Wimbledon Fourth Round Monday: Sweet Sixteen promises day of plenty, old and new



Here it is: too much of a good thing. Spoilt for choice, surrounded by riches and unsure where to look or whom to back. This is the quandary the second Monday of Wimbledon offers every year, uniquely in the Slams, holding all the round of 16 matches on one day. Get a lucky ticket and make the right moves and you could catch a bit of all 32 men and women remaining in the draw. But, as Rafael Nadal mentioned in his press conference, the sheer number of matches means that you are definitely going to miss some good players as well. The peril of plenty.

Clockwise: New mum Azarenka is hoping to go deep; pre-tournament fave Pliskova was knocked out in the 3R; Garbine Muguruza is looking to find her form from 2016; 2 time champ Kvitova, back from a horrific injury, was a winner by just showing up; World #1 Angie Kerber looks to turn her year around here and Venus Williams just goes on and on.



The men's draw is top heavy after a few years and the women's is open as an field ready to be plucked by the next Ostapenko.Or maybe the current one herself, who has shown admirable grit and spirit in fighting her way to the last 16. She plays the Ukrainian, Elena Svitolina in one of the many women's matches which are just too close to call. Ostapenko had an unforgettable French Open, and so did Svitolina, but for different reasons. Serving for her quarter-final match against Simona Halep, the Croatian proceed to melt down in epic proportions, and lost 12 of the next 13 games to lose 3-6,7-6(8), 6-0. Either way, it promises to be close and thrilling. Pick: Ostapenko

Romanian Simona Halep, the beneficiary of the Svitolina meltdown, who then proceeded to have her own in the final (up a set and 3-1 with a point for a double break before she was beaten down by the Latvian in the French finals) goes up against the most popular mum in Belarus, Viktoria Azarenka, one of the most popular players on tour. Azarenka has been a darling of the crowd even more than usual, but her lack of sufficient match play coupled with Halep's form and skills should see the end of the ride for Azarenka. Pick: Halep

The other two matches in this section of the draw pit 37-year old Venus Williams, playing her 20^th Wimbledon, against the 19 year old Croat, Ana Konjuh, in the first match on Centre Court and the British hope in the ladies (yes, you read that right) Johanna Konta against Carolina Garcia. Garcia is still trying to live up to her early promise and is playing well, but Konta has the force and the crowd behind her. Konjuh is no lucky winner here, having earned the epithet 'Baby Serena'. Venus has all the experience in the world on this grass, but youth has no fear and that could lead to a tight match for the American. Picks: Konta and Williams

At the top of the draw, Serena Williams' last two title victims, World #1 Angelique Kerber and Venezuelan Garbine Muguruza tee off, both having ordinary years after their breakthroughs last year. Kerber has been hanging on to the top ranking by her nails, but her toughness is a huge asset. Muguruza takes to the grass more naturally, and that might be enough for her. The Pole Aggie Radwanska, another Serena-final victim takes on the apparently ageless Russian Svetlana Kuznetsova, with the Russian dominating the head to head (13-4). Picks: Muguruza and Kuznetsova

In the least heralded section of the women's draw, the American Coco VAndeweghe, approaching something her form from Australia, where she made a semi-final run, emerges as the strongest favorite to overturn the Dane Caroline Wozniacki and in the battle of near-unknowns, Maggie Rybarikova, who defeated Petra Kvitova earlier should hold the advantage of Petra Martic from Croatia.

Picks: Halep, Konta, Ostapenko, V Williams from the bottom half and Vandeweghe, Rybarikova, Kuznetsova and Muguruza from the top half.

Qualification (for potential bettors): my original picks were Pliskova and Kvitova! You have been warned.

Clockwise: Rafael Nadal, looking to continue his La Decima form; form favorite Roger Federer, defying everyone at 35; Stan Wawrinka has always had a problem with grass, and left in R1; Djokovic is finding his best form at the place where it all started to go wrong last year; Sasha Zverev looking to crash the exclusive club; an injured World #1, Andy Murray looks set to fight for his crown.

 

If the women's field is young and inexperienced, the men's is more traditionally loaded.



There are fewer oh-so-open matches on the men's side, with the famed Big Four coming in on good form – Djokovic in the last two weeks, Murray the last month, Nadal and Federer all year. Given that the last time someone outside this ever-amazing quartet won Wimbledon was in 2002 (Lleyton Hewitt), it would be a brave, rich and foolhardy person to bet on anyone else. Djokovic should handily beat Frenchman Adrian Mannarino, who just doesn’t have the tools to challenge the Serb. Likewise Murray will be up against another shot maker in another Frenchman Benoit Paire (just YouTube Paire dropshot to sample his ridiculous talent) but should be strong enough to overcome him. Nadal faces a slightly tricky opponent in Giles Muller, a fast/grass court specialist with a monster serve who can take time away from the Spaniard and make things tough. Bad news – Muller beat Nadal at Wimbledon. Good news: That was 12 years ago, and Nadal has gotten better on the grass since then. Federer plays the most intriguing matchup against the Bulgarian heartthrob Grigor Dimitrov who has been saddled with the impossible-to-live-up-to moniker 'Baby Fed', his game resembling the Swiss master's in many ways. But everything Grigor does, Roger does better. And the head to head is five – nil in his favor too. Expect the big 4 to all come through, with Nadal facing the toughest challenge.

In the remaining matches, the American Sam Querrey, who knocked out Djokovic in the third round, last year should be able to handle the big serving South African Kevin Anderson, who was two sets to love up against Djokovic two years ago. Expect a close serve-fest. Marin Cilic should put paid to Roberta Bautista Agut's surprising run this far, and Thomas Berdych's grass-court nous should be sufficient against Dominic Theim, who has surprised many by progressing this far. The last matchup is a doozy – last year's finalist and monster serving Canadian Milos Raonic against rising superstar Russian Alex Zverev, for whom the sky is the limit.

Picks: Murray, Querrey, Nadal and Cilic to come through from the top half and Raonic, Federer, Berdych and Djokovic from the bottom.

Prediction: More close matches on the women's side. On the men's side: Dimitrov-Federer will be beautiful to watch, Nadal could get pushed hard against Muller and Raonic-Zverev is almost too close to call.

Too much of a good thing: Never enough!

 

When the Djoker forgot to entertain

When Novak Djokovic won the Novak-Slam last year, he remarked that it was as if his ‘spirit had left his body’ during the final points. Well, that spirit has come thudding to the ground. The quarter-final thumping at the hands of Dominic Thiem in Paris last week was the kind of out-of body performance that made the match go from irresistible to unwatchable.

Watching Djokovic crash out of the French Open last Wednesday was the most disorienting and painful sight I’ve ever seen on a tennis court (apart from my own attempts at a slam dunk overhead). Even though he was in a slump that had already seen him give up three of the four Slam titles he proudly held a year ago (the first man to do so since Laver; and the first ever to win 4 straight Slams on three surfaces), this was a defeat of such a nature that left me stunned. It turned out I was in good company – seven-time Slam winners John McEnroe and Mats Wilander had pretty much the same response, struggling for words. The mind raced through all the Slams in all the years past to find a comparable defeat. One could not be found.

It wasn’t that Djokovic was knocked out in an early round like at Wimbledon last year (3R to Sam Querrey). Nor was it that Djokovic lost to an unknown player (Dennis Istomin in Australia). He lost in a completely respectable quarter-final to the only man who had beaten the eventual French champion Rafael Nadal on clay this year, the Austrian especially-on-clay wunderkind and last year’s semifinalist, Dominic Thiem. No, the shock at this defeat was all in the manner and not in the result. And it was to a man who he had just beaten 0 and 1 two weeks ago. Things seemed to be getting back on track, slowly.

…

Not since 2005 had he lost a set to love in a Grand Slam. And even during the early years, when he was known as a joker (not always appreciatively) when he had a reputation of retiring in matches (he retired two sets to love down against Nadal in 2006 and almost ludicrously claimed he had been ‘in control’ in the early stages), there had hardly been a match where he so visibly threw in the towel.

From 2008 to the end of 2010, he was content being #3. He would mostly reach the semifinals of Slams, lose to Federer or Nadal (except in Aus ’08) and be characteristically generous in defeat (and continues to be), always good to see. But in 2011, he changed the status quo and went from chasing the top two to leaving them chasing him. The greatest achievements in sport come when the status quo is challenged. But this was not the Djokovic we knew. That many loved and some found irritable at times. The man for whom match point was just a hurdle to be crossed before winning a match (ask Roger Federer in the 2010 and 2011 US Open semifinals, about that). This was not the man who defeated a sublime Federer to win his second U S Open in 2015 in front of a not-even-remotely balanced nighttime New York crowd. The man who, not once, but twice, has handed the formidable Nadal seven defeats – count them, seven – in a row. The man who defeated two of his greatest rivals in back to back matches – 4h50m against Murray and then a day and a bit later, 5h53m against Nadal to claim what was his greatest Slam title, a barely comprehensible feat of skill, endurance, strength and indomitability. Djokovic, who used to be weak, called a joke by Federer and mocked by Roddick had transformed himself into Mr Indomitable. He could not be passed. He would not be beaten. None shall pass, as the Black Knight said.

…

Except that now he was floundering, making seven backhand errors in the first set tiebreak against a fearless opponent. He might as well have lost his limbs for how effective he was in the third set. A third set, when everyone expected him to grind down and find a way back in, he chose to bolt. Charging the net and giving up the ghost, and now the joke was on him.

Change must come. The firing of his entire coaching team, the switch to Lacoste, the hiring of Agassi, however unconventional the terms all speak to an intent to rediscover his mojo. The retention of Pepe Imaz, the repeated talking of love and peace – this is all very well at a commune, but not on a tennis court, in a sport that Boris Becker once said was ‘boxing without the punches’. Jim Courier was not the only expert to question Djokovic on the benefit of keeping Pepe around.

Twelve months ago, he was the next Laver. The man who was seriously challenging Roger Federer for the overall Slam count and a legitimate contender for the GOAT title. Now, he risks going the way of Mats Wilander, who after winning three Slams in 1988, barely won a match of significance at a Slam after. Once the peak was reached, he could not reset his goals. And tennis was the poorer.

Falling down is how we grow. Staying down is how we die. Here’s hoping Novak Djokovic doesn’t  stay down.

Disclosure: I am a Rafa Nadal fan and could argue that Novak’s slump is a good sign from that point of view. Novak Djokovic could and has defeated Nadal and Federer on their favorite surfaces handily. But as a tennis fan, who wants the best to be the best, it is hard viewing. Djokovic at his best is a real threat to Federer’s Slam count. Yet, one hopes that Agassi slaps some sense into him. Maybe Steffi can give him a dose of good German common sense and tell him to shelve the peace and love for post-retirement. He needs to find the inner mongrel. Come on Novak, rip some shirts. Without it, he may as well almost retire to his house in Florida. Otherwise this is too painful.

Review: Federer and Me: A Story of Obsession

Federer and Me: A Story of Obsession by William Skidelsky
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I suppose it is not fair to read a book written by an obsessive and then expect it to be totally fair and balanced. Having said that, Skidelsky's book is not without merit. The strongest portions are the ones where he discusses the advancement of the game, expertly analyses the Federer forehand and compares the same with other (older and newer) forehands. However, the ground is slightly shakier when Skidelsky talks about his own life, narrating how he lost his virginity (?) and attempts to amuse us with his experience in a restroom in Halle. Think Bill Bryson-lite. I finished the book feeling quite sorry for the author's then girlfriend who became his wife. His description of the amazingly recuperative powers of Federer’s game to allow them to heal after a particularly painful personal episode raises many questions, best answered by a therapist. Still, perhaps that is the price of being married to a person who has a self-proclaimed obsession. The descriptions of Nadal are predictably one-eyed, undoubtedly lapped up by Fedheads everywhere, but not particularly original or inventive. What has always amused me is how fragile Federer's fans are, given his success. Instead of the granite confidence of other sports fans, the Federer fan is always insecure - far more than needed, it seems. Skidelsky does the Swiss no favours by drawing a line to him from Graeme Hick - the Zimbabwean's most ardent fans would balk at that. Near the end of the book, Skidelsky comments on the unevenness of his relationship with Federer (as must be with almost all fans and their idols). Like the Ethan Hawke character in Before Sunset, maybe this book was written with that subliminal motive or getting the attention of the Swiss player. And he may yet be rewarded. A good read for Federer fans, uneven for tennis fans.

View all my reviews

2016 - Novak Djokovic's Grand Slam quest

While the final in Basel pointed to Nadal making steps towards his best and offered a good look at Federer at his aggressive best, it is still hard to look beyond a certain Serbian to be overwhelming favourite at all the tournaments that count next year. I believe Djokovic has ‘Grand Slam’ on the mind and here are some reasons why he should be reasonably optimistic.

Will Novak solve the riddle of Roland Garros in 2016 and achieve a Grand Slam?

He has no real rivals over five setters. Roger Federer and Andy Murray have challenged and beaten Novak this year, turning in stellar performances. But these wins were over three sets. They have been unable to really take a tilt at Djokovic at the Slams. Murray lost to Novak easily in Melbourne and folded in the fifth at Paris. Federer played a match for the ages in his Wimbledon semifinal against Murray, but was always playing catch-up in the finals. At New York, almost everything went Federer’s way - he played short matches, not dropping a set and being as fresh as possible, the crowd at Flushing Meadow was not even remotely fair, resembling a Davis Cup crowd rather than a neutral crowd and he managed to play superbly for two and a half sets. But the signs were always pointing to trouble. He came into the final not having dropped serve over two or more tournaments and found himself under severe pressure in almost every game in the first set. It really seemed as if Djokovic could break at will. And in a two-horse race, Roger was always second best. Beyond Murray and Federer stand Wawrinka, who plays his best at the business end of tournaments and does not suffer from the pressure of performance there and actually competes well with Novak especially in Melbourne and Paris,  and Nadal (if he continues to work his way back and even then, only on clay probably)

He is thinking about it. During the US Open, Novak was asked about his chances of winning the Grand Slam one year. His answer was very informative. Instead of the usual ‘take it one match at a time’ platitude that players love trotting out, he just said to the interviewer ‘from your mouth to God’s ears’. I think all the attention on Serena’s Grand Slam pursuit has put it firmly in his mind.

He ended up with a better Slam year than Serena in 2015: Djokovic had a better year in the Slams than Serena (27-1 to 26-1). Wawrinka played lights out tennis in Paris and that is pretty much what it takes to beat Djokovic anywhere.  His pursuit of the calendar Grand Slam is more realistically achievable than anyone since Federer in 2005 (before you-know-who came and bossed the clay). His celebrations of late have become more muted, which seems to indicate that he is chasing history.

He is not being stretched: After winning three Slams, Djokovic won the next two tournaments convincingly. Every match and every set was dominated except for one set against Tomic. On average, he broke his opponents twice each set they played. And he always seemed to have an extra gear. Who would bet against him running the table through to the end of the year?

Basel 2015: Roger Federer wins and Rafael Nadal leaves encouraged too

It was a good day for Swiss tennis fans.

It was the best result for them - their hero, unsatisfied with six titles, powered his way to a seventh. And the cherry on top was the fact that he did it against his primary rival, Nadal. They hadn't met since last year's Australian Open and you had to go further back for a meeting in a final (Rome 2013). Federer, second only to Djokovic indoors, was pretty much in control for almost all of the match barring a brief phase at the end of the second set, where Nadal reminded him of the slender margins of this game as well as laying a marker for the rest of the tour. For the rest of the match a wonderfully aggressive Federer was able to handle everything Nadal threw at him, served with great power and accuracy and rarely made to chase. Too much game on a surface that suits his game to a T, and his wonderful commitment to aggression over the last year and a half has only done him good.

Nadal, meanwhile, did not have too much to cry about. After a woeful 2015, he has started to approach consistency over the last three tournaments he has played - a runner-up to Djokovic at Beijing, a semifinal at Shanghai and now a runner up - these matches have shown him making his way back towards his best. More work has to be done, but it is thrilling to have him in the mix again. If the first set against Djokovic in Beijing showed glimmers, here he was able to mount a serious challenge at times, dazzling the crowd with some vintage shots.

I was hoping that tennis would win and while not a classic, the match was compelling with plenty of winners and almost customary ‘wow-did-you-see-that’ shots from both men. Federer and Nadal will leave Basel encouraged for the rest of the year and for 2016. And after that, who knows?

Both men are closer to the end than the beginning but rather than sadden, it need only make us enjoy each match they play a little more. Don't forget, this too shall pass.

It was a good day for tennis fans.