie commentators spent much of the contest adoringly narrating his every move – their eyes probably assuming the shape of hearts. During the final, one of the commentators even went as far as to say: “He’s a good looking player, and I say that because he does look good.” Well, nice to know.

I mention this because the hype, predictions and expectations placed upon him are essentially based on just that – his style and the superficial similarities to Federer’s game. It certainly isn’t his negative tour win-loss record or the fact that he is yet to grace even the third round of Grand Slam or win a title. One would expect the career of Richard Gasquet to serve as a cautionary tale towards those quick to launch the “Baby Federer” hype machine, but apparently those covering Grigor Dimitrov missed the memo. Instead, people are quick to falsely equate the style that Dimitrov’s tennis exudes with the actual substance and level required to reach the top echelons of the game.

Having said that, there was much to be impressed about from Dimitrov against Murray. The match itself was both engrossing and disappointing. On one hand, it featured entertaining, rapid all-court tennis. However, it was also frustrating in its utterly predictable mental collapse from the Bulgarian. He arrived on fire and looked to have the better of Murray until serving for the first set. Then, after a nervy collapse whilst leading 5-4 with a break, he briefly recovered only to fall apart in even more dramatic style in the tiebreak. The second set saw Murray’s level fall off the face of the earth, but once again Dimitrov squandered yet more chances and hammered the final nail to his coffin. It had the potential to be an entertaining and tight contest, but instead closer resembled a damp squib.

What impressed was the brand of tennis the 21 year-old exhibited. In the past, his athletic gifts and raw all-court style have shone brighter than any other aspect of his game, but Sunday made for completely different viewing as it was the finer aspects of his game that demanded attention. Most notable was his notoriously weak backhand. Murray unsurprisingly focused most of his attention to that wing early on, but rather than the backhand breaking down easily as usual and offering mostly ineffective slices and a weak spot for Murray to smother, Dimitrov responded by showcasing such impressive and improved variety on his backhand wing. He infused his driven backhand with powerful and flatter blows, weightier topspin, some loopier balls and the occasional angle. His slice too appeared a completely new stoke as he combined a variety of different types of slice – deep floating slices, more penetrating slices, and short and low slices with no pace. Rarely did the Bulgarian execute the same shot twice and this elaborate variety caught Murray off-balance, with the Scot unable to settle into any rhythm and forced to find solutions himself.

He also impressed with his instincts around the court. Court sense is generally an innate, natural talent and certainly an area in which Dimitrov has previously left much to be desired. But against Murray he approached the net at the correct moments and made sensible, logical decisions around the court. He also appeared especially observant of how Murray dealt with different aspects of his game. An example being in the first set when Murray began to struggle with short and low slices to his forehand. Dimitrov wasted no time in mercilessly exploiting that weakness with a slew of dropshots and no-pace low slices to Murray’s forehand side. In other words, he looks like he’s growing up and maturing before our eyes.

The question remains just what this maturity is and how far it will take him. Just a couple of days later he arrived in Sydney and shamelessly tanked the match away, quickly reminding us of exactly what we’re dealing with. Hype won’t reveal his true potential, but time will, and 2013 promises to be the year that tells us all we need to know about Grigor Dimitrov.

Quotable Quotes: So, Janko Tipsarevic still has a big mouth, eh?

At this point, it’s an undeniable fact of nature that Janko Tipsarevic has the biggest mouth on Earth and all surrounding planets. In the past he has criticized the WTA, branded Amelie Mauresmo a “pervert” for her sexuality, criticized the WTA, compared his “friend” Ana Ivanovic to “a truck on steroids” (I still don’t understand…what does that even MEAN??!!), criticized the WTA, claimed that he stays well away from all gay ATP players, oh, and he criticized the WTA too.

Today, after Gilles Simon and the rest of his crew idiotically kicked the door wide open at Wimbledon, the Serb has once again stepped in and decided to put his Grand Canyon-sized mouth where it isn’t wanted, tackling his favourite topic once more.

(via @svenja_sportch)

‘It’s ridiculous that women get the same prize money at Slams. They should at least play Best of Five [...] I don’t underestimate Azarenka’s achievements, but the best time (for women) is over. It was when the Williams sisters and Clijsters, Henin and Mauresmo played at the top of their game’

Let’s get one thing straight, the Best of 5 vs Best of 3 argument is perhaps the most laughable, desperate and tired argument in history. It has beeen battered to death yet keeps on coming back. The fact remains that if those poor, unfairly treated and persecuted men really have a problem with women playing less sets for the same prize money, then they should be campaigning for best of 3 sets at slams. If not, then they should shut up. Full stop.

The rest of Tipsarevic’s quote is not unlike Simon and co.’s comments at Wimbledon. The thing is, Tipsarevic obviously isn’t actually wrong in stating that the WTA was better a few years back. It certainly was. But this entire argument is completely perplexing. How is this remotely relevant? What does that have to do with anything? Prize money isn’t calculated based on subjective preferences, nor is it based on the revenue each tournament makes each year. It’s a fixed sum and equal because men and women play alongside each other as equals. Plus, every TV deal, sponsor and other major revenue source pays for the men and women as a joint package regardless of whether men or women are on top.

But, hey, let’s just consider Tiparevic and Simon’s argument for the hell of it. Tennis is all about phases and eras. There are countless stats to support the fact that previous WTA era was far more popular and famous than the then-weaker and volatile ATP (yet the WTA players were being paid less prize money) and the tables have turned over the past few years. When the big 3 cease to be, well, the big 3, it’s fairly obvious that – if they even make it to the top – the current ATP youngsters won’t be nearly as popular or dominant as the current top players. So, the only resolution to the argument the ATP players have wasted so much of our time on would be to give equal prize money, then take it back, give it again, take it back again, give it again and so on based on the revenue and interest each era of each tour creates. That would, of course, mean the male players would likely be paid less than the women at times. In what world is any of this remotely realistic or plausible?

The entire “debate” just seems like an excuse for most ATP players (and it isn’t just Simon and Tipsarevic) to flex the muscles of their offensively humongous and extraordinarily obese egos and assert that they’re far more superior to the women. The good news is that regardless of how much Simon, Tipsarevic, Tsonga and co. bitch and moan, nothing is ever going to change. And that’s how it should be.

Let’s Talk About: Bernard Tomic

The tennis tour we enduringly follow is often, ironically, so little about the actual tennis. The gruelling, demanding and overly pressured nature of professional tennis demands character, reveals character and builds character. Only a select few come innately equipped with a hybrid of the required mental, physical and tennis qualities needed to ease their way to the summit of professional tennis. For the rest, the tour itself moulds them – soul-destroying losses come before gleeful wins, humbling lessons are received before the tables are turned. It’s all a process, a vital one.

Why the hell am I babbling on about nothing in particular, I hear you ask? Well, earlier this week the tour’s resident “wundakid” Bernard Tomic was destroyed by Benoit Paire in the lowly Gstaad ATP 250, receiving a bagel and managing only four games in total. A week earlier he was brushed aside in straights by an out of sorts Thomaz Bellucci and the tournament before saw him bounced out of Wimbledon – the scene of last year’s heroics – by grass novice David Goffin in four sets.

It was the Wimbledon loss that most interested me, or, rather, his reaction to the loss. Unlike the vast majority of players who offer the usual generic answers after a bad loss, Tomic was conversely candid when exploring the reasons for his defeat, blaming his lack of effort for his poor form, evidently assuming his talent would be enough. I was shocked. Not shocked at the mere omission of him not trying hard enough (in the timeless and eloquent words of Maria Sharapova; duhhhh), rather the combined knowledge that Tomic is notorious for his amusingly lofty ambitions, that he’s falling so painfully short of those amusingly lofty ambitions and that he evidently has a crystal clear understanding of exactly why he’s falling so short of those amusingly lofty ambitions yet hasn’t made any attempt to rectify it? I shouldn’t be, but again, I was shocked.

It all comes back to my original point. Relative to practically every other player, Tomic has barely had to lift a finger during his short career. He achieved immense success in juniors solely down to his natural talents – slicing, dicing and reading opponents like a book without bothering to properly construct points. The success in juniors brought hype and self-hype which prompted tournament directors to toss a never-ending stream of wildcards in his direction (he received 10 wildcards in his first 15 tournaments of 2011) which were treated with arrogant indifference by Tomic as he only put his full efforts into the main events.

Finally, it’s all coming back to haunt him. His talent has fallen in place only a handful of times over the past eighteen months, while for the most part the ATP tour has been quite the culture shock. His weaknesses are being effortlessly exposed at all levels and the tactics he utilized so much in juniors are unsurprisingly ineffective against professional tennis players. He has crashed straight into a glass ceiling and, at least for now, hasn’t armed himself with the knowledge of how to break through it.

The good news for Tomic is that he’s certainly talented and, of course, still extremely young with plenty of time to learn and appreciate the art of hard work and improve both the mental and physical aspects of his tennis that are clearly lacking. But looking just thirteen spots below him at the sorry state of Donald Young’s tennis career, he would be well-advised to hurry.

Quotable Quotes: Nadal Makes A Few Adjustments

One Slam title, two slam finals, a masters title, a comfortable top two finish for the 7th straight year, and yet 2011 was quite a tough year to swallow for Nadal and his fans. After the countless losses to Djokovic in the first half of the season followed by injury and defeats to just about every man and his dog in the second half, he finally made the decision to switch things up and try out a new racket in the off-season.

“My preparation is not the perfect one, and I’m trying to play with a little bit heavier racket, to get a little bit more power,” Nadal said. “(With the new racket) I’m losing a little bit of control now, sometimes I don’t feel the forehand as good as before. But it’s something that I believe can help me in the future. After the Davis Cup final I had all the rackets prepared at home to change. In theory I’m supposed to practice almost a month or at least three weeks with the (new) racket, but finally I practiced only one week, and I’m here now, so probably it’s not good enough.

“You can’t think that everything will be perfect from the beginning, but you make the change thinking it’ll be better in the future. There’s no magic, but the new racket can help a little bit to improve my game. It’s a risk I’m taking at the beginning of the season.”

What I have always admired more than anything about Nadal is his ever-present willingness to make adjustments and improvements his game. While enjoying such an illustrious and legendary career as his, it must be so easy to refuse to change what, for the most part, has been a winning formular over the year.

But that’s not how Rafael Nadal’s mind works, and while Federer is still putting himself at a disadvantage by competing with his 967,532 year-old racket frame (one that the dinosaurs probably would have turned their noses up at), Nadal is forever looking to improve even the tiniest and least important mechanics of his game. We only have to look back to the 2010 US Open and at the completely reckless adjustment to his serve on the eve of the tournament. In retrospect, the likelihood is that he would still be chasing the Career Grand Slam had he not taken that risk.

As for this specific racket change, we’ll soon see whether or not it pays dividends. But one thing’s for sure, Nadal creates easily more racket head speed than just about any other player in the history. The new racket isn’t going to single-handedly catapult him out of Djokovic’s shadow again – trusting himself to hit through the ball, and to do so in the tight and important moments, will. We’ll see.

Rod Laver talks Bernard Tomic

Judging by all the sleeveless t-shirts seen on him over the past month, Bernard Tomic seems determined to show every man, woman and child his shiny new muscles – the results of his off-season fitness slug. However, that didn’t stop yet another tennis great from speaking about him and gently implying that he’s a lazy sod.

“Sometimes you hear of disturbing things, his game, maybe it looks like he’s not caring enough about his game, and sometimes you’re flat, that happens,” Laver said.

“He’s got to bring himself through that level and train himself to work all the time as hard as you can.

“He’s a great player now. But he’s got to be a champion, he’s got to win tournaments.”

2012 will be a very telling year for Bernard Tomic. For what is considered his breakthrough year, last year was infinitely strange; he had one great tournament, one or two other good matches, but beyond that it was a mass of disappointing and some quite comical first round losses after being handed a slew of wildcards. We’ll soon see whether or not 2012 will follow that same inconsistent pattern.

Two Guys, One Vase.

Yesterday, Andy Murray picked up his first Masters 1000 title of the year and 7th of his career, leading Novak Djokovic 6-4 *3-0 when the world number one was force to retire.

It was a tough situation all-round. It has to be tough for Andy to win such a big title like that. But he’ll take it. Will the level he showed this week be enough to capture his first slam at the US Open? Not even close. He was far too passive for most of this week and the level of play wasn’t particularly great in any of them. But at the same time, a title is a title and a Masters 1000 is a Masters 1000.

He’ll go to the US Open full of confidence, and judging by the Cowan and co’s excited muttering at the prospect of the Big 3 all being either injured or in poor form at the US Open, with all the British pundits once again expecting him to win his first slam there. Expect an article from Simon Reed claiming that Murray is the favourite to win the US Open in 3, 2, 1…

Of course, it’s also tough for Novak. We all remember the days when he was called ‘Fakervic’ and every top ten player and their dog all systematically criticized him for his various ailments. Nowadays, his peers’ views don’t appear bother him as much as they clearly did back then. And even so, when it got to the point where he was rolling first serves in at 88mph and couldn’t hit forehands without pulling up and wincing in pain, retiring was the only and logical option so close to the US Open. It took him a long time to make that decision, and he was probably more reluctant to quit because of all of the scar tissue from back in the day. However, apparently not everyone was convinced;

My only reaction to that is oh. As in ‘OH, is that Jamie Murray or Janko Tipsarevic?’ It’s one thing to be happy for your brother/friend or whatever. But it’s another thing altogether to start acting like some groupie living your life vicariously through that person and going as far as to start gloating on twitter about it. Grow up, son. It ain’t cool.

But anyway, let’s talk about the ATP in general. Really, this has to be one of the most uninteresting periods on the ATP for a long time. The start of the year was exciting; as the Djokovic run gathered steam, we all watched with baited breath to see who would be the player to end it. In retrospect, it just had to be Roger Federer, and the manner in which he euthanized the streak was stunning. Absolutely stunning.

But since then? Well, all there has been to watch is Rafa’s game and confidence falling apart while Roger has appeared completely disinterested for the most part – the sparkle in every part of his game other than his serve nowhere to be seen. And this all really shows that, contrary to popular belief, there is zero depth in the ATP right now. Every single top 4 player has been playing poorly during this US Open series, and yet no player has been even remotely close to taking advantage. We all thought that Fish’s time had come this week in Cincinnati, but after easing past Nadal, he then put on a complete shocker against Murray and threw away probably the biggest opportunity in his career thus far to pick up a Masters 1000.

So on we go. Who knows what will happen in a week from now when the final slam of the year finally kicks off? It could be a completely boring trainwreck of a tournament continuing on from the trend set by the last handful of weeks, or else something special and unexpected could happen. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see…

Novak Djokovic Finds Calm Amongst The Canadian Chaos

First Murray was upset in his first match, then Nadal, and then Roger Federer in the third round, but as his rivals toppled like dominoes around him, Novak Djokovic stood firm to reach yet another semifinal in this Career-defining year. This time he demolished Gael Monfils, the next highest-ranked player left in the draw, 6-2 6-1 in 73 minutes.

This win moves his win-loss record for the year to 51-1; FIFTY-ONE – ONE! So much was made of the streak in the first half of 2011, but the way he has recovered is almost even more impressive. After the bubble finally burst in that fateful French Open semifinal, many expected Djokovic’s form and game to fall back down to what we’ve become accustomed to over the years, but he has simply brushed the dirt off his shoulder and edged his way back to his brilliant best.

After the match, Novak offered up perhaps one of the biggest understatements ever to be spoken; “I have played the best match of the tournament, no doubt. Everything is going well.” It sure is, Novak. It sure is.

RAMBLE (and bad title) ALERT: Bastards flail in Bastad.

This morning I caught a glimpse of the Bastad semi-final draw and immediately thought that, with Robin Soderling, David Ferrer and Tomas Berdych ranked between 5 and 8 and 11-ranked Almagro rounding off the semi-final lineup, things could get pretty interesting down at the 250 event.

Of course, that was completely delusional of me, and I apologize. Instead, Mr Berdych put in a truly appalling peformance, managing to win only one game in the entire match and was essentially two points away from being double bageled by the top-seeded Soderling. Almagro didn’t fare much better, picking up only three more games than Berdych in his semi against Ferrer, with his defeat actually six minutes shorter than the Czech number one’s.

For both players, it’s yet another failure to add to their list of letdowns against top players in 2011. Almagro, infamous among players and fans alike for his constant use of gamesmanship on tour was in full flow earlier this week – glaring down at opponents, attempting to influence umpires and, in the words of Jonas Bjorkman “walking”. Generally I don’t have as much of a problem with his behaviour as most do, as long as the gamesmanship doesn’t fade into cheating. However, what I do have a problem with is that without fail, whenever it is time for him to play someone of actual prominence, he immediately lays down on the ground and invites his opponent to walk all over him. This was the Ferrer match in a nutshell, illustrated by the fact that even though Ferrer loves to play with his food even at the best of times, the match was over in a flash. The resulting effect is that talented as he is, it makes Almagro look even more gutless – with him essentially bullying the lesser players before handing the match to the higher ranked ones.

As for Berdych, he yet again finds himself easily dispatched by the first in-form player he meets. It’s easy to wonder how he has managed to keep hold of his top ten ranking after disappointing in the defence of all three of his massive results from 2010, but the Czech number one has actually made the quarters/fourth round or better at twelve of his fourteen events so far this year. The problem is that he has become a model of mediocrity, and every time he has found himself in those quarterfinals and semifinals, he has been inevitably brushed aside with ease. These results would be understandable for a player lacking the firepower to really compete against the very best, but for someone with as talented and capable as Berdych? It’s just disappointing.

Looking on to tomorrows final, this time I don’t think it would be delusional to expect an interesting match. Two excellent claycourters with completely contrasting styles of play and also contrasting attitudes on-court. Should be a good ‘un.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,228 other followers