2014 Australian Open Championship...Melbourne, Austalia

[don_budge]

The Dog and Pony Show...and the 2014 Australian Open

Yesterday morning I was coming in from the stable after letting the horses out and feeding the fat barn cat named Rosa. It was a beautiful winter day here in Sweden...everyday is beautiful out in the country with so few people around. It’s not that I don’t like people it’s just that I feel a whole lot better when they aren’t around...a line from a movie called “Barfly” with Mickey Rourke. But anyways...strolling leisurely out in the field and into the forest was a moose cow and two almost full grown calves. The sight filled my heart with love...love of life. Love of nature. The natural order of things.

In tennis things somehow have gotten all convoluted and the natural order of things has been dramatically and drastically interfered with by none other than the genius of the planet...the genius of man. With each invention comes a curse...bottle quoted someone as saying and we have only to witness our favorite game and pastime to realize that indeed tennis is a metaphor for life. But only if you think like a poet...I suppose. A dreamer. To me...it speaks of an arrogance. The arrogance of mankind. As if somehow we reinvented the game to lead us to believe that somehow we are better than...better than those of the past. Like life nowadays...ask any teenager what life would life be like without a smart phone. They are pretty damn sure of themselves...that would be no life at all. They must think that the people of the past are really stupid. More metaphor...just food for thought.

The 2014 Australian Open Championships gives us all the evidence we need to see how easy it is to alter the natural order of things...just monkeying around with the courts a bit and substituting some new pills (the balls) and everything went topsy turvy. The story is an epic and if I had the time and the writing skills I would love to attempt to capture it...with all of the theme and every single nuance within it. But just look at the remaining players in the draws...for once even consider the woman as well. Something very unusual happened down in Melbourne which always leads me to the question...why?

Yesterday was like a dream to me...from the moment I saw the moose cow and her two offspring until I went to bed...nearly exhausted from following the tournament and doing my duties as a teacher of tennis to my students. I love a day that I fall asleep like the dead because I am so tired from pursuing the things that I love. Yesterday was such a day. It started quite early for me and because of the Roger Federer match there was another piece of business that went somewhat unnoticed. I was up watching that one too. Grigor Dimitrov vs. Rafael Nadal.

Looking back I am so happy that klacr...aka Kyle...started the thread about the Stockholm Open that was won by young Grigor, whom I have nicknamed “Kid Gallivant” because of his passion for life as well as tennis. He’s got an eye on the ladies...which is great as long as it doesn’t distract you and take your eye off of the ball. It looks to me that Grigor has his eyes squarely on the ball and yesterday he came from just a couple of points of sending his royal ass holiness to an early exit. I say that in jest...sort of. This guy is a real piece of work as are 99.99 percent of the professional athletes of modern sports are...in my humble opinion. As some like to say. But not me...I say it only in jest. I don't pretend to be humble when discussing tennis. Not in todays politically correct climate. I never did learn to "pony up".

The Stockholm Open thread gave us a chance to keep an eye on young Grigor and klacr followed up with a thread devoted strictly to Dimitrov that lead some of us to get to know him a bit better. At least about his tennis game. He has long suffered the complimentary nickname of “Baby Fed” because of his obvious modeling his tennis game after the Swiss Maesto but he has blossomed into his own person...his own player. I thought that he just might take out the griping and bitchy Nadal and he almost did. He was so close that he was crying afterwards...crying mostly from nerve and from the realization that he is that close to breaking into the top echelon of current tennis players. It would be enough to make any young man from Bulgaria cry. Life historically hasn’t been a walk in the park for Eastern Europeans. It's no trip to the beach. Like Stanislas Wawrinka...Grigor Dimitrov is climbing up the food chain and Nadal nearly became his claim to fame. But it is only the beginning for our gallant and dashing young man from Bulgaria. No more Mr. Sharapova either...he is his own man now. Let’s watch him grow...and conquer.

Which brings us to Roger Federer...and I am not going to say too much right now. Let me just say that the Tildenesque bit is all intertwined and it is only to connect the three dots as usual. The court, the racquet and the balls. There is the most logical of explanations. I will just wait and see how everything plays out. I expected him to “routine” Andy Murray...and he did. I expect him to take Nadal down...but that isn’t saying that he will. But he should have hired John McEnroe for this confrontation only. More than anyone in the world McEnroe could have managed a tactical game plan against Rafael Nadal on an apparently slightly faster than “normal” tennis court surface. John McEnroe solved the riddle of Björn Borg in the waning days of Classic Tennis and this matchup is only the same thing...but it is being played in the mirror. Instead of a left-handed artist of a player with all of the shots from A to Z against the classic mechanical right-handed player with the strong gripped forehand and two-handed backhand...we have the reverse.

Federer’s dismissal of Andy Murray was pretty much a routing match...as only a tough Grand Slam quarterfinal can be. He dismissed him outright in the first two sets riding the wave of “being in the zone” when he caught that wave he was riding throughout the match with Jo-Wilfried Tsonga clear through the third set...when he hiccuped. But that is all that it was as Mats Wilander at some point in an earlier commentary discussed. During the course of a great five set match there are going to be ebbs and flows. Federer ebbed just a bit...but he never lost that steely resolve as Murray did. Federer may have hiccuped but his confidence never waned.

Murray was back to whining and grimacing. Playing to psychology of feigning injury and messing with the opponents mind. John Newcombe, Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors and even Ivan Lendl must have been concealing their own grimaces. Such behavior was once deemed unworthy. Never show your injury to your opponent unnecessarily...acting in such a manner is unsportsmanlike. But unsportsmanlike is a relative term...what flies today drew yesterdays ire. His reaction to the ball that Roger barely scraped off of the pavement was rather typical...questioning Roger’s honesty right in front of the entire crowd. If there was one person in the crowd who was absolutely certain as to whether that ball was up or not up...it was Roger Federer. Rest assured if Roger had not gotten that ball...he would have called it on himself.

So all of the dramatics aside we are left with the tactics, the racquet, the quicker court surface and the balls. Trust me that this is the beginning of the story. The story is as deep as the ocean. But the crux of the matter lies in my dream paradigm of tennis. The book is Tilden and the model is Gonzalez with the Budge backhand. Hopman is the coach and FEDERER is living proof. Everything this week has actually gone according to script. The playing surface has been altered which in turn leveled the playing field. The quicker surface gives a slight favor to the more classic player with variety of shot, whereas the sand laden surface that causes the ball to behave as if it is bouncing on velcro gives the advantage to the western grips and the two handed backhand. This stuff is straight out of Tilden and I hardly need anyone to confirm this for me...this isn’t some dog and pony show for me. It amuses me that some beg Doug Eng to confirm what is right in front of their eyes...but don’t get me wrong about Doug either. As one forum participant has in the past. I have as much regard for his views as anyone else here in the conversation. But no more and no less. We must be all equals...seeing as we all put our pants on one leg at a time. As I said...I never did learn to "pony up". I don't think that you should either. But do as you will...I don't offer any advice in this regard.

Roger needs to slice the backhand. Pure and simple. He needs to slice Rosewellian style in order to make the ball lay down and skid on the slightly slicker surface with the quicker balls. Occasionally he should slice high and soft...to take the air of the ball. Then go back to hammering. Mix it up. Take your opponent out of his rhythm then reestablish your own. If he played Nadal correctly it would be as routine as it was for Murray and for Tsonga. Perhaps a bit tougher. Both Nishikori and Dimitrov experimented in bringing Nadal forwards with short angles and drop shots but neither were able to carry out the strategy to fruition. Power slicing deep into the corner of the Nadal backhand and short and angled to the Nadal forehand will have the same effect as Novak Djokovic’s flat two-handed backhand with even better results on the quicker surface. Nadal will have to work so much harder to run around his backhand. Federer actually won the fourth set against Murray with a rash of errors that were the result of some brilliant backhand slices. Murray started to spray forehands as he attempted to run around his backhand.

[stotty]

Nadal's left hand looks a right mess with a huge blister bleeding like a gaping wound. That's got to help Roger's cause I at least a little bit. I didn't see Nadal/Dimitrov but apparently Nadal was struggling to serve with that blister.

[klacr]

Masterclass by Federer.

Bit of a slip up in that 3rd set, but like all great champions Federer believed in his game and recovered to right the ship in the 4th set. Some will say Murray's back is still not 100% and this was the first test for it. That may be true. But losing the first two sets to Roger is what truly did Andy in. Huge mountain to climb against an in-form, aggressive and confident Roger.

Nadal-Federer and Berdych-Wawrinka are your semifinalists.

For Nadal, if he happens to pull off this Aussie Open title, he will become only the 3rd man to have won all grand slams at least twice. The other two? Rodney Laver and Roy Emerson. Pretty good company.

For Fed, if he was able to get past Nadal and win the finals, then wow! Just wow! The power of the tennis world would make a seismic shift.

For Wawrinka, well, he's gotta get past a confident Berdych and not that he wouldn't be able to but the mountain is big. Would be an epic run for the Stanimal.

For Berdych, No doubt he has the firepower to beat anyone. The question is can he produce and execute it match after match? Hoping Berdych does something amazing. I really really do.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[tennis_chiro]

Roger Federer 3.0

at 2-3 in the third set, Mats Wilander commented on EuroSport on Federer's aggressiveness forcing Murray to start going forward himself: "…and suddenly we are looking at a completely different style of tennis, … and how healthy would that be?"

However, in anticipating a change in style by the top players, Mats is overlooking the fact that hardly anyone has the necessary skills to execute these tactics. Murray is one of the few top players who has adequate front court skills to go forward effectively. If Federer rediscovers his serve and volley skills, his earlier playing habits as a teenager and young pro will give him a head start to be able to showcase those skills at an elite level and approach the craftsmanship that Edberg routinely demonstrated.

To be able to execute the kind of aggression Federer was using, a number of things are necessary. First of all, you must have the weapons to create opportunities. On top of that, to do it on your opponent's service games, you are going to need defensive skills that can adequately neutralize your opponent's weapons. There are a number of players that have those skills.

Next, you are going to need the ability to recognize when you have created one of these opportunities as well as the speed and transition skills to actually take advantage of it. There are a lot less players, even among the best in the world, who actually have these skills anymore.

Finally, after all that, this new aggressive player needs the simple comfort level with his position at the net so that he can react instinctively to the passing shot he must now intercept and dispatch accurately and crisply to its final resting place. This is much more than simple volleying skills, these are instinctive reactions. It is almost impossible to learn those reactions after about age 16. They have to be built into the player as he develops. Otherwise, we end up with otherwise miraculously coordinated world-class athletes actually looking terribly clumsy on the tennis court (Think Agassi, Roddick or today, Djokovic).

And the final necessary piece is commitment; without commitment to this tactic, you will never get the necessary reps and experience to develop any proficiency. The second time an established player makes a clumsy volley error or gets fooled and moves the wrong way on a passing shot, he is going to want to abandon the tactic. And it is going to take a lot more than a couple of uncomfortable points before he develops any real comfort or proficiency with the tactic. That's part of the reason it is so important to develop this tactical skill early in the development of a player, while he is still in his mid-teen years, at the latest.

Even in the match tonight, Roger was firing on all cylinders and at the end of the third set, he got just a little tentative and his movement toward the net became significantly reduced. First, it was because Murray was taking the opportunity away from him whenever he could, but then Roger became just a little tentative and he paid a bit of a price for that conservative approach. It worked out eventually, but there were a lot of break points he could not convert because he was unable to make the same moves he was making early in the match. Perhaps he recognized a little shortcoming in Andy's movement and decided to take the conservative approach, but he wasn't using the same devil-may-care, swashbuckling approach that characterized his play the first two and a half sets.

Nevertheless, it was great fun to see both Murray and Federer trying to work their way forward whenever possible at the beginning of the third set. I don't think we've seen this kind of play from both players in quarterfinals or later of a grand slam in almost 10 years. Unfortunately, for the reasons I outlined above, we are not going to see it very often in the near future either. But we might see it from Federer again; hopefully in two days against Nadal. Djokovic is smart to bring Becker in to his camp to help him improve in this dimension; but it wasn't smart to relegate Vajda and fail to recognize it would take months of work and many matches in practice as well as tournament play before he could afford to risk employing the tactic as a major strategy in his campaign to win any major. Federer is rediscovering a former self with Edberg; for almost all of the rest, it means creating a whole new alter ego almost from scratch. Of all the current and former top ten players, the French (Tsonga, Gasquet and Monfils especially) are probably the best equipped to incorporate this kind of play into their playbook. Most of the big guys are simply too slow; I think Janowicz could do it, but he has a lot of other problems first. Wawrinka did win a gold medal in doubles. But even a relatively young player like Dimitrov is unlikely to put up with the beating he has to take to develop the necessary reactions and comfort with that position at the net as someone tries to pass him.

I hope I'm wrong, but it's going to take a lot more than a little faster courts and tighter knitted nap on the balls to bring back serve and volley tennis, even at the levels Federer was employing tonight. That's a small fraction of the number of trips Rafter or even Sampras made to the net; forget about comparisons to the serve and volleyers of the 60's and 70's who came up on almost every second serve, at least on hard courts and grass. But it could be a great opportunity for Roger and a key component to success for the reincarnated Roger Federer 3.0. Again, I certainly hope so. It is great fun to watch!

don

[stotty]

Great match by Federer. He reverted back to type in the end after a quite brilliant start seizing the net so often. He cannot afford to revert back against Nadal. He will have to carry out the plan from start to finish.

Interesting that Federer was not immune to sneak attacks when pulled wide on his sliced backhand. Murray could have done that more often.

Federer moved exceptionally well...so, so well.

[stotty]

2 sets to 1...don_budge must be on a heap on the floor right now. The match was Federer's for the taking.

I still feel the game is in Federer's hands, not Murray's. He needs to catch Murray coming off a high at the start of set four.

I am so impressed with Federer'e movement and defensive play...on top of his brilliant attack.

[don_budge]

The book is...

Watching the Fed-Murray match.

Fed looking real solid. Murray looking listless. Federer is up two sets to love. Fed is using great variety on the backhand and using it to set up the forehand. Being aggressive. Great job coming to the net on smart approaches and first volleys

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Tilden.

[klacr]

Watching the Fed-Murray match.

Fed looking real solid. Murray looking listless. Federer is up two sets to love. Fed is using great variety on the backhand and using it to set up the forehand. Being aggressive. Great job coming to the net on smart approaches and first volleys

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

How's it going Andy?

I'm not able to watch right now...but how's it feeling Andy? Are you comfortable now? I'm only guessing...not peeking. But I'm guessing...not!

[don_budge]

The winds of change...are upon us

Berdych-Wawrinka.

A spot in the finals.

New blood.


Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Something has changed. Anybody else notice?

[don_budge]

Set the alarm...for Nadal and the Modern Paradigm of Tennis

Shall I set the alarm and get up and watch Dimitrov versus Nadal tomorrow?

You might want to set the alarm for Rafael Nadal. He is getting a wake up call...from Dimitrov and the ITF. He thinks his having friends in the business is more important than the integrity of tennis.

The speed of the courts will make playing so near the baseline impossible with the wild windup on the forehand. It will make playing so far behind the baseline a fruitless tactic. "The Kid" might just take him down...if he can figure out how to press this advantage and not be shy while doing it. This is no time to get cute...that's one mad dog on the other side of the net.

Soon you guys are going to need a dossier about why the speed of the surface would render the present modern paradigm of tennis...extinct. Just imagine if they slick up the grass once more...the way it was for over a hundred years.

[tennis_chiro]

I agree completely. I am not discounting Fed's at all. No doubt about Fed's forehand. The only forehand I would say has an argument to be better than Feds is Nasal. I do like how Stan straightens his arm way earlier pre contact that Fed. As for slice, Feds is the best. But Stan has a very good one. Way better than Novak or Nadal to me.

Did you guys notice Fed is hitting the high backhands much better, much more aggressively? I think it's the racket. But I don't know if anyone can hang in exchanges with the backhand the way Stan did last night, at least not as consistently. That aspect was critical to him not giving up ground to Djokovic's forehand attack.

As for the forehand, I think you have to question Fed's consistency, at least the last couple of years; too many ue's! But when he sets up and hits it, don't the pros consider it the most deadly, except maybe for Del Potro, who can't hit it on the run as well. When you consider consistency, then you have to give the nod to Nadal.

Really curious if anyone else noticed that more aggressive play on the high backhands and backhands in general with the new racket for Fed.

don

[stroke]

On a week in week out basis Cahill could be right, but there have been key matches where Federer's backhand has been absolutely scintillating. In fact, no one I can think of has hit backhands better than Federer when he's in full flow. His slice is better than Warinka's. He's better at neutralize two-handed opponents with it. Federer has better hands, too, so can pull of those miracle shots no other player can.

Like I said Cahill could be right...but I wouldn't discount Federer's. Federer's backhand has been overshadowed by his forehand...but his backhand is truly great also.

I agree completely. I am not discounting Fed's at all. No doubt about Fed's forehand. The only forehand I would say has an argument to be better than Feds is Nadal. I do like how Stan straightens his arm way earlier pre contact that Fed. As for slice, Feds is the best. But Stan has a very good one. Way better than Novak or Nadal to me.

[klacr]

Always great to hear observations from Doug on the forums. He's one of the best minds in our industry and one of the biggest assets that USPTA has in its organization.

Now on to a very exciting semi-final

Berdych-Wawrinka.

A spot in the finals.

New blood.

Berdych has been to this stage before and made finals of Wimbledon. Wonder how much gas Wawrinka has in the tank after Djokovic match? Stan has spent more time on court than Berdych. Berdych has ability to take the racquet out of your hand. If Wawrinka beats Berdych I'll be upset for my boy but pleased that a player like Stan gets a chance to compete for a GS title. Nothing against Stan. I always root for him, unless he plays Berdych. Tomorrow will be one of those instances. If Berdych happens to win, just smiling from me. If he happens to pull off the improbable and finally announce himself into the game's elite by winning in finals against whomever he faces...GOD HELP YOU ALL..for the number of posts that I may produce showcasing my fandom and showing off my stained, wrinkled, torn and faded ticket on his bandwagon for a very very long time. Wanna talk about a happy camper? Wanna see a cheshire cat grin? You want to physically know what a smile from ear to ear looks like? If Berdych wins the whole shebang you will see that from me. But we are still a long ways a way from that. But I'm getting antsy just thinking about it.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

I also like what Cahill said about Stan's one handed backhand, calling it unquestionably the best in the game.

On a week in week out basis Cahill could be right, but there have been key matches where Federer's backhand has been absolutely scintillating. In fact, no one I can think of has hit backhands better than Federer when he's in full flow. His slice is better than Warinka's. He's better at neutralize two-handed opponents with it. Federer has better hands, too, so can pull of those miracle shots no other player can.

Like I said Cahill could be right...but I wouldn't discount Federer's. Federer's backhand has been overshadowed by his forehand...but his backhand is truly great also.