Cilic is a tough guy to read. Whether he plays well, or not so much, he plays at a similar level of intensity. In terms of body language, there’s not much of a difference, because he seems to be one of those players that try to find themselves in ‘automatic’ mode to find their best tennis, rather than an inspired mode.
It’s not too dissimilar to Tomas Berdych’s approach to ball-striking except that Cilic is relaxed, not casual like Berdych can be. Neither of them enjoy toughing out rallies much, they prefer hitting clean and accurate shots, and that’s where Djokovic had an advantage over Cilic though I’m not sure what Cilic could have done about that since Djokovic is naturally a better mover. Cilic is a much better competitor than Berdych though, more capable of fighting through bad days because he has a much better selective memory.
When Cilic plays well, it’s like he takes all of the elements out of the equation. Rarely have I seen such a high level of tennis being made to look so simple, almost as if Cilic never even went above his comfort zone, yet looking at his shot selection, he clearly redlined his game hitting close to the lines with alarming regularity.
This match was just as much about the errors as the winners, because it was all about Cilic asserting his authority, not hitting winning shots. He opened the match with a clear game plan in mind, to shorten up the points as much as possible, so that even if he made numerous errors, he didn’t allow Nadal to feel good about himself or that he had any control over the match. It all began with the return of serve which Cilic attacked relentlessly, and from there, he was able to take control of the point and finish it off.
The way Cilic played against Nadal, it was like he got in the zone for two sets and never really looked up to see who was on the other side of the net. He knew who he was playing against, he had his set tactics but it was all about execution and that’s what he focused on, hitting his spots. I’m sure it’s just his calm demeanor by nature, but how nonchalant did Cilic look changing directions almost every couple of shots? Precise, high-risk early ball-striking made easy. This doesn’t look sustainable to me over multiple matches, too reliant on timing and we’ve seen it in his career before, his game frequently wandering off for a set or two.
He also looked comfortable exchanging backhand crosscourts to Nadal’s forehand often winning that battle, and somehow managing to generate impressive pace and angle to find winners that didn’t look like they could be created. His height surely helped with that, and Cilic takes the ball earlier than the majority of players.
Nadal looked lost, and he tried several tactics, first prolonging rallies and taking the pace off the ball, anything to get himself more in points, but Cilic rose to the challenge. Then he tried to be more aggressive but it was too late by then. Unfortunately for Nadal, his serve didn’t allow him to start off on the right foot. He seemed to struggle noticeably with Cilic’s skidding flat balls as well that bounce relatively low off the court, making it difficult for Nadal to scoop up. I really think that taller players have the greater luxury of having a bigger margin of error on flatter shots, and that really helps Cilic out.
Posts
10 comments:
It's interesting to see that you drew the comparison to Tomas Berdych given Cilic just lost to him for the second time in their second career meeting. I'm a great fan of Cilic's and when his game is on, as was the case against Murray at the US Open and against Nadal at Beijing, every stroke of his is a sight to behold.
I used to like to compare him to Del Potro, but I think this is no longer valid. The Croat is just too shaky, he almost never backs up a stellar performance with another one, and what is even worse, he has these lapses in almost all of his matches where he literally shanks every ball, especially on the forehand side. There are entire games full of mishits. And his serve is far from being the weapon it should be. I noticed about the young guns that they return pretty well, which I attribute to their great wingspan rather than technique or coordination. Those two factors account for his matches sometimes looking like a WTA match, with more broken than held service games, as was just showcased against Berdych.
All these inconsistencies seem understandable in someone who just turned 21, but I have been following him for quite some time now and he doesn't seem to improve much in those areas.
In a nutshell, he needs to work on
1. his serve, (usually a Croatian specialty)
2. consistency within a match and over the course of the season. Start to at least win the matches against the players ranked below him, the rest will follow, and
3. movement and/or technique on the forehand, which can be his undoing.
By beating the top players, he has shown that he can be one himself some day, but he had better start to erase those liabilities immediately. Otherwise he will end up as an athletic version of David Nalbandian, and it would be sad to see another player waste his talent like that.
Interesting post Anonymous.
Well Berdych is a good example of a player whose career hasn't really gotten anywhere in the last couple of years, and that's because he never really goes on these runs - it's more like one good match here or there. But I also think it's because of his lack of an all-court game, something that Cilic also needs to work on. To me, Del Potro doesn't play as much of a high risk game. He doesn't hit anywhere near as close to the lines as Cilic does, and he seems to get more height over the net on his groundstrokes too whereas for me, it doesn't look like Cilic has a lot of "loop" on his groundstrokes in that the ball seems to travel in a straight line, rather than it curving over the net. I mean, I guess that's just a way of saying he hits with very little topspin, but sometimes other players don't appear to have much either. Del Potro's point construction is also much better.
Yes, Cilic is quite famous for his lapses and unnecessary three set matches over the course of his early round matches. I'm not really a fan of him though, so I haven't watched much of his early round matches that he'd be expected to win, though you don't have to watch much to know that it's mostly the forehand that costs him games and sets.
They showed a speed comparison of serves between Cilic and Berdych, and the average first speed of Cilic was only about 185km/h which seems nowhere near as big as it should be. I mean, I'm sure that Cilic can hit his serve much bigger than that, but can he manage to incorporate variety as well as pace? He did win a large percentage of points on his first serve regardless against Berdych though, it was the second serve that put him on the back foot. I've noticed that he quite likes those short wide serves which obviously work well when they hit their spots, but not so much if they're slightly less accurate.
I'd say that Nalbandian is actually more athletic than Cilic is, despite their appearance, at least in terms of movement. I guess that's not so surprising though given Cilic's height.
I'd be curious to see how Cilic's career pans out because he seems to take his career pretty seriously, but I'm not sure how much he's willing to make noticeable changes in his game.
Just a comment on the Nalbandian analogy.
I agree that the Argentine does move more fluently which is probably due to his being seven inches shorter or something like that. The problem with him is: he doesn't move enough. He is infamous for his overweight, and as soon as his excellent shotmaking doesn't do the job, he cannot compensate for it by means of footwork and fight his way into a match.
With Cilic I think that stamina is not a problem but a couple of low-bouncing balls usually suffice to drive him out of his comfort zone. That is an obvious strategy against him and all of his opponents except for Nadal employ it. So he is often caught lunging for balls and a tall person's movement always tends to look clumsy. Eventually, though, Cilic is closer to his natural maximum than Nalbandian.
Come to think of it, I rememeber Cilic once said grass was his favorite surface. I don't really see why and he is yet to prove it, too.
Anyway, what I actually meant was that both players have tremendous potential. Nalbandian has wasted it almost completely, and Cilic might be heading down that path as well if he doesn't start to work on these evident weaknesses. I could as well have mentioned Monfils or Gasquet as harrowing examples.
That's true that Nalbandian can get lazy with his movement sometimes, and often he can't be bothered chasing shots on less important points, or at least there can be a noticeable difference depending on the stage of the match. I think in a lot of cases, on his bad days/bad shotmaking is caused by the bad footwork though.
You are right that Cilic is something closer to his natural maximum. It's just that I interpreted your comment to mean that he was more athletic in general than Nalbandian. I'm not actually sure what Cilic could improve with his movement. I think he moves well for his size. I guess aside from the low balls it's more that he never seems to really sprint that hard, it's more his wingspan that gets him to everything.
I think Gasquet is also a good example, I was thinking of writing an article about him after observing how he played against Ferrer. It's not really that he lost, but every time I've watched him since his comeback from suspension, every point he plays is cheap. Never seems to want to win points properly like how everyone else does. I'm not sure whether to give him more time to find his form or what.
Monfils still has hope, he seems to slowly be getting better but constantly seems to be fighting himself, to be able to play aggressive tennis.
It's really a very informative and useful blog... thanks and keep posting..
1goaltube.blogspot.com
great players tennis blog nice job
londonolympics2012livestream.blogspot.com
can he win this year any gold medal
Sportsunplug.com
its a brillent blog
totalnewsarena.blogspot.com
Post a Comment