Tennis

The Nishikori vs Murray match was a strange match, made of many momentum switches seemingly coming out of nowhere and without much tactical sense or reason. I guess it was a question of who at any given moment was managing his game better. For Nishikori, it was about finding the right way to attack. He wanted to be aggressive, but not take too many risks and maybe throw some variations in there to not allow Murray to get in a groove and not miss a ball. For Murray, it was about being consistent, tracking down shots, but doing that without becoming too passive.

At the start of the match Nishikori had his balancing act all wrong, playing every ball on the same tempo and, unable to break Murray's defense, overplaying and making tons of mistakes. End result: 6-1 Murray. That's about the point where Dimitrov against Murray tried to continue doing the same thing hoping for a different result... Well... Dimitrov got slaughtered doing that and there is a reason Nishikori is ranked a lot better than the bulgarian. He adjusted his game (EDIT: To be fair, they also closed the roof, which allowed a break during which Nishikori had a chance to talk with his coaches, a luxury that Dimitrov did not have). He sliced a little more, played some drop shots, tried to finish points at the net and tried to keep being aggressive while playing to safer targets. On the other side of the net, possibly lulled by all the free gift he got from the japanese in the first set, Murray kinda stopped doing much else than putting the ball back in play with just a moderate amount of mustard. Well... Nishikori won that set 6-4.

Ebb and flow, ebb and flow, Murray found an extra gear near the end of the third to bag it 6-4 and was in a good shape to take an early lead in the fourth, as Nishikori kinda lost the plot, but then another momentum switch happened that was both clearly explainable and absolutely impossible to understand. During a rally on break point for Murray, something, somewhere fell, doing a loud metallic noise, so the chair umpire stopped the point with a let (as it also happens when a player has a ball drop off his pocket or when something flies on court during a point) and Murray was pissed off and went to remind the umpire that in a similar situation at the French Open he stopped during a point when there was a loud noise, but lost the point because that very same umpire did not stop play (a stupid argument btw, because all you have to do is play unless the umpire stops the play: if it was up to the players to stop points for outside disturbance there would be no shortage of bullshit). Now, would you believe it, unable to let it go, Murray lost the following seven games. Not points, GAMES. That's some under 13 level of junior bullshit right there. Murray still managed to rope Nishikori back in in the fifth, but at the very end the japanese just found the ressources needed to score his second win in 9 matches against Murray.


Things were a bit clearer in the Del Potro vs Wawrinka match, but also a little strange. Del Potro made the better start, broke early, dominated proceeding, but somewhat against the flow of the game Wawrinka broke back and forced a breaker that he utterly dominated, Del Potro gifting him three points with as many forehand errors. Boosted by the win of the first set, Wawrinka dominated proceedings in the second... until he played a shocker of a service game, found himself a break down and was unable to recover it... (a rare occasion where the player who made the most winners and the least unforced errors still managed to lose the set!).

From then on though the match took a very simple form: 90% of the points were played in the backhand to backhand diagonal. Del Potro playing very conservatively, just sliced or lifted balls cross-court, hoping Wawrinka would a) play down the line and 1) miss 2) allow Del Potro to counter attack with a huge running forehand 3) play a winner or hard to retrieve shot, b) play a bad cross court shot and 1) miss 2) allow Del Potro to run around his backhand and start dictating with his forehand. This situation proved trickier than I thought for Wawrinka, but another component played in his favor: as the match went on and many rallies were played, Del Potro started to feel it physically, while Wawrinka remained rock solid. The patient and resistant swiss won the last three games of the third set and then the first four of the fourth and that's all she wrote.


So we have our semi finals:

DJOKOVIC [1] vs MONFILS [10]
Will this be the first true test of Djokovic fitness level or will Monfils be unable to cope with the moment? Will it be a one sided affair with the world N°1 making light work of a Monfils pinned 3 meters behind his baseline, or will it turn into a 7 hours epic made of 50 shots rallies as no one is able to score a winner against the other and both refuse to make unforced errors?

WAWRINKA [3] vs NISHIKORI [6]
Their head to head is as evenly split as 5 matches can be. And in a draw where just one member of the big four reached the semi finals (I doubt this happened often in the past decade), both will feel it's a big opportunity to reach a final.

WTA day: World N°1 Williams played a good match. Problem: Pliskova played a better match. The tall czech served very well (expected), dealt well with anything short (no surprise here), withstood the pace and weight of shots of her opponents (huh?) and read the game well enough to play some high quality defense and counter-attack when need be (whaaaat!?). To add insult to injury, the taciturn looking Pliskova kept her composure, even after gifting Williams with a break a back when she was just three decent service games away from victory. She kept her cool in the the 2nd set tie break, even after letting an early advantage slip, but in the end, it's the World N°1 who blinked, serving a double on Match Point for her opponent.

Direct consequence of this: Serena Williams will no longer be World N°1 in Monday's ranking. It will be Angelique Kerber (no matter what happens in her semi against Wozniaki currently being played). That's very untimely for Williams, because after matching Steffi Graf's record of 186(?) concecutive weeks at number one, she finds herself unable to beat that mark and extend it to 187. The Slam title that would make her beat Graf's record definitly seems hard to win too!

The two semi finals tonight were a good case study to see the difference between a good competitor and a bad one.

Monfils made a nervous start against Djokovic. Not serving well, unable to dominate the serb from the back of the court, the frenchman found himself in a 0-5 hole. At this point he decided that Djokovic was playing too well and that his only hope would be to try and break his groove. So Monfils started to rush the net, to play moonballs, to remove all pace and angle from his shots all without discernible sense nor reason. It kinda worked? Djokovic started to miss more and Monfils scored three games in a row and had a break point to be on serve at 4-5. But then it stopped working, Djokovic won the first set and, since Monfils continued to play his wtf brand of tennis, the serb also won the 2nd set and even found himself leading 2-0 in the third after barely more than an hour of play.

At this point, the crowd started booing Monfils, wondering what kind of parody of tennis they were getting for the big bucks they paid. Somehow it helped. Monfils went back to playing competitive tennis and managed to play it more freely than at the start of the match and, oh wonder, it paid off. Monfils dominated proceedings, punching holes in Djokovic's defense with his huge ground strokes and retrieving just about everyball the World N°1 sent his way (including some excellent drop shots that really should have been impossible to retrieve - but 'impossible n'est pas français!').

Djokovic certainly did not enjoy this turn of events (and one of his T-Shirt paid the price for it), especially in the oppressive heat and humidity of New York. Huffing and puffing, several time manipulated for shoulder problems (both sides), Djokovic found himself in a fight he tought would not happen when he was two sets and a break up. But in the end the serb competed through the whole match, while his opponent started to compete when it was almost too late. With a better match start, with small adjustments instead of total revolution, maybe Monfils would have been able to compete from the middle of the first set instead of from the beginning of the third and that might have allowed him to see a different outcome. This time though Djokovic won in 4 sets.


In the other semi it's Nishikori who started the match brilliantly. Taking the ball early, dominating on serve thanks to the precision of his delivery and the quality of his first ground stroke, returning well, the japanese rushed Wawrinka, preventing him to have the time to set his feet and execute his powerful ground strokes. As Wawrinka seemed a little sluggish in the New York heat, Nishikori ran away with the first set and even got a break in the second. At this point though Wawrinka did not decide to reinvent his game on the spot, he tried to do the same thing, but a little better, be a little more patient when dominated, be a little more aggressive whenever possible, serve a little better, return a little better, hit the rally shots a little harder to a little safer targets to get going and slowly but surely he turned the match around.

Nishikori had to defend more, he found himself in a number of tough rally and he won many of them at first, but the toll it took on him piled on and on and every muscle fiber in his body started to remind him more and more loudly that he played an epic against Murray two days prior. Wawrinka turned the 2nd set around, winning it 7-5 and from there dominated proceedings, hitting the ball harder and harder, again and again (the core of his fitness training with Paganini: more power for longer), as his opponent slowly declined, punch drunk.


This is Wawrinka's third Grand Slam finals in just as many years. He won the previous two. Oddly, he also happen to have won the last 10 finals he played... don't tell Djokovic! Or maybe... tell him!

Stan did it!!

He did indeed!

Once again he had a slowish start, making a lot of errors and allowing Djokovic to almost run away with the first set. Almost, because as the swiss started to find his groove, he roped Djokovic back and forced a breaker. As a viewer that was a bit of a roller coaster of emotions, because at first it sounded like the final might be one sided and then we were like 'Ah! We have a match!' and then the tie-break happened in which the World N°1 steamrolled Wawrinka so we were like '... or maybe we don't?'

Oddly, this set structure of an early lead being canceled only to find the first leader pull through in the end also happened in sets two and three, but in favor of Wawrinka. Both time the swiss got an early lead, saw Djokovic come back, but then broke the serb to bag the set (at 5-4 in the 2nd and 6-5 in the 3rd). This ability to play well in the important moments, to cease the opportunities, is what set the two players apart in this final: Wawrinka was the one making most of the points and most of the errors, trying to be aggressive from the back of the court with his heavy ground strokes, but, 1st set breaker excepted, he just found that extra gear, that extra focus, when he really needed it, saving a ridiculous 14 break points of the 17 he faced (a couple times three in a row) and making 6 of the 10 he obtained.

This mental toughness also manifested itself in a never say die attitude that saw the swiss win a number of ridiculous rallies that he turned around with incredible defensive skills, demoralizing Djokovic with his ability to find excellent length in his shots, including a couple defensive lobs that landed on the baseline!

As far as strategy go, the main thing was that Djokovic's reluctance to serve and volley allowed Wawrinka to make a lot of blocked or sliced returns. The first allowed the swiss to start the rally in a somewhat neutral position with a lifeless, centered deep ball that Djokovic had to accelerate himself with little opportunity to create aggressive angles without taking undue risks. The second, targeted at the backhand side of the serb ensured the reply would most of the times be a backhand cross court (it's very risky to go down the line off a low and shortish ball as the net is higher and you have less court to work with) allowing the swiss to enter a backhand to backhand duel that he often wins, thanks to his ability to surprise his opponent with missiles down the line (a shot made even more effective because he uses the same wind up movement to go cross court and down the line, creating uncertainty).

The fourth set was a different beast. We were wondering from the start of this Open how would Djokovic react under pressure, how big his tank was considering an injury prevented him to prepare himself for this event well, but after 6 matches (three where the opponent retired, one where the opponent was in worse shape than Djokovic and two where he was gifted the match by poor competitors) we still had no answers. In Sunday's final the answer came: After three hours of play, Djokovic faded hard. Slightly cramping in one of his legs, suffering from blisters on both feet and from an injured toe (it was bleeding and manipulation by the physio was extremely painful - possibly a toenail issue?). Increasing the effectiveness of his serve, the World N°1 was able to stay in touching distance of Wawrinka in spite of being struggling physically, but Wawrinka did not blink and continued to hit hard and hard and hard, again and again and again. They say the river is stronger than the stone, but so is the hammer: For the third time this fortnight the humble hard working swiss outlasted his opposition.

Three years, three Grand Slam finals, three different cities, three different surfaces, three duels against the current World N°1: Three Grand Slam titles! A feat that will undoubtedly put Wawrinka for all eternity along the all time greats of the sport, in the dozen name long list of those who won three different slams or the even shorter list of those who won their first three slam finals. As it happens, at 31, he is also the oldest winner of a slam since Agassi in 2003 (32 at the Australian Open).

Just a note on Davis Cup semi finals. It was Croatia vs France and Great Britain vs Argentina and somehow both favorites lost!

France had to make do without Tsonga nor Monfils so on day one Cilic made light work of Pouille and then Gasquet dominated Coric for 1-1. The french put their Grand Slam winning and World N°1 pair in the double (Mahut + Herbert), but the croatian team responded with Dodig (a very competent double and single player) and Cilic... and they won! The battle of the N°1 today was one way traffic with Cilic playing a third brilliant match of the week-end and beating Gasquet in straight sets.

Because of his injury troubles, Del Potro is not the argentinian N°1. That did not prevent him from beating Murray on day one in a 5 hours epic! Worse for the home crowd, Edmund also found himself the loser against Pella (a guy I hardly ever saw play). The Murray Brothers kept hopes alive on Saturday by beating the strange pairing of Del Potro and Meyer and then Murray used all that was left in his tank to beat Pella in straight sets on Sunday. Evans was supposed to challenge Del Potro in the final rubber, but the tower and Tandil took a rain check. After two strenuous days of competition, he preferred to not take any risk with his health. So suddenly, with Meyer on the other side of the net, things seemingly got a lot better for team GB and the possibility of making a comeback from 0-2 down for the 11th time in the last 35 years of Davis Cup history (that something the commentator said, I am not fact checking that!) became real... except it did not because, after a slow start, Meyer (a former top 30 player also hampered by injuries) dominated and raced to the finish line. Much tears were shed (mostly by Meyer!).

Wow, Djoker out in the 2nd round of the AO against a wildcard player no less.

Scored free tickets to see Nadal beat Baghdatis last night. The score didn't really indicate how good they both were though Nadal deserved the win.

Nice Faille!

I did not get to see much sofar and it's not looking that good ahead. Just a note on Istomin, he was ranked 30ish at his best and if there were such a thing as hardcourt ranking, he would have been a little higher even. It's a guy who, without a doubt, can play some very good tennis. That good for that long though? I am sure he was the first to be surprised, with Djokovic a close second!

Dang, Murray out too now! Come on Fed!!

In strange twist of fate only 2 of the top 8 seeds reached the quarter finals of the men's draw: Wawrinka and Raonic! Having Federer and Nadal out of the top 8 helps, but still!

At this rate we'll get Misha Zverev vs David Goffin on Sunday!

More likely: a Federer vs Raonic with a Raonic win.... :/

Probably one of the strangest AO ever. Top seeds were falling left and right, it looked like we would get some new blood to lift the trophy and when the dust settled, the young blood was spilled and we ended up with Federer vs Nadal and Williams vs Williams in the finals, just like at the All England Club back in 2008! Fun fact: that year Dimitrov won the Wimbledon junior title...

Federer fans will find some hope in the fact Nadal has not beaten the swiss in more than 3 years! Well... 3 years and 1 day ago, Nadal won his AO semi against Federer and, between then and now, they met just the once in the Basel final at the end of 2015. Another source of optimism is that Dimitrov started to play his semi when down a set and he still managed to come very close to victory.

I must say though that my main worry is that Federer will crumble under the magnitude of the occasion. Both him and Nadal are well aware of the significance of the match in their rivalry and for their legacy, as it is highly unlikely that they will ever meet in another Grand Slam final.

On my phone, so I'll be brief (for now): what an incredible scenario in this slam and in this final! Federer a break down early in the fifth and winning? Get out of here! What a disgusting lack of respect for the health of the fans!

This final could have been one way traffic, but instead we got the stuff of legend, with both players playing well and showing the tweaks made in their game in the last few years. Amazing.

Trully an amazing final. I almost destroyed my couch at the end ! Good job Rafa, good job Roger, they both wrote history tonight.

What a match! I'm so glad Roger got #18!!

This is getting a little ridiculous now.

In Indian Wells, in the most packed quarter of a draw ever devised for a Master 1000 (Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Del Potro and with the youngsters Zverev and Kyrgios for good measure), it's Federer who found a way through. Djokovic barely edged past Del Potro only to get outgunned by Kyrgios and Federer dominated Nadal with all out aggression from both wings, controlled Johnson and then benefited from Kyrgios' illness (celebrated his second win in two weeks against Djokovic?).

In the three other quarters of the draw, only Wawrinka managed to confirm his seeding (and it was though work as he won two matches in the breaker of the deciding set, the first against japanese youngster Nishioka - runs down every ball, misses very little and has a tricky cross court leftie forehand with which he finds very acute angles - and the second against Thiem). Nishikori fell to an in form Sock and Murray got surprised in his first match by Pospisil. So in the semis, Wawrinka disposed with ease of the surprise(d?) guest Careno Busta and Federer won against Sock after being gifted the first set by the american (the 2nd set was a much tighter affair as Sock started to serve and hit is forehand very well).

In the final, Wawrinka tried to hit through Federer while Federer tried to deprive Wawrinka of the time he needs to hit his huge ground strokes by being very aggressive. Despite losing serve for the first time of the tournament (!!!) at the beginning of the 2nd set, Federer's plan worked better, and even when it did not, he managed to offer a tough enough fight in defense to make things hard for Wawrinka.

So, yeah: 6-4 7-5, title N°90, Master 1000 N°25, ranked N°6 on Monday (his goal for his return was Top 8 before Wimbledon...), N°1 in the race (point from the start of the year as opposed to points in the previous 52 weeks) with an almost 1500 points lead, 6 out 6 wins against Top 10 opponents in 2017.... and, you know what, it's Miami next week and both Djokovic and Murray are injured....

This is getting a little ridiculous now.

We are leaving the ridiculous to enter the realm of the legendary... Federer just won in Miami beating US youngster Tiafoe, Del Potro, an in form Bautista Agut, Berdych (saving match points!), Kyrgios (in three breakers!) and Nadal in the final with a clean 6-3 6-4. It's the second time in his career that Federer manages the very rare feat of winning the Australian Open, Indian Wells and Miami... the first time was in 2006... 11 years ago... What the actual fuck?

In the final we saw clearly why the new and improved Federer is now a very tough nut to crack for Nadal. In the past, the game play was extremely simple for the spaniard: serve to the back hand, play to the back hand, get misses, punish short balls, attack the open court if Federer runs around his backhand. But now, serving to the backhand is risky and targeting the backhand is also risky, so the whole plan crumbles and Nadal is left, if not dumbfounded, at least in the uncomfortable position of having no plan, second guessing every shot selection, missing a lot and being unable to deal with the broader than every spectrum of weaponry Federer brings to the court. Federer's backhand today was not as impressive has it has been through the year so far (though he produced some stellar shots), but, in a way, just the increased potential is enough to put Nadal in disarray as to what to do.

Wisely, but a bit frustratingly, Federer announced after the match that the French will be his only event on clay this year.

Thinking of attending the US Open with my dad to watch Federer's possibly last, best chance in the US at a major. Anyone been in the last couple of years and give me a breakdown of costs for tickets? Grounds tickets, match tickets, grandstands, etc