2019 Australian Open...ATP 2000...Melbourne, Australia

[arturohernandez]

Djokovic added Craig O'Shaughnessy to his team. Look at the blueprint for the AO final.

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/how-...n-game-ao-2019

Now compare to the one for the US Open final

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/djok...nal-brain-game

I think only a Wawrinka-like player has any hope against Djokovic.

Otherwise he will breakdown their strength, a page straight out of Bill Tilden's book.

[don_budge]

Bill Tilden is the Book...

Otherwise he will breakdown their strength, a page straight out of Bill Tilden's book.

From the past:

From the Book...Bill Tilden (Chapter 13 Exploiting Your Opponents Weaknesses)

"There is another approach to this tactical problem, which is that your opponent is never completely beaten until you have broken his morale and made him conscious of his impending defeat. Pounding a weakness is one way to do it. It is the longest, often the surest and certainly the most universally used method. A method I frequently prefer is quicker, more exciting and perhaps more dangerous but if you are successful it inflicts the most lasting of all defeats. It is to play your opponent's strength until you break it. (This, of course, is the exception to the tactical rule of not giving your opponent a shot he likes to play.). Believe me, once a player finds his favourite shot won't win for him, his whole game collapses. If he can't win with his strength, he cannot win at all. Once a player admits defeat to himself he is through, even though he plays on gamely and tries to hide it. Certainly, the very fact that you attack his strong point with assurance and confidence will shake him, if you get away with it a few times. It makes him aware of your strength of purpose and will to win and keeps tremendous mental pressure on him that is worth much to you in a long match. It takes courage and determination on your part to attack his strength but if you do it of your own volition you are prepared for his reply and you can tune your own game accordingly."

The Book is William Tilden and nowhere is this more evident in this one simple paragraph. These words are crystal clear and burn like white light into a tennis player's skull. Sheer brilliance.

What makes these words so brilliant and important to any tennis player that has aspirations of greatness is the inspiration that they install in one. He uses words like courage, strength of purpose, assurance and confidence. These are words that are hopefully in Dominic Thiem's tennis lexicon this morning as he prepares for the most important battle of his career. It is a defining moment for young Thiem. Nadal is ageing and he is vulnerable to this tactic as Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer have shown.

Novak came to this conclusion first and he had the tool necessary to carry it out. A flat and penetrating cross court backhand. Roger developed this shot with a beefed up backhand enabled by a bigger racquet head and a stronger grip. Roger borrowed a page out of Novak's play book and learned that to defeat Rafael Nadal you must prevent him from camping out on the backhand side where he himself has beefed up his own backhand. Nadal loves to camp out on this side where he can get himself in position to be aggressive with his backhand while dictating everything that gets to the left of him. You must knock him off balance by attacking the forehand and then hurt him beyond recovery by either attacking the backhand or going once again to the forehand as Nadal scurries to recover on the backhand side.

Dominic Thiem has the backhand to carry out this tactic. He has the tools. Does he have the tactical acumen? Does his coach have his head in the game? Perhaps he needs don_budge as a corner man.

[stotty]

I watched the replay again this morning. I just love watching Djokovic clear round his backhand to hit a forehands. He is doing this a little more these days off slower balls. He is so light on his feet and his clearing steps and spacing are just perfect. He does this one aspect even more beautifully than Federer.

[arturohernandez]

Nicely put!

Dominic Thiem has the backhand to carry out this tactic. He has the tools. Does he have the tactical acumen? Does his coach have his head in the game? Perhaps he needs don_budge as a corner man.

Even Djokovic has his kryptonite. Watch Wawrinka attack his strengths. Even the slice helps. Today’s one hander doesn’t use it enough. Thiem needs to watch Stanimal.

https://youtu.be/cMPxGRCSmPk

[arturohernandez]

There might be a reason that Djokovic was so confident. He fired everyone except the stats guy. And the stats guy predicted that Djokovic could be beat both Nadal and Federer just over a year ago.

https://metro.co.uk/2017/12/13/novak...-2018-7157980/

[don_budge]

Novak Djokovic versus Rafael Nadal...YAWN

I watched the match from beginning to end. Oh...I missed a couple of points in the beginning as I put the finishing touches on the horses beds in the stable. It was morning here in Sweden. The snow began to fall and it didn't quit until the next day. I've been shovelling the whole time. Creating piles. Piles of white stuff. It's amazing what you can do if you are consistent, steady and persistent. There is a maze of paths and all of the doors have been cleared of the white stuff. I love to shovel snow. Repetitive motions. Long strokes. Short strokes. Each stroke with a specific intent. A reason. There are tactics in shovelling snow...you know.

How many times have these two played now? Fifty three times. Four times they have met in the quarterfinals of a tournament and the rest have been in the semifinals or finals. What does that say about the rest of the field? Not much I would say. Everybody knows that in the past ten years there have been essentially three players who have vied for the Grand Slam titles. Sure there have been a few that were sprinkled around to other players but it all comes down to this...most of the time. So once again it was Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal in the finals of a Grand Slam. That's why I say...YAWN. It's pretty boring and when you really think about it the style of play is really boring. Both players look like rank amateurs if you pull them off of there security blanket of the baseline. The volleys were almost comical. Keystone cops at the net.

So this is modern tennis. I was talking to my friend last night...The Ugly American. He made the comment about the quality of play and added that he realizes that I don't like what is going on in tennis these days. Well it's true. I am very critical and I emphasized to him the this is my right...that if there is such a thing as free speech there is nothing that says that I have to like it. Or like anyone playing it either. But I tried to set the record straight just a bit...between the Ugly American and myself. Don't get me wrong. There were a couple of things that I really liked about the final on Sunday and the women's final the day before. I really liked that Nadal was on the receiving end of a good beat down and I really liked the two ladies who played in the final.

The one other thing that I really appreciated was the manner in which Novak Djokvoc beat Rafael Nadal. He did it in the manner that I have been writing about since 2011. His tactic has evolved through the years and at one time I called Novak Djokovic "Meteoric" and it is probably time for another word to describe him. I am going to say that he has "Evolved". It really isn't terribly difficult to see what Novak is doing. It isn't difficult to understand why Nadal has such a difficult time in coping with it. What is very interesting is how the cult of personality plays out. How hype replaces objectivity. How because this is all we have in tennis we ignore the reality of the situation. When I say we...I don't include me. It is just for conversation. You know where you stand.

The shot clock was recently implemented in the professional game of tennis. It was done for a reason. The reason being is that there are certain players on the tour that take forever to put the ball in play. It is only a gamesmanship ploy. That is all that it is. There is nothing more to it than that. Stalling and taking a bit of extra time has always been a gamesmanship ploy in tennis. There is nothing new under the sun. It is just that a couple of players on the ATP tour have taken it to great lengths and made it a part of their personna. Even their personality.

Rafael Nadal is the biggest abuser on the tour of this tactic. This is rather common knowledge...I believe. His stalling starts the moment he appears on the court as he always makes his opponent wait for him at the pre-match coin toss. He does the exact thing every time which in itself is not a crime. Many tennis players do this. They have certain behaviours that they sort of repeat out of supersticion or some belief that it helps their performance. But Nadal took it way too far. He was out of control. So the shot clock was put into effect and lo and behold he was the only player to complain about it. It figures. There was much talk about a new service motion and I watched him throughout the tournament and I didn't see much of a change. Perhaps just a slight change in the backswing but it was insignificant. It was nonsense. Nobody cares...unless you get sucked into the hype. It doesn't amount to a hill of beans in the end. It certainly had no effect on the final...did it? Nope...but the shot clock did force him to abbreviate his pre-serve routine. He eliminated the two motions with his right hand where he went shoulder to shoulder before he went into his ear to nose (two swipes) to the other ear routine. He must be a little off to think that he has to do this every time he serves. Or he is just being annoying. As Stefanos Tsitsipas said...he would call it a talent. Making the other player play bad.

I always think the these players would struggle to make it in any other era. I've watched tennis for many years. There was a period of time when I quit watching it. Tennis is not what you would call "my life". "It's a hobby", he said to me. I forget what his name was. I met him at the "Kings of Tennis" in Stockholm. It's a hobby for me too. Particularly now. But I watch some of it. For a long time it has been the "Roger Federer versus Anybody Show" for me. Roger being the "Living Proof" in my make believe teaching paradigm. A paradigm where I try to connect the dots all the way from Bill Tilden in the 1920's to the present day. Tilden was a huge critic of the game also. Very critical of the governing bodies as well. I wonder what he would say. Well there is no need to wonder...I think that I am saying it for him. In so many words. My own words. I have that right...you know.

For me the highlight of the 2019 Australian Open occurred in the round of sixteen with the match between Roger Federer versus Stefanos Tsitsipas. WE had gotten a glimpse of a preview a couple of weeks earlier and the real thing at the Open did not disappoint. Not in the least. All of the build up was well deserved and given the hype you could just discount it. The match had merits all of its own. The play between the two certainly did not disappoint. Roger brought out the best in Stefanos this time. There were not delaying tactics to throw off the young man's rhythm. There was not gamesmanship to try to break his concentration. No there was only tennis and it was the most beautiful tennis that I have seen played in such a long time. It was really a sight to behold.

At the end there was the young man defeating one of the greatest champions in sports that we have witnessed in a long, long time. He is riveting solely based on his merit as a tennis player. Solely on how he depicts what a tennis player should be. For me he has been a source of inspiration. Something to write about as I learned to write about the beautiful sport of tennis. I have to admit that without him I would be hard pressed for anything to say. But with him in the game and when he is present and accounted for in ANY given tournament there is always something of interest. Something to compare between eras...between players. Between great champions. He didn't let me down in this tournament either. Once again he carried it...even after he lost. One thing that I must point out is what he did after he lost. He came to the net, shook the hand of his young opponent and congratulated him and wished him luck. At least that is what I am assuming he did. He is what you call the epitome of class. You will find his picture in the dictionary under the word...class. Grace under pressure. He is a beautiful performer. A gift from above. I know you are thankful as I am.

So the story continues. I don't know how long I can continue. I am not sure that Stefanos Tsitsipas will be able to provide me with the inspiration to continue. I certainly hope that he continues to develop and mature. I pray that someone will tell him that don_budge found the flaw in his service motion that if corrected might just enable him to get to the next level of totally friction free serving...where it is only inertia and gravity greasing the track of his motion. But this all remains to be seen. I wonder what the odds makers make of it. What the future is. Something is bound to happen. After all...it is high time for the next culmination point in tennis. The post Roger Federer culmination point. Not that Roger is done. But you can safely say that he is most likely on his way out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpM5W2k-U-s

Here is a match from another era. The year is 1989 and it is none other than the great John McEnroe versus Boris Becker. Look at the great variation of shot. Talk about angles...the geometry of the tennis court. Those mysterious lines...who could have dreamed this game up? God? Look at the drama of McEnroe. Anything but boring. But here Johnny makes an interesting point. He is disputing a decision by the umpire as he has been called for delay of game. The drama starts at around 16.34 and begins to climax around 18.00. It is an interesting issue that McEnroe is exploiting. He has been complaining about speed of play...accusing Becker of taking too much time. You see...Johnny doesn't like to wait. He is getting impatient. Now as a pawn of the tennis establishment McEnroe does nothing but fawn about the stars of today. But I really wonder what McEnroe would do? What would he do if he was the one waiting for either of the two finalists to put the damn ball in play.

[bottle]

Who!?

When they (who!?) outgrow the Maligning Serena Club they'll finally be getting somewhere.

[klacr]

Something not to be overlooked, Nicolas Mahut and Pierre Hugues Herbert won the career grand slam with their men's doubles title in Melbourne. PHH is a crafty serve and volleyer. Have been waiting for him to make a big splash on the singles court but it hasn't happened. Very impressive feat with all 4 grand slam titles.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton