Thursday, October 30, 2008

Have the courts been slowed down too much in Paris?

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga at the Paris MastersThis week, in the Paris Masters Series, like every year at this event, the main focus on the event appears to be on who will be obtaining the remaining three places in the Tennis Masters Cup in Shanghai. At the end of yesterday’s play, this question seems to have been largely answered already, as David Ferrer crashed out to Philipp Kohlschreiber in his opening match, while Gilles Simon continued his strong run defeating Igor Andreev in his first match of the week. Unless if any of the outside contenders, like Fernando Verdasco, Gael Monfils or David Nalbandian wins the title, or either Jo-Wilfried Tsonga or James Blake reaches the final (and Simon loses early), which appears unlikely at this point, both Juan Martin Del Potro and Gilles Simon will be making their Masters Cup debut this year.

As for the tournament itself, there has been quite a bit of discussion from commentators and fans yet again this year regarding the speed of the court in Paris Bercy, which before it was switched to indoor hardcourt last year, used to be played on one of the quickest courts on the tour, on indoor carpet. For me, the biggest problem is that the tournament organizers announced that they had sped up the court this year to make it a similar speed to Madrid, when this clearly is not the case. While it is true that the speed of the indoor courts has definitely slowed down across the board, it does appear that there was a concerted effort from many of the tournament directors to speed it up this year, compared to last year with the court surface in Vienna and Basel playing faster than it did the previous year.

In the match between Andy Murray and Sam Querrey, Querrey could not appear to penetrate through the court at all, with his usually dangerous forehand sitting up relatively high making him look nothing more than a solid, consistent player. But interestingly if you tune into the action on Court 1, there is such a sizable difference in playing conditions, where the court appears to be much quicker, although the lower camera angle definitely adds to that view.

Personally for me, I have been enjoying watching the action on Court 1 on the Masters Series TV website. It feels more like watching a live tennis match, than a usual televised match does. It has an extremely low camera angle and the camera actually doesn’t even manage to fit the entire width of the court, so it has to pan across to catch all of the action, even though it is filmed on widescreen, so imagine how frustrating it must be for those watching on 4:3. I spent most of the time marvelling at the pace that the players can generate on their groundstrokes, and with the sound effects, you can hear the clean sound of the ball coming right off the strings of the players’ racquets and all of the little steps required for each player to get into position, especially if it’s someone who is a busy mover, like David Ferrer.

I like the way they start off each match in a concert-like atmosphere on Court Central with the lights dimmed down and the spotlight being placed firmly on the players, as they walk onto the stage. The French crowd also seem to be fairly enthusiastic, and more vocal about their support than most other crowds in the world. Unfortunately the camera angle does the spectacle no favours, with it being filmed relatively low with the court resembling the shape of a square, more so than its actual dimensions. It’s harder to appreciate the pace and depth that the players are generating on their shots, although it is easier to appreciate touch shots and excellent feel, which both Murray and Stepanek exhibited yesterday. Andy Murray was particularly impressive yesterday, showing a lot of confidence in his game, at times toying with Querrey, with short slices, dropshots, lobs and more. At one point, he hit one of those flick backhands that Roger Federer occasionally hits, where he was running with his back from the net and flicked his racquet across over his head to hit a passing shot winner.

The match of the day was between Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Radek Stepanek. Stepanek played close to his best tennis for most of the match, putting Tsonga under a lot of pressure to come up with passing shots, particularly on Tsonga’s weaker backhand side and showed some superb feel and athleticism at the net. With the encouragement of the crowd, Tsonga was extremely fired up for the occasion, although the level of his play fluctuated far more than Stepanek’s, going through several ups and downs during the match. But on the crucial points, Tsonga delivered on the passing shots, especially on the backhand side where it really looks like he has to labour hard to find the strength needed to line it up, generate the racquet head speed and hit the desired target. He finished the match with a flourish hitting three spectacular winners to break serve Stepanek’s serve to win the match.

I also managed to catch some of the action between Italy’s Simone Bolelli and James Blake. Bolelli is an excellent shotmaker and can hit his fair share of flashy winners on a good day, but also has the reputation of being fairly inconsistent. It was interesting to note in this particular match the vast difference between the quality of shot that Bolelli hits when he is set up for the shot and when he has to improvise. Bolelli is fairly upright in his stance on both the forehand and backhand wings when he is in position, so whenever he was forced to hit a shot off the back foot or even stretch out to hit a squash shot or blocked shot, his movement and racquet control looked incredibly mediocre.

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Gilles Simon battles past Nadal to reach his first Masters final

Gilles Simon in his upset win over Rafael Nadal at the Madrid MastersGilles Simon had saved six match points in two separate matches to reach the semi-finals of the Masters Series in Madrid. In his toughest test of the week against the world number 1, Rafael Nadal, Simon was tested in every way possible in one of the most physically and mentally draining three set matches that I have seen, and came out triumphant.

The match was an exhausting three hour, 20 minute marathon which featured exceptional court coverage point after point, with both players probing each other and moving each other around superbly. Even at the end of the second set, Simon looked like he was on the verge of being beaten to the ground with the amount of energy that he was needing to expend each and every point, and he would often bend down in tiredness before composing himself again for the next point. But looks can be deceiving, and Simon continued to dig deep, and come late in the third set, Simon was still there, still willing to grind out every point and still having the courage to go for his shots.

Contrast this to their previous match that these two played in the third round of the Australian Open earlier this year, before Simon had made his big breakthrough, where they had similarly gruelling rallies in the first set and Simon expended all of his energy in an attempt to win the first set where he did hold a couple of set points, but as soon as the set had slipped out of his hands, he ran out of gas and was beaten convincingly in the next two sets.

The match started off in a routine manner with Nadal being able to boss around the rallies. Simon was relaxed in his approach to his tennis, content to play reactively and keep the ball going crosscourt the majority of the time, often going to Nadal's backhand. It felt like Nadal was able to move Simon around with little effort and without risk, much like what would you expect when Nadal plays against a lower ranked player, not in the semi-finals of a Masters Series.

There was speculation that maybe Simon was jaded from the energy he had expended during the week, as he gave himself more time to get to the ball, letting the ball come to him instead of playing it on the rise. Typically Simon has the sort of easygoing strokes that with the way he hits the ball, sometimes it feels like he can afford to swing late because of his short backswings.

Simon is one of those players who I have always thought had excellent feel and finesse on his groundstrokes, much like someone like Anna Chakvetadze on the women's side except that Simon bases his game around consistency whereas Chakvetadze is the opposite. They both have a knack of hitting shots into tricky positions time and time again, and have excellent placement on their groundstrokes. They also thrive on their opponents giving them openings or angles to work with to set up their groundstrokes, and this was again evident in this match as Simon and Nadal were consistently outmaneuvering each other in one gruelling rally after another.

After losing the first set, Simon promptly adjusted his game plan, started taking the ball earlier (which is what we were expecting right from the outset), hitting the ball a little bit harder and opening the court much better. In the last two sets of this match, Simon took his (usually) subtle game to another level executing everything that he normally does with more power and conviction.

Simon's backhand is his stronger wing, where he possesses a lot of variety and is able to redirect the ball with ease, either angled crosscourt or down-the-line, and his return of serve on that side is one of his biggest strengths. However, it was his forehand that was the revelation in this match. He usually only unloads on it selectively but it became a big weapon in this match as he flattened out on it consistently and was often able to win points hitting it hard and flat to Nadal's forehand.

Simon possesses very flat groundstrokes on both sides, and as a result, he doesn't unload on his groundstrokes often and uses it more as a surprise tactic, as a change of pace, while relying on placement other times but against a player as good defensively like Nadal, he opted for a more aggressive game plan.

It must be said that the high bounce that Nadal gets on his shots worked in Simon's favour from that standpoint, to give a bit more margin for error on Simon's flat shots, whereas I'd say against Andy Murray, he's going to be having a lot of problems when Murray slices his backhand to Simon's forehand side, or at least that will limit his offensive options.

However, what was most impressive about Simon was the courage and fighting spirit that he showed to continually battle for each and every single point, despite the constant mental and physical pressure that was placed on him throughout the match. The 15 minute game at 3-3 was the best example. Simon had set up the point perfectly pulling Nadal way out of court finally after stringing together five or so perfectly executed strokes then found himself with a floater that he would have just needed to tap into the open court, but the shot was landing dangerously close to the line and Simon didn’t know whether to leave it or not. In the last minute, Simon stuck out his racquet with two hands as to hit a swing backhand volley but failed miserably as it sailed long by quite some margin. Then immediately the next point Simon bounced back and continued to take the game to Nadal, taking the ball early and moving it around.

He doesn't get discouraged by the past. Each and every point, he is prepared to put in just as much effort, never resorting to cheap ways of winning points, even if he just ran a couple of laps around the court in the previous 25+ shot rally. In that way, he was able to deal with the pressure that usually allows Nadal to get on top of his opponents. At times, Nadal thought he had done just about everything to win the point, then Simon in that final shot when completely out of position, came up with the unlikely winner, much to Nadal's surprise.

Nadal kept plugging away and continued to try to move Simon around the court in a controlled and relentless manner. His shots, especially on the backhand side looked to be lacking in its usual pace which allowed Simon to dictate more than he'd like. Most of his shots were hit at medium pace at best on his end, and he was never really able to step up the pace when he had maintained control of the rally. Towards the closing stage of the match, a few errors started to creep in especially when he had to deal with deep shots which he ended up mishitting badly, while Simon continued his relentless consistency.

For Nadal, he might view this match as the one that got away considering that he was only able to convert a miserable 5/22 break points. As for Simon, apart from reaching his first Masters Series final, his chances of making the elite eight man field at the year end Tennis Masters Cup in Shanghai have improved greatly, and he now must be considered one of the main contenders to take one of the final spots.

Monday, October 13, 2008

Kunitsyn wins his maiden title in Moscow while Safin continues his title drought

Igor Kunitsyn, first title in MoscowOn a week in, week out basis, Igor Kunitsyn rarely wins even consecutive matches on the ATP tour. But when he plays in his home country of Russia, he’s a different calibre of player, with all of his career highlights occurring in Russia. Kunitsyn had previously made two ATP semi-finals in the Kremlin Cup and one semi-final in St. Petersburg so it was appropriate that he lifted his maiden title in Moscow, where he defeated his countryman Marat Safin in three gruelling sets.

Safin himself hasn’t won a title since the Australian Open in 2005, and on paper, he was the clear favourite to win this, maybe more because of his experience rather than his form which was somewhat patchy. Safin was pushed to the limit in three sets in the first round against the 521st ranked Noam Okun, which incidentally was his 400th career win overall but later went on to defeat Nikolay Davydenko, the three-time Moscow champion.

For those who woke up in the morning and checked the score thinking it was a matter of Safin self-destructing, that was not the case. To put it briefly, Safin played solid tennis for the vast majority of the match, but was not able to elevate his game to the level necessary to beat a tenacious Kunitsyn, who was able to neutralise everything Safin was throwing at him and used it to move him around with accurate groundstrokes. Safin never looked in control during the baseline rallies and was not able to overpower the more inexperienced Russian.

I hadn’t seen Kunitsyn play much before until this week so it was hard to gauge what his game looks like on an average day but in his matches against Safin and Santoro, he took down his opponents by playing good controlled and accurate tennis. Kunitsyn, at first, doesn’t look like he would be much of a threat, after all, he’s nothing more than solid off both wings and he doesn’t hit with any more pace than the average player.

This initial impression turned out to be a hasty one on my part and had more to do with his nervous start against Safin, where in the first three or so games, he had already piled up ten unforced errors to a mere two from Safin. Kunitsyn also needed time to adjust to Safin’s pace of shot, which is very much the opposite of Fabrice Santoro’s, his opponent in the previous round. Often Kunitsyn found himself catching the ball late especially on the forehand side and whenever he had to resort to a second serve, he was being put on the back foot immediately.

Kunitsyn’s forehand technically looks almost like a mirror image of Marin Cilic’s, and like Cilic, he has the same tendency to sometimes not get enough racquet acceleration and dump it in the net. In fact, his game style and the way he produces his groundstrokes reminds me much of a less powerful version of Cilic, except his backhand has slightly more topspin than Cilic’s.

Kunitsyn had some trouble early on holding serve, while Safin was cruising through his games but Kunitsyn picked up his level from then on, and it became a real contest as the overall quality of the match improved. Safin wasn’t really able to impose himself in the manner that I thought he would. He was keeping consistent depth on his shots and content to play patiently and move the ball around for the most part. Whenever he stepped up the pace on particular shots, he found Kunitsyn right there to return it with interest, and Safin wasn’t really playing well enough to try to play consistently aggressively. For a brief moment in the first set, Safin experimented with moving forward and coming into the net, which brought him some success, but this only lasted about three or so games as Safin then retreated back into playing a typical baseline game.

The impressive part about Kunitsyn was that he was hanging with Safin, and doing a better job moving Safin around than vice versa. Kunitsyn would fit right in the category of a counterpuncher because he needed to either be given slight openings to hit effective shots or either set them up himself, using what his opponent feeds him rather than taking it out of his opponent’s hands.

The best point of the match was at 15-30, 4-4 in the first set when Safin threw everything he had at Kunitsyn hitting deep and hard to both sides of the court, including a massive forehand that skidded right off the back edge of the line, but Kunitsyn absorbed all of the pace and was able to get back into a neutral position trading deep crosscourt groundstrokes, then about four or five shots later fires a forehand down-the-line.

Sometimes counterpunchers are given a bad name, and people interpret that to mean the same as a purely defensive players but counterpunchers play their fair share of well-placed, forcing shots. Almost every rally in this match was long and extended with both players keeping relatively good consistency, depth and accuracy but it lacked a bit of spark at times, with a similar pattern in the baseline rallies emerging throughout the near-three hour long contest. Safin, surprisingly didn’t win that many free points on his serve aside from early on in the first set and on some big points, notably on the many of the break points which he saved with clutch serving.

The first set went the distance with Kunitsyn edging out Safin in the tie-break 8-6, coming from a 3-0 deficit. In the crucial set point which Kunitsyn won, Safin’s serve was initially called an ace but Kunitsyn challenged and was proven correct with the serve missing by a considerable distance. Then to win the set, Kunitsyn shanked a forehand that landed high and awkwardly deep onto the baseline forcing Safin into error. Kunitsyn led by a break at 4-2 in the second set, but played possibly his worst game of the match to hand it back straight away, and so the battle continued.

In the third set, Kunitsyn received treatment for cramps on at least two occasions, but did not show any noticeable signs of fatigue. By then, Safin’s game started to deteriorate and given how closely contested the whole match was, it was a rather tame ending for Safin as Kunitsyn closed out the match in a relatively comfortable fashion.

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Berdych comes back from the brink to defeat Roddick and reach the Tokyo final

Tomas Berdych, into the finals of TokyoTomas Berdych, looked down and out most of the match against Andy Roddick but edged it out in a third set tie-break to reach the final of Tokyo, where he next meets Juan Martin Del Potro.

The match, aside from the third set tie-break which was played superbly from Berdych, was characterized by minor concentration lapses or small poor patches of play from both players which was enough to make the difference at each of the crucial points in a closely contested match. Roddick was in the driver’s seat for most of the match, holding onto an early break lead in the opening game of the third set to serve for the match at 5-3 in the final decisive set, but couldn’t finish Berdych off and subsequently lost in a third set tie-break.

The first set could be best described as efficient, with both Roddick and Berdych winning points typically the way they would like to, with Roddick serving a high percentage of first serves like he so often does and taking care of his service games, and Berdych controlling the tempo of the baseline rallies, backed up by some big serving of his own.

The turning point was at 5-5 in the first set, when Berdych hit an off forehand that landed deep right on the baseline on break point down, much to Roddick’s displeasure. That was when Roddick started to have a running dialogue with Norm Chryst on the chair for the rest of the match, and even to someone in his box. While Berdych went on to hold serve that game, that point effectively had no impact on the outcome of the match as Roddick went on to win that set in a tie-break, but it did affect Roddick’s performance later on. He was grumpy and frustrated, he was distracted and his performance was lacking in intensity, and he only has himself to blame.

The most fascinating aspect of the match was to watch the contrasting manner in which both players went about in their approach to the baseline rallies. Roddick is intent to keep the pressure on his opponent by forcing his opponents to come up with winning shots time after time. He tries to win points any way he can even if it doesn’t necessarily look effective, and that makes him a better match player in the long run than someone like Berdych who doesn’t adjust his game according to the calibre of player he is facing.

Berdych has the ability to generate impressive weight of shot and power on his groundstrokes seemingly through timing and good balance and positioning on his shots, whereas Roddick puts noticeable effort and energy into all of his shots and movements. Berdych’s shots seem to be able to shoot through the court, more so than other players, and often he made Roddick’s groundstrokes look lightweight in comparison. Even when Berdych was hitting a safe rally shot, it looked like the equivalent of a typical player’s aggressive shot, which would have to be one of his biggest strengths. His movement around the court is equally as effortless, and I particularly like the way he moves around his backhand to hit that off forehand, which he used often in this match more as a setup shot to open the court, which he would often follow up with an accurate forehand down-the-line.

In the rallies, Roddick looked more like he was trying to keep up with Berdych and take advantage of any minor slip-ups that Berdych had, which turned out to be an effective enough strategy for the majority of the match, but in the end, Roddick made a couple of poor errors of his own to lose the lead that he had created for himself.

The way Berdych sets himself to hit his groundstrokes, he likes to have the ball coming to him at a predictable height, preferably up high so he doesn’t have to bend down low and because his margin of shot over the net can be a problem. He can handle the occasional slice but he has to see it coming early. In the third set, Berdych was broken in the opening game of the third set, making two very tame errors getting caught flat-footed on very makeable shots, that were played deep right down on his feet perhaps showing that he is more comfortable at using his wingspan to move to a ball, rather than making the necessary adjustments to return a shot coming towards his body. Berdych rarely mixes up the height and spin that he generates on the ball, even defensively, where you rarely see him throw up a higher loopier ball to give himself more time to get back into position.