About the US Open Final

I wanted to use this space in my blog as a post-mortem of sorts on the US Open final and the US Open more generally. I will then look have a quick look to the rest of the season on the ATP Tour for Nadal and Medvedev. There were lots of different storylines and levels of intrigue that came with both the players involved and the actual play on the court that I want to try to untangle for myself, more than anyone else.

Before this North American hard court season, many tennis fans knew Daniil Medvedev more for a racist incident, throwing coins at a chair umpire, and telling off Stefanos Tsitsipas than for what he could produce on the court. The rapid development of his game was partially obscured by these incidents, but also by other young breakthrough, such as Denis Shapovalov beating Rafael Nadal in Montreal 2017 and Stefanos Tsitsipas defeating at the Australian Open 2019.

Medvedev patiently waited for his turn in the spotlight. He wasn't putting up bad results by any means. He had won his first three ATP Tour titles in 2018, including a 500 event, and won his fourth title in February of this year. Stefanos Tsitsipas still hasn't won above a 250 yet, but because he got that big win over Federer at the Australian Open on his ways to the semifinals, people looked at him differently.

At Wimbledon, Medvedev lost a third round match to David Goffin 7-5 in the fifth. Medvedev was up two sets to one and was up a break in the fifth set. With a round of 16 matchup against the mercurial Fernando Verdasco next, this seemed like a lost opportunity for Medvedev. That elusive slam quarterfinal slipped out of Daniil's grasps. Now, despite having lost 6-4 in the final to Nadal, the story is quite different.

Tennis fans knew from the way he battled Novak Djokovic in a very physical four-set match at the Australian Open this year that Medvedev played a physical style, but I don't suspect many (myself included) realized just what great shape he had gotten himself in. An ESPN graphic last night showed that Medvedev had never won a five-set match in his life. So, it seems almost like an oxymoron to proclaim what great shape he is in, given that he has never summited the hardest physical test in the sport. However, having watched him the past few weeks, I can't help but feel that way.

Since his first match in Washington on July 30th, Medvedev has played 23 matches of tennis.  That's 60 sets of tennis. He's won 20 of those matches and 48 of those sets, taking home a Masters 1000 title and runner-up trophies at another Masters 1000 and a 500 event. The US Open was by far the most demanding of him, only winning two of his seven matches in straight sets, and playing a total of 27 sets. Medvedev was cramping up against Dellien, down a set and a break against Koepfer, and down two sets and a break against one of the greatest fighters in the history of the game, Rafael Nadal.

That's damn impressive.

Speaking of Nadal, of course I want to devote a lot of space to him. I have to admit I am a Federer fan, but it's hard not to respect a player like Nadal. Nadal is sometimes looked at as if he is weak on grass and hard courts. Yet, that could not be further from the case. The guy has two Wimbledon titles and, now, five hard court majors. Take out the French Open and that's still the resume of an all-time great.

Nadal won two of those majors, the 2017 US Open and 2019 US Open, after the age of 30. It's not like he's only winning these titles off of clay when he's young. At the 2017 US Open, Nadal dropped three sets over the course of the entire tournament, and was never pushed to five sets. This year, including a withdrawal, Nadal was pushed to five sets once, accounting for two of his three sets lost. And losing two sets to Medvedev in this form is nothing to be ashamed of.

Despite an extensive injury history, Nadal's major results this year of an Australian Open final (loss to Djokovic), French Open title, Wimbledon semifinal (loss to Federer), and US Open title is unbelievable. Nadal's been injured much more than Federer over the course of his career, so despite the difference in age, it's just as impressive what Nadal is doing at 33 as what Federer is doing at 37/38. But, I'm going to try to refrain from making comparisons with Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic, because it's better to just sit back and watch the incredible things that these three players can do.

Nadal's results aren't confined to majors, either, not by any means. Since turning 31, Nadal has also won five Masters 1000 titles, including two on hard courts. He's won a couple 500 events too, including a hard court win at the China Open. In other words, Nadal has been impressive both at the majors and at regular tour events, and not just on clay.

Everything that's to say about Nadal has already been said, so I'll leave my gushing of his career at that.

So, what about the match specifically yesterday? As Nadal was on his way of going up two sets to love, I thought that it might be in his best interest to do what won him his match against Djokovic in Cincinnati, and red-line. I felt like Nadal was wearing Medvedev down and that Medvedev was partially doing this to himself with his poor court positioning, frequently putting himself well behind the baseline.

Now, this isn't to say that Medvedev can't get depth on the ball from such a position. One of the most remarkable things that continued to surprise me during his summer run, until I came to expect it, was the depth Medvedev was able to hit from tough positions on the court. It was amazing how consistently Medvedev was able to get the ball deep from areas that you would expect him to hit short balls. Of course this type of court positioning did open up Medvedev to do more running, as Nadal was able to pull him around the court, but until the last ball was played, it felt that even if Medvedev's fuel tank was around empty, that he was always right near a gas station.

Nadal looked wearier and wearier as the match went on, but at the age of 33, it is absolutely remarkable what great shape he was in. Playing a 23 year-old didn't phase Nadal, he is still one of the most fit players on tour. The match yesterday lasted nearly five hours, yet Nadal was still chasing balls down, making ridiculous defensive plays when necessary, and covering the court so well that even though you knew Nadal was exhausted, you also knew there was no way his body was going to give out anytime soon. What helped make this match special was that both players were visibly exhausted, yet forged on.

Down two sets and a break against Nadal is usually curtains, but the mental and physical resolve that Medvedev showed to come back and win those two sets is why it's hard to take his five-set record that seriously at this point. No, he hasn't won a five set match, but as crazy as it is to say, that doesn't matter. How he almost came back from two breaks down in the fifth, having a break point to get back to five all, is the cherry on top in terms of seeing him as more fit than almost any other player on tour. Don't forget about how much tennis he's played before this.

The match, besides the physical challenges, featured some awesome tennis. The angles, variety, rally tolerance, and precision that both players showed was world-class and an absolute treat to watch. There's drama because a match is going on for a long time and drama because both players are at an extremely high level and it's exciting to see who's tennis comes out on top. This match was both of those. Again, a showing of how best-of-five should never leave the majors.

So, Nadal won his 19th major, putting him one behind Federer for most of all-time. Given the head-to-head, especially with how Nadal is winning more and more majors off of clay, it would be very hard to put Federer above Nadal in terms of the "Greatest of All Time" rankings if Nadal ends up with equal or more majors. However, Federer I think still has a major or two left in him (he was a point away at Wimbledon this year) and Djokovic might end up passing both. But, again, let's stray away from the "Greatest of all Time" debate and look at this more as the "Era Where The Three Best Ever Players Played."

So, how does the rest of the season play out? I don't see Nadal playing much. He's supposed to play Laver Cup, but let's see what happens. Maybe Shanghai and/or Paris, along with the ATP Tour Finals? Medvedev has a packed schedule, but who knows if he will end up playing all of these. He definitely will want to rest more, maybe only playing mandatory events, so he doesn't wear himself out, a la Dominic Thiem in years past.

The season feels over, but it isn't. There's still tournaments to be played, money and points to be won.

But, if the last big memory of the 2019 season is the US Open final, then I'm glad it will be of Nadal and Medvedev battling it out.

Men's US Open Draw Thoughts

The US Open is almost here! We have reached the final major of the 2019 season and players will have one more chance to win a grand slam before the season's end. While in previous blog posts this season, I have done draw breakdowns for the majors, I am going to stray a little from that here. I will be giving my general thoughts about the draw first, before moving on to predictions a very brief analysis.


Don't Be Surprised If:

1. The Big 3 are in the semifinals of a major again

You definitely shouldn't be surprised by this, but I'm just putting it in here for completeness' sake. The Big 3, consisting of Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer, and Rafael Nadal, are head-and-shoulders above the rest of the field in the best-of-five format. During both the French Open and Wimbledon, three of the four semifinalists were the members of the Big 3, and 5 of the 6 major finalists this season were members of the Big 3. It just doesn't seem fair, but it's reality.

Beating these guys during majors, where the best-of-five format takes away some of the variability in results, has been close to impossible for the vast majority of the field. Sure, a guy like Kyrgios could theoretically do it, but what are the chances he even makes it to the first Big 3 member he would face, Rafael Nadal, in the semifinals? Very slim.

2. Grigor Dimitrov has a very good tournament

Dimitrov has been at the butt of jokes this year, given his horrid form, losing seven of his previous eight non-exhibition matches, with a close win over Steve Johnson in Los Cabos his only win. But, with that said, he looked much better last week in Cincinnati against Wawrinka, coming within a tiebreak of beating the three-time major champion.

Dimitrov's draw is also very favorable. Getting an out-of-form Andreas Seppi in the first round is not bad at all, and the potential seeds he would face are not the most intimidating group to play right now (Borna Coric, Milos Raonic, and Kei Nishikori). Raonic retired from his last match in Montreal with injury, while Coric and Nishikori both did not look to be near their best form in Cincinnati. If Dimitrov can beat Seppi and gain some momentum, he could play himself in the form he needs to make a deep run.

3. Alexander Zverev and Stefanos Tsitsipas Both Lose in the First Round

No. 5 seed Alexander Zverev has a very tough first round opponent in Radu Albot. Having won a hard court ATP title in Delray Beach and having had a solid summer hard court, Albot won't be an easy out for Zverev. Albot recently beat Marin Cilic in Cincinnati, getting a ton of balls back in play and counterpunching well. Zverev might feel the need to try to end points early and get some more juice on his serve. This might not be the best idea, given that he hit 20 double faults in his previous match in Cincinnati against Miomir Kecmanovic. Zverev has also not adjusted to the best-of-five format as well as his ranking and other accolades would suggest. He's never been past the quarterfinals of a major, and never been to the quarterfinals away from Roland Garros.

No. 8 seed Stefanos Tsitsipas is at a bit of a summer standstill. He's just 3-3 since Wimbledon and has lost his last three matches. He faces one of the most dangerous floaters in the draw, Andrey Rublev. Rublev made the quarterfinals of Cincinnati, beating Roger Federer along the way. In addition, Rublev went to the quarterfinals of Winston-Salem before eventually losing to Denis Shapovalov. This feels like the makings of an upset with Rublev high in confidence, and Tsitsipas lower in confidence. While following the French Open, it seemed the gulf between these players was massive, it does not feel that way anymore.

4. Roberto Bautista Agut Gets to Another Slam Semifinal

Roberto Bautista Agut surprised many when he reached the Wimbledon semifinal, but perhaps, the only thing surprising about it was that his first major semifinal was on grass instead of hard (his best surface). Roberto Bautista Agut's game isn't based on hot shots, or blowing his opponents off the court, but instead is based on consistency, placement, and patience. Bautista Agut hits a fairly flat ball, spreads his shots around the court well, and waits for his opening to attack. Bautista Agut's speed around court is also very impressive and opponents often will press too hard in an effort to get balls past him, trying to create openings when there aren't any available.

Bautista Agut's draw is manageable. The draw in his 16th of the draw is Matteo Berrettini, who is out of form, and who might not even make it to Bautista Agut in the third round. A potential round of 16 match against Rublev, Tsitsipas, or Kyrgios wouldn't be easy, but you I expect Bautista Agut to out-grind any of the players mentioned. A matchup with Thiem or Monfils in the quarterfinals would also be tough. Thiem and Monfils, however, has not been hot-and-cold recently. Monfils did beat Bautista Agut in the Montreal quarterfinal, but I don't trust his fitness over the course of a best-of-five match.

5. Qualifier Hyeon Chung Plays Rafael Nadal Close in the Third Round

Current World No. 151 Hyeon Chung has been injured for much of the past year, but when he's playing well, he's an extremely difficult player to deal with. Chung is best known for making the semifinals of the 2018 Australian Open, beating Novak Djokovic along the way in straight sets. Chung has won nine Challenger titles in his career, no easy feat, including a straight sets win over Yuichi Sugita in Chengdu during his comeback earlier this month.

During qualifying, Chung destroyed his opponents, giving up no more than three games in a set and easily advancing to the main draw. It's clear that Chung is quickly elevating his game up to levels of his past. Chung's game is effective due to his footspeed, anticipation, and footwork, especially on hard courts. He has good strength, as well, often getting power on balls that he initially looks out of position to get a good hit on.

Chung's first round against Ernesto Escobedo won't be easy. Escobedo recently won a Challenger title himself and when his game is clicking, can hit opponents off of the court. However, I expect Chung to counterpunch well in that match and come through it. In the second round, Chung would play either Fernando Verdasco or Tobias Kamke. Verdasco retired from his most recent match in Cincinnati against Benoit Paire and is not in the best form coming into this tournament. Kamke is also a qualifier and doesn't have the weapons to beat Chung.

Then, in the third round, there would most likely be a showdown between Hyeon Chung and Rafael Nadal. While Nadal certainly looked impressive in winning Toronto, he will find it difficult to hit through Chung's defenses, just as Djokovic struggled at the Australian Open a couple years ago. Chung will come into the match with both the confidence and big-match major experience that will cause him to be less intimidated by Nadal. Nadal's extreme-topspin forehand to the Chung backhand won't be as effective as Nadal would like, as Chung is able to move to his backhand and strike it very cleanly.

With that said, it probably won't be enough to beat an in-form Nadal. But, I expect Chung to keep the match close, winning at least one set and keeping two of the other sets close. However, don't be shocked if this is a five-setter.

My Favorite First Round Matchup

Felix Auger-Aliassime vs Denis Shapovalov

Yes, it seems kind of cheesy for me to pick this All-Canadian matchup featuring the two young stars that we saw in this exact stage last season, but it really is a compelling match. Shapovalov won last year's match in a retirement, with Shapovalov up 4-1 in the third set. The match is well-known for their emotional embrace following the match. No. 18 seed Auger-Aliassime got his revenge this year, beating Shapovalov in straight sets in Madrid.

Shapovalov has really struggled since making the Miami semifinals, having failed to win two matches in a row since Miami. However, Shapovalov recently added Mikhail Youzhny to his team in a coaching trial, and has looked much better in Winston-Salem, winning three matches in a row in straight sets to make the semifinals. While he lost to Hubert Hurkacz, this was a very good week for Shapovalov. Auger-Aliassime played very well for a long period of time this season, making three ATP Tour final. However, he has cooled down a bit since losing in the third round of Wimbledon, going 3-3 during the summer hard court season.

Tough to choose a winner in this one. You could make a convincing case for either player. I think Shapovalov has gotten himself in better form than Auger-Aliassime recently, and because of this, I am picking Shapovalov to win this one.

Predictions

Quarterfinals
Djokovic over Medvedev in 4
Federer over Dimitrov in 3
Bautista Agut over Monfils in 5
Nadal over Schwartzman in 4

Semifinals
Djokovic over Federer in 5
Nadal over Bautista Agut in 4

Final
Djokovic over Nadal in 4

I have basically given my rational for the four semifinalists in my blurbs above. The Big 3 are just so much better than the rest of the field and Bautista Agut is in the form of his life and I trust him to win more than I trust the rest of the field, sans the Big 3. Medvedev gets major props for winning Cincinnati (beating Djokovic in the process), along with making the finals of Washington DC and Montreal. However, I don't think he will be able to redline over the course of best-off-five like he did against Djokovic in Cincinnati with the best-of-three format, and we saw in Australia that Medvedev will not be able to wear Djokovic down from the baseline in the best-of-five format.

In terms of the semifinals, I think that the loss to Djokovic at Wimbledon holds a lot of scar tissue for Federer and that Federer hasn't completely recovered, mentally, from that match. In another tight, huge match at a major against Djokovic, I just trust Djokovic more to come through in the big moments. Djokovic is in Federer's head, at this point. While Bautista Agut can out-grind many of his opponents, Rafael Nadal is not one of them. Nadal is much more of a dynamic shot-maker compared to Bautista-Agut, and shoudl be able to hit with as enough angles and variety to throw off Bautista-Agut. I look for Nadal to win that match without too much worry.

I can't pick Nadal to beat Djokovic after the final in Australia. Djokovic absolutely dominated that match and has won his last six straight sets in major finals on hard courts, winning both last year's Australian Open and the 2018 US Open (against Juan Martin del Potro) in straight sets. Yes, I have Djokovic playing 5 sets the match before against Federer, but a day' in-between matches should be enough, and I like Djokovic to win his third major of the year, and 17th major overall.

Novak Djokovic will be your 2019 US Open champion!

Wimbledon Men's Predictions

Wimbledon is almost here! Check out my predictions for Wimbledon below, along with my reasoning! I think tennis fans will be familiar with a few of my semifinalists.

Quarterfinals
Djokovic over Edmund in 4
Khachanov over Anderson in 5
Nadal over Simon in 3
Federer over Struff in 3

Semifinals
Djokovic over Khachanov in 4
Federer over Nadal in 4

Final
Federer over Djokovic in 5


Reasoning
I almost feel a little guilty picking the "cop out" of the Big 3 taking up three of the four spots in the semifinals, but it feels very scary picking anyone but them. They've taken up 5 of 8 major semifinal spots this season, with Federer's loss to Tsitsipas in the round of 16 of the Australian Open being the only time that one of the three hasn't made the semifinals so far this year. And that was a very tight match. But, let's go through all the quarters of the draw.

I am projecting three of Djokovic's first four matches at Wimbledon to be not too easy for him. Philipp Kohlschreiber is his first round match and he did have a victory against Djokovic in Indian Wells, although Djokovic has won twice since then and is totally in control of the head to head. Kohlschreiber is also not in the best form coming into this tournament, so he shouldn't be too much of an issue for Novak. Kudla is my second round pick to play Djokovic, and while he understands grass court tennis very well, he doesn't have the weapons to challenge Djokovic.

The round of 16 is going to be, perhaps, Djokovic's toughest match until the final. I have him taking on Felix Auger-Aliassime, a player I am very high on. Auger-Aliassime is only 18 years old, but he is clobbering his serve and hitting his groundstrokes with a lot of precision and confidence. I don't think he will be scared of Novak, and he has the weapons to really challenge him. But, at the end of the day, I don't think he is quite good enough to beat Djokovic at a major yet, and so I ave Djokovic advancing to play Kyle Edmund.

I have Edmund reaching the quarterfinals because I think that crowd support is huge for him, and I also really like what I've seen so far from in Eastbourne. In Eastbourne, he has been hitting his forehand huge and dealing with the changes of pace involved with grass court tennis very well. Edmund should beat Munar easily in the first round. I predict that he will then have some very tricky matches in a row with Verdasco, Tsitsipas, and Medvedev, but again, I really love what I've seen from Edmund in Eastbourne. In addition, both Verdasco and Tsitsipas have not looked great on the grass and I can't see either of them advancing too far at Wimbledon. And, with Medvedev, while his game is well-suited for grass, I think his grinding style is too hard to keep up for many rounds in the best-of-five format. I think in a Edmund-Djokovic quarterfinal matchup that it will play out much like their third round last year, with Edmund getting a set, but Djokovic ultimately being too much for him to handle.

This next quarter was the toughest for me to predict, and I honestly have very little idea what's happening. I know Anderson is just coming back from injury, but he obviously did very well last year, and his game is very well-suited for grass. A first round clash with Herbert will be tough, Herbert is great at the net and knows his way around a grass court. However, when push comes to shove, I just trust Anderson more in the big moments of a match like that. His next two rounds I have him facing off with Tipseravic and then Copil. Tipseravic shouldn't trouble Anderson at all, and while Copil has a big serve, the rest of his game isn't up to the standard needed to beat Anderson in a match like this. I have Anderson playing Wawrinka in the fourth round, and Wawrinka is not nearly as good on grass compared to other surfaces. So, I have Anderson advancing there to take on Karen Khachanov.

This was tough selection, but I liked what I saw from Khachanov in Halle, and think that he could bring his good form on grass into Wimbledon. Khachanov plays a very good up-and-comer named Soon Woo Kwon, but I don't think he is quite good enough to challenge Khachanov on grass. My predicted second round for Khachanov would be very tough, as I have him taking on Feiciano Lopez. But, I don't trust Lopez to consistently do well in best-of-five format anymore and have Khachanov winning a tight one. The next two rounds against Bautista Agut and then Zverev wouldn't be easy, but grass is both of their weakest surfaces. I just feel like Khachanov can play at a higher level than Bautista Agut on grass. In terms of Zverev, I also don't trust him at majors and Khachanov will be looking for revenge after Zverev beat him in five sets at the French Open last year.

So, I have Khachanov and Anderson facing off in the quarterfinals. Anderson won their only meeting last year in Miami, taking the match in three sets. However, given that he is still coming back from injury, this match would be a step too far for him, and I think Khachanov would win. Maybe I am just higher on Khachanov than most people?

From the top quarter of the bottom draw, I have Gilles Simon as one of the quarterfinalists. I really loved what I saw from Simon at the Queen's Club, where he was so close to taking the title. His passing shots have been on fire recently, and he's counterpunching so well. I have him easily beating Caruso and Uchiyama in the first two rounds. While Caruso beat Simon at the French Open, Simon is playing significantly better recently. In the next two rounds, I have Simon beating Fognini and Thiem. While both are great players, they are much better on other surfaces compared to grass, and Simon is just much more comfortable on the surface than them.

In the quarterfinals, I have Simon battling Rafael Nadal. I'm not overly confident in Nadal on grass, but it's just really hard to pick against him, especially considering how close he was to the final last year in his epic semifinal against Novak Djokovic. Sugita is a good grass court player, but Nadal just does everything better and with more power, and so Sugita should not present too much of a challenge. A second round match against Nick Kyrgios, however, would be extremely intense and must-see television. At the end of the day, though, Kyrgios' form has been mediocre and Nadal surely still remembers and wants revenge for Kyrgios' win in Acapulco. Nadal wins that one in a tight match.

Nadal would then potentially go up against Denis Shapovalov, who I have beating Jo-Wilfred Tsonga in the second round. Shapovalov has the game for grass, but I just don't think he is consistent enough to get another win over the Spaniard. In the round of 16, I have Nadal beating Dan Evans, a Brit with a nasty backhand slice who is in great form. However, this just comes down to the fact that Nadal is on a different league compared to Evans. Evans slice, while effective against many opponents, shouldn't trouble Nadal too much, he's just at a higher level than most. Against Simon in the quarterfinals, while there should be some long, taxing rallies (even on grass), I just can't see Simon outlasting Nadal here. Nadal advances to the semis.

In the top part of the final quarter, I have Jan-Lennard Struff making it the quarterfinals. I really like how Struff has been playing, as he looked good in Stuttgart before eventually falling to Berrettini. He is serving really well and hitting his groundstrokes with a lot of power. Albot will challenge him in the first round match, but ultimately not be able to hit through the court enough to beat him. And while Fritz (his potential second round opponent) is doing well in Eastbourne, having watched both recently, I like Struff to edge out that match in a close one. The next two rounds would be very tough, with Isner in the third round and Nishikori in the fourth round. However, Isner is just coming back from injury and would not be very sharp, and potentially still getting his fitness back. In terms of a matchup with Nishikori, I think that Nishikori's second serve is a major liability on grass, and I believe that Struff would punish him for his second serve.

I have Struff taking on Roger Federer in the quarterfinals. Federer is so accomplished at this tournament, he played very well on clay, and took his good form to Halle where he won the title. There's not much left to say about Federer on grass, I mean, his serve is magnificent, his backhand slice is extremely effective, and he knows the perfect opportunities to go to net. Federer won't be challenged in either of his first two matches, but a potential third round against the mercurial Alexander Bublik (who I have beating the winner of Gasquet-Pouille) would be interesting, as Bublik has a huge serve, and loves putting different spins on the ball which could be effective on grass. However, Federer would be just too solid for Bublik.

In the round of 16, I have Federer taking on Matteo Berrettini, who won the title in Stuttgart and had a good run in Halle. His huge serve and nasty backhand slice would give Federer some issues. However, I think that Federer's chip return on grass would be effective enough that Berrettini wouldn't be able to hold as easily as he would like, and give Federer enough break opportunities so that the matchup would not be a huge threat to him. The same principles apply to a quarterfinal against Struff because, while I love the German's game, I think Federer's chip return would be effective and Federer would advance to the semifinals. Federer holds so easily on grass that it puts a lot of pressure on opponents.

In a Djokovic-Khachanov semifinal, the high level of the Djokovic return would highlighted. Khachanov would not be able to get a lot of free points on serve against Djokovic, and Djokovic is so solid from the baseline that this could frustrate Karen. Khachanov picked up the biggest win of his career in beating Djokovic in the finals of the Masters 1000 event in Paris, but at Wimbledon last year, Khachanov only won 8 games in the entire match. While I think Khachanov could pick up a set, I would be very confident in Djokovic winning the match.

A Federer-Nadal semifinal would get a lot of press, just as it did at the French Open. However, unlike the French Open, I think Federer would win this match. While it was not the case on clay, Federer's attacking game would be very effective on grass in this matchup. Federer would take the fight to Nadal and make him uncomfortable with the attacking tennis that he would play. Roger's serve would be helped out by the grass, and Rafa would not be as good on defense as he was at Roland Garros. Federer would make the final.

In the final, I think it would be tight. As we've seen in past Wimbledon finals between Djokovic and Federer, Djokovic's consistency has worn Federer down over the course of the match. However, I think it would be different this time. Federer looked good on the clay and in Halle. I think that Federer would be more aggressive than he has in previous Wimbledon finals against Novak, not allowing Djokovic to wear him down from the baseline. I think Federer would really go after the Djokovic serve and try to take over the net as soon as possible. And, most important of all, I think that Federer backhand is better now than it was in years past when he's taken on Djokovic. In backhand-to-backhand rallies, I think that Federer's backhand would breakdown less in the past, and he would win more points in these exchanges. Therefore, I think this tips the scales slightly in Federer's favor.

Roger Federer will be your 2019 men's Wimbledon champion.

ATP Review: Rio de Janeiro, Marseilles, and Delray Beach

This week, instead of previewing a tournament, I am gong to look back on the previous week's tournaments and talk about some of the big headlines that came out of the tournaments. There was three tournaments last week, with first-time winners and the return of an ATP superstar, so there is a lot to talk about!

Rio de Janeiro
The biggest headline of this week in Rio de Janeiro, an ATP 500 event, is that Laslo Djere won the title. It came out that Djere's parents had died, including his father recently,  and so this made the title extra special for Laslo. He beat Auger Aliassime in the Final, who also had a breakout week, in two sets, the second being really tight. Djere beat Thiem this week and Auger Aliassime beat both Fognini and Cuevas, all of which were big wins. This was Djere's first title, and to do it with his parents on his mind and in a 500 level tournament is very impressive. Auger Aliassime is only 18 years old, so he has plenty of time to get that first title.

A big story of this tournament is that the top seeds really struggled. In fact, every seed but the fifth seed, Joao Sousa lost. Of those seven other players, only one managed to even get a set, Nicolas Jarry against Roberto Carballes Baena. However, Thiem, Cecchinato, Jaziri, Schwartzman, Lajovic, and Fognini did not even get a set in their First Round losses. Now, of course, this is not quite as shocking as the stats say. Jaziri is not a clay courter and was playing against a good clay courter in Delbonis. Schwartzman had a long week in Buenos Aires and was also playing a good clay courter in Cuevas. Thiem and Fognini were playing against the eventual champion and runner up, respectively. But, still, not a great showing from the seeds.

Also, I want to shout out Hugo Dellien, he has been working so hard on the ATP Challenger Tour, and finally had his breakthrough this week, making the Quarterfinals of Rio. Also nice to see guys like Bedene and Cuevas starting to show form again, although it was a shame that Bedene got injured.

Marseilles
In Marseilles, an ATP 250 event, top seed Stefanos Tsitsipas beat Mikhael Kuskushkin in two tight sets. This is Tsitsipas' second title, one in indoor conditions in Stockholm, and now here in the indoor conditions of Marseilles. The Final was very tight, and Kukushkin was up a break in the second set, was a point away from the double break, and got two points away when serving for the set, and in the tiebreaker. In the first set, Kukushkin had a game point to send the first set into a tiebreaker before he was broken. Tsitsipas does such a good job, in my opinion, of just hanging in there in matches, staying close, and then taking his opportunities as soon as they come. The margin that Stefanos hits his groundstrokes with is also very impressive.

Kukushkin, before the Final, was extremely impressive. Mikhail played against tough opponents such as Shapovalov, Rublev, and Humbert, but didn't drop a set until the  Final. It was a great week for Mikhael, but also, I think, for Humbert, who proved his game can thrive at the ATP level, making the Semifinals, and fot David Goffin. Goffin had really been stuggling to find his form this year, but didn't drop a set in his two matches until the Semifinals, where he served for the first set, but lost the match to Tsitsipas. Goffin had a very good win over Gilles Simon in the Quarterfinals.

The second seed in the tournament was Borna Coric, but his loss to Humbert in Borna's opening match is not as bad as it initially appears. Humbert can play extraordinary tennis on a hard court, and Coric, in the quick conditions of Marseilles and having not played in a while, was just a little overmatched against Humbert, but I wouldn't worry about Coric because of this loss. Borna will be fine, I think, but just enjoys playing in slower conditions more.

Delray Beach
Delray Beach, an ATP 250 event, saw Radu Albot beat qualifier Daniel Evans in the Final, with Albot winning in a tight third-set tiebreaker, saving three match points. Like Djere, this was Albot's first title. It's interesting that, for both men, this was also their first Final too, so they were able to win despite the nerves. Albot played so well to win this title. He beat very good players in Kyrgios and Johnson, and his double bagel in the second and third set in the Semifinals against McDonald was very impressive. And then, to have the mental fortitude that he had in the Final, coming back from a set down and saving match points, was spectacular. In fact, Albot won every match this week but his first match, in three sets.

However, Evans was also great this week. He had to fight so hard, not only to get through qualifying, having to come back from a set down in his qualifying match, but also in his First Round. He played defending champion and three seed Frances Tiafoe in three sets. Evans came back from a set down, and Tiafoe served for the match in the second set, and had a break lead in the third set. Evans also beat very good players, such as Seppi in the Quarterfinals and second set John Isner in the Semifinals, coming back from a set down against Isner too. Evans destroyed a good player in Lloyd Harris in the Round of 16. losing only two games in that match. Evans will win an ATP title soon, I am confident about that.

The one seed was Juan Martin del Potro. This was very exciting news, because del Potro had been out injured for quite some time, and this was his first tournament back. del Potro had a very good first tournament back, winning a couple matches before losing in a tight third-set tiebreaker to McDonald. McDonald had a good week himself, with that win over del Potro highlighting his Semifinals run.


And so, that is a short recap of ATP tennis last week. With two ATP 500 events, in Dubai and Acapulco, and an ATP 250 in Sao Paolo, there will be plenty more ATP action this week. Roger Federer has already won his first match in Dubai, beating Philipp Kohlschreiber in three sets, and Rafael Nadal returns to take on Mischa Zverev in the First Round of Acapulco.

Next Season's Major Predictions

Since we have entered the WTA and ATP off-season, with the exception of the ITF Women's Tour and ITF Future's tournaments, I thought this would be a good time to look to next season for my predictions of which men and women will win the four majors. Of course, this is completely speculative (especially because the players I have playing in the Final could be on the same side of the draw), and I will probably look foolish later, but here are my picks to win the majors next season.

Australian Open
Women's Final: Sloane Stephens defeats Aryna Sabalenka in three sets
There are so many players I feel that have a shot at the title. However, I was very impressed with what I saw from Sloane Stephens last year, for the most part, and feel like she, along with Serena, were the best players last year without a major. Sloane's game adapts very well to hard courts, and bigger hitters will have a hard time hitting through her and will be frustrated in the heat of Australia. Aryna Sabalenka has made huge strides in 2018, and given her performance to end the year, seems primed to have a spectacular 2018. At number 13 in the rankings, expect this Final appearance to push her into the Top 10. However, I think Stephens has a little too much defense for Sabalenka, and Sloane will win in three sets.

Men's Final: Novak Djokovic defeats Marin Cilic in four sets
Djokovic was so good to end the season. After his tight loss to Cecchinato at the French Open, Novak barely lost for the rest of the season. He had one of the wins of the season over Rafael Nadal at Wimbledon, which proved to the rest of the world that he is back, and he beat Kevin Anderson in the Final. His US Open victory was thoroughly dominant too, barely being threatened and getting another major. Djokovic beat Federer a couple times too, including the Paris Masters Semifinals in another fantastic. I expect Djokovic to use the momentum of 2018 to get him an Australian Open victory, where he has won the tournament six times and is ultra-comfortable at the tournament. In regards to Cilic, I think his Davis Cup Final wins will help alleviate the mental block that seemed to haunt him for much of 2018 when he was winning in a match. Marin will also have confidence from being a set away from the title this year, but Djokovic will force Cilic into too many errors, and Novak will win the title.

French Open
Women's Final: Simona Halep defeats Garbine Muguruza in three sets
For me, Halep is the clear favorite to win the French Open. Her pedigree on clay is extremely good, and she is able to defend very well, and put her opponents in uncomfortable positions on the court. She has made the Final twice, coming within a set of the title against Sharapova and Ostapenko, and last year she finally broke through for the win against Sloane Stephens. I know that Darren Cahill is not coaching Simona next season, but I still expect Halep to have a great season and to win the French Open. As I was trying to decide who to have Halep beat in the Final, I eventually decided upon Garbine Muguruza. For me, she showed some signs of her true level towards the end of the season, despite a mostly rough 2018, and she still is the 2015 champion at Roland Garros. Her ability to hit through the court is superb, and I expect her to face Halep in the Final, where Simona's endurance and ability to make Garbine play a lot of extra balls will be the difference.

Men's Final: Rafael Nadal defeats Dominic Thiem in four sets
I know this is not an exciting prediction, given that almost the exact same result happened last year, but I have to call it as I see it. Nadal is an absolutely incredible player on clay, having won the French Open 11 times, and it is extremely difficult for players to take a set off of him on clay, let alone beat him. Nadal, essentially, plays all aspects of tennis at a very high level on clay. However, he is getting older, and injuries are concerning for him, and because I also think Thiem is going to take a step forward next year by not hitting as many unforced errors as in the past, I believe that Thiem will take a set off of Rafa at the French Open last year. But Nadal's amazing defense, along with his ability to hit winners from ridiculous places around the court, are still going to be too strong for Dominic to handle.

Wimbledon
Women's Final: Serena Williams defeats Naomi Osaka in two sets
I think that Serena would have won Wimbledon last year, but her ground game was not at the level that her serve was at. Serena has a spectacular serve, and when he groundstrokes are firing, then it is nearly impossible to beat her. Serena plays great at Wimbledon, winning the title seven times. This year, unlike against Kerber last year, I think that Serena's groundstrokes won't be rusty and her groundstrokes will match her serve in its effectiveness. Osaka had an amazing 2018, winning Indian Wells and the US Open, but when Serena is serving well and hitting her groundstrokes cleanly on grass, she can take the racquet out of Osaka's hands. Osaka will be overpowered by Serena on the grass, and I have feeling Serena will be extra-motivated to beat Osaka given that she lost to her twice last year.

Men's Final: Roger Federer defeats Novak Djokovic in five sets
I think that Federer has one more major in him, and I think it will come this year at Wimbledon. Federer won the Australian Open last year, but struggled, relatively, throughout much of the season, starting with his loss to Juan Martin del Potro in the Final at Indian Wells. Federer, I believe, will structure his season around winning Wimbledon, and will serve well throughout the Final. I think that he will come to the net a lot, pressuring Djokovic to make extremely difficult passing shots, and so he isn't worn down by Djokovic. Djokovic, as he showed once again last year, and through his four Wimbledon titles total, is extremely good on grass. But, in a match that I think will be very tight, the crowd support and Federer's will to extend his major lead is going to will him to a very close win over Djokovic.

US Open
Women's Final: Serena Williams defeats Aryna Sabalenka in three sets
Serena, as I have talked about before, is an incredible player. She has shown very often that her combination of power and accuracy is extremely hard to beat. The crowd support at the US Open is also very helpful for Serena. Serena does very well at the US Open, winning the title six times. As I mentioned previously, I am very high on Sabalenka. She hits the ball extremely hard, but has great margin on her shots too. However, I think that Serena has a little more power on her groundstrokes than Sabalenka and serves better, so she should win a tight title in three sets.

Men's Final: Karen Khachanov defeats Kevin Anderson in four sets
I have a feeling that the men's singles bracket at the US Open will provide a lot of surprises. Khachanov was so impressive in winning the Paris Masters event. His defeat of Djokovic in the Final showed that he can hit through amazing defending accurately and he showed very little signs of the moment being too big for him. Next year, I believe he will continue to work on his game, and will put everything together in winning the US Open.Anderson has continued to impress, since his breakthrough Final of the US Open in 2017. Anderson made the Final of Wimbledon this year, and proved he was going to be a top player for a long time. However, I think that Khachanov's game is less-prone to break down than Anderson's game, and I think he wins in four tight sets against Kevin.

So, what do y'all think of my predictions? Please let me know your thoughts on who is going to win the majors next year?

Why Juan Martin Del Potro Should Receive a US Open Wildcard

A week ago, another Twitter poster, Baseline Bagels, and I got into a heated debate over whether Juan Martin Del Potro deserves a wildcard to the US Open.  Del Potro would need a wildcard to the US Open because his ranking (at 142 in the live rankings currently) is not high enough to give him direct entry into the main draw, and I learned though that he is not using a PR because, I would assume, it has either expired or he has used it all up.  I am vehement, however, that not only does Del Potro deserve a wildcard to the US Open, but that the US Open should be extremely enthusiastic about giving him one.

For starters, Del Potro is a former US Open champion.  In 2009, Juan Martin won the event, beating an impressive group of players in the process.  In the final three rounds of the tournament, he beat three slam champions (although only two at the time) in Marin Cilic, Rafael Nadal, and Roger Federer.  Del Potro beat Nadal in straight sets, only losing six games, and came back from two-sets-to-one down in the Final to beat Federer.  Coming into that Final with Federer, Del Potro had only lost two sets during the tournament.

So, with a resume like that, it seems obvious that Del Potro would receive a wildcard if his ranking is not high enough to have direct entry into the main draw.  At only 27 years old, Del Potro is still in the prime of his career, and as wins this year over Stanislas Wawrinka, Dominic Thiem, Gilles Simon, and Grigor Dimitrov have shown, Del Potro is still capable of playing at a very high level and would certainly not be an easy First Round opponent for anyone.

Baseline Bagels tried to say that giving Del Potro a wildcard would be the same as giving one to former champion  Lleyton Hewitt.  However, besides the fact that Lleyton Hewitt has retired, he is also 35 years old and has not won consecutive singles matches since 2014.   If Hewitt was 27 years old, then he would probably have an argument for receiving a wildcard, but Del Potro and Hewitt's situations are much different and should not be compared.

Another important thing to remember about Del Potro is that he is the only male slam, and US Open, champion from the Western Hemisphere (another difference between him and Hewitt) since Andy Roddick at the US Open in 2003.  While he isn't an American, he is from the Americas and that is definitely something to keep in mind when deciding whether to give the wildcard to an American or Del Potro.  Because, the crux of Baseline Bagel's argument is that the US Open is a place to develop American talent, and thus every non-reciprocal wildcard should be given to American players.

And in almost any other situation, I would wholeheartedly agree with Baseline Bagels.  The United States has so many young, talented American players alongside many talented older Americans that have made their mark on tennis in the United States, that, even if Del Potro had a ranking that got him direct entry into the main draw, choosing the US Open wildcards would be extremely difficult.  However, with a former champion, 27 years old, from the Americas not directly into the main draw, it is a no-brainer that Del Potro should receive a wildcard instead of any of the other candidates for that wildcard.  In regards to the younger Americans,  the American player not receiving a wildcard because Del Potro received one might be better off in the long run attempting to qualify (just as Del Potro had to qualify in the early stages of his career) for the US Open instead of being given a wildcard.

And, the US Open also doesn't have to worry that giving a wildcard to a non-American would mean less fans would be interested in the US Open, and specifically Juan Martin's matches.  Del Potro already is a household name, he has huge fan support, and any match he plays in will be a huge draw.

For me, this is an easy decision for the USTA to make.  The USTA should absolutely give Juan Martin Del Potro a US Open wildcard.

The Current, and Future, State of the WTA: Parity or Lack of Star Power?

Does a seed even mean anything anymore?  That's the question that many tennis fans must surely be asking themselves over much of 2016, but especially the past two weeks in Madrid, and now Rome.  And it's becoming reality that top seeds will fall in what seems like huge upsets weekly and pandemonium quickly spreading throughout the draw.  So, what should we make of the current state of the WTA?

Before answering that question, it's important note that a huge reason for why it feels like there has been more crazy draw sheets this year, as opposed to years past, is because Serena Williams has been out for much of the year and thus, while in years past there might have been a lot of drama with seeds, it was shielded by a constant presence on top of the women's game.  One always knew that Serena would be there at the end of the tournament and that, through all of the noise, consistency would reign at the top of the game.

And, ultimately, I think that the dominant presence of Serena was good for the game, as tennis fans knew that Serena would play well and exemplify the quality of tennis to be expected from the top of the women's game.  This year, Serena's age (24 years old) looks to be effecting her play and injury/illness concerns have also hampered her game, so the flaws in other WTA top players are more visible.  But, with Serena's retirement not too far in the future, it's important to look at how the tour will be without her.

To help look at this issue further, let's look at examples of what I have been discussing, first showing how the seeds did in Madrid, and are currently performing in Rome.  In Madrid, at the end of the First Round, five seeds were out, but these included both the number one and two seeds, Agnieska Radwanska and Angelique Kerber, respectively.  But, the seeds continued to fall in the Second Round, as six more seeds were sent packing (or in Safarova's case, withdrew) including the three seed, Garbine Muguruza.  It got to the point where by the Quarterfinals, the only seed remaining was sixth-seeded Simona Halep.

And while you can make the argument that much of this "craziness" was negated by Halep being the eventual winner of the tournament, I just find it impossible to get past that out of the 16 players seeded in this tournament on the women's side, only one could manage to win three matches in a row.  And while some of the losses are understandable, Cibulkova has given Aga problems ever since she double-bageled Dominka in Australia in Sydney in 2013, other losses, such as Muguruza flaming out to Irina-Camelia Begu were unacceptable for a player of her ability.

And so far, for the WTA in Rome this week, the same general pattern has continued, besides Serena finally bringing a level of calmness to the top of the draw.  While in the First Round of Rome there weren't many upsets, with only three seeded players falling, it is important to note that this could be due to the fact that the top eight seeds had byes into the Second Round.  So, when put into that light, 3/8 seeded players who actually played in the First Round losing actually is worse than it initially seems.  However, in the Second Round, eight more seeds were lost, meaning that 12/16 seeds were gone before the Round of 16, and of the 12 seeds in the Second Round, 2/3 were dismissed.  And these seeds included the number two seed, Angie Kerber, the four seed, Victoria Azarenka, fifth seed Petra Kvitova, and Madrid champion (and sixth seed) Simona Halep.  It's safe to say that today was disastrous for seeded players in Rome.  This means that the Round of 16 will feature only one matchup of seeded players on the WTA side, with Suarez Navarro and Bacsinszky playing each other tomorrow.

There are two different main arguments that can be debated regarding the wild results from this season, and specifically in Madrid/Rome.  The first possibility that could possibly be deliberated is that the results are a direct consequence of the parity of the of WTA.  By parity, I mean that because the level of a top player (with, personally, the exception of Azarenka on hard courts and Serena on any surface) and lower ranked players are not that huge, so that when a player lower in the rankings upsets a seeded player, it really isn't very surprising at all.  Pundits making this argument would say that, for instance, Eugenie Bouchard  is only slightly worse than Angelique Kerber, despite the 44 places separating them in the live rankings.  Therefore, it would be completely understandable to these people that Bouchard dispatched Kerber today.  However, doesn't this "parity argument" merely seem like an excuse for players who lose early, as opposed to a legitimate reason for the results?  Because, in reality, the players at the top are there for a reason: they earned the most points.  So, if we throw aside the possibilities of players being ranked low due to injury and that a player might obtain more points from playing more tournaments, the players with more points should be better than those below them.

The opposite side of the coin here would be that the wave of upsets that has hit the WTA Tour this year is due to a lack of star power, where a group of players can just take over the tour and will constantly be battling in the later stages of tournaments, week after week.  On the men's side, this would be the equivalent of the Big Four (Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray,  Roger Federer, and RafaelNadal).  Obviously, there are some flaws with this line of thinking.  First off, Serena and Venus Williams are still on tour, so despite Maria Sharapova being out on suspension, these are two big names who have won many, many majors between them.  The counter to this opposing viewpoint would be that Venus is obviously finished as top tennis player (due to her age and Sjogren's Syndrome) and so while she might have a big name, it is unrelated to the argument at hand.  And with Serena's issues this season, as previously mentioned, this fails to address what will happen when she retires, along with the results when she was gone this season.  And, one could say that Victoria Azarenka has dominated the spring hard court season this year, winning Indian Wells and Miami.  However, as Madrid showed us, who wins the tournament is less related to this topic as opposed to how seeds on the whole are doing.

However, if we are to take this argument at face value, we would be led to believe that because there is not a group of "commanding players" on tour (besides Serena), it is no surprise that upsets are so frequent nowadays on the WTA.  Because there is this "feeling" that the playing field is equal, whether one is ranked number two or number 46 psychologically doesn't matter because players like Radwanska and Kerber do not have the mindset of typical top players.  And perhaps this is a direct result of Serena winning so many majors over the past few years, that she hinders other players from reaching stardom, and the mindset that comes with it.  I mean, if anything, Kerber winning a major has worsened her results, and while this may be because she is struggling with media attention that a major winner attracts, it is certainly not something that would be expected of the number two player in the world.

So, ultimately, is there a clear-cut answer to whether parity or a lack of star power is producing the current results on the WTA Tour?  I don't think so.  Throwing aside the obvious possibility of confounding factors not considered in this article, I think that it's probably a combination of the two sides that lead to the present state of the WTA.  Despite my earlier, big spiel on ranking points, perhaps women's tennis, with, for the most part, a lack of big weapons, lends itself to closer matches and more parity.  However, at the same time, it's very valid to say that because there hasn't been consistent winners on the WTA Tour recently, especially in majors, this definitely diminishes the star power of everyone but Serena, so when Serena is not playing well or is off the tour for some reason, it almost feels as if the WTA is an uninteresting free-for-all.  And, from a financial perspective, this is definitely not a good thing.  Because, a lack of stars means a lack of attendance at WTA matches (and non-joint events, in general).

However, I don't want to say that the future of tennis is bleak.  It's also important to remember that when Serena leaves the tour, all players, but especially the top ones, will have a much better shot at winning majors, and eventually more WTA players will win three, four, five, etc. majors and find consistency in their games.  And, inevitably this will lead to stardom, and the WTA will be perfectly fine.  However, currently, with Serena not being as dominant as she once was (at least currently) and many other players high in the ranking unable to fulfill the void this has left, the current and immediate future of the WTA is not a pretty sight.  However, I urge tennis fans and members of the tennis media not to panic, and to see the big picture on this issue.  Everything will be fine.

And, anyways, if Serena wins the French Open, all of these problems will disappear from sight, put on the backburner for another time.

The Power of Twitter in Relation to Tennis

As someone who has on twitter for over three years now, I know twitter very well and love it dearly.  I love sending out irrational, angry tweets to my 100+ followers who could probably care less what I have to say.  But, as some random, unimportant dude who's tweets really mean nothing in the grand scheme of things.  I've made tweets that, if I had any sort of stature in society, would get me ridiculed with sponsors pulling any support of me they previously had.

But, the good news?  I don't have to worry about that because, as I said before, I am essentially Joe Schmo.  However, for players on the WTA and ATP Tours, one is constantly in the spotlight.  As a professional tennis player, whatever you say will be twisted, convoluted, and you will be blasted for something that you totally did not mean to say.  But, in the case of some players on tour, no twisting is needed and what players say on twitter is quite powerful.

Perhaps the biggest example of someone who probably needs to censor themselves more on Twitter is Ivo Karlovic.  We all surely remember Ivo Karlovic's passive-aggressive tweet following Serena William's 19th Grand Slam victory in Melbourne.  When Serena closed out Maria Sharapova in straight sets to win the tournament, in showing her excitement, Williams started jumping up and down and hopped over to her Player's Box.  Karlovic, upon seeing Serena's celebration, sent out a nasty tweet that said "Earthquake in Melbourne #jumping".  The implication here certainly seems to be that Serena is overweight and her jumping is causing the ground to shake.

So, what were the implications of such a tweet?  Well, of the direct responses to the tweet, some of them thought it was funny (but did not necessarily agree with what Ivo had to say) while many others ripped into Ivo and thought it was anything but amusing.  In addition, tennis website tennis.com considered it a lowpoint and the tweet generated A LOT  of discussion on the popular women's tennis forum tennisforum.com, in which, based on the first couple of pages that I read for writing this post, were not favorable.  In any case, it was very inappropriate of Karlovic to (whether intentional or not) deflect the spotlight from Serena and onto himself.

This was not the only case of Karlovic making a spectacle of himself with jabs on twitter.  Just last Sunday, Ivo lashed out in a tweet against Roger Federer, saying, "Roger said its dark so it's dark".  What Karlovic completely ignored is the fact that it was cloudy out, and therefore would get darker earlier than usual, and also that Monfils could have probably used the rest, given that the world later learned he was sick for that match with Roger.  So, while Karlovic had been trying to take a swipe at Federer, he ended up looking pretty stupid himself.  Karlovic also has had many more cases in which he has written rude tweets, so he certainly has a track record with abusing his twitter account for the sake of putting down others.

So, why am I bringing up athletes and twitter today?  This is because, today, I read a very rude and disrespectful tweet from Tara Moore, who is also on the WTA Tour (but is lightyears behind Serena in terms of quality of play, and I now know, in terms of quality of individual).  It was learned before the match that Serena was very sick for her Semifinals match against Timea Bacsinszky at the French Open.  Serena was very down on court, and was clearly suffering even more so than during the Australian Open this year.  However, Moore was not convinced about Serena's performance and sent out a tweet in which she said, "Not only is serena one of the best women players of all time, she's also one of the best actresses #suckitup #learnhowtolose #pathetic".  In my opinion, the hashtags at the end of the tweet are where Moore really crossed over the line and made a rude tweet into a disrespectful one.

So, how did this tweet go over for Moore?  Well, almost every reply was negatively directed towards Tara, with Moore later even tweeting that death threats were coming her way.  Moore tweet also got coverage at theguardian because of her tweet, which also reported that even injured tennis player Laura Robson sent out a tweet dismissing Moore's "#pathetic".  All of this controversy over the 395th ranked women's player in the world in the live rankings!  This should really not be happening and the amount of attention payed to Moore is certainly not proportional to the amount of attention she has received (almost entirely negative) due to this tweet.

So, a player like Moore should be desperately working to make her way up the rankings in order to really try to make it on the tour.  Instead of sending out a nasty tweet about, arguably, the best women's tennis player of all time, she should be making sure the spotlight is off of her, so that she has no distractions on her quest to be the best that she can be.  And the same can be said for Karlovic, as well.  Since winning Delray Beach in February, Ivo has won a total of three matches.  In the entire clay court season, he won a total of one match.  And, when he sent out the tweet regarding Serena and an earthquake, he had made a Second Round exit in the Australian Open.  Again, like Moore, instead of drawing attention to himself, Karlovic should be wanting to deflect all of the attention off oh himself and really focus in on his tennis.

I must say, though, I give a little more leeway to Moore regarding this issue (as of now) than I do to Karlovic.  This is because Karlovic (as previously mentioned) definitely has a long history with sending out rude and hurtful tweets, where, as far as I can tell, Moore seems to be a "first time offender".  And while she is an adult, and thus is totally responsible for whatever decisions she makes, perhaps she didn't quite realize just how bad her tweet had and the subsequent impact it would have, while Karlovic seems to tweet nasty things all of the time without batting an eyebrow.  However, both Karlovic and Moore should feel ashamed about how they have presented themselves on their twitter account.

In any case, the main lesson here is that, for professional tennis players, twitter is very powerful.  For players those who tweet with class and grace it can be a great way to connect with their fans.  But, for those who do not conduct themselves in that manner on twitter, perhaps it's time to shut the account down.  Maybe Ivo Karlovic and Tara Moore's twitter accounts need to be deactivated.

Should we be Worried About Roger Federer?

As you might have figured out over the past weeks, Roger Federer is not where he once was.  The Roger Federer of old would have never lost to Sergiy Stakhovsky, let alone at his favorite major championship.  As a fan, that was a real shock to see.  But, another Federer opponent, this time in Hamburg, had another surprise in store.

At the Semifinals of the German Tennis Championships at Hamburg, unknown Federico Delbonis upset Federer, beating him in straight sets.  Federer seemed like a shoe-in to win this tournament, so to see him not even get a set off Delbonis was quite disturbing.  So, should we be worried about one of the all-time greats?

No, at least not yet.  At Wimbledon, like Rafael Nadal against Lukas Rosol last year, Roger just caught Stakhovsky playing the best tennis match of his life, while he was only at his "B" game.  Watching Stakhovsky in the next round playing Jurgen Melzer, it was very clear that his spectacular match against Federer was a fluke.  Now, you might be thinking that, in his olden days, Federer would overcome this.  However, we must remember that on grass, a hot player whipping his serve in and crushing the ball around the court is nearly impossible to beat.  It was clear last year with Rosol and this year with Stakhovsky.

I am also willing to brush off his loss to Delbonis at the German Tennis Championships, as well.  This is due to the fact that he, finally, decided to switch to a racket with a bigger head.  As anyone who plays tennis knows, we do have to give Roger some time to adjust to the new racket before harshly judging him.  We must also remember that Roger is not a world-beater on clay, which is his weakest surface.

So no, we should not be worried about Roger Federer.  If he plays poorly at the US Open, however, it will be time to sound the alarm.

Australian Open Predictions

Now that we have went through the draws, it is time for pick who I think will make the Semifinals and ultimately win the tournament, in both men and women.  Now, just because someone might have an easier draw it doesn't mean that they will necessarily mean they will make a run to the Finals, but they just might.  Let's get started!

What Will the Women's Semifinals Match be?

Victoria Azarenka vs. Serena Williams
Li Na vs. Maria Sharapova

The first matchup is no surprise to anybody.  These two players are clearly the cream of the crop of women's tennis at this time, as evidence by their epic Finals match at the 2012 US Open.  With the way these two are playing, I really don't see anybody outside of the other one even getting a set off these two.

The other Semifinals matchup might surprise you, at least half of it.  I believe Sharapova's hard-hitting game will help her get past tough opponents Venus Williams and Angelique Kerber.  For Li Na, I believe she will get warmed up from early easy competition and then proceed to rip through opponents such as Samantha Stosur and Aga Radwanska, thus setting up a matchup with Sharapova.

What Will the Women's Finals Match be?

Serena Williams vs. Maria Sharapova

Serena Williams is playing at a very high level right now, a level I am not sure even Victoria Azarenka can match.  I believe Azarenka will keep it close both sets, but Williams will just too much firepower for her to handle.

In the other Semifinal, I think that Li's inconsistent game will catch up to her, with Li trying to do too much to stay on the court with Sharapova.  Maria wins easily.

Who Will Win the Women's Final?

Serena Williams

Serena Williams matches up extremely well with Sharapova, as evidence by her superb record against Maria.  This was brought to the forefront during Williams' walloping of Sharapova in the women's Finals of the Olympics, with Sharapova hardly capable of winning a game.  Serena won't win in that fashion, but she will take it in fairly-easy straight sets.  I will continue to pick her until someone else in the field can show me they can beat her at the level she is playing at, on the biggest stage.

Who Will the Men's Semifinals Matches be?

Novak Djokovic vs. David Ferrer
Andy Murray vs. Roger Federer

Novak Djokovic, guided by a very easy draw, will have no problem navigating himself through the draw.  David Ferrer, unlike Djokovic, is very much in the background for this tournament.  No one really talks about Ferrer, even though he has proven to be a very good player.  I think he will, silently, make it into the Semifinals, ready to prove to the world that this is his time for a breakthrough.

Andy Murray, buoyed by his Olympic and US Open performance, will sail into the Semifinals, relatively unchallenged.  At the bottom of the bracket, Roger Federer will, once again, prove to never go down without a fight.  Federer, engrossed in at least one four set match, and a five setter too, will battle his way into the Semifinals, eager to prove that his Olympic Finals against Murray was not a sign of what's to come.

What Will the Men's Finals Match be?

David Ferrer vs. Roger Federer

Yes, Ferrer will shock Djokovic in the Semifinals.  His getting every ball back will frustrate Djokovic so much so, that he will begin hitting error after error, allowing Ferrer to take the match in four sets.  In the other semifinal, Federer, driven by his spanking at the Olympics, will best Murray in five hard-fought sets.  Federer wants another major, badly.

Who Will Win the Men's Final?

Roger Federer

Federer, his vast amount of experience propelling him, will be patient enough to wait for his opportunities against Ferrer, and take advantage of them.  It might not be easy, but Roger Federer will win the 2013 Australian Open in three tough sets, his 18th major championship.

Yes, you heard it from me.  Serena Williams and Roger Federer will win the 2013 Australian Open championships.  This one will be fun.

Wrapping up the Men's Tennis Season

After an exciting year of extraordinary tennis, the tennis year is finally coming to a close.  Yes, there is a little Davis Cup left to be played, and some minor tournament are on the horizon, but the vast majority of the tennis season is over.  Let's take a look back at some of the highlight's of this year.

First off for congratulations is Novak Djokovic.  At the 2012 Australian Open, he continued to stay hot from the past season and won the major championship over Rafael Nadal in the final match.  He then proceeded to make at least the Finals of two other majors, and the semifinals of a third.  In those two final matches, the French Open and US Open, it was not as if Djokovic did not put up a fight, as he won at least one set in both matches.  Even though his year was not as spectacular as 2011, this was still a great year for Novak and a signal for more things to come.

Rafael Nadal played well this year.  Even though he was out for much of the second half of the season, he did not play at the Olympics or the US Open, when he did play, he succeeded.  He made it all the way to the Australian Open final before bowing out to Novak Djokovic in five sets, and then proceeded to get revenge on Djokovic when he beat him in four sets at the French Open.  It seems like Nadal's winning streak at the French Open is endless.  Although he did not do much for the rest of the years, Lukas Rosol and injuries the culprit, his start of the season is good enough to land him in this post.

Roger Federer played some amazing tennis too.  After his loss to Novak Djokovic in the French Open Semifinals there seemed to be a general consensus in the tennis community that Federer might never win another major.  Well, boy did he prove the doubters wrong.  At Wimbledon, he battled through a back injury and several close matches to make the final against hometown favorite Andy Murray.  He got down a set early, but then seemed to look 10 years younger as he battled back in the second set before taking the third and fourth sets to win yet another major.  Couple that with a silver medal at the Olympics and the fact that his Quarterfinals streak is still alive, and I would say Federer had a great year.

Andy Murray really had a wonderful year himself.  After really challenging Roger Federer at Wimbledon, he won a gold medal over that same Roger Federer in the Olympic gold for Great Britain at the All England Club.  It was not just the fact that he won, but how he won.  Murray had total control of the match as Federer was left helpless.  The big win, though, came at Flushing Meadows in the US Open.  After a few easy matches, and a couple tough ones, he found himself in the Finals against Novak Djokovic.  Murray took the first two sets before Djokovic stormed back to take the next two.  This could have been the end of yet another promising major for Murray, but he would not let this one slip away.  He won the fifth set and won his first major championship.  This was the best year of Murray's career.

Lastly, we cannot forget about Lukas Rosol.  This was the man who beat Rafael Nadal in the Second Round of Wimbledon.  I distinctively remember that fifth set as if it was yesterday.  That was the most dominate on a serve I have ever seen a player.  Nadal could barely get a racket on the powerful shot.  I remember the look on the two players faces as I watched the last game with Rosol serving at 5-4.  The focus of Rosol's and the disbelief on Nadal's.  Rosol won that set 6-4 to take the match in five sets.  Thank you, Lukas, for showing that the top four players are not unbeatable.

This has been an unbelievable year in men's tennis.  Could next year be any better?  We will have to see.

Thoughts for the First Three Rounds for the Men at the US Open and a Look Ahead

The First Three rounds are over at the US Open for the men.   Since yesterday I gave my thoughts on the women, today I decided to give my thoughts on the men's draw.  Who impressed me?  Who disappointed?  Find that out and a look ahead below.

The man who really impressed me has to be Tomas Berdych.  As you might recall, he was one of the people who I said had a terrible draw.  Well, he proved himself during this tournament.  He has only dropped one set, and has beaten a couple of really good opponents on his way to the Round of 16.  It looks as though his mid-summer slump was merely a bump in the road.  It is definitely a possibility that he can win another match and face most likely Roger Federer in the Quarterfinals.

Another player who has really impressed me is Andy Roddick.  Unlike Kim Clijsters, who seemed to be bogged down by her retirement announcement, Roddick seems to relish it.  Roddick is playing freely and without regrets, playing major-contending tennis.  He has only dropped one set, and when things were looking bad in the fourth set in his Third Round match against Fabio Fognini, he found another level and beat Fognini in four sets.  Roddick is playing some great tennis.

The same can not be said about Jo-Wilfred Tsonga.  When one is a top five seed, one is definitely at least to make it to the Quarterfinals and challenge the players at the top.  So, a Second Round loss to unseeded Martin Klizan is nothing other than a major disappointment.  It was not only the round that Tsonga lost in, but also the way he lost it.  After beating Klizan 6-1 in the second set to tie the match at one set a piece, Tsonga won a mere four games in the next two sets combined and whimpered out of the Second Round.  It seems as though Tsonga will never be on the level of the top 4 players.

Now, it is prediction time.  I believe Roger Federer will make it to the Semifinals, but my other semifinalist in that side of the draw might surprise some.  After a shaky First Round, Milos Raonic has not dropped a set, and I think he will beat Andy Murray in the Round of 16 and make it to the Semifinals.  In the other half of the draw, David Ferrer and Novak Djokovic will both advance to the Semifinals to play each other.  Federer will beat Raonic, and Djokovic will beat Ferrer.  This will set up a Roger Federer-Novak Djokovic final match.

In the Finals, Federer will get off to a hot start, and will beat Djokovic in three sets for his 18th major championship.

Why Draw Day Could be the Most Important of a Major

Yesterday, the US Open draws came out.  Now, for some, this is just another batch non-news, but, it is much more important at a major than you might think.  Why is this?  Well, let's take a look at the women's and men's draw to find out.

Tomas Berdych has had a rough portion of his year.  He lost in the First Round of both Wimbledon and the Olympics.  The US Open is supposed to get him back on track.  It's unfortunate he got a bad draw.  In the opening round, Berdych will play David Goffn.  This is the same David Goffin who made it to the Round of 16 at the French Open and the Third Round of Wimbledon.  David Goffin took a set of Roger Federer at the French Open.  This is not good for Berdych.  And if he wins this, he has to play Denis Istomin, who was one set away from a Wimbledon Quarterfinals appearance this year.  This was a horrible draw for Berdych, and one that could shape his tournament.

Another example of this in the men's draw, this time working the man's favor is with Roger Federer.  Yes, he will have to play Andy Murray in the Semifinals, if they both make it there, but for at least the early matches, there could not have been an easier draw for him.  To start off, he plays Donald Young, who has not won a match in who knows how long.  His potential Third Round Opponent, Fernando Verdasco, does not have the weapons to beat him, and his potential Quarterfinals foe, Tomas Berdych, who might not even make it out of the First Round, has fizzled out ever since his Wimbledon Finals appearance.  There are no hidden roadblocks for Federer in this draw.  This was a great draw for Federer.

On the women's side, Angelique Kerber has a deceptively hard draw.  When one looks at the bracket, one would see that Kerber would only possibly see one seed, and a low one at that (Tamira Paszek ; 29 seed), until possibly the Round of 16.  Well, there are lots of under-the-radar roadblocks thrown in there.  This starts with her First Round opponent, Anne Keothavong.  Keothavong took Wozniaki the distance at the Olympics and there is no reason why she can not carry that momentum into the US Open.  In the Second Round, she might have to take on two-time US Open champion Venus Williams, who she had to beat in two tiebreaks at the US Open, and the in Third Round, she might have to play Paszek, who made an under-the-radar Quarterfinals Wimbledon appearance this year.  Needless to say this is not has easy as it seems.

The easy draw for the women has to belong to Maria Sharapova.  She will not potentially have to play a seeded opponent until the Third Round, if she makes it that far.  Unlike Kerber's draw, however, there is no tricky players early in the draw. Her potential opponent, 27 seed Anabel Medina Garrigues, would be blown off the court with Sharapova's power.  In Sharapova's whole quarter, there is only one top ten player, 5 seed Petra Kvitova.  Sharapova would not potantially have to play Kvitova until the Quarterfinals.  Yes, Serena Williams is in her half of the draw, but as we saw at the French Open, she can lose early in a major.  Williams also looked shaky at the Western and Southern Open.  Until those potential matchups, however, things are looking pretty good for Maria Sharapova.

These examples show just how important the draws can be at a major, in this case the US Open.  Now, a couple players are going to have to prove me wrong, and a couple of people will have to take advantage of their easy draws!

Li Na and Roger Federer: Two Very Different Champions at Western and Southern Open

Li Na won the Western and Southern Open this year.  So did Roger Federer.  Both are major champions.  But, that's about where the comparisons can stop as these are two very different winners.  While one is the definition of consistent, one is among the biggest mysteries in sports.  Both this week, however, got it done.

Li Na has definitely had an interesting career.  For much of her early career, she was a no name, with nobody really paying attention to her.  Then, an unexpected breakthrough occurred as Li made it to the finals of the Australian Open in 2011.  Then, she won the 2011 French Open over Frencesca  Schiavone, which created a frenzy in China.

After that, however, she just dropped off the map.  Inconsistency was a major problem for Li Na, so much so, that it was hardly a mild surprise when Li lost in the Second Round of Wimbledon to Sorana Cirstea.  How could she go from winning the French Open in 2011 to not even making a quarterfinals appearance in 2012?  Personally, I never thought she would win another tournament!  Well, she proved everyone wrong and won this year's Western and Southern Open.  Will she succeed at the US Open?  Well, if her past performances are any indication, we will not know until she steps on the court at Flushing Meadows.

Now, Roger Federer is another story.  Besides the fact that he has two Olympic medals, including one gold, he has 17 major championships.  In 2004, 2006, and 2007, he won three majors in one year!  He has a career grand slam, too.  He has been to a Quarterfinal in a major for what seems like forever.  He  had recently won Wimbledon 2012.  He is the model of consistency.  So, we knew he would give a great showing at this tournament.

What we did not know however, was that he was going to dominate the tournament, never really being threatened as he took home the crown.  He even continued his resent serge against Novak Djokovic and beat him in straight sets.  Again, he never was a let down, consistent throughout the tournament, until he had won it all.  Like the rest of his career.

Roger Federer and Li Na have much different backgrounds when it comes to their tennis backgrounds. However different their pasts are, however, they both found a way to win one of the main tournaments leading up to the US Open.

Age Should Not be a Question for Roger Federer

After Roger Federer lost the Gold Medal Match in embarrassing fashion to Andy Murray 6-2, 6-1, 6-4, the inevitable happened.  It seemed like every so-called "expert" questioned whether or not Roger Federer was fading into oblivion.  I am here to stop this from happening, he does not deserve to be treated like this.

The world knew that Roger Federer was going to be special from the second he stepped on the court.  He won his first major championship in 2003 at the sacred ground of the All England Club at the age of 21.  He has won, with the exception of a singles gold, almost every tournament one can ask to win.  He  won four major championships by the end 2004!  This guy deserves more than these retirement questions.

By the time the French Open rolled around in 2010, Roger Federer had won 16 major championships, at this rate, Roger Federer seemed invincible.  25 majors was seemingly within reach!  With the way the media portrayed Federer, he could be 50 years old and still winning majors.  So the decline in his game was even more shocking.

From after the Australian Open 2010 to before he won 2012 Wimbledon, Federer failed to win one major.  He went from this heralded superstar, to an old man.  Many thought that this "shocking" decline  meant Federer was "too old" to win a major again.  Why do we doubt Federer's age?

At 2012 Wimbledon, Federer saw it all.  He went from the Second Round beating Fabio Fognini with three straight 6-1s to being down 2 sets to love to Julien Benneteau, but winning anways.  It doesn't matter if Federer is 20 or 30, no situation is too great for Roger Federer.

During the Final, down a set, no worries, he won three straight sets to win the major championship.  Did we hear any questions about Federer's age then?  No, it was almost like he became the favorite for every major for the next couple of years with the praise he was receiving.  But, as we later found out, those questions were lurking.

Even though he won the silver medal at the London Olympics, experts and fans alike were upset with the way he played during the finals against Andy Murray.  What do you think started again?  Yes, the age questions.  Even though a few weeks earlier he had beaten the same person to win Wimbledon, he was all of the sudden "old" again.  Nobody "old" wins seven straight best-of-five matches, including against two of the top four players in the world.

The old questions have now resurfaced after Roger Federer's loss to Andy Murray in the Olympic tennis finals, but as we have learned, age should not be a question for him.  

How Andy Murray Has Changed

A year or two ago, Andy Murray was playing well beyond the baseline, always on the run, and a poor sport.  After his gold at the Olympics, it seems as if this is all changing.

When Murray lost in the finals of the 2008 US Open, all of the excuses in the world were available to him, whether it being his first major final, or the awe of Roger Federer, there was no pressure on him.  By the time he lost in straight sets to Novak Djokovic at the finals of the 2011 Australian Open, questions were arising about whether or not Andy would ever win a major final.  Then, in 2012, his game changed.

Starting in 2012, there was a total change in Andy Murray's tennis.  For instance, watch in much of this video the difference of how Andy Murray used to play.  Now watch video of his match with Federer in the Wimbledon Finals this year.  Even when he is losing points, you can see the difference in his game, which would eventually lead him to the Olympic gold.

In the first video, we see Murray just settling for weak baseline shots, while Djokovic completely controlled the tempo and flow of the match.  While in the second video, Murray moves much better and  even when he is losing the points, his movement and ball striking are a lot better.  That could be the match, even with the loss, that turns Murray's career around.

Now, let's look at how Murray's attitude has changed.   This from the 2010 Australian Open.  Watch how Murray losses his cool over a challenge.  Then, look right here, which is Murray after Wimbledon 2012.

See the difference?  In the first video, instead of just continuing on with the match, Murray gets bogged down because Rafael Nadal took an extra second or two to call for a challenge (which was about a millimeter away from being correct).  The second video shows that Andy Murray has finally matured.  He was gracious to Federer while really showing a side of him that was negated by his constant outbursts.

After struggling for years, it seems as if Andy Murray has found himself and is finally righting the ship. The world saw his resurgence after 2012 Wimbledon, and we saw arguably the best match of his life in the gold medal match of the 2012 Olympics.  Andy Murray has changed, and because of this, it seems as if a major championship is right around the corner.