2008/2009: Reviewing the top 10 women and their future prospects

Written exclusively for Inside-Tennis.net:
It was a turbulent season on the WTA Tour in 2008. Justine Henin, the dominant player of 2007 announced her immediate retirement while she was still on top, Maria Sharapova struggled with injuries after an impressive Australian Open and the number one ranking seemed to chop and change every couple of months, to the point where it was difficult to think of any player as the ‘best player of the world’. In the end, Jankovic edged it out due to a strong end of 2008, despite not winning any slams, and by showing just that extra bit of consistency compared to others. The grand slams were won by four separate players for the first time since 2005, illustrating the lack of a dominant player.

Below is a review of each top 10 player’s 2008 season and their prospects heading into 2009, particularly in the grand slams.

1. Jelena Jankovic

After a successful 2007 season, Jankovic’s progress stalled in the first three quarters of the 2008 season. She looked worn out physically and mentally, and started to rely more on her natural athleticism rather than all-round game to win matches, which was always a step above many of her peers. The turning point was at the US Open, when Jankovic grinded out a couple of tough matches, then relished the opportunity in a night-time final against Serena Williams, despite not winning the match. Jankovic was loose and relaxed, showing that when she plays uninhibited tennis, she is one of the best players in the world. Jankovic then built on that momentum in the latter stages of the year, sending a strong message to the media and tennis fans that mocked her short-lived number one spot prior to the US Open.

When Jankovic is playing well, she moves her opponents around beautifully side-to-side with deep, accurate groundstrokes and can turn her matches into a living nightmare for her opponents, who can never seem to hit through her consistently enough or break her down. The key to Jankovic’s success seems to be a matter of whether she can remain relaxed and enjoy herself, and whether she can remain as physically strong as she needs to be, both areas which seem to go hand-in-hand with her. Jankovic will definitely be a threat in 2009, and should be able to consistently reach the late stages of the majors. If Jankovic can put herself in the position to challenge the top players enough times, then she will win one sooner or later.

2. Serena Williams

Following the retirement of Justine Henin, Serena was predicted to replace Henin as the leading player of women’s tennis, given that it was Henin that defeated Williams in three out of the four slams in 2007. However, Serena continued to struggle with maintaining any consistency, and her tournament schedule was comparatively lighter than Jankovic, who is known as an ironwoman. Williams suffered two disappointing losses at the Australian Open and French Open at the hands of Jankovic and Srebotnik but redeemed herself with a finals appearance at Wimbledon where she fell to her sister, Venus in a high quality match and at the US Open where she took the title. Serena’s long-talked about fitness and motivation problems, seem to be well behind her, reinforcing the fact that Serena is no longer as dominant as she was earlier in her career, but rather one of the best players in the world. Serena should be able to win one or two slams next year, but anything beyond that would be unlikely.

3. Dinara Safina

It was a breakthrough year for Safina, who before this season, had never been mentioned in the same breath as players like Jankovic and Ivanovic. It was commonly thought that Safina’s movement would prevent her to challenge for the biggest titles, but Safina showed remarkable improvements in this area, and subsequently so did her results. She had also improved her serve, and her competitive spirit and mental toughness gave her an edge over some of her peers. During the stretch between the French Open to the US Open, Safina compiled consistently the best results of any player. Given all that she has achieved this year, she has to be considered one of the main contenders in each of the slams, but whether she will win one is another matter.

4. Elena Dementieva

After three years of finishing consistently in the top 10, Dementieva compiled her best season since 2004, in a year that was highlighted by capturing the Olympic gold medal. For Dementieva, the key seems to be consistency, given that throughout her career she has been known for crashing out in the early rounds more often than other top players and frequently struggling with long, tough three-set battles. Unfortunately for Dementieva, despite her game moving in the right direction, she still seems suspect mentally. This was in evidence at the French Open, Wimbledon and US Open, where she struggled in either tight or leading positions, particularly at the French Open where she blew a 5-1 lead in the second set against Dinara Safina. What year Dementieva will have in 2009 is tough to predict, but based on history, I’ll go with a consistent top 10 finish for her, and maybe one semi-final appearance at a Slam.

5. Ana Ivanovic

It was a year of two halves for Ivanovic, who was superb up until the French Open then faded badly after that. The build-up to Ivanovic’s first grand slam title was almost like a learning experience, in the manner she crumbled badly on her first attempt, then improved on that performance in the Australian Open final before capturing the French. Like Safina, Ivanovic had also made great strides in improving her fitness, and she had tempered her game to some extent. However, rather than building on her slam win, Ivanovic started to struggle considerably, mentally more than anything where she often seemed shaky and lacking in confidence. The US Open loss to Julie Coin sticks to mind, where Ivanovic struggled to take advantage of a nervous Coin in the latter stages of the match, and was equally shaky herself. Heading into 2009, the pressure should firmly be off her shoulders by now and after the off-season break, she should be able to bounce back, and learn from that experience to yet again compete at the highest level.

6. Venus Williams

In the last few years or so, Venus Williams has largely compiled inconsistent results over the course of a season, and this year was no different. By capturing Wimbledon yet again, Venus confirmed her status as the best grass court player of this generation. Apart from Wimbledon, the one shining light of Venus’s year was her title win at the year-end championships, a place where she had never triumphed before which bodes nicely for 2009. Injuries and physical problems remained a frequent problem for Venus this year, and that will again be one of her main obstacles in 2009. If I was to make a prediction, I’d expect 2009 to be a very similar year for Venus to this year.

7. Vera Zvonareva

Zvonareva broke through to the top ten this year off the back of a strong end-of-season where she was 27-7 in wins/losses. Her breakthrough tournament was undoubtedly in the year-end championships where she finally established herself as a player that can potentially cause the top players problems, defeating Jankovic, Ivanovic, Kuznetsova and Dementieva to reach the finals. During the week, she played the sort of controlled aggression reminiscent of the likes of Dinara Safina. However, there are still big question marks over Zvonareva having crashed out early in all four grand slams this year and having never advanced past the quarter-finals in her career.

8. Svetlana Kuznetsova

It was undoubtedly a disappointing year for Kuznetsova, in a year that saw her capture no titles, continuing her miserable finals conversion rate having reached 5 finals in 2008. The grand slams in particular were a low point, with her only highlight being a semi-final appearance at Roland Garros where she was beaten convincingly by Safina. Compared to 2007 where Kuznetsova was ranked number 2, branded undeserving of that achievement and made the US Open final, Kuznetsova has largely flown under the radar this year, and for good reason. Kuznetsova most definitely has the game to compete near the top of the rankings, especially given the current lack of a dominant figure, but what kind of year she will have in 2009 is largely unknown.

9. Maria Sharapova

Sharapova began the year on a high winning the Australian Open, in what was arguably her most impressive slam win in her career, prompting suggestions that she could be the next dominant figure in tennis. But it became an injury-plagued season for Sharapova, who struggled yet again with the same shoulder injury that had troubled her late in 2007. If Sharapova can remain injury-free, she should still be one of the leading contenders in all of the majors, except for the French, and she should have a good shot at obtaining the number 1 ranking as well. Sharapova simply has more weapons than the likes of Dementieva and Safina, a much better serve and has the ability to perform as consistently as them, if not more so.

10. Agnieszka Radwanska

Radwanska continued her rise up the rankings in 2008, mainly breaking into the top 10 more as a result of ongoing consistency rather than any breakthrough result. She reached two quarter-finals in the slams and reached the fourth round on the other two occasions, but on all occasions, she was beaten relatively comfortably suggesting that she still has some way to go before she can challenge the elite players. She has taken a couple of major scalps in her career, but is too prone to being overpowered to beat them on a good day, to be able to string enough big wins together.

Del Potro's injury puts Argentina's Davis Cup chances in doubt

Prior to the start of the Davis Cup clash between Spain and Argentina, Argentina were firm favourites to take a 2-0 lead on the opening day. But at the end of the opening day's play, both countries were level at 1-1, with Argentina's David Nalbandian comfortably defeating David Ferrer 6-3 6-2 6-3 in the opening rubber, before Spain's Feliciano Lopez produced a minor upset to defeat Juan Martin Del Potro 4-6 7-6(2) 7-6(4) 6-3.

With the groin injury that Del Potro picked up towards the conclusion of his encounter, the hopes of Argentina taking home their first Davis Cup looks more uncertain than ever. Today's doubles rubber should be the decisive factor in this final, where the winning nation should be favoured to lift the trophy on Sunday. Spain should start the match as slight favourites given their better track record in Davis Cup doubles, whereas Nalbandian/Calleri have shown an inconsistent level in the past, most notably in the 2006 final where the Argentine pair meekly went down to Marat Safin and Dmitry Tursunov in three very one-sided sets.

The day started off brightly for the Argentine team, with David Nalbandian, relishing the opportunity of playing for his country, finding his best tennis to dispatch of David Ferrer comfortably. Nalbandian has openly expressed his burning desire to win the Davis Cup, and he was extremely fired up for the occasion. In this frame of mind, Nalbandian is tough to beat, showing the sort of killer instinct that is often lacking on the main tour. That added purpose and determination in his mindset means that he doesn't give away any more cheap points than necessary, and on the occasion where he throws in a couple of poor errors, he bounces right back and continues to pour the pressure on his opponent. Ferrer had chances in this match, but whenever it felt like the match was building up to a contest, Nalbandian either edged it out to hold onto his serve, or bounced back strongly to break serve in the following game.

The match was more hard fought than the score suggested with both players often being pushed to the brink on their own service games. The match started off in a similar vein to many of their previous matches, featuring long, extended rallies, with Nalbandian being more adventurous in his shot selection. Nalbandian took an early break lead, then Ferrer started to maintain better depth and his accuracy on his groundstrokes to briefly threaten Nalbandian. But he was struggling to effectively set up points on his own serve, where he was often being attacked and immediately put on the back foot.

Ferrer has been struggling with his form as of late, and that showed in his patchy performance. Ferrer doesn't strike me as the kind of player that has the inner confidence to rise to the occasion, when he doesn't have the match wins under his belt. On the other hand, he is a battler and once he gets his teeth into a match, he can be dangerous. Ferrer needed to be rock solid to pose any threat, but it never looked like he had the necessary feel on the groundstrokes, often muscling it into the court.

Nalbandian has the superior shotmaking abilities to Ferrer, often catching Ferrer off-guard with changes of pace down-the-line and angled shots off both sides, but particularly on the forehand. The key for Nalbandian was to attack selectively, but slow down the pace when in a defensive position unless if attempting a winning shot. In particular, he was winning a lot of points on the return of serve, nailing that forehand crosscourt when receiving the wide swinging serve on the deuce court. By the end, the amount of winners started to mount for Nalbandian, while Ferrer started to lose belief after he squandered break points early in the third set.

It was up to Feliciano Lopez to keep Spain's hopes alive, and he delivered in abundance. Sometimes Lopez can be overly reliant on his own serve, and can be prone to making awful errors, but against Del Potro, he put in one of the most consistently effective performances I've seen from him. Lopez started off slow, being outplayed easily from the back of the court, and he handed the early break of serve to Del Potro with four sloppy errors. I think of Lopez as more of a short point player, thinking that eventually his groundstrokes would break down against most of his peers.

Usually when players face Lopez, they look to target his major weakness, the backhand where he is severely lacking an attacking shot, and resorts to the slice on most occasions. It's like the safe haven for players to go to when they're on the dead run. But this is a match-up that strongly favours Lopez, because Del Potro has been known to struggle with low slice backhands. He also likes to get into a rhythm from the back of the court, which Lopez does not provide him with.

Del Potro showed a lack of tactical awareness, displaying no particular pattern of play in order to win points. His accuracy was poor, letting Lopez taking more of an aggressive mindset, and quickly move up to the centre of the court, to put away volleys. He needed to take him out of court better and move the Spaniard around. On occasion, I noted him trying to trading crosscourt forehands to Lopez's backhand side, but Lopez promptly ran around it hit a forehand. He attempted a similar pattern of play against Roger Federer in Madrid, and got burned consistently. He needs to learn that you need to either open up the court to find an opponent's weakness or do so with much better accuracy.

Lopez seemed to enjoy the pace of Del Potro's groundstrokes, as well as the low bounce on the court which enabled him to shorten his backswings and redirect his shots. His groundstrokes were holding up remarkably well, even in the longer rallies. Importantly, he was also executing the lower difficulty shots well, taking care of the high volleys, put away shots and serving consistently well, which can sometimes be a problem with him. He never buckled under pressure, apart from one slight hiccup early in the third set and kept up a consistently high level to defeat Del Potro, who struggled with a groin injury from midway through the third set.

Will Argentina be able to overcome the pressure to capture their first Davis Cup?

The upcoming Davis Cup final between Spain and Argentina, has been described by the Argentine players as “the most important in Argentine tennis history”, in particular by David Nalbandian and Jose Acasuso. There has been a buzz around the media, the players and the public alike in the last week or so, seeing that this is a golden opportunity for Argentina to finally capture their first Davis Cup title, and to do so in front of their supporters. Guillermo Vilas, undoubtedly the most successful player Argentina ever produced, never managed to lead his country to the coveted title.

The pressure will be immense. Opportunities like this don’t come across often, and the Argentine players want to be a part of national history. The bookies are heavily leaning towards Argentina as heavy favourites and rightfully so. Both David Nalbandian and Juan Martin Del Potro have form on their side, as well as the advantage of surface choice which has seen them lay an indoor surface which was reported as being quicker than Paris Bercy and Shanghai.

From a spectator's point of view, the upcoming final was dealt a major blow with Rafael Nadal announcing his withdrawal, a week ago. The original line-up promised to be one of the most mouth-watering clashes in recent years, and could have gone right down to the wire. It promised to be a battle of heavyweights, with Rafael Nadal trying to fight his way through a partisan crowd on his least favoured surface against a fired up David Nalbandian, or attempting to withstand the barrage of big groundstrokes from Del Potro.

But as it stands, the main talking point of the tie is ‘Will Argentina be able to deliver under pressure, and will Spain be able to challenge them?’ And unfortunately for Argentina, if they are victorious, the amount of recognition they receive worldwide will be diminished significantly.

Now let’s take a closer look at the potential matches that will be taking place over the next three days.

David Nalbandian vs David Ferrer
Matches between Ferrer and Nalbandian have a tendency to be hard fought and tough mentally and physically, with long, exhausting rallies in abundance. Ferrer holds the advantage in the head-to-head, leading 6-3 in this matchup, but Nalbandian leads their hardcourt meetings 3-2. Last time they met in Paris Bercy last year, Nalbandian won in a three hour, three set contest, and prior to that, Ferrer defeated Nalbandian in five long sets after Nalbandian squandered a match point, missing a putaway backhand.

Nalbandian will have to remain patient and take advantage of his volleying skills and court sense to finish the point off at net. Ferrer has been struggled to find anything close to his best form as of late, and will need to rediscover his consistency to be of any threat. Nalbandian will likely rise to the occasion, while Ferrer might need to take advantage of his underdog status to find his form.

Prediction: Nalbandian in four sets.

Juan Martin Del Potro vs Feliciano Lopez
Feliciano Lopez, on paper possesses the game to upset the rhythm of Juan Martin Del Potro. He has a vicious lefty serve, a tricky slice backhand and regularly ventures to the net. Del Potro over the last few months has proven to be especially effective in disposing lower-ranked opponents, with his controlled big game, but this particular match-up should cause Del Potro more problems than if he were to face a more consistent, but equally effective player, like say Juan Carlos Ferrero.

Lopez posted a good indoor season himself for his standards, but isn’t really in the same class as Del Potro. I would expect Lopez to take it to a couple of tie-breaks and snatch a set, but he has too much of a tendency to throw in a poor quality service game every now and then which should cost him dearly.

Prediction: Del Potro in four sets.

Jose Acasuso/Agustin Calleri vs Feliciano Lopez/Fernando Verdasco
Lopez/Verdasco are a firmly established doubles team and have had some relative success on the Davis Cup stage, including in September when they pushed the Bryans to a fifth set in the semi-finals. Acasuso/Calleri have a short history together, however, they did reach the Basel semi-finals this year notably defeating the Polish duo Fyrstenberg/Matkowski. Lopez and Verdasco have better reflexes and flair than the Argentine team, and team up well together, which should give them the crucial advantage.

David Nalbandian could still be slotted in. However, Alberto Mancini will be wanting to keep Nalbandian fresh for the final singles, if need be, especially considering that Nalbandian succumbed to fatigue in his singles match against Nikolay Davydenko in early September. The smart move would be to stick with Acasuso/Calleri if Argentina go up 2-0, because I can’t see Feliciano Lopez defeating Nalbandian in a fifth rubber.

Prediction: Lopez/Verdasco in three sets (five sets if Nalbandian plays)

Juan Martin Del Potro vs David Ferrer
If Ferrer doesn’t find his best tennis, this is exactly the kind of matchup that Del Potro should relish. Del Potro is as consistent as Ferrer is, but has more firepower and a more effective serve. Ferrer doesn’t possess the game to take Del Potro out of his comfort zone, to get him moving out wide nor the serve to keep the match close. Ferrer will try hard to hang around and frustrate Del Potro but Del Potro has a good head on his shoulders. The only troublesome situation that Del Potro could find himself in, is if he tires out, because then his footwork starts to deteriorate and he becomes nowhere near as consistent.

Prediction: Del Potro in three sets

Bottom line: Argentina to defeat Spain 3-1

David Nalbandian vs Feliciano Lopez
This rubber won’t eventuate if Argentina have already clinched it, but in the scenario of it going down to a fifth rubber, I would strongly back Nalbandian. Nalbandian is more equipped to deal with Lopez than Del Potro, and should be able to hit enough effective returns and passing shots low down at Lopez’s feet. Additionally, Lopez has little experience on the big stage compared to Nalbandian, who possesses one of the best Davis Cup records, and has the experience of having played a previous Davis Cup final to draw from. It would be a tough ask for him to clinch the tie here.

Prediction: Nalbandian in three sets

Djokovic joins the winners circle again

It was only around May this year when Novak Djokovic was projected by tennis experts as the man most likely to overtake the number 1 position that Roger Federer had held for over the last four years. From Wimbledon onwards, Djokovic seemed worn out physically and it seemed that his customary end-of-season slump had begun even earlier than it did last year. But where Djokovic went winless in last year's Masters Cup, this time, it was the Serb who walked away with the trophy.

Where Djokovic was frequently a talking point earlier this year, he flew under the radar for most of the tournament, with more of the focus being on Andy Murray and Roger Federer, and even Gilles Simon. Understandably so, because this week his play had been inconsistent and representative of how he had played in the second half of the year. Flashes of brilliance, but mixed with wild shots that were nowhere near making their targets.

Mentally he was nowhere near the same player as he was earlier in the year. Back then, he was so clutch that he would almost always predictably come up with a big serve whenever he needed one. If he wasn't playing well enough to go for his shots then he'd battle it out instead making use of his athleticism and consistency, and was reluctant to give away anywhere near as many cheap points.

Instead what I noticed about Djokovic was that he constantly looked edgy, and easily frustrated, and that led to him frequently taking rash decisions in his shotmaking, going for the big outright winner before he needed to. Djokovic is the kind of player that needs to play with raw emotion and energy to play his best tennis, so it is much easier for someone like him to be emotionally drained. It didn't help his mental state that physically he wasn't as fresh near the back end of the season.

Earlier in the year, Djokovic made a point of emphasising that he was the new kid on the block, often commenting that tennis fans have been getting sick of the same people winning, and enjoy new winners. But after all of the success he achieved, he could no longer apply that same mindset, now that he was considered in the same league as Federer and Nadal, at least in terms of their ability to contend in the big events.

Djokovic is the kind of guy that finds it hard to stay grounded. He doesn’t give his lower-ranked opponents as much respect as some other players, knowing that if he can execute his shots well enough, then he will come out on top. I don't think he is alone in this regard, but it appears to have impacted on him more negatively than on others. In interviews, he has mentioned on several occasions the additional pressure that he feels on his shoulders, for matches that he feels he should win, such as yesterday’s match against Simon.

In his post-match interview, he mentioned that he was feeling the pressure which might explain why he was cramping and breathing heavily in that match, having had the day's rest and not being physically tested throughout the week. Then add to that, his strategic "energy-saving" third set effort against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in the previous match.

One would have thought that his physical problems would have hampered his chances against Nikolay Davydenko in the final, given the manner in which the Russian dismantled a jaded Andy Murray. Davydenko was striking the ball sweetly taking the ball exceptionally early and sending Murray running side-to-side, almost like some sort of practice drill designed to improve Murray's fitness.

But the Novak Djokovic that turned up on court, was nothing like the Djokovic of yesterday, and he came out firing on all cylinders. It was the best match that Djokovic has played in a long time, reminiscent of his early season form and appropriately it was in the final of a big match. He started off the match unleashing big groundstrokes off both wings, with both of his down-the-line shots on song. It was sort of like fighting fire with fire - two attacking players trying to strike the first blow to their opponent, and Djokovic comfortably came out on top in that regard beating Davydenko in the power and weaponry department, and of course executing his shots better.

The way Djokovic generates his power from both wings, it's almost as if he throws his whole body weight into the shot, setting up for the shot early then rotating his entire body forward into the ball. His movement is equally as dynamic, where he is often seen lunging and stretching out his body to the maximum. His flexibility is exceptional and he manages to maintain excellent balance and control on the defense to be able to hit deep, effective shots from that position, where he was often able to win points while seemingly on the dead run. It's not often that Davydenko is dominated from the baseline like this, but he unsettled Davydenko, constantly rushing him and putting him under pressure to attempt higher risk shots in order to gain the initiative in the rallies.

Both players are essentially aggressive baseliners, but Davydenko is completely different in his approach. He doesn't take the same free full-blooded swing as Djokovic and instead positions himself close to the baseline so that he is right on top of the ball, in order to take the ball as early as possible. His approach is more based more on precision rather than explosiveness, rotating his body in synchronisation with his racquet moving across the ball and putting in all of those little steps required to play the perfectly timed shot and generate the maximum racquet head speed out of it.

In this particular match, Davydenko was never able to feel at ease, falling behind quickly in the match, going down 5-0 in the first set before finally winning his first game. His serve was failing him, struggling with his first serve percentage and he was getting punished with his second serve, although interestingly Davydenko didn't have much success on his first serve either, only winning 55% of points in the first set.

Djokovic remained in full control of the match until when he initially served for the match at 5-4, where he showed signs of nerves. Down break point, Djokovic gestured in frustration to the Chinese crowd who cheered his first serve fault, then promptly served a double fault after distracting himself. Davydenko, when down and out, started to swing more freely and generate more racquet speed to get that extra pace needed to hurt Djokovic. But as soon as the match evened out at 5-5, the racquet speed dropped again as he dumped a forehand into the net to tamely drop serve yet again. And as Djokovic did against Simon in the previous round, Djokovic hit back to break serve straight away in the following game and served it out comfortably.

With this win, Djokovic has now closed the gap rankings-wise on Roger Federer, trailing a mere 10 points from the number 2 position meaning that if he can win a couple of matches early next year in Brisbane, he can head into the Australian Open as the number 2 seed. That is, assuming that Federer does not contest a tournament in the first week of the year.

Murray sends Federer packing before the semi-finals in Shanghai

Roger Federer had never failed to make it into the semi-finals stage on five previous occasions at the Masters Cup, but that record was in threat against Andy Murray, who has been the most in-form player of the last three months. In the end, Federer came up short, but his performance was more worthy of praise than criticism, in a high quality match where he displayed superb determination and fighting spirit.

Federer, in his previous two matches in Shanghai against Gilles Simon and Radek Stepanek, had struggled to find his form. He had been misfiring on the forehand side, showing a lack of patience, where he would often snatch on the shot, as if he was trying to force too much on that side, instead of swinging freely. On too many occasions, he opted for the flat point-ending forehand instead of the medium-risk loopier shot that he can also hit. It's not that Federer can't hit these shots, but he needs to be extremely relaxed to get the timing right.

Given his previous performances, it was to my surprise that Federer came out determined and confident of his own all-court, aggressive game as if he fully trusted in his abilities. From the outset, it was obvious that Federer has a lot of respect for Murray, and he came out with a specific gameplan in mind. Federer was stepping up the court and trying to rush Murray as much as possible, reminiscent of how he played the US Open final. The points were kept short, not letting Murray use his athletic abilities, variety and point construction.

It was a fascinating encounter as a matchup, because both players have the attributes needed to deal with each other's strengths. If anyone has the ability to take time away from their opponents, it's Federer, who can be ruthless and can steamroll right through his opponents. If there's anyone that can withstand the barrage of weaponry coming from Federer's racquet, it's Murray who has the ability to neutralise almost any shot that comes his way. He does this by forcing his opponents to hit higher risk shots as well as counter-attacking himself, especially when on the run or when forced to hit passing shots.

This, as well as the exceptional athletic ability of both players, allowed the two to exchange fast-paced rallies of the highest quality, which were characterized by both players having to hit the equivalent of several winners to be able to win points, and both players turning defense to offense with relative ease. Federer tried to find his way to Murray's forehand more often than not, while Murray tried to pick on Federer's backhand.

Murray is so dangerous that whenever he gets his racquet on the ball, you get the sense that he can turn around almost any point in his favour, and the longer the rally goes on, the bigger advantage he has because he is a steadier player than Federer. What I have noticed about Murray recently is that there seems to be no particular manner in which players can rely on to consistently win points against him, and that makes it exceptionally hard for his opponents. He handles aggressive players extremely well because he has excellent passing shots and he can throw them off their rhythm, but he also has the advantage when engaging in long rallies against the more consistent players, due to his greater variety from the back of the court.

Federer needed to be selective when picking his opportunities to come in. The best bet for Federer was to try and take control of the rally early on if he can, but to respect the quality of shot if it is too high risk to attack. He implemented this balance successfully in the first set, waiting until he could move Murray out of position enough to do sufficient damage before unloading on his signature forehand. Federer can sometimes get into the habit of blocking back serves, usually being confident that he can win the point more often than not if they get into an extended rally, but against Murray, he attacked Murray's serve relentlessly, especially on second serves.

In the first set, Federer looked to be in control for most of the set, but Murray continued to probe and test Federer, keeping the match close before Federer crucially broke serve late in the first set. In the second set, Federer stepped his foot off the accelerator by a small amount, no longer imposing himself on the match as much and that was enough to make a big difference. This allowed Murray to start getting more into the rallies he likes, prolonging the rallies, placing shots into tricky positions and employing changes of spins and pace to hurt his opponent. Murray, importantly started serving better, not giving Federer as many opportunities to attack on his weaker second serve, getting 75% of his first serves to cruise to a 5-2 double break lead.

That was when the match turned to become a dramatic contest that was filled with momentum swings for both players. Where Murray seemed to have control, he somehow let it slip away from 5-2 in the second set squandering two set points. Murray missed a few too many second serves and Federer took his chances wrestling control of the point right from the return of serve and finishing it off at net. Federer went on a tear winning something like 7 of the next 8 points, then Murray recovered to take it to a tie-break, and took it up another level to win the second set in a tie-break, which featured the best tennis of the match.

At the start of the third set, Federer took an injury time-out for the back injury that he had first suffered from in Paris, and it started to hamper his movement especially in the first half of the third set. Once Murray had Federer stretching out wide, Federer had little chances of getting back into the point and whenever he came into the net, he moved gingerly whenever he had to lunge to hit a volley.

But this is where Federer began to show his fighting qualities, and started to put the injury out of his mind. If he was going to lose, he was going to go down swinging and leave everything out on the court. The manner in which Federer fought back time and time again from a losing position was reminiscent of the effort that he put in the classic Wimbledon final this year, where he also seemed down and out on several occasions but pulled out winning shots under extreme pressure. Federer saved seven match points at 5-4 in the third set, but in the end, it wasn't enough for him to win the match as Murray pulled it out 7-5 in the third set.

Zvonareva goes undefeated in round robin play, while Serena and Ivanovic withdraw

This year marks the first time in a three-year agreement where the women's year-end championships will be held in Doha, in an outdoor arena. Over the last five or so years, there has been a recent history of the tournament being hit by withdrawals, although it was this time last year that Justine Henin and Maria Sharapova played that memorable three hour encounter in the final, the match that mentally exhausted Henin and led to her retirement. In 2006, Henin and Sharapova battled it out for the year-end number one ranking, and Amelie Mauresmo played some good tennis back then as well.

As for this year, Jelena Jankovic has already secured her position as the year-end world number 1. Svetlana Kuznetsova and Ana Ivanovic have struggled for form as late, and unfortunately for them, this week hasn't done any wonders for their confidence as they both packed their bags out of Doha without notching up a single win.

Unfortunately for the fans, yesterday turned out to be essentially a day filled with meaningless matches, after both Serena Williams and Ana Ivanovic withdrew from their final round robin matches, with Williams citing a sore stomach muscle and Ivanovic feeling the effects from a virus.

Vera Zvonareva continued her good run at the year-end championships, defeating Jelena Jankovic in yesterday's match, extending her undefeated run in Doha to three consecutive wins, all of which were over top ten players. Zvonareva had her breakthrough year in 2004, where she broke into the top 10 for the first time in August, and qualified for her first year-end championships. Zvonareva, since then, never made it back since until this year, but has played some of her best tennis as of late compiling a win-loss record of 26-7 since the Beijing Olympics, where she picked up a bronze medal. Where Zvonareva went winless in this very same event in 2004, the 24-year-old Russian now looks like one of the main threats heading into the business end of this year's event.

So how is that Zvonareva finds herself on the brink of breaking into the top 5 this year? Throughout the championships, Zvonareva has been playing with controlled aggression keeping good length on her groundstrokes and moving her opponents around just enough, to enable herself to keep the initiative in the rallies, kind of like a less powerful version of Juan Martin Del Potro on the men's tour.

While Zvonareva doesn't have a standout quality in her game, on a good day, she forces her opponents to play either a higher risk game or break down her game, which has been a difficult task for everyone so far. When I watch her, what I notice the most is how she takes care of her side of the net remarkably well, maintaining an aggressive game plan but giving herself good margin for error keeping all of her shots a metre or so inside the lines. Of course, this is only referring to the composed Zvonareva, when she's not having one of her well-known mental breakdowns, which it must be said occur less and less these days. When she's on the defensive, she tries to get the ball back deep in the middle of the court, not giving her opponent much to work with.

Playing against a more consistent and athletic player in Jankovic, it was going to be a tall order for Zvonareva to defeat her. The first set went exactly as planned with Jankovic cruising through past Zvonareva 6-2. Zvonareva wasn't playing poorly, keeping relatively good consistency but whenever she was pulled out wide and on the run, she was forced into hitting a weaker return and was punished repeatedly for that. Although Zvonareva's movement has improved over the last season, it still remains a weakness in the Russian's game especially when compared to some of her peers, like the Williams sisters, Dementieva and Jankovic, who is perhaps the best mover on tour along with Venus Williams.

In the second set, Zvonareva opted for a more aggressive game plan, taking the ball down-the-line on more occasions than she did previously and being much more effective on the run. She was now getting behind the ball much better and finding herself able to hit more of a full-blooded swing, especially on the forehand side. Jankovic continued to probe and test her to the full extent as they engaged in numerous long gruelling rallies, and Zvonareva needed to dig herself out of some tough games, which she did so successfully. In the end, it was the usually steady Jankovic who cracked, making just a few too many unforced errors in the final set to go down in defeat.

For Jankovic, given that she finished her group second in the standings, she still was able to qualify for the semi-finals and will have the opportunity to contend for the title, as will Zvonareva, of course.

Nalbandian lights up the indoor season again

David Nalbandian has traditionally done well indoors, where he has compiled his best results of his career. This year has been no different, yet it has come as some sort of a surprise, because of the year he has had which saw him not advance past the third round of any of the four Grand Slams.

Last year he picked up back-to-back Masters Series titles in Madrid and Paris and in 2005, he won his biggest title in winning the Masters Cup over Roger Federer in the final. Now he is into the final of the Paris Masters Series, where he next faces Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, having defeated the likes of Juan Martin Del Potro, Andy Murray and Nikolay Davydenko to advance into the finals.

In defeating Andy Murray on Friday, who had been on a 14 match winning streak, Nalbandian was at his very best, putting on a fine display of smart, patient, all-court tennis. When Nalbandian is in this sort of form, it is hard not to marvel at the variety, shot selection and shotmaking capabilities that he possesses. I tend to think, that out of all the players, he possesses some of the most variety off the groundstrokes.

Some people think that variety tends to refer to only things like slice backhands and changes of spins, so in that case you'd think of Andy Murray or Roger Federer. But Nalbandian has so many options from the back of the court, because of the accuracy of his groundstrokes and his ability to change directions, to go down-the-line on both sides or pull his opponent off court with extreme angles off both the forehand and backhand. This allows him to implement any pattern of play that he wants, but he also has the tactical game as well as a solid net game to effectively make use of it. Combine that with early ball striking and that allows him to dictate play and open up the court better than almost anyone else in the game. Often he was catching Murray off balance in the baseline exchanges by taking his forehand up the line, then coming in and knocking off the backhand volley, short and wide wrong-footing Murray.

The match, in itself, was really a treat, with two of the best tactical players coming up against each other, both probing each other for openings and then pulling the trigger when they had the opportunity. Both Nalbandian and Murray seem to utilise more.blocked shots and deep floating slices to get back into the point than the majority of their peers, which is what makes the both of them so effective at changing from offense to defense and vice versa. As a result, both players really had to set up their points amazingly well to finish it off, which produced many entertaining rallies.

The biggest difference in this match was the strength of Nalbandian's return of serve coupled with Murray's low first service percentage, which allowed Nalbandian to consistently attack Murray right from the outset and put the Scot under consistent pressure. Nalbandian's return of serve really is amazing when it is on. He is consistently able to knock it back deep on the baseline time and time again to effectively set up the point or rip return winners off second serves. But he also has the ability to block it back deep when returning a more effective serve. Murray tried to use the wide serve slicing out to Nalbandian's forehand, which seemed like a good tactic in theory going out to Nalbandian's weaker side, but he got burnt time and time again, with Nalbandian reading it and quickly pouncing on it.

Sometimes when I watch performances like this, I wonder why it is that Nalbandian is as inconsistent as he is. Technically he is very sound, and he has efficient groundstrokes which should allow him to play with some sort of consistency. Even though his game is based around accuracy and timing, he is usually sensible enough to play within himself when he is not playing well enough which should give him enough margin for error to do better than he does. Having watched quite a number of his matches in recent times, I can say that I have some sort of explanation.

 

It was in the very next match that Nalbandian produced a very up-and-down performance to overcome Nikolay Davydenko who most certainly was nowhere near his best in this match. Nalbandian started off showing the same rich vein of form that he had carrying from the match against Andy Murray, particularly on the return of serve, where he was seemingly able to maintain incredible depth on almost every return he was able to come in contact with. But where Nalbandian could have closed it out comfortably in straight sets, he instead let Davydenko into it by losing his intensity and consequently looked like he was playing with no tactics at all.

When Nalbandian is playing well, he is excellent at moving forward into the ball and being proactive, often being quick to take advantage of any opening that he creates to close it out at the net.

It takes focus and concentration to play that sort of tennis, to be able to quickly sense which shots are good enough to take advantage of, and which shots to neutralise to get into the point, and that's what I think the main problem with Nalbandian's game is.

I tend to find in most cases that the more tuned in he seems to be in the match, not only does he play better, but he tends to play more creatively as well. Often when he doesn't have that sense of urgency, he starts to look like a much more mediocre player, showing none of the variety and tactical game that he is capable of and his movement generally tends to suffer too.

It's hard to know exactly just how much his fitness is an impact in the sluggishness that he sometimes has in his movement, because that as well as the lack of energy that he sometimes exhibits are both related to each other, in his overall approach to the game. Having watched quite a number of his matches as of late, it is interesting to note the amount of times where his poor form (and the errors he produces) seems to be a direct result of the lack of energy he displays in his matches, rather than his game simply going off.

Davydenko, in comparison, who also showed poor form in this match simply could not find the range of his groundstrokes. He continued to swing away with full commitment, while appearing to have no idea where he hit it, until after he executed it. He wasn't only missing his groundstrokes, but by large margins at times and missing shots that were seemingly very easy.

Davydenko doesn't hold back when he isn't playing well. He continues to play with that same rapid pace that he usually does, perched on the top of the baseline and trying to generate large amounts of racquet head speed. You can see why he can mishit so many shots playing that way and sometimes you think he should just slow down the pace and give himself time to find his rhythm.

It's a good thing that he is such a gritty competitor, that can he still find the energy to play the fast paced game that he does regardless of his own poor form, and this allows him to edge out numerous matches throughout the course of a season.

Although from my point of view, these kinds of matches from the Russian tend to be extremely hard to watch, and a result it puts me off him sometimes because he can be fantastic to watch when he is cleaning the lines. He's also a dangerous customer, because there's always a chance that he can string together a couple of spectacular points to get back into the match, since he tends to continue to go for his shots.

Whereas Davydenko treats every point the same regardless of the score, Nalbandian is the exact opposite and generally likes to play to the score, which can be both an advantage or disadvantage. On break points, he can come up with brilliant change-up tactics that take his opponents by surprise, or either he can knuckle down and perfectly construct a point taking full use of his own strengths and favourite playing patterns. But he can also get complacent or lose concentration at particular stages of the match, which seems to be more likely to happen the less he is able to get into a rhythm. Because the more he is able to get into a rhythm, the more he is able to play the points he likes and the more enjoyable the match is for him.

Davydenko started to play better midway into the second set winning many more cheap points on serve, and occasionally strung together some good points. He was doing all of the dictating and the match was seemingly played on his own terms. I kept waiting for Nalbandian to take it up a notch in the business end of the second set, or early on in the third set, but he continued to play the same sort of uninspired tennis for one and a half sets. The biggest advantage that Nalbandian has over Davydenko is variety, and finally at 2-2 in the third set, he started to lean into those groundstrokes again, take Davydenko off-balance looking to come into the net, and as soon as that happened, that was enough to win the match.

Monfils shows he still has a lot to learn while Roddick shows flashes of his old form

Gael Monfils had been long touted as one of the young guns, one of the upcoming stars of the men's tour but failed to live up to expectations for a number of years. He had been frequently disrupted by niggling injuries for most of his career, and when he was healthy enough to play, there was a distinct weakness in his tactical game and he was constantly criticised for his overly defensive game.

In the last few months, he has slowly finetuned his game with the help of new coach, Roger Rasheed, Lleyton Hewitt's former coach, who apart from adding some discipline into the Frenchman's training regime, has also helped Monfils slowly transform his game into a more well-rounded game that is a healthy mix of offense and defense.

He still gets stuck behind the baseline on occasions, but he no longer appears to be pinned back with no options, instead being able to effectively neutralise shots before throwing in that change of pace or running passing shot that has been long known as one of his trademarks.

From a tactical point of view, yesterday's match up against the world number one, Rafael Nadal was a fascinating encounter because it would answer a lot of questions about Monfils' willingness to attack and how he would approach the match in general. The Spaniard is often known for wearing his opponents down and being relentless in his consistency, but more importantly because of his superior defensive skills, he forces each and every single player on the tour to play an aggressive game in order to threaten him.

Masters Series TV commentator, Robbie Koenig mentioned that Monfils had been practicing specific drills to upset Nadal's rhythm, including one that involved hitting a series of crosscourt forehands to open up the court to drill the forehand down-the-line into Nadal's forehand corner, which is the one clear weakness in the Spaniard's game. David Ferrer's two performances against Nadal at the US Open last year and at the Masters Cup specifically come to mind, where he exploited this tactic relentlessly and with little subtlety, as he frequently nailed his off forehand into Nadal's forehand side time after time.

Monfils started off the match doing exactly just that, showing excellent footwork and movement to consistently run around his backhand and hit big forehands. But unfortunately, that sort of aggressive tennis was short-lived as Monfils reverted back to the defensive game that he is known for, and what he is comfortable with. Monfils usually loves playing on the big stage, and with this being a centre court match in his home country against the world number 1, more fireworks were to be expected.

His entire performance in general reminded me much of the style of tennis that he exhibited when I first sat up and took notice of his game when he took out Marcos Baghdatis at the Australian Open in 2007, after Baghdatis had his magical run to the finals the previous year. Back then I noticed that he had one of the most unpredictable games, and that he often seemed confused as to how he should approach his matches. With most players, you get a feel for the patterns or combinations of shots that a player likes to implement. But while Monfils himself did have a general playing style, he would also often throw in awkward shots out of nowhere, but it didn't feel like it was brilliant, more that it was random.

Monfils's performance was not awkward yesterday against Nadal, but it was puzzling that he would achieve so much success with one particular tactic, but that he would completely abandon it for the vast majority of the match. One can only conclude that he found it too difficult to break out of his old habits and go out of his comfort zone, but in this particular match, he had nothing to lose. Nadal's performance himself left a lot to be desired, where a lot of his shots were sitting up high and looked very attackable.

Andy Roddick yesterday, in contrast was particularly impressive against Madrid finalist, Gilles Simon. Roddick hasn't really shown much form in recent times, despite having some moderate success at the lower level events. On occasions, Roddick can get caught into the trap of playing solid, consistent tennis, not making full use of the power that he is able to generate on his groundstrokes especially on the forehand side. Roddick tends to try and win service games by placing consistent pressure on his opponents and hoping to get one service break per set, which is all he needs to pocket a set on most occasions.

On a different note, Roddick also has a tendency to associate aggressive tennis with constant netrushing without acknowledging that he has to effectively set up a point to increase his chances of having success at the net. Often he only reserves his aggressive game for the top players, for example, against Novak Djokovic at the US Open where he had relative success going for his shots but crumbled on the big points. To be honest, because he does not attempt this sort of tennis often enough, it is still difficult to tell whether Roddick is actually able to implement this sort of strategy consistently with success.

However, yesterday against Simon, he was in particularly impressive form, where his groundstrokes looked dangerous and he had an extremely intimidating presence about him which isn't always the case. Simon, in contrast, with his energy-saving game, looked like a decidedly small and irrelevant figure although to be fair he has a knack of hanging around and generally beats his opponent in a much more subtle fashion.

Right from the outset, it looked like he wanted to send a clear message to Simon, and this was no clearer than when he stepped in and crushed Simon's weak second serve on numerous occasions. On the backhand side, he was stepping in and taking it early, making it difficult to Simon to extend the points as he would like to. The final game of the first set was the standout, where at one point, Roddick hammered three consecutive off forehands to take the set.

However, the second set had a slightly different tone to it as Roddick went down two break points, showing some overeagerness in his shotmaking, mishitting a couple of forehands and throwing in some double faults. But Roddick saved all of the break points, often opting for the high percentage well-placed kick serve, which caused Simon all sorts of problems. This pattern repeated numerous times later in the set, and whenever he needed a big point, he went for that same reliable and high percentage strategy.

The baseline rallies in this set were much more closely contested, as a result of Roddick stepping his foot off the accelerator as well as Simon playing more solid tennis and seemingly getting his teeth into the rallies more. I noted often that Roddick started off many of the points keen to get his opponent off the back foot by taking the ball early, but as soon as they engaged in longer rallies, Roddick started to hit those loopier, medium-paced shots again. However, in the final game of the match, Roddick went back to the successful strategy of attacking Simon's second serve, and despite some shakiness in the big points in that game, earned himself the crucial break to take the match.

Simon, for a brief moment, showed some of the fighting qualities that saw him reach the final of the Madrid Masters only just two weeks ago, but it wasn't enough for him to win the match. At one point, in the final game when moving out wide to retrieve a forehand, Simon slipped over and dropped his racquet in the process, but recovered quickly to hustle to the opposite side of the court, before Roddick made the error on the following point.

In the final match of the day, Nikolay Davydenko continued his dominance over Tomas Berdych extending his head-to-head record over the Czech to 8-0, barely dropping any games in a convincing 6-1 6-1 win. I remember watching one of their earlier matches from the Australian Open in 2005, which was closely contested, and featured some impressive ball striking from both players but since then Berdych has lost much of his belief against Davydenko, which adds up to the difficult match up problem that he faces.

Davydenko is one of the few players on the tour, who I feel are extremely difficult to overpower because he is able to use an opponent's pace against them to redirect the ball and move them around. Compared to Berdych, Davydenko takes the ball earlier than Berdych, is more accurate in his shotmaking and can generate better angles and is a better mover. I like the rotation that Davydenko gets on his groundstrokes which enables him to change directions on his groundstrokes effectively, and he was doing this frequently like he usually does, often going down-the-line on both sides.

In terms of game, Davydenko had the clear advantage, so Berdych needed to hope that Davydenko was slightly off his game, and that he himself was on good form. When that didn't turn out to be the case, the shoulders started slumping quickly for Berdych. As soon as Davydenko went up a double break in the first set, Berdych never looked like he was even going to make this a contest.