The best of the French Open: The top 3 matches of the week

The not-so-definitive list of the best matches of the first week...

[1] 3rd round: Robin Soderling def. David Ferrer 6-7(5) 7-5 6-2 7-6(5)

Robin Soderling has never been much of a factor in the Grand Slams, and prior to this match had never advanced past the 3rd round in any Slam, which is rather awful for a player of his standard, one I consider to be consistently top 30 calibre and for someone that possesses such big weapons. It was over three and a half hours of absorbing tennis, and a match which featured around 60 winners from Soderling. And that's 60 winners against Ferrer on clay.

It reminded me of the brief experience I had watching Soderling at the Brisbane International, leaning over a fence, so close to the action that I could pretty much feel and hear the shots coming off Soderling's racquet. Clean, big hitting with Soderling pounding the ball into submission on a frighteningly regular basis, though his consistency was not as prevalent as it was in this match. Against Ferrer, I was reminded of the same kind of thing. It was an ongoing onslaught of weaponry, with Ferrer tried to fend off as much as he could.

It didn't initially seem like it was going to be one of those days for Soderling. It was a slightly patchy match at first, a combination of impressive shotmaking and errors, from both players, and not only from the more volatile Soderling. For Ferrer, they were uncharacteristic errors, but for Soderling, he was pretty much living up to expectation. The rallies were surely too lengthy for Soderling to keep up that kind of flat ball-striking, and so it was slightly up and down, but good enough for it to be entertaining. This made for a wonderfully dramatic and unpredictable match, and there were numerous service breaks which added to the feeling that anything could happen.

But that was where the slight inconsistencies started to disintegrate, making for a high quality affair from the second set onwards. Consistently entertaining rallies, hard-fought games and high emotions as you would expect, when it comes to Soderling and Ferrer. You could literally see Soderling gradually gaining in confidence as the match went on to the point of being able to replicate it on the big points, a skill that usually eludes him. But today, there was full commitment on his shots particularly on the sometimes troublesome forehand, seemingly able to reel off large amounts of forehand winners at will.

From the third set onwards, Soderling had hit a purple match. On any normal day, Ferrer would have surely done enough to throw off Soderling's rhythm. So what we had then were these drawn out rallies that started to defy belief more and more as it went on. That Soderling could continually hammer the ball in the corners, with little hesitation and few mistakes and that Ferrer could keep chasing them down. One thing I like watching is how explosively Ferrer moves out to return serve, that he so often seems to be able to retrieve serves that land on the lines, and then recovering easily afterwards.

It wasn't like Ferrer played a defensive match, he went for his shots, maintaining good accuracy on his shots and moving the ball side-to-side. But what he needed to do was to explore the angles more, and have Soderling lunging out to reach for shots more often, because it seemed like the majority of shots somehow landed into Soderling's strike zone. He also needed to make more use of the dropshot, which was strangely lacking in Ferrer's repertoire that day.

[2] 2nd round: Roger Federer def. Jose Acasuso 7-6(8) 5-7 7-6(2) 6-2

There's something that I find incredibly exciting and entertaining about unexpectedly good performances. Acasuso, who is sometimes a good claycourter, and sometimes just completely out-of-form, had won just one claycourt match during the European season leading up to Roland Garros and struggled in the opening two sets of his first round match before turning it around. But in this match against Federer, Acasuso was on the verge of gaining a stranglehold on the match at 5-1 in the third set, and it looked fairly certain to be heading into a fifth set.

I was reminded yet again of how Acasuso is such a smooth, yet explosive shotmaker. Long, flowing groundstrokes and armed with a very dangerous forehand that consistently put Federer on the back foot. It was a simple game plan, a somewhat predictable one at that, but executed almost perfectly to keep Federer off-balance. In many instances, I've seen players simply trying to pound Federer's backhand relentlessly with little change-up, but with few results. Federer simply isn't that vulnerable to making errors if he can anticipate it every single time. But Acasuso was seemingly able to hit that off forehand time and time again practically in the same spot, close to the sideline and reaped the rewards. It wasn't like taking the high percentage way out though, and Acasuso would change it up to hit down-the-lines whenever he had found an opening, coming into the net as well when he sensed the opportunity.

What I liked the most was that he never backed off, and continued his aggressive game plan, even if he wasn't mentally strong enough to pull off his best shots when he needed them. Until the third set, from 5-1 that is, when unfortunately, instead of asking Federer some serious questions, Acasuso went back into his shell and started dropping balls short, with less pace. Still, it was a tension-filled match for three sets with the potential upset factor involved, and a high quality affair that featured plenty of variety and all-court tennis. Though if I was to measure a match in its parts, I think the fourth set of the Federer vs Mathieu match is worth a mention as well, which features both players playing at the top of their games.

[3] 1st round: Radek Stepanek def. Gaston Gaudio 6-3 6-4 6-1

It didn't have the drama, but it had the show. It wasn't Gaudio's best performance, and in the end it was all about Stepanek. It was like Stepanek pulling the strings in a puppet show yanking Gaudio wherever he wanted to side-to-side, front-to-back, and vice-versa. I don't think it's possible to see anyone use the entire court better, than Stepanek did in this match. Aside from Stepanek's variety which he is well-known for, it's also impressive how well Stepanek changes directions on both sides and that's how he's able to take his opponents out of their rhythm as often as he does.

I've seen the dropshot used in so many instances throughout the tournament, but no one follows up their dropshots better than Stepanek does, often frustrating the hell out of his opponents by making them cover large amounts of court, while feeling they have no control over what happens in the point, running for no reward. It wasn't an impressive performance from Gaudio, nothing more than solid, and we know he's capable of much better shotmaking. But his court coverage is impressive, and that adds to the entertainment factor of the match. It's a truly unique match, at least in the first two sets.

It's a familiar sight: Federer shows signs of weakness, Djokovic faces Nadal again in a final

A few weeks back before the start of Monte Carlo, both Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic were known to be having some sort of mini-slump. It's a mini-slump because consistently making quarter-finals and semi-finals of bigger events suggests that things could be worse than they currently are. But what could be associated with the tennis from Federer and Djokovic was that it was a bit rough around the edges, their games not looking as neat and tidy as it used to look, and more patchy in general.

But since then, things have changed for the better for Djokovic, as he finds himself in another consecutive Masters final this week in Rome, the most promising sign being his performance against Nadal in the Monte Carlo final. Federer, in comparison is still searching for his game, but more so his confidence and as to what kind of balance he should try to achieve when executing his game.

What I wanted to see was Djokovic asserting his authority over Federer, showing the same sort of intensity and energy that he showed in that final against Nadal. But it didn't happen, except in brief spurts, although seemingly in exactly all the right moments. It didn't feel like a battle of the heavyweights in terms of shotmaking, but rather a mental battle, both players not wanting to give an inch to each other. Especially Federer who clearly didn't want to repeat the Miami performance, where he literally self-destructed with a multitude of unforced errors.

Instead it became more about trying to take control of points in more subtle ways, relying more on shot selection, placement and defensive abilities. It was like they were both probing each other looking for weaknesses, and trying to set up points by moving their opponents out of position. I had the feeling that it was more like they were gearing up, making sure they had found their full range before bringing the weaponry. The match was building up to its climax, and the signs were looking good for a competitive affair.

Federer's forehand seemed particularly dangerous, despite tempering it somewhat, it still put him in control of most points, though helped out by Djokovic's struggling first serve percentage at times. Djokovic was patchier, especially on his returns and backhand, but whenever he was down a break point, he stepped it up on most occasions. His off-forehand to Federer's backhand was working well, and he hit some great crosscourt backhands on the stretch at times, but also had his fair share of errors on that side usually just missing long.

In the end, Djokovic's more inconsistent play cost him the first set, but the manner in which it happened, a crowd member calling out during Djokovic's ball toss put an unfortunate spin on the match. After saving a multitude of break points, Djokovic had finally conceded the set.

The crowd incident ended up being an influential one in the context of the match, one of two key events in this match, more so because of how negatively Djokovic responded to it. Suddenly it looked like he was irritable, and soon after, he even showed his frustration towards the sky for distracting him with the sound of thunder. The forehand in particular, isn't a particularly efficient shot, and can get a bit messy when he's not fully focused, although of course it can break down for other reasons as well. Seeing Djokovic play like this, lacking in concentration, belief and energy, compared to some of the latter stages of the match confirmed to me that he is so much better when he's playing with insane amounts of determination, and more entertaining as well.

Whenever Djokovic sensed a chance to take advantage of Federer's shortcomings, and build a lead, it was like the chances of him making him an incredible retrieval would increase dramatically. Case in point, on break point at 3-3, Djokovic returns a deep off-forehand from Federer that looks almost like a winner with an even better shot, a blocked backhand down-the-line right on the line but it doesn't win him the point. Then in that very same point, a shot skids right off the line and he desperately tries to get out of the way of the ball in time, to be able to hit a safe, deep backhand into the court.

That's why I think Djokovic has had some kind of success against Nadal, not only because of his attacking abilities, but his ability to put together these monumental points. The kind of points that have pretty much everything in it, the ones that you think are just great rallies in general, not just extraordinary winners from one player.

The turning point of the match was the rain delay, a chance for Djokovic to mentally regroup which he needed badly. With Federer these days, one break is hardly a done deal especially whenever he's up against Murray, Nadal or Djokovic. He had played almost entirely a clean match up to midway in the second set, but then the same kind of error-strewn games that we've seen from him in the past few months on occasions reared its ugly head again.

In that Miami final, I've heard that maybe Federer could have managed his game better, by being more cautious in his shot selections and opting for the off-forehand on more occasions instead of the higher risk down-the-line shot. But this time, Federer took the cautious approach, so what advice is there left for him?