Newport Day One Is Here

Or maybe wanting to knock Pliskova off No 1 ? She’ll have some competition there I feel.

The men’s field for the Citi Open is very strong. In addition to Milos, who is a past champion, Grigor and Kei also took WCs. Both Zverevs, Delpo, and Thiem are playing, as well as a slew of Americans including Isner, Sock, Johnson, Young and Harrison. So, without the Big 4, this is a great chance for these guys to shine.

Even the doubles has a strong field, including the Bryans and J. Murray/Soares.

The women’s field is not as strong, so they must be thrilled that Sloane Stephens took a WC, as well as Simona.

Chazz –
Yes – I read the story on the Guardian site but it seems ‘investigation’ doesn’t really mean fixing actually took place – just that odd betting patterns triggered alert.
I’d be rather surprised if there was anything irregular at W’don.

Hartt, Berdych is better than Cilic (sorry Marin!). Cleaner game, bigger serve, better control. To me at least. Yet Cilic has a us open title. I constantly worry about how “content” and satisfied USA and non big five players are. Though Mardy Fish suffered from this dialogue in his head about getting better versus never being good enough, apparently Federer had the same kind of dilemma in his mind in the fifth set against Nadal in Melbourne this year.
To win slams players must hate losing more than they love winning, and they must find a way to improve their games every year if possible or every few years if possible.

I get it that Federer and Nadal and Djokovic and Murray to some extent are the equivalent of superheroes all cut from the same cloth of greatness. But putting them on some pedestal discounts the significant things they did to stay on top of and rediscover their talents.

There was no just going to play my game for these guys. Murray was a pusher of sorts before he amped up his serve and groundstrokes – he still has some of the magic of Santoro but at quite a mph or kmph. Djokovic didn’t have a great volley back in 2007 when I caught a match of his. Federer truly steadied his backhand over the last twelve months. Nadal seems to be pumping his serve in as well.

GuLbis, Karlovic, others have upped their games. For Gulbis it has paid off, and Karlovic too, given he’s still out there terrifying opponents with his serve AND the rest of his game, much of which he didn’t have – back in 2003!!!

So- it isn’t just that the big four are absolute freaks. But that Wawrinka also became a freak, and other players that are less talented boosted their games significantly and became much better players.

Berdych made great moves in the off season to bring in excellent coaches and trainers. He’s better for it. But why didn’t he, or anyone else for that matter outside of Robin Soderling, do this before? What took them so long?

Winning a slam isn’t everything. But getting the most out of your game, and adding to that game with new shots and combinations, is essential.

Alex Zverev and Nick Kyrgios and anyone else aspiring to a slam title have to take note.

None of these champions will let you in the door. You have to break the door down.

Andrew, as I said, I agree that Berdych should have made changes earlier. But I don’t agree that he is better than Cilic. One major flaw is that he does not play the big points well, and I don’t think any amount of training is going to change that. Other players say his game is quite predictable, and that is something that he could change.

I actually enjoy watching Karlovic, especially, as you say, now that he has improved aspects of his game other than his serve.

In saying that the Big 4 are better than the others in no way negates the hard work they put in and how they continue to improve. Of course that is a big part of why they are so great.

And some of the other players do make changes. A few years ago Milos knew he needed to develop a more aggressive game, in particular a better net game, and he has worked very hard to achieve that. He is not a natural volleyer, but he is better at the net than he is often given credit for. In general, he wins about 66% of his net points.

And Mischa has said of Sascha that his younger brother wakes up each day wanting to be better than the day before.

That Berydch despised losing!!! Players have to somehow tap into that bratty side of themselves. All great players have it. Not just the looming despair that they might lose a match, but a visceral dislike for that possibility and an inner rebellion.

In other words, the outer brat of McEnroe and Connors is there in today’s champs – it’s different, but there. Nadal hates losing as much as anyone in history. And Federer too.
Somehow Djoker is great with it in his search for peace and luv.

Chazz, those remarks by Federer about the younger players were widely reported. So I had a look at the net play stats for some of his opponents at this year’s Wimby. Of the 4 I looked at, 3 went to the net more often than Fed. But they were not particularly successful. There are not stats for serve and volley, but Mischa Zverev had 32/58 net points, or 55%. We know from his style of play that he would have frequently used s&v. Fed only went to the net 34 times, but he won 25 of those points, or 74%.

Milos had 27/50 net points, or 54%, way below his usual success rate at the net. In contrast, Fed only had 22 net points (fewer than Milos’ winners) but won 18, or 82%. There aren’t stats for the number of s&v attempts, but I remember the match and Milos did try s&v during it.

Even Berdy went to the net more often than Fed, having 20/36 points, compared to 23/31 for Roger. But, once again, Fed’s % was much higher, 74% to 57%.

Only Grigor had fewer net points, 9/12 compared to 15/22 for Fed, but his % was actually higher, 75% to 68%.

What this shows is that these players did indeed come to the net, for the most part more often than Fed himself. But Roger returns so well and is so adept at passing, that it is tough to do well at the net against him, even with players like Mischa and Milos who normally do incorporate net play into their game.

This is why Federer is being a bit ingenuous. When he comes to the net he is not facing himself on the other side. He is correct when he says the players aren’t going to have great success from the baseline against guys like Rafa, Novak, Andy and himself. But they aren’t going to find a lot of joy at the net, either.

Don’t misunderstand me. I love net play and would love nothing more than to see more serve and volley in today’s game. I just think it is extremely tough to so successfully with today’s playing conditions and today’s top players.

I know Federer hates losing. I know he also loves the sport. But he doesn’t love it when he’s close but no cigar. Arguably he has become MORE like Nadal in the last twelve months, in terms of pushing more during matches. He used to be a great front runner, but if you stayed close you could make him uncomfortable.

Now he’s tough to beat even when he’s behind. He’s enjoying it, but there’s also a disappointment if he loses, and he wants to stay as far away from that disappointment as possible.

Federer’s always had the inner brat. It’s part of what makes him so incredible.

Example, 2005 Wimbledon final with roddick. That was not nice. 2007 Aussie final versus Roddick, not nice.

On court Federer is merciless. He is a huge Siberian tiger.

Anisimova strikes again!!

vs Neel 6:0 6:1
vs Min 6:1 6:2

Of course Federer is merciless on the court. Any Fedfan knows that. 🙂

As far as JMac’s commentary was concerned, I thought he sounded like a broken record. As it was, Milos came to the net 50 times in 3 sets, only 8 times fewer than Mischa, whose game is built around net play. And he was less successful than normal when he did. So the answer was to come in even more? I don’t think so.

If Berdych did that he would have majors!

Thanks to Scoop’s comments about him a few months ago, I added Stefanos Tsitsipas to my youngsters to watch list. He is 18, will turn 19 on Aug. 12 and is currently ranked 167. He made it through qualies at both RG and Wimby this year. The ATP site has a feature about how he spent his free day this week, which led me to his twitter account.

Not only is Stefanos a talented young player, but he is totally charming. On twitter he has axioms and corny jokes, as well as talking about what is happening in his tennis life, such as practicing with Fed. My favourite saying: “You can’t buy happiness, but you can buy ice-cream. And that’s kind of the same thing.” A man after my own heart!

I will be following Stefanos even more closely. At 6’4″ he is another of those tall, lanky youngsters who seem to be popping up all over the place.

OMG they are talking up Konta in UK – BBC listed her match with Simona as the ‘match of the tournament’ and watched by more people than the number who watched the men’s final.

The British public would grasp at anything it seems.

The match of the women’s event was Muguruza v Kerber and that decided the final but since the British public have little interest in either player it probably rated a fraction above zero on the fan-meter.

Not good for Johanna IMO.

Hartt – be interesting to see how the young Canadians do in the coming tournaments. I’l keep an eye on Denis and Felix.

Angie’s intensity is a basic part of her game – it’s what got her those titles last year but has been lacking in so much of ’17. She seemed to find that quality again at W’don and I hope she can summon it up for her coming tournaments. Without intensity she’s looked completely disconsolate and worn down at times this year.

Wrist injuries can be really bad news as we know, especially in young people. I hope Felix gets over his and doesn’t return too soon
I agree with you in questioning if Denis should be playing every week but I suppose he’s got lots of energy and probably feels he can do it.
Young players don’t believe they’ll ever be injured or exhausted – until it happens.

Edit, I meant the qualies and matches at Queens. Denis had a WC for Wimby.

Konta’s best thing to happen in UK since Murray. Why not celebrate her. I doubt it’s going to her head. She’s got a lot of guts.

Sure, Federer’s better. What does he do right? How does he improve? That sneak attack by Roger trick shows he’s always willing to improve. That’s not common even among top players. Look no further than Sock’s bh or lack of bh. And Sock, top 30, is a guy that needs a five, ten percent improvement in every area.

Andrew, perhaps the practice session that you saw is not indicative of how Denis usually works. He was with Bresnik for a few weeks in the off season and I can’t imagine Bresnik accepting anything less than a complete effort. Also he had a practice session with Andy, and that must have been intense!

Harrt –
Do agree with your comments re Fed and so on – there’s only so much to be said about them.

But unfortunately few fans are interested in the ‘ordinary’ – might work in fiction but not in fact. We found on the mag I used to edit that there was no bigger turn-off for readers than stories about the daily grind on tour. (Unless it’s stories which are not going to be written for legal reasons.)

So – back to the rich and famous….Fed/Nadal pictures on the cover are like pics of Princess Diana used to be – flying off the stands.

Catherine, I understand how stories about “ordinary” players might not be popular in a magazine. But something like the ATP site can run them, and they do. I just wish they did it more often. Especially since they have several pieces on a variety of topics every day. And of course Scoop features different players in his Biofiles.

So I guess I will have to keep searching for those stories.

Catherine, lots of motivations for doing interviews. Foremost, cash, money. It’s good for agents and players and the sport. I don’t think we can dispute it, if I were a player and made a pretty penny for how far I made it in a tournament and because of favorable endorsement and my agent got an endorsement, that’s a way to pay off training expenses other stuff. We talk often how hard it is to pay for coaches and travel, well – not the case for Konta, she’s doing well foremost because of her performance but also other paid appearances including exhibitions or potential exhibitions. Second players generally appreciate attention and coverage – they sometimes have a sense they are a big deal and revel in it. I don’t think I have to point this one out, but some players read even these message boards!
It’s inevitable. Players like positive coverage. But it’s a two way street, when they’re doing fine coverage is great. When not, things feel worse – you’re losing and people are saying mean things! That’s the nature of the beast.

Robson? She’s nO Mugu-ruthless!