Yeshayahu Ginsburg

Mental Giants Maria Sharapova and Novak Djokovic Notch Wins at Sony Open Tennis

March 24, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

Novak Djokovic press 2013 Sony Open 01 — Novak Djokovic in press at Sony Open Tennis on Sunday.

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

March 24, 2013 — Maria Sharapova and Novak Djokovic each got through their third round matches on Sunday while dropping only six games each, showcasing their mental prowess and vigor. Djokovic was untroubled in his dominating match of Somdev Devvarman, strolling through a second set that was nowhere near as close as the 64 scoreline indicated. Meanwhile, Sharapova was seemingly forced to work much harder in her own 6-4, 6-2 win over Elena Vesnina.

Novak Djokovic 2013 Sony Open 02 — Novak Djokovic

Djokovic, a clear favorite, will next face Tommy Haas in the fourth round, while Sharapova will go up against Klara Zakopalova, who ousted last week’s BNP Paribas Open semifinalist Maria Kirilenko in straight sets.
Though it may not initially come to mind, Sharapova and Djokovic can probably each be described as the most laid-back top players on their respective tours. Both are fiery competitors on the court, but once they step off court, each is easygoing and willing to joke around with their team and other top players. Djokovic and Sharapova, in particular, did several commercial spots together for HEAD Tennis previously, and it gives a good insight into their personalities.
But having an easygoing personality doesn’t hold these players back from being fierce competitors on court.
Djokovic, today, gave two important insights into what drives him on court. He spoke of the inspiration that he receives from his fans, saying, “It’s incredible just to see the amount of passion that the people have who support me and who feel that what I do inspires them.” That’s a strong quote and really helps the fans feel involved in the game itself.
The Serb also explained that there was a mental component that wasn’t quite there yet in his game a few years back. He was a consistent top 3 player, but he couldn’t consistently beat Federer and Nadal until 2011.
“It was a process of learning, understanding who I am, what I need to do on and off of the court, maturing. I was patient. I did have my doubts definitely through this period, but (my team) and great friends always believed in my abilities and convinced me that I could do it. I also believed very much that I could be No. 1 of the world.”

Maria Sharapova 2013 Sony Open 01 — Maria Sharapova

Sharapova also gave a lot of insights into her own mental state on court today. She spoke about taking everything one match at a time, even though she can take world No. 1 at the end of this tournament if Serena loses early. She showed a personal side in her tennis too, talking about memories of coming to this tournament with her parents when she was younger.
It’s important to realize that there is a great deal that goes into these players’ games. It is so much more than just talent and executing on the court. It’s the little things that can add a mental edge or a boost in confidence.
It is wanting to inspire fans, or memories as a child, or even an intense desire to be just a tiny bit better than ever before. And for some players, that means being serious and totally zoned-in all the time. But for others, it’s about being relaxed or able to take a joke. Or, as Sharapova easily deflected when asked if her screaming has evolved over the years, “That’s not for me to judge. It’s more for you.”

With Federer and Nadal Out, Sony Open Primed for Surprise Runs

March 20, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

In the tennis rankings, there are always little meta-rankings that have to be thought of. The rankings are not merely a list of who has played better for the past 52 weeks. The rankings define the tennis season. Rankings affect seeding and direct entry into tournaments. Players around the top 80 and a bit above know that they are getting close to where they can directly enter 250s without having to play qualifiers. Once you hit the top 40, you can guarantee yourself entry into the Masters tournaments and being seeded in 250s. There are imaginary cutoffs throughout that players are trying to stay above so that they will have the best chance to improve their ranking in the future.
By far the most important ranking number, however, is 32. Being in the top 32 guarantees a player a seed at a Slam. It means that he knows that he can’t be forced to face a top player until at least the third round. It usually (but not always) means facing a weaker opponent in the first round. A seeded player might have a bit more of a target on their backs, but it doesn’t make so much of a difference. Everyone is trying their absolute hardest to win every Grand Slam match anyway.
Even within the top 32, though, there are important additional cutoffs. Different Slams break up the seeding a little differently, but the basic premise is the same. No player in the top 32 can play each other until the third round. The top 16 cannot meet until the fourth round. None of the top 8 seeds can meet until the quarterfinals. The top 4 are each in different quarters of the draw and the top 2 each get their own half.
Aside from being prestigious tournaments in their own rights, this is one of the main things that the Masters tournaments do for the tour. They give a massive opportunity for players to jockey for positioning and affect their rankings before the Slams. I know that there are 2 months and 2 more Masters 1000 events between now and Roland Garros, but Miami is a massive opportunity for a lot of players to drastically improve their seeding by the time the end of May rolls around.
Both Federer and Nadal have withdrawn from this tournament. This means that there is a lot of space in the draw that might have otherwise been very difficult for a lower player, or even another top 10 player, to be able to navigate. Murray and Djokovic are still the obvious favorites, but there are places for players to pick up points. For example, Ferrer’s quarter of the draw seems pretty wide open and a player like Kei Nishikori (just to name one) can really gain a lot of points. There is a large gap between the top 8 and the field right now, so no one is likely to break into that group in the immediate future, but picking up 180 or even 360 points here would be a great way to put a player in a strong position to make even more headway up the rankings in the future.
With the way Berdych played last week, it’s hard to imagine him not reaching the semifinals. But there are a lot of very good players in his quarter and just about any of them can use this opportunity to earn a lot of points. I can really see just about any seed from that quarter winning it, which would bring with it 360 points. And while 360 points might not be such a large number when we look at the top 10, it would definitely put any top 20 player into a strong spot to be in the top 16 two months from now.
Of course, the most important outcome of Nadal’s absence from this tournament is that David Ferrer will move back into the top 4 in two weeks. We saw Federer and Nadal meet in a quarterfinal at Indian Wells because Nadal was outside the top 4. If Ferrer can keep that #4 spot until Roland Garros, it could mean that Rafa will have to play another member of the “Big 4” in the quarters instead of the semis. Rafa has almost 3000 points to defend between now and the French Open (including Miami) while Ferrer has barely over 1000. And while Nadal will be the favorite in the clay court Masters tournaments, we have to wonder how much he needs to protect his knee and whether that will keep him from being a top 4 seed when it’s time to go to Paris.
Until now, though, we only looked at players making good runs. Even at the top of the game, 1000 points is a lot. If someone could take advantage of Federer’s and Nadal’s absences and actually win this tournament, it would give a massive rankings boost and would really change that player’s entire season. 1000 points would move Murray up to World #2. It would put Berdych or Del Potro within reach of the top 4. It would allow a lot of top 20 players to begin bridging that massive gap to the top 8. It would basically guarantee a player at least a top 16 ranking for the next 4 Slams. The draw is not that wide open, so don’t expect a surprise winner. But we definitely can expect some good runs from some lower players, and the boost in their ranking will definitely allow them to be more competitive for the entire rest of the season.

Lleyton Hewitt's Last Chance to Step Up in Indian Wells, Miami?

March 6, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

I’m not going to lie, I have become a bit of a Lleyton Hewitt fan over the past few years. Few people in tennis fight as hard as he does every single point. He has talent, yes, but what gets him through matches on the tennis court is energy and momentum. He hasn’t had the ability to just beat other players on talent alone for a few years now. When he is playing uninspired, he can lose to just about anyone. But when he finds a reason to fight and grabs on to it, he can still play one of the highest levels of tennis on tour.
We watched Hewitt play Novak Djokovic on the biggest of stages twice last year. The first was in the fourth round of the Australian Open when Djokovic actually looked unbeatable. Hewitt was being dominated early but rode the crowd to actually take the third set. The second time was at the Olympics, where Hewitt actually won the first set but could never really pull ahead in the second set. Both of these times, Hewitt was playing tennis on a level equal to the best players in the world.
So why isn’t Hewitt still a top player? Why is his ranking just barely inside the top 100? In short, Hewitt is not so young anymore. His body can no longer keep up with what his mind and heart want him to do. Fatigue sets in much earlier in tournaments and matches. Once he’s tired, he can no longer get to the ball in time to hit his crisp, accurate shots. His form is a little forced and errors start flying everywhere. But before that point, his game is pretty much just as clean as it was 15 years ago.
Which brings me to the reason that the upcoming 4 weeks should be the most important of Hewitt’s year. The Indian Wells and Miami Masters tournaments offer Hewitt something that no other tournaments on tour offer. It’s a Grand Slam format—with a break in between each of the rounds, but it’s only best-of-three. It is the best of both worlds for Hewitt. It gives him the opportunity to take a day off between matches so that fatigue won’t kill him early in each match. And it’s only best-of-three sets, which means that he is not out there for at least two hours in each match.
Over the past few years, we have seen Hewitt play in tough matches. We have seen him push others to five sets. And we have seen him have to come back from tiring matches and attempt to do it again the next day. I have absolutely nothing against Hewitt when I say that his body just can’t do it anymore. He can’t play for 3 hours then come back two days later. He can’t play a tough three-setter then come back the next day. But what he can do, and what he should concentrate on doing, is playing at his absolute best in the two tournaments that don’t force him to do either of those things.
Some have begun referring to Indian Wells as the “fifth Slam”. It is certainly the tournament that has tried to hardest in recent years to put itself a step above the other Masters tournaments. But for Lleyton Hewitt in the next two weeks, it has to be the only Slam. It is his best opportunity to make a great run at a big tournament. He needs to take it because he’s not going to have so many more chances.

Back Once More, Can Tommy Haas End his Career on a High Note?

February 27, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

There are a lot of things that can be said about Tommy Haas. He came out of the gate very early in his career, reaching his first final in 1997 at the age of 18, upsetting Yevgeny Kafelnikov in the process. Haas won his first title at in 1999 and first cracked the top 10 a few months later. Haas reached a career-high of World #2 at the age of 24, but that is really where he peaked. Haas’s career is a sad tale, actually, though it is great to see him still competing at a high level.
Haas’s career can be defined by 3 things. The first, which is something that troubled an entire generation of tennis players, was an inability to beat Roger Federer. Haas did not meet Federer at seemingly every turn in Slams the same way that, say, Andy Roddick did, but Federer held him back from having a better career nonetheless. It is not ridiculous to say that Haas could have at least had one Grand Slam final in 2009 had Federer not stood in his way.
Then again, a lack of success at the Slams is the second thing that could define Haas’s career. For a player who is clearly one of the most talented in the world and who has been towards the top of the rankings as much as he has, Haas does not have much to show for it in the way of Grand Slam success. He has reached semifinals in his 15+ years on tour, as well as 3 more quarterfinal appearances. It is sad that Haas seems to have been unable to compete at his highest level on the biggest stages, but that is exactly what separates the great talents from the all-time great players.
The final defining characteristic of Haas’s career, and this one could very well have strongly influenced the first two, is that it has been riddled with injuries. Twice, now, Haas has been out for over 12 months with an extended injury leave. Both of those times came when he seemed to be peaking—in 2003 and again in 2010. The 2003 injury began with a personal leave after a tragic accident that nearly claimed the lives of his parents. Before he could return to tennis from helping his family, he needed surgery on his shoulder and missed almost an entire year. Even though he has moved back towards the top of the game since then, he has never quite been the same. He had a 2-1 record against Federer before then but is only 1-9 since (though, to be fair, Federer had not quite hit his peak by that time).
His injury in 2010 came right after he seemed to hit his stride again. In the summer of 2009 he had nearly beaten Roger Federer at Roland Garros (and clay is Haas’s worst surface by far) and reached the semifinals of Wimbledon before, again, falling to Federer. He had an uneventful late summer of 2009 with respectable results. However, he had hip surgery in February of 2010 and missed over an entire year for the second time in his career.
Now, however, Haas is nearly 35 years old and is making his third run towards the top of the rankings. He has been in strong form since last summer and has the results to show for it. He just reached the top 20 after reaching the finals of the tournament in San Jose. He is the second-seed in Delray Beach this week and will have a chance in Indian Wells and Miami to really increase his ranking before the summer. I do not know how much longer Haas has in his career. He is playing very well and seems healthy, but as his career has shown things can change in an instant. This year may be his best, and last, chance to finally do something memorable at a Grand Slam or even a Masters. He is no longer one of the top few players in the world, but he does still have the talent to compete with anyone on any given day. There is still more to be written in the bittersweet story that is the career of Tommy Haas. But I do know that he has at least one more chance to cap it off with a happy ending.

Why Won't John Isner Play on Clay?

February 20, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

John Isner is honestly baffling as a player. He has probably the best serve in the world. It is certainly one of the biggest, it is quite accurate, and his height allows him to do things with it that most others can’t. Even when compared to similar players like Milos Raonic or Kevin Anderson, Isner’s serve just seems more effective. So it would stand to reason that, like other powerful servers and big hitters, Isner’s best bet at being a top-level player is to play as much on hard courts as possible and to try and just power his way through as many matches as he can.
This theory has worked for him and brought him into the top 20 in the early years of his career. Unfortunately, it is the wrong outlook. Because if there is one surface that can put Isner over the top—if there is one area in which he can truly become a top player in the world—it is the red clay courts of Europe. Does this sound strange? After all, Americans and big servers are not known for their prowess on this surface. So why would Isner be at his best on clay? Let’s look at Isner’s history.
Isner has played several memorable and historic matches, the highlight obviously being his record-shattering marathon against Mahut at Wimbledon in 2010. But, if I was forced to judge, the best match that Isner has played in his career was actually one that he lost. After a poor 2010, Isner’s ranking had fallen into the 50s. As such, he was unseeded at the 2011 French Open. Unluckily for him, he drew Rafael Nadal in the first round.
It was a match that was expected to be potentially troublesome for Nadal but no one had thought for a second that Isner could win. Isner played the match of his life, serving well and really hanging with Nadal on clay. He managed to break Rafa once and took two tiebreaks to really give him a chance to win the match. No one else took two sets off Rafa that entire tournament. What doesn’t often get mentioned, however, is that Isner could have played that match even better.
Isner’s forehand on any ball sitting up in the middle of the court is lethal. Isner’s kick serve on the high-bouncing clay is nearly unreturnable, and certainly cannot be kept low if put back in play. This is a combination that Isner used during that match, but not nearly enough. He had serves that would bounce over Rafa’s head. Rafa would sometimes stand as far as 15 feet back to return Isner’s second serves. This is a potent weapon that Isner for some reason just doesn’t use.
Isner’s clay skills were not only shown once, though. If he has had one match in his career as impressive as that Roland Garros match against Rafa, it was his first-round Davis Cup rubber against Roger Federer last year. Isner used his variety of serves and massive forehand to really just beat Federer off of the high-bouncing clay court. Isner has these skills and has shown that they are not only flukes, the only real question is why isn’t he embracing his clay court potential. Not to mention, of course, that Isner also took Djokovic to 5 sets on clay in a Davis Cup match back in 2010 and really could have won that match. Now, 2010 Djokovic is not quite the Djokovic of today, but he was still a top 3 player in the world and was one of the best on clay. That match showed us the beginning of Isner’s potential on clay. The Nadal and Federer matches cemented it.
Isner is playing at least five tournaments in a row at this point in the year. Last week he played in San Jose, losing in the semifinals to Tommy Haas. He is currently playing the 500-level tournament in Memphis and will follow with Delray Beach, Indian Wells, Miami, and then probably Davis Cup. These are all on hard courts. I can understand why he wants to stay in the United States and that he might not want to go to clay before coming back to the two hard court Masters events in Indian Wells and Miami. But this is his chance. He could be playing in the South American clay court swing instead, which in turn would prepare him well for the European clay court swing in a few months and Roland Garros at the end of May.
Isner is a very good player. His lack of a real baseline game is a major inhibition, but it certainly isn’t so prohibitively bad that he can’t compete with the top players. He needs to embrace who he is, though, and realize what surface and style will best suit his game. He is muddling around in the top 10-20 right now, which isn’t bad. But he could definitely do better. He needs to work on his baseline game (obviously). Most of all, though, he just needs to play on clay, utilize his lethal high-bouncing serves and shots, and attack at every opportunity he gets. Doing that almost earned him an epic upset over the best clay-courter of all time. Doing that did earn him an upset over arguably the greatest player of all time. If he can finally realize that and consistently utilize his game in that fashion, there really is no telling how much he can achieve.

Why Rafa's Loss Should Encourage his Fans

February 13, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

Rafael Nadal made his long-awaited return to tennis after a 7-month absence last week in Vina del Mar, Chile. The South American clay court swing (fondly referred to as the Golden Swing) seemed like the perfect place for Rafa to get his tennis legs back. They are usually smaller tournaments highlighted by clay-court specialists and, because of the location and timing of these events, often have relatively weak fields. Not to say that winning any ATP tournament is ever easy or that the players are weak, but the average player in these tournaments is less likely to be someone who could trouble Rafa than, say, a big hitter on a hard court.
This is probably why it was so shocking when Nadal lost in the final to Horacio Zeballos. After all, all we had seen all week were comments about how great Rafa was doing in his return and how he seemed to be cruising to a much-needed title. Rafa had only dropped 14 games in his first three matches. Now, it could be the ease with which Rafa won those matches that blinded us to the issues he was having, but there were certainly things there. It really only took the loss to Zeballos for us to realize that Rafa is still nowhere near 100%.
Now, maybe it’s unfair for us to expect him to be. After all, the man had not played competitive tennis since Wimbledon, over 7 months ago. Maybe, because we have seen so much seemingly-superhuman feats from Rafa in the past, we expected him to return and to instantly compete at the level of an all-time great just like he has shown us throughout his career. But the truth is that he is just a normal human being and will need time and match play to get back to his former level.
Anyone who watched Rafa’s first three matches could see that he was not quite all there yet, though the one-sided score lines may have helped us ignore these facts. Rafa was clearly not moving at his full speed. There were balls that he just didn’t get to that he would have before the injury and there were shots that he could not play with his normal lethalness because he wasn’t quite getting there on time. His movement was definitely also a little more ginger than usual, as if he was protecting his knees. Finally, his intensity was not quite there. Watching him almost gave the feeling that he could have gone after more in a lot of points but just chose not to. All of these were most clear in the final where he lost, but once you see these things there they were obvious if you went back and watched the early matches as well.
Honestly, though, I don’t think that any of these are bad things. For his entire career, Rafa has played with one attitude. He has said that he will go all-out on every single point, in every single match, and just deal with the consequences to his body when they come. And that attitude won him 11 Slams and made him an all-time great. But it finally caught up with him. The consequences of years of abuse to his knees and body have finally arrived. And now that they have, Rafa is doing the smart thing. He isn’t playing all-out in matches that aren’t as meaningful anymore. He is rightly using them to get in experience and match play. He is rightly building himself back up to a level where he can compete with and beat the best in the world. But he is doing it in a way that will not harm his body unnecessarily. The first part of Nadal’s career was defined by winning as much as possible, physical consequences be damned. But if last week is any indication, the second half of his career will be defined by prolonging it as much as possible, even if that means collecting a few extra losses along the way.

The Oddity of Davis Cup

February 6, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

Davis Cup is one of the most exciting tournaments in the tennis world. However, it is also one of the most enigmatic and frustrating. It does not even come close to the Slams in terms of importance of prestige. But for some fans, a Davis Cup match can be so much more meaningful than any Grand Slam match.
First of all, Davis Cup actually allows the fans to get involved. All of those fan-kept “rules” about etiquette and niceties go out the window in Davis Cup. You are the fans of the home team, and that means you do whatever you can to help your team win. An opponent makes an error, you cheer loudly. The opponent double-faults, you can clap. The opponent begins to argue with the umpire, you never allow him to live it down. It might be a competition of countries, but the basis of this tournament really is the fans.
And that, above all else, is why this tournament can be so incredibly frustrating for the fans. Often, the matches mean more to the fans than to the players themselves. We often don’t see the top players compete, whether due to fatigue (since Davis Cup always follows shortly after a big tournament) or due to an unwillingness to risk injury. Sometimes it just isn’t feasible for these top guys to play Davis Cup on top of the rest of their schedules.
This creates a curious case where Davis Cup doesn’t really represent the best countries in the world. We’ll leave aside, for now, the fact that one player can essentially win an entire tie by himself (by winning two singles matches and carrying his doubles team, as Bjorn Borg was famous for doing). But often, we just don’t get the best of a country actually being represented.
Take, for example, the first-round match of Spain vs. Canada from this year. On paper, this match is a blowout. Canada has three players in the top 100. Spain has 4 in the top 25 (3 if you don’t count a recovering Nadal). Now, this match could have been interesting anyway. Canada was the home country and chose a fast indoor court that suited their players much more than the Spanish. Milos Raonic’s massive serve can make any match close. Canada was the upstart country looking to pull off a massive upset against world power Spain. There were plenty of storylines and a good amount of intrigue to go with this match. Unfortunately, none of that is what we got.
Most of the top Spanish players in the world just couldn’t be troubled to play this tie. Spain brought in 3 singles players for this tie. They were, respectively, the #5, #8, and #11 ranked Spaniards at the moment. None of Spain’s current or former top 10 players (Nadal, David Ferrer, Nicolas Almagro, and Fernando Verdasco) could show up. I’m sure they all had good reasons and won’t go into individual ones here. That’s not the point. The point is that this is indicative of the lack of importance many top players give Davis Cup.
We were supposed to have a blowout here with some upset potential for Canada. Instead, what we got was a blowout by Canada. In the three live singles rubbers, the Spaniards won exactly one set—Albert Ramos took the first set off Raonic in a tiebreak. After that, it was all Canada. Frank Dancevic slaughtered Marcel Granollers, the top Spanish player competing, to the tune of only losing 5 games. And Raonic finished things off in the first rubber on Sunday, beating Guillermo Garcia-Lopez in straight sets as well.
Most of what comes out of this tie is the great story of an up-and-coming tennis country using home soil to beat the #1 seeded country. But let’s be fair and clear. The Spanish team that competed this past weekend was not the same team that earned that #1 ranking. And that, above all, is the enigma of Davis Cup. It means so much to the fans, but circumstances keep the players from being able to give it their all. Would better Spanish players have shown up had the tie been in Spain? Almost definitely. But now the Spanish fans won’t get to see their team in later rounds. Davis Cup is an incredible opportunity for the fans, but can only remain that way if the players have enough incentive to actually compete.

Matching up Murray Against Federer: Who Has the Edge?

January 24, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

Andy Murray is one of the two current players on tour that have a winning record against Roger Federer. The other, obviously, is Rafael Nadal. Murray and Nadal do not play similar styles, but they do have something in common. They are both, at their very essence, counterpunchers. Yes, they have a drastically different way of doing things. But their basic goal in every rally is the same—play frustratingly solid defense until an opening to attack presents itself, then take it. The incredible defense that each of them plays is what troubles Federer the most. He is used to controlling rallies with his precise and strong groundstrokes. Murray and Nadal (and Djokovic) are some of the only players on tour who really take that ability away from him, which changes the entire tone of matches that Federer is involved in.
It is precisely this reason that I worry about Andy Murray’s apparent change of strategy this tournament. Murray has looked more aggressive in the first few rounds of this tournament than he usually does. He used to emphasize the counter in counterpunch. Now his main goal seems to be the punching. It is working for him beautifully. Even without his serve being so great this tournament, he is still winning a good deal more points than his opponents. Granted, he has not yet met a top-tier player, but his aggressive tennis has been suiting him very well this tournament.
Unfortunately, I fear that this aggressive tennis just will not go over so well against. Federer. Murray does not have the raw power to outhit Federer from the baseline like Tsonga did for much of his match against Federer. Murray will not be the one who comes out ahead in aggressive exchanges. He just won’t. Murray is a tremendous precision player who hits the ball cleanly. But Federer does those things better than Murray does. Murray deals with adverse conditions better than Roger, so maybe the heat or some wind would help the Scot, but in a perfect match Federer will come out ahead more often than not in even exchanges.
Which is why, for this match at least, Murray really needs to go back to what has worked for him against Federer in the past. And while it’s true that Murray has never beaten Roger in a Slam, I don’t think the losses can be attributed to the differences between best-of-5 and best-of-3. Federer was just better than Murray in each of those matches. Murray’s counterpunching still bothered Federer even then.
I’m not saying that Murray doesn’t have a chance if he plays aggressively. He still is a great player and is incredibly difficult for anyone to beat. But he does have certain advantages over Federer usually. There is a reason he is 10-9 against Federer when very few other players ever get close to even, let alone above it. The attacking that he has been doing so far this tournament would probably negate some of those advantages, in my opinion.
Of course, the one thing that really beat Murray in his previous matches against Federer at Slams was nerves. Murray just didn’t really show up mentally to the 2008 US Open final or the 2010 Australian Open final. He was beaten off the court very quickly and really never played his best game. Last year’s Wimbledon final was a little different. The nerves weren’t as obvious there, but Murray could not capitalize on any of his opportunities late in crunch time. He had 30-30 on Federer’s serve several times in the final few sets and actually got a look at the serves. He never could generate the break points that he needed though.
It is not at all unfair to assume that trouncing Federer in the Olympic final and winning the US Open final has cured any issues that Murray has with showing up mentally in these big matches. But you never know. It could be that facing Federer in a Slam will still weigh heavily on his mind because he has never beaten Roger in one of these tournaments. What we do know for sure, though, is that if Murray comes out nervous, he doesn’t really have a chance in this match, no matter how aggressively or defensively he playys.

Australian Open ATP Quarterfinals Recap

January 23, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

Because the quarterfinals, by definition, only have 4 matches, I’m going to do this recap a little differently than the earlier ones. I’m going to highlight three players who looked good. The first two will be the ones who exceeded expectations and the second will be the player who looks to be playing at the highest overall level right now. It’s not really fair to say anyone looked bad or underperformed this round. We had 1 epic match, 2 matches where the favorites won as expected, and 1 match where the lower seed just brought his strong form and almost pulled off the upset. Federer is the only one who can be said to have disappointed, but he honestly didn’t play so poorly. He just almost got beaten by a big server who hits massive groundstrokes, something that has been happening for the past few years.

Who Looked Good

1. How can I not give this first spot to Nicolas Almagro? Almagro has often had trouble just winning sets off Ferrer in the past, let alone almost winning a best-of-five match. Almagro showed a high level of play throughout this match that we are really not so used to seeing from him, though maybe we should begin to expect it. Almagro has clearly picked his game up a few levels and we should start looking for him deep in most tournaments. His lack of ability to successfully serve it out—on each of three occasions, no less—tells us that he’s not quite there yet, but you can’t really get used to winning in pressure situations unless you lose in some first.
2. The guy who looks best to win this tournament right now is actually the one that has been mostly flying under the radar. Andy Murray hasn’t really run people over this tournament, but he has been pretty close to being unbeatable. He hasn’t faced players quite as good as Djokovic has, but Murray has been relentless with a slightly more offensive version of his counterpunching tennis. Murray just wins far too many of the points; it’s really that simple. His serve hasn’t been overpowering and his return hasn’t been perfect, but he has just been far too dominant in the rallies for anyone to touch. He doesn’t look invincible, but he definitely has to be the favorite of the final four.

Match of the Round

It feels unfair to deny Ferrer/Almagro this spot. After all, it was the second-best match of the tournament at the time it was played. Unfortunately, Federer/Tsonga a night later was just better. Federer won the first- and third-set tiebreaks by a single minibreak, but it was the sets that Tsonga won that made this match an epic. Tsonga played the only way he possible could against Federer: he hit big on every single shot. No matter where he was on the court or whether it was a forehand or backhand, every single shot of Tsonga’s was absolutely blistered. Federer wasn’t passive either, pulling out winners. It was attacking tennis at its finest, with Tsonga’s power was just too much for Federer when his shots were on. Federer, though, always stayed in touch and managed to hold serve often enough to be able to take advantage when Tsonga slipped up for just a moment. That was how he won the third set and how he won the fifth. Tsonga was dominating the later stages of the match. Federer just found the right moment when Tsonga’s level dropped, broke serve, and concentrated on holding the rest of the way to pull out the epic victory.

David Ferrer: Waiting in the Wings No Longer

January 22, 2013 by Yeshayahu Ginsburg

By Yeshayahu Ginsburg

I don’t know how it happened. I don’t know when it happened. But David Ferrer has transformed himself into a top tennis player. Ferrer has been a very good player for a long time now. He has been in or around the top 20 since 2005 and was having good runs in Slams that long ago as well. That’s not what I mean when I say he is a top player. I mean that Ferrer is just a tiny step below the top 4. That’s how good he is right now.
It’s not really possible to point out a time when Ferrer made the jump from “top 15 player” to “player who can compete with anyone”, but it has occurred gradually over the past several years. Starting in 2011, Ferrer really just stopped losing matches to players that he should beat. Since then, Ferrer’s competitiveness and mental toughness against other top players—those who he shouldn’t necessarily beat—has risen gradually but very noticeably.
Ferrer still gets upset. Everyone does. But now, when every tournament starts, Ferrer is almost expected to make the semifinals. Yes, the players like Berdych, Tsonga, Del Potro, and others of that class can beat him. But Ferrer is now expected to win those matches. He comes in as the favorite when he meets anyone below the top 5.
If anyone is benefiting from Nadal’s absence from tennis, it’s Ferrer. In 2011 and 2012, Ferrer used to be an important spoiler in the draw. If he was placed in Federer’s or Nadal’s quarter, he was dead meat. If he was against Djokovic or Murray, he actually had a chance and could pull off the upset. Now, though, it’s his quarter. He is expected to be a semifinalist in all of the major tournaments. Yes, he’s not as much of a favorite in the draw as the rest of the top 3. But he is the first name in the quarter to look for, something that wouldn’t have been true a few years ago, even if Nadal wasn’t there.
Now, though, Ferrer needs to make that final jump that he seems close to making sometimes. He needs to be able to compete on the same level as the top 4. He needs to actually be considered a factor in those matches. It’s not quite fair against Nadal or Federer. They are just bad matchups for his style of play and they always will be. The zero victories against Federer statistic might not last forever, but he is at a distinct disadvantage against Roger even before the match begins. He has beaten Nadal before, but the same principle holds true. Nadal plays the same basic style as Ferrer; he’s just more powerful and plays it better.
What Ferrer really needs to do to compete with the top 4 is build up his mental toughness. And there have been encouraging signs. Beating Tipsarevic in a fifth-set tiebreak at last year’s US Open was both unexpected and encouraging. It showed a level of mental fortitude that Ferrer had seemed to severely lack for basically his entire career until then. Gutting out the epic five-set win over Almagro here in Melbourne was another very positive sign. At the age of 30, it’s not clear how many years Ferrer has left in which he can compete at his top physical form. What is clear, though, is that if he gets enough time to build up his game mentally we may have to keep him in mind with (or just a tiny bit below) the Big 4 at the beginning of Slams. The trajectory is clear. Before 2010, Ferrer was hit or miss at Slams, usually losing in the first 3 rounds. Since Wimbledon 2010, Ferrer has always reached the fourth round. He has reached 5 straight quarterfinals, with three of those being semifinals appearances (including this one). It’s a big jump to reach the level of the Big 4, but that is definitely the direction that Ferrer is heading towards at the moment. Whether he can reach that point is something that only time can tell.