Another clay season is here, which means that in a little over a month, almost the entire tennis world, if not the entire tennis world, expects to see Rafael Nadal hoisting the winner's trophy at Roland Garros for an 11th time.
And given Nadal's form in both the clay court Davis Cup matches he played, and in Monte Carlo, despite being fresh off from an injury, Nadal looks as dominant as he's ever been. In his Davis Cup and Monte Carlo matches, Nadal has won every set he has played. And not only that, but in every set he has played, the opponent has not gotten five games in a set, let alone winning a set.
And let's not pretend like Nadal's opponents have even been getting to four games in a set very often! Nadal played ten sets in Monte Carlo. Of those ten sets, only one set, the first set against Grigor Dimitrov in the Monte Carlo Semifinals, has had Nadal's opponent winning four games! However, Nadal's opponents have won zero or one game in a set three times! So Nadal has triple the number of sets where his opponents have won zero or one game compared to when his opponents have won four games (or more)! This includes Dominic Thiem, who beat Nadal in Rome last year, getting only two games in his match with Nadal, and Kei Nishikori winning only five games in the Final against Nadal.
So, how do you beat Nadal playing at this level on clay?
In Nadal's career, only two players have beaten Nadal at the French Open. In probably the biggest shocker in tennis history, Robin Soderling beat Rafa in four sets at the French Open in the 2009 Round of 16. And then, in 2015, Djokovic beat Nadal in straight sets in the Quarterfinals. But, Soderling is out of the game, and its unrealistic to believe that Djokovic, who has been injured for a lot of the previous year, to go onto Nadal's turf and beat the 10-time Roland Garros champion in a best-of-five match.
So, this leads me to my theory. I don't think a baseliner and/or a clay courter can beat Rafa at the French Open this year. For instance, Nishikori and Thiem are all talented baseliners with awesome groundstrokes and can put all kinds of pressure on opponents. Nishikori was up huge on Nadal in Madrid before leaving with injury, so while he might have the game to beat Nadal on clay, not only does his game have to be peaking and Nadal's game extremely mediocre, but he also has to navigate the best-of-five format. When Nishikori has played Nadal best-of-five, he has lost every set he has played, going 0-9 in sets in the three major meetings, which includes Nishikori winning eight games in three sets at the 2013 French Open.
Thiem beat Rafa in best-of-three at Rome last year, so he can beat Nadal on clay. But look what happened not only this year in Monte Carlo, when Rafa was not fatigued as he surely must have been in Rome this year, but also last year in his matchup with Nadal in the French Open Semifinals. In three sets, Thiem managed to win seven games, and the match included a 6-0 third set win for Nadal. These baseliners can give Nadal a fight, and possibly even beat him, in best-of-three, but playing on Nadal's turf in best-of-five is tough.
David Ferrer, a Roland Garros finalist and one of the best clay courter of this generation, has won one set in four matches against Nadal at the French Open. Even Roger Federer, who has won a record 20 majors, won only four sets in five matches at the French Open against Nadal.
So, my theory is that the best chance to beat Nadal at Roland Garros, a player needs to do a few things, which are MUCH easier said than done. First, a player must have a huge serve. As Nishikori learned yesterday against Nadal, not having a big serve to win a bunch of free points against Nadal on clay will just lead to absolutely brutal baseline rallies where a player might be able to sustain their game early, as Nishikori did have an early break *2-1 in the first set, but by the end of the match, the player is absolutely gassed by constantly chasing down Nadal's heavy-topspin shots. Again, look at Nishikori yesterday, by the end of the match, he had lost six of the final seven games. But, Nishikori was actually rare in the fact that he got a good start, as every other opponent in Monte Carlo last week was broken in their first service game of the match.
The player must not allow Nadal to establish a rhythm from the baseline. I think a big server with an aggressive baseline game has an advantage in this area too. Rallying with Nadal a lot gives him the rhythm he needs to feel comfortable and work the player around the court, so a player must absolutely crush any ball that is less short, as Thiem did in Rome last year and Soderling did at Roland Garros, because otherwise, Nadal will probably almost every rally ball back, creating a rhythm for himself. And once he has that rhythm, then he is nearly impossible to beat because of the high margins he creates for himself through his groundstrokes. This means that it is ok to go huge and miss groundstrokes! Even if a player misses some groundstrokes, its still creating the start-and-stop culture of the match needed to allow a player to beat Rafa.
So, as I've said, players must have a big serve allowing them to win and the player must not allow to establish a baseline rhythm. Part of the deal with this lack of baseline rhythm and big serving is for a player to come to the net as much as the player can. This, again, will make Nadal have to hit passing shots, and along with the big serving and with the player going for every groundstroke, will make Rafa feel uncomfortable. And that's the key, make Nadal uncomfortable and play your game, instead of playing his game. Of course, though, missing every groundstroke is also a losing strategy, so the player has to at least sometimes be making these high-risk groundstrokes.
Throughout the parts of Nadal's Monte Carlo matches that I watched, opponents were glued to the baseline playing Nadal's game, by coming to the net, hitting monster serves, and emphasizing short rallies, the right player can make Nadal extremely uncomfortable and potentially cause a huge upset at Roland Garros. I kind of think of a player doing this to be similar to what Mischa Zverev did to Andy Murray at the Australian Open in 2017. Murray wasn't able to play his game, and he ultimately lost in a shocker.
Obviously, though, belief is key, and if a player doesn't have belief that the player can challenge, and ultimately beat Nadal on clay, then when the player start to gain momentum in a match against clay, then whoever is playing Nadal will crumble. So, I think that having beaten, or coming close to beating Nadal on clay before will ultimately be necessary to beat Nadal at Roland Garros. I think that this belief is partially why Djokovic beat Nadal in the 2015 French Open is because of his five setter in the 2013 Roland Garros semifinal and how he took the first set against Rafa in the 2014 French Open Final. On a smaller scale, I also think that the reason why Thiem beat Nadal in Rome last year, aside from Nadal's fatigue, is because Thiem played Rafa so tight in the first set last year of the Madrid Final, ultimately losing that set 7-6(8). Thiem finally knew that he could beat Nadal on clay.
So, you might be asking, who has all of these traits? And one guy comes to my mind: John Isner. Yes, he isn't someone who immediately comes to mind when you think of a clay courter who can challenge Nadal, but if there is going to be someone who can beat Nadal, it's either Isner, or someone who plays very similar to Isner. But, I think it's Isner who can beat Nadal for a few reasons, all which are demonstrated in Isner's five-set loss to Nadal in the 2011 French Open First Round. And while Isner did lose in five sets, he was two points away from 5-5 in the fifth, where anything would have been possible.
In that video you will see exactly the things I am talking about. Isner came to the net as often as possible. This took away Nadal rhythm and forced him to hit passing shots, which he can obviously do, but given the power of the balls coming to him and the reach of Isner, made life extremely difficult for Rafa. You can also see in the video that Isner is just whacking his groundstrokes. Whenever John can, he is hitting absolutely huge groundstrokes and insists on playing his game, as opposed to playing Nadal's game.
The serving from John is absolutely huge. As mentioned before, something we saw in Monte Carlo last week is that opponents often got off to terrible starts against Nadal. By having a big serve like John's, it allowed him to stay in sets and hope the pressure got to Nadal. Both sets that went to tiebreakers in that match were won by Isner. If Nadal's opponent can use their huge serve to keep the player in a set, both when on serve and when down one break, then potentially Nadal will falter and that player can take advantage, in this case Isner.
This was even true in the fifth set, when Isner used his power game to just stick around the set, and had an opportunity at *5-4 to potentially break back when at 30-30. Sure, Nadal was getting a lot of Isner's serves back, but when he did, often, John was in a great position in the point.
John's groundstrokes need to be on-point, as they were in that match, and as they were in Miami, where he recently won his first Masters 1000 title over Alexander Zverev in the Final. John's groundstrokes were at a very high level throughout that tournament and when his game is working like it was in Miami, he is extremely difficult to beat. John's ground game can be lifted to a higher level than other big servers, such as Ivo Karlovic, which is why I think Isner has a much better shot than Karlovic to beat Nadal at the French Open: John's groundstrokes just have a higher ceiling than Karlovic's groundstrokes.
Now, of course I am not saying that John will assuredly beat Rafa should they matchup this year at the French Open. That would be incredibly ridiculous of me to say, and quite demeaning given Nadal's sensational pedigree. Isner did lose to Stevie Johnson in a third set tiebreaker in Houston last week in his second match, although that was his first clay court tournament of the year and given Isner's plentiful tiebreakers, sometimes losing close matches like that is to be expected. And I mean, Nadal is 7-0 against Isner, including a 3-0 record on clay. But, in two of three of John's matches with Rafa on clay, they did go the distance, including a three setter in Monte Carlo which included Nadal winning a very close first set tiebreaker. And Isner did reach the Semifinals of Rome last year, a tournament who's conditions are much like the French Open.
I am just talking about who has the best shot to beat Nadal at Roland Garros this year. And unless you have a fully healthy, all-time great with a two-handed backhand (i.e. the Djokovic of 2015), then it's extremely improbably for a baseline-oriented player to beat Nadal. That's why I give Isner the best shot. And Isner should have a lot of belief, given how close he was to beating Nadal at Roland Garros in 2011, and how recently won his first Masters 1000 event.
So, all I'm saying is to not dismiss John's chances, not to fall into the belief that the players who can beat Nadal have to be spectacular for years. All it takes is one match for a player like Isner to record an upset that rivals Nadal's loss to Robin Soderling.
I believe that John Isner is the biggest threat to beat Rafael Nadal at the French Open.
Showing posts with label Davis Cup. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Davis Cup. Show all posts
Monday, April 23, 2018
Saturday, December 23, 2017
Will Jack Sock Sustain His Success?
2017 in the tennis season concluded with many heart-warming stories. Lucas Pouille came through in the clutch to beat Steve Darcis in the decisive fifth rubber at Davis Cup. David Goffin finally seemed to turn a corner in his career, beating Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer in the ATP Finals, and then beating Lucas Pouille and Jo-Wilfred Tsonga in Davis Cup. Grigor Dimitrov played, arguably, the best week of tennis in his career when he took the ATP Finals crown, going undefeated in the process.
But, for me, the biggest story at the end of season was Jack Sock's emergence as a threat to anyone he plays and his incredible successes to close out what was, beforehand, a forgettable season. Before playing in the Masters 1000 event in Bercy, Sock hadn't played great tennis. He hadn't made the Semifinals of a tournament since Washington before the hard court, summer Masters 1000 tournaments, a tournament in which he managed to embarrass himself by questioning the surface on which the tournament was played. It seemed as if Sock would meekly finish out 2017 before looking to turn things around in the new year.
But, Jack was not going to accept that script. His game started to come together in his first match in Paris. Played off the main court, Jack took on Kyle Edmund in a rematch from an earlier meeting in Atlanta where Kyle easily took care of Sock 6-4, 6-1. And it looked as if Sock's season would be ending soon when Edmund took a 5-1 lead in the third set.
But, Jack did not quit. I've questioned Jack's work ethic in the past, but I must give him credit, in this match he did not give up. Watching the tiebreak, which ended 7-5 in Sock's favor, I couldn't get over the attacking, physical style of tennis he played. He wouldn't let Edmund really get into the tiebreak, despite the deceivingly-close score. Once Jack got the mini-break to lead 4-2 in the tiebreak, one could sense the match was over.
From there, Jack beat Lucas Pouille in straight sets before taking on Verdasco. Fernando won the first set in a tiebreak and, again, it would have been easy for Jack to mail it in and call it a season. But, again, Jack refused to go down. Sock dominated the last two sets for a three-set victory. Then Sock took down hometown favotite Julien Benneteau in straight sets before playing Filip Krajinovic in the Final.
It was surely tough on Jack to have to take on Krajinovic. Sock was seen as the heavy favorite in this match, and given that a trip to the ATP Finals, was on the line, this was surely mentally tough on him. But after losing a tight first set, Sock played the best tennis I've ever seen him play and easily won the final two sets. Sock had now won three matches in the tournament having lost the first set.
And, instead of resting on his laurels after such an impressive tournament, Sock kept up his high level of play in the ATP Finals. He played Roger Federer tough in his first match and then, with elimination lurking, he came back from a break down in the third set to beat Marin Cilic in a third set tiebreak.
Sock would then take on Alexander Zverev, a top three player in the world, with the winner advancing on to the Semifinals. Sock won the first set before playing a terrible second set and getting down a break in the third. In addition, Sock got a point penalty early in the third set. Everything was seemingly go against Jack and, once again, Jack could have just played out the cards and go into the offseason feeling good about himself.
But, Jack wouldn't give up. Jack came back and won the match 6-4, breaking for the in at 5-4 up, to go on to the Semifinals against Grigor Dimitrov. And while he lost the match, he still took the first set over Grigor and proved, once again, that he could compete against the best in the world. Jack Sock had proven to the world that he could be a force in the coming years.
But, will Jack Sock sustain his success? This is then natural question after such great success which, at least from an outside perspective, seems to have come out of nowhere. For Jack, I think the key to success is making sure that his fitness is high. That has been a question mark in the past, and it will be interesting to see if Jack continues to show a high level of fitness when not in the climate controlled conditions that indoor tennis produces.
Another interesting question is how Jack Sock handles the pressure of being the top American male tennis player. For a very long time, John Isner has been the top male American tennis player, and now Jack will be tasked with leading what was once the top country in male tennis. Jack seems like an easy-going guy, so the pressure that produces shouldn't be a problem for him, but it is a question that needs to be asked.
Something else to look for is whether or not Jack can consistently compete at the level he competed with at the end of the season. It's one thing to win a Masters 1000 event and then do well in the next tournament, but it's a whole different ball game to keep those successes coming. Earlier in the season, when Jack had some successes in Indian Wells and Miami, he followed that up with a disappointing loss to Jordan Thompson in Davis Cup.
And while he did make the Semifinals of Houston in the following tournament, he then didn't Semifinals of a tournament (nor win more than two matches in a tournament) until Washington, which was then followed by some more poor results. So, it will be interesting to see if Jack can get some sustained success to start 2018. If Jack starts off strong through the Australian Open, then thoughts of the next American grand slam champion will come into view.
He needs to have the right attitude, though. That outburst that I mentioned earlier is not the type of behavior typically seen in champions. Sock's game is not on the level of a guy like John McEnroe or Jimmy Connors, he can't be losing his focus on issues such as the condition of the court. But, I think that, given what we have seen at the end of the season, winning a slam is certainly a possibility.
With a continuation of good fitness and with a good attitude, I believe that Jack Sock can win at least one slam and sustain his success.
But, for me, the biggest story at the end of season was Jack Sock's emergence as a threat to anyone he plays and his incredible successes to close out what was, beforehand, a forgettable season. Before playing in the Masters 1000 event in Bercy, Sock hadn't played great tennis. He hadn't made the Semifinals of a tournament since Washington before the hard court, summer Masters 1000 tournaments, a tournament in which he managed to embarrass himself by questioning the surface on which the tournament was played. It seemed as if Sock would meekly finish out 2017 before looking to turn things around in the new year.
But, Jack was not going to accept that script. His game started to come together in his first match in Paris. Played off the main court, Jack took on Kyle Edmund in a rematch from an earlier meeting in Atlanta where Kyle easily took care of Sock 6-4, 6-1. And it looked as if Sock's season would be ending soon when Edmund took a 5-1 lead in the third set.
But, Jack did not quit. I've questioned Jack's work ethic in the past, but I must give him credit, in this match he did not give up. Watching the tiebreak, which ended 7-5 in Sock's favor, I couldn't get over the attacking, physical style of tennis he played. He wouldn't let Edmund really get into the tiebreak, despite the deceivingly-close score. Once Jack got the mini-break to lead 4-2 in the tiebreak, one could sense the match was over.
From there, Jack beat Lucas Pouille in straight sets before taking on Verdasco. Fernando won the first set in a tiebreak and, again, it would have been easy for Jack to mail it in and call it a season. But, again, Jack refused to go down. Sock dominated the last two sets for a three-set victory. Then Sock took down hometown favotite Julien Benneteau in straight sets before playing Filip Krajinovic in the Final.
It was surely tough on Jack to have to take on Krajinovic. Sock was seen as the heavy favorite in this match, and given that a trip to the ATP Finals, was on the line, this was surely mentally tough on him. But after losing a tight first set, Sock played the best tennis I've ever seen him play and easily won the final two sets. Sock had now won three matches in the tournament having lost the first set.
And, instead of resting on his laurels after such an impressive tournament, Sock kept up his high level of play in the ATP Finals. He played Roger Federer tough in his first match and then, with elimination lurking, he came back from a break down in the third set to beat Marin Cilic in a third set tiebreak.
Sock would then take on Alexander Zverev, a top three player in the world, with the winner advancing on to the Semifinals. Sock won the first set before playing a terrible second set and getting down a break in the third. In addition, Sock got a point penalty early in the third set. Everything was seemingly go against Jack and, once again, Jack could have just played out the cards and go into the offseason feeling good about himself.
But, Jack wouldn't give up. Jack came back and won the match 6-4, breaking for the in at 5-4 up, to go on to the Semifinals against Grigor Dimitrov. And while he lost the match, he still took the first set over Grigor and proved, once again, that he could compete against the best in the world. Jack Sock had proven to the world that he could be a force in the coming years.
But, will Jack Sock sustain his success? This is then natural question after such great success which, at least from an outside perspective, seems to have come out of nowhere. For Jack, I think the key to success is making sure that his fitness is high. That has been a question mark in the past, and it will be interesting to see if Jack continues to show a high level of fitness when not in the climate controlled conditions that indoor tennis produces.
Another interesting question is how Jack Sock handles the pressure of being the top American male tennis player. For a very long time, John Isner has been the top male American tennis player, and now Jack will be tasked with leading what was once the top country in male tennis. Jack seems like an easy-going guy, so the pressure that produces shouldn't be a problem for him, but it is a question that needs to be asked.
Something else to look for is whether or not Jack can consistently compete at the level he competed with at the end of the season. It's one thing to win a Masters 1000 event and then do well in the next tournament, but it's a whole different ball game to keep those successes coming. Earlier in the season, when Jack had some successes in Indian Wells and Miami, he followed that up with a disappointing loss to Jordan Thompson in Davis Cup.
And while he did make the Semifinals of Houston in the following tournament, he then didn't Semifinals of a tournament (nor win more than two matches in a tournament) until Washington, which was then followed by some more poor results. So, it will be interesting to see if Jack can get some sustained success to start 2018. If Jack starts off strong through the Australian Open, then thoughts of the next American grand slam champion will come into view.
He needs to have the right attitude, though. That outburst that I mentioned earlier is not the type of behavior typically seen in champions. Sock's game is not on the level of a guy like John McEnroe or Jimmy Connors, he can't be losing his focus on issues such as the condition of the court. But, I think that, given what we have seen at the end of the season, winning a slam is certainly a possibility.
With a continuation of good fitness and with a good attitude, I believe that Jack Sock can win at least one slam and sustain his success.
Monday, July 18, 2016
United States Davis Cup Disappointment: What Went Wrong and What's Next?
The entire situation was sort of surreal. The United States couldn't possibly have blown a 2-0 lead in the best-of-five Davis Cup, could they have? As I sat last night pondering what happened in the United States-Croatia Davis Cup Quarterfinals, I just couldn't wrap my brain around the total collapse that occurred for the United States in this competition. And, when you combine the collapse with the reality of the current state of American male tennis, it makes the loss all the more frustrating.
The Davis Cup campaign for the US men started out promising. After losing in the Round of 16 of the World Group to Great Britain the past two years, in 2016, the team won their Round of 16 tie against Australia, beating the Australians in their home country on the grass in four matches. John Isner beat Sam Groth, the Bryan Brothers won the doubles match in five sets, and the Isner took down Bernard Tomic to win the tie for the Americans. This was a huge win for the United States, as a very winnable next tie against Croatia loomed.
The tie against Crotia started out amazingly well for the United States. After losing the first two sets, Jack Sock proceeded to win the next three to beat Marin Cilic in a dramatic five set victory to give America a 1-0 lead in the tie. Considering how Cilic also lost in five sets to Roger Federer in his previous match at Wimbledon (also leading two sets to none), this was a greatly damaging loss to his psyche. John Isner then took the second rubber of the tie over Borna Coric in three fairly straight-forward sets to give the United States a commanding lead.
In my mind, and I imagine in the minds of many American tennis fans and even the players, it was a matter of "when" rather than "if" in regards to when the United States would finish off this tie, with the Bryan Brothers having a great shot to win the doubles rubber and make sure there would not be a live rubber on Sunday. This is when things went awry.
Bob and Mike Bryan took on Ivan Dodig and Marin Cilic in the doubles rubber. The Bryans, obviously, are doubles legends. They have won 16 doubles majors, and an Olympic goal together, while also winning 11 mixed doubles majors split between the two (Bob with seven mixed titles and Mike with four). It is a great luxury for the United States to be able to put such an amazing doubles team out there every time Davis Cup rolls around, and it is almost to be expected that America will take the doubles rubber.
It must be said that Ivan Dodig was a player not to be underestimated. He has been as high as number four in the world in doubles, and won the 2015 French Open with Marcelo Melo. However, Dodig's doubles partner in this match, Marin Cilic, scarcely plays doubles, as shown by his doubles ranking of number 256 in the world. Therefore, presumably, he would be the major weakness on the court. However, that did not turn out to be the case.
Instead, it was Mike Bryan who was the weak spot out there, causing major issue for the American squad. With a serve that was broken often, and which I could not say was even at the level of serve you'd see on the ATP Challenger Tour, while doing enough with the rest of his game to make up for his serving deficiencies, it was a disastrous day for Mike. It was very upsetting watching the match, as the Bryan Brothers as a tandem have clearly lost a step out there, which an experienced doubles player like Dodig was quick to exploit. And while Cilic played well, the Bryans just couldn't seem to put him in tough positions at the net, which might have also allowed his recent best-of-five issues to enter the front of his mind. But, In the end, Dodig/Cilic won the match in four sets, and the tie would go on to Sunday.
I must say, my expectations for John Isner beating a rejuvenated Marin Cilic were not high. I thought John had a chance, and certainly felt like he would take a set, but Cilic is a singles major champion and certainly not someone to be underestimated. John, however, put in a slightly disheartening performance, losing in straights sets, and only even being able to reach a tiebreak in the first set. In that first set John had a set point on Cilic's serve in the tiebreak, but couldn't convert, as Cilic managed to win the point after initially being on the defensive. In the second and third sets, Isner's huge serve was broken. Isner also never managed to break Cilic's big serve, losing out on his first, and only break chance. The tie was all-square, two apiece.
It seemed, to me, as if Isner felt he had done his job when he beat Coric on Friday, and never truly believed that he had what it took to beat Cilic. And this same lack of belief is what makes it disappointing that John pulled out of the Olympics and an ATP 250 event in Atlanta instead. It seems as if John's thinking is, "I don't think I can beat those top guys, so why try?" And I believe it is this type of mindset which has hindered John throughout his career, and was in full display yesterday, once more, against Marin.
The fifth rubber was between Jack Sock and Borna Coric. Sock came into the match with all of the momentum with his huge comeback victory over Cilic. That was the type of match which changes a career, as Sock not only beat a major champion in the best-of-five format, but did so when the odds were certainly against him. I expected him to come into this match oozing with confidence. And against Coric, a solid player, but not a guy with big weapons, I thought that Jack would be able to dictate play and pull out the victory. However, from the very start, Sock looked very low-energy out there, as if he were physically done from the match against Cilic.
All Coric really had to do was play good defense, get balls back in play, and wait for Sock to implode. The forehand that Jack is known for did not have the same bite as we are accustomed to seeing. And, I believe, it all stems back to Jack's fitness. I have been very critical of Sock in the past for not being fit enough to compete at the highest level on tour. His performances in Atlanta last year and in the Houston Final this year were a real indicator that Jack needs to be working harder on his fitness. Yesterday was yet another example of how he needs to be in better shape. Now, it seems like adrenaline during the Cilic match is what got him through that match, and when that adrenaline was gone, Sock could not handle the physical demands of another best-of-five match, especially against a defensive-minded Coric. Borna won the match in four sets, winning tie for Croatia 3-2. Croatia moved on to the Davis Cup Semifinals.
So, what can be done to make sure that a disappointing tie like this never happens again? I think that the United States should adjust who is playing on the team. I will start off by saying that I think that the Bryans should get to continue to play the doubles rubber until they retire. They have earned the right to have this opportunity, and there is no other American doubles player that is good enough to even approach the current level of Mike and Bob Bryan.
However, I would put different players in for John Isner and Jack Sock. I think American tennis should start looking to the future. Players such as Taylor Fritz, Frances Tiafoe, Stefan Kozlov, and Tommy Paul should be given an early start playing for the United States Davis Cup team. Yes, these guys might not be winning matches immediately, but they are the building blocks for American tennis, and while the United States might not win the Davis Cup this year, if you allow young players such as Fritz, Tiafoe, Kozlov, and Paul to get Davis Cup experience early in their careers, then this will be beneficial for years down the road, and maybe in five years the United States can win Davis Cup once more.
Putting some of these young players out there might not be a popular choice, initially. I understand that, but with the game that these young Americans have shown, I think they could surprise some folks, possibly even winning a round or two next year, if a combination of these four players, based on the surface played on, were the singles players for the United States Davis Cup team next season.
But, even if you don't like my idea for how to change up the United States Davis Cup team, based on the disappointment this past weekend, it is quite clear that a change of some sort, either with in regards to who is in the lineup or who is our captain, must occur.
The Davis Cup campaign for the US men started out promising. After losing in the Round of 16 of the World Group to Great Britain the past two years, in 2016, the team won their Round of 16 tie against Australia, beating the Australians in their home country on the grass in four matches. John Isner beat Sam Groth, the Bryan Brothers won the doubles match in five sets, and the Isner took down Bernard Tomic to win the tie for the Americans. This was a huge win for the United States, as a very winnable next tie against Croatia loomed.
The tie against Crotia started out amazingly well for the United States. After losing the first two sets, Jack Sock proceeded to win the next three to beat Marin Cilic in a dramatic five set victory to give America a 1-0 lead in the tie. Considering how Cilic also lost in five sets to Roger Federer in his previous match at Wimbledon (also leading two sets to none), this was a greatly damaging loss to his psyche. John Isner then took the second rubber of the tie over Borna Coric in three fairly straight-forward sets to give the United States a commanding lead.
In my mind, and I imagine in the minds of many American tennis fans and even the players, it was a matter of "when" rather than "if" in regards to when the United States would finish off this tie, with the Bryan Brothers having a great shot to win the doubles rubber and make sure there would not be a live rubber on Sunday. This is when things went awry.
Bob and Mike Bryan took on Ivan Dodig and Marin Cilic in the doubles rubber. The Bryans, obviously, are doubles legends. They have won 16 doubles majors, and an Olympic goal together, while also winning 11 mixed doubles majors split between the two (Bob with seven mixed titles and Mike with four). It is a great luxury for the United States to be able to put such an amazing doubles team out there every time Davis Cup rolls around, and it is almost to be expected that America will take the doubles rubber.
It must be said that Ivan Dodig was a player not to be underestimated. He has been as high as number four in the world in doubles, and won the 2015 French Open with Marcelo Melo. However, Dodig's doubles partner in this match, Marin Cilic, scarcely plays doubles, as shown by his doubles ranking of number 256 in the world. Therefore, presumably, he would be the major weakness on the court. However, that did not turn out to be the case.
Instead, it was Mike Bryan who was the weak spot out there, causing major issue for the American squad. With a serve that was broken often, and which I could not say was even at the level of serve you'd see on the ATP Challenger Tour, while doing enough with the rest of his game to make up for his serving deficiencies, it was a disastrous day for Mike. It was very upsetting watching the match, as the Bryan Brothers as a tandem have clearly lost a step out there, which an experienced doubles player like Dodig was quick to exploit. And while Cilic played well, the Bryans just couldn't seem to put him in tough positions at the net, which might have also allowed his recent best-of-five issues to enter the front of his mind. But, In the end, Dodig/Cilic won the match in four sets, and the tie would go on to Sunday.
I must say, my expectations for John Isner beating a rejuvenated Marin Cilic were not high. I thought John had a chance, and certainly felt like he would take a set, but Cilic is a singles major champion and certainly not someone to be underestimated. John, however, put in a slightly disheartening performance, losing in straights sets, and only even being able to reach a tiebreak in the first set. In that first set John had a set point on Cilic's serve in the tiebreak, but couldn't convert, as Cilic managed to win the point after initially being on the defensive. In the second and third sets, Isner's huge serve was broken. Isner also never managed to break Cilic's big serve, losing out on his first, and only break chance. The tie was all-square, two apiece.
It seemed, to me, as if Isner felt he had done his job when he beat Coric on Friday, and never truly believed that he had what it took to beat Cilic. And this same lack of belief is what makes it disappointing that John pulled out of the Olympics and an ATP 250 event in Atlanta instead. It seems as if John's thinking is, "I don't think I can beat those top guys, so why try?" And I believe it is this type of mindset which has hindered John throughout his career, and was in full display yesterday, once more, against Marin.
The fifth rubber was between Jack Sock and Borna Coric. Sock came into the match with all of the momentum with his huge comeback victory over Cilic. That was the type of match which changes a career, as Sock not only beat a major champion in the best-of-five format, but did so when the odds were certainly against him. I expected him to come into this match oozing with confidence. And against Coric, a solid player, but not a guy with big weapons, I thought that Jack would be able to dictate play and pull out the victory. However, from the very start, Sock looked very low-energy out there, as if he were physically done from the match against Cilic.
All Coric really had to do was play good defense, get balls back in play, and wait for Sock to implode. The forehand that Jack is known for did not have the same bite as we are accustomed to seeing. And, I believe, it all stems back to Jack's fitness. I have been very critical of Sock in the past for not being fit enough to compete at the highest level on tour. His performances in Atlanta last year and in the Houston Final this year were a real indicator that Jack needs to be working harder on his fitness. Yesterday was yet another example of how he needs to be in better shape. Now, it seems like adrenaline during the Cilic match is what got him through that match, and when that adrenaline was gone, Sock could not handle the physical demands of another best-of-five match, especially against a defensive-minded Coric. Borna won the match in four sets, winning tie for Croatia 3-2. Croatia moved on to the Davis Cup Semifinals.
So, what can be done to make sure that a disappointing tie like this never happens again? I think that the United States should adjust who is playing on the team. I will start off by saying that I think that the Bryans should get to continue to play the doubles rubber until they retire. They have earned the right to have this opportunity, and there is no other American doubles player that is good enough to even approach the current level of Mike and Bob Bryan.
However, I would put different players in for John Isner and Jack Sock. I think American tennis should start looking to the future. Players such as Taylor Fritz, Frances Tiafoe, Stefan Kozlov, and Tommy Paul should be given an early start playing for the United States Davis Cup team. Yes, these guys might not be winning matches immediately, but they are the building blocks for American tennis, and while the United States might not win the Davis Cup this year, if you allow young players such as Fritz, Tiafoe, Kozlov, and Paul to get Davis Cup experience early in their careers, then this will be beneficial for years down the road, and maybe in five years the United States can win Davis Cup once more.
Putting some of these young players out there might not be a popular choice, initially. I understand that, but with the game that these young Americans have shown, I think they could surprise some folks, possibly even winning a round or two next year, if a combination of these four players, based on the surface played on, were the singles players for the United States Davis Cup team next season.
But, even if you don't like my idea for how to change up the United States Davis Cup team, based on the disappointment this past weekend, it is quite clear that a change of some sort, either with in regards to who is in the lineup or who is our captain, must occur.
Monday, May 18, 2015
So, Who is the Favorite at the French Open for the Men?
So, a major debate going on in the tennis world right now is: Who is the real men's favorite to win Roland Garros this season? Let's dig in.
Possible Favorites:
-Andy Murray: You might be thinking to yourself, "Huh? Not possible." But, I'm being dead serious when I include Murray in this section. Andy has been spectacular this clay season. After entering the clay court swing with no titles on the surface, he exits with two trophies and zero losses. He first won the title at the BMW Open in Munich, Germany. On the way he beat some pretty good clay court (and overall) players in Goffin, Bautista Agut, and Kohlscreiber (in a Monday Final!). Then Murray quickly went to Spain and played some of the best tennis, in my opinion, that he's ever played on any surface. He dismissed the new generation in Raonic and Nisikori, both in straight sets, and then rocked Rafael Nadal, only giving up five games in the process. Andy Murray has earned his place on my unimportant blog!
-Novak Djokovic: This guy is just incredible. After having won the Australian Open, Indian Wells, and Miami on hard courts, Novak continued his success on the clay. He then went on to Win Monte Carlo (also destroying Nadal, only losing six games to him) and then went on to win Madrid, beating clay courters like Almagro and Ferrer and also beating all-court players like Federer and Nishikori to complete a perfect clay court season (him and Murray either played different events or Murray withdrew). Djokovic also has the claim that he made the Final of the French Open in two of the past three seasons, with seemingly only Rafa being able to stop him.
-Rafael Nadal: I don't even think I have to say a word here. Seriously. This guy has won nine of the past ten French Opens (2005-2014 sans 2009) and has utterly dominated other clay tournaments in past years with zero mercy. Rafa is a clay legend. But, while he did pick up a clay 250 in Buenos Aires, Rafa has not done as well this clay court season. He made the Round of 16 in Barcelona, quarters in Rome, semis in Rio and Monte Carlo, and the Final in Madrid. For a lot of people, that is a great clay season, but not for Rafa. It also was the way he meekly went out in a lot of those matches (such as Murray in Madrid and Wawrinka in Rome) that has a lot of tennis fans worried.
So, who do I think the favorite is? Let me first rule out Andy. Although he has played really well this season, I can't get over how he had zero clay titles before 2015. While Andy has GREATLY improved on the surface, it's too big of a stretch to say that he goes from not having even won a 250 on clay to the favorite for the French Open. He might make a run, but until Novak and Rafa are out, he won't be the favorite. That leads us Djokovic and Nadal. A lot of tennis "pundits" think that Novak is the favorite, and while I can't fault them for their choice (he has played AMAZING this season), I'm sticking with Rafa.
First off, I can't get over how Rafa is a nine-time champion at a MAJOR and has won 90% of the major champions in Paris over the last ten years! Just think about that. 90%! So, that brings with it a lot of psychological advantages, which I think the media is too quick to say is escaping from Nadal. On top of that, Djokovic has won 0 majors on the surface, which says a lot about how he performs in Paris, NOT how performs on clay. In addition, Nadal is 6-0 against Djokovic in best-of-five on clay (Davis Cup and FO, excluding a Djoker retirement). The main court at Roland Garros, Philippe Chatrier, also suits Nadal perfectly, giving him A LOT of room to move around, which is super important for Rafa's game. Rafa also has the uncanny ability to grind an opponent down in best-of-five which one cannot see in a best-of-three clay court event. Finally, when I was looking at Djokovic's past results at RG, I noticed that every one of his losing matches from 2010-2014 were in four or five sets. What does that tell me? It shows me that Djokovic can play extremely well on the surface, but despite having extraordinary conditioning, on clay he just wears down. It's not that he's being outclassed, he's just wearing down. And that is a disturbing trend.
So, there you have it! Let me know in the comments if you agree or disagree with what I've had to say!
Possible Favorites:
-Andy Murray: You might be thinking to yourself, "Huh? Not possible." But, I'm being dead serious when I include Murray in this section. Andy has been spectacular this clay season. After entering the clay court swing with no titles on the surface, he exits with two trophies and zero losses. He first won the title at the BMW Open in Munich, Germany. On the way he beat some pretty good clay court (and overall) players in Goffin, Bautista Agut, and Kohlscreiber (in a Monday Final!). Then Murray quickly went to Spain and played some of the best tennis, in my opinion, that he's ever played on any surface. He dismissed the new generation in Raonic and Nisikori, both in straight sets, and then rocked Rafael Nadal, only giving up five games in the process. Andy Murray has earned his place on my unimportant blog!
-Novak Djokovic: This guy is just incredible. After having won the Australian Open, Indian Wells, and Miami on hard courts, Novak continued his success on the clay. He then went on to Win Monte Carlo (also destroying Nadal, only losing six games to him) and then went on to win Madrid, beating clay courters like Almagro and Ferrer and also beating all-court players like Federer and Nishikori to complete a perfect clay court season (him and Murray either played different events or Murray withdrew). Djokovic also has the claim that he made the Final of the French Open in two of the past three seasons, with seemingly only Rafa being able to stop him.
-Rafael Nadal: I don't even think I have to say a word here. Seriously. This guy has won nine of the past ten French Opens (2005-2014 sans 2009) and has utterly dominated other clay tournaments in past years with zero mercy. Rafa is a clay legend. But, while he did pick up a clay 250 in Buenos Aires, Rafa has not done as well this clay court season. He made the Round of 16 in Barcelona, quarters in Rome, semis in Rio and Monte Carlo, and the Final in Madrid. For a lot of people, that is a great clay season, but not for Rafa. It also was the way he meekly went out in a lot of those matches (such as Murray in Madrid and Wawrinka in Rome) that has a lot of tennis fans worried.
So, who do I think the favorite is? Let me first rule out Andy. Although he has played really well this season, I can't get over how he had zero clay titles before 2015. While Andy has GREATLY improved on the surface, it's too big of a stretch to say that he goes from not having even won a 250 on clay to the favorite for the French Open. He might make a run, but until Novak and Rafa are out, he won't be the favorite. That leads us Djokovic and Nadal. A lot of tennis "pundits" think that Novak is the favorite, and while I can't fault them for their choice (he has played AMAZING this season), I'm sticking with Rafa.
First off, I can't get over how Rafa is a nine-time champion at a MAJOR and has won 90% of the major champions in Paris over the last ten years! Just think about that. 90%! So, that brings with it a lot of psychological advantages, which I think the media is too quick to say is escaping from Nadal. On top of that, Djokovic has won 0 majors on the surface, which says a lot about how he performs in Paris, NOT how performs on clay. In addition, Nadal is 6-0 against Djokovic in best-of-five on clay (Davis Cup and FO, excluding a Djoker retirement). The main court at Roland Garros, Philippe Chatrier, also suits Nadal perfectly, giving him A LOT of room to move around, which is super important for Rafa's game. Rafa also has the uncanny ability to grind an opponent down in best-of-five which one cannot see in a best-of-three clay court event. Finally, when I was looking at Djokovic's past results at RG, I noticed that every one of his losing matches from 2010-2014 were in four or five sets. What does that tell me? It shows me that Djokovic can play extremely well on the surface, but despite having extraordinary conditioning, on clay he just wears down. It's not that he's being outclassed, he's just wearing down. And that is a disturbing trend.
So, there you have it! Let me know in the comments if you agree or disagree with what I've had to say!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)