Gilles Simon battles past Nadal to reach his first Masters final

Gilles 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.

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

On 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.

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

Tomas 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.

Sela makes his first ATP final, and meets Roddick in the final

Following the excitement and drama of Davis Cup last week, it was back to business as usual on the ATP tour as some of the players made their way to Asia to play in either Beijing or Bangkok. Unlike Davis Cup, the matches that took place this week were all about the tennis, with crowds being in both tournaments being sparsely populated and players being treated to nothing more than a polite applause, although for a brief moment yesterday, Andy Roddick’s name was chanted enthusiastically by a small group of Chinese fans.

This week was the start of the Asian tennis season, which briefly lasts two weeks and ends in Tokyo next week although it will be expanded from next year where Shanghai will be awarded an indoor Masters Series event. The results that took place in both tournaments were contrasting, with upsets galore in Beijing while the top four seeds navigated their way into the semi-finals stage.

Clearly the man of this week has been Dudi Sela, from Israel, who earned his way into the Beijing finals defeating the likes of David Ferrer, Tommy Robredo and Rainer Schuettler. Sela, currently ranked 92nd in the world, had previously never advanced past the quarter-finals of an ATP event. Prior to this week’s efforts, he was most known for carrying Israel into the Davis Cup world group by defeating Nicolas Massu and most notably Fernando Gonzalez in five sets.

Sela is another one of those players who has a very natural feel for the game, in a similar vein to Olivier Rochus but without the hustle and determination (or to a lesser extent anyway). His groundstrokes, which lack the necessary punch to threaten at the highest level, are fluid, effortless and difficult to read especially on his one-handed backhand. His shots rely mainly on timing, and in this particular match against Schuettler he was striking the ball particularly well, resulting in a comfortable 6-3 6-3 win over the German.

His backhand is his big weapon - he can generate numerous winners off that side or throw in a slice backhand for variety which often forced errors out of Schuettler especially in the first set. Early on in the match, I noticed Sela in one point which was being evenly contested, suddenly unleash a backhand down-the-line winner out of nowhere, completely taking Schuettler by surprise.

I watched his backhand closely to notice that Sela takes his racquet back early in preparation but has the ability to hold it before completing his swing, making it almost impossible for his opponent to read where it is going. Because of this, he was also able to increase the pace on his shots using the same backswing which allowed him to take control of points by taking his opponents by surprise. But you can also see the downside to this sort of approach because Sela can get pushed back to playing a more defensive game, or get rushed into error by a bigger hitter.

In the match against Schuettler, it was interesting to note the contrasting styles between both players. Schuettler has a fairly mechanical game in that the effort he puts in is obvious to make sure that he sets himself in the right position, and how he throws his body weight forward to try and maximize the amount of power he can generate. Schuettler generally plays a high percentage game in that he usually likes to keep the ball going crosscourt and only pulls the trigger if he sees the opportunity to do so, although he has the variety to come to the net to finish off points.

Schuettler is fairly good from a tactical point of view, and his shots are usually struck with purpose. In the second set, he tried to change the rhythm of the match by taking more risks, hitting with more pace and coming into the net more often, but it was not enough to change the outcome of the match.

Sela took a more instinctive and reactive approach to his tennis, often coming up with winners on the run, or shots that were able to turn the point in his favour. While Sela won the first set relatively comfortably with two service breaks, the first four games of the second set went on serve until Sela broke serve with a flourish, first firing a forehand winner down-the-line on the run, then two lobs over Schuettler’s head to take control of the match. By the end of the match, Schuetttler’s frustration became obvious as he began to talk to himself, knowing that he had run out of ideas.

Sela next meets Andy Roddick in the final, who proved too solid for Bjorn Phau, winning 6-2 6-7 6-1. Phau plays most of his tennis at the Challengers level, and it was interesting to note the difference between the two in this match. It looked like Roddick, one of the most energetic players on tour, was playing on autopilot most of the time playing his usual game, taking care of his service games in an efficient manner and hitting reliable, consistent and heavy groundstrokes.

The match featured many extended rallies, where Phau, the lower ranked player was the one trying to make things happen, maybe going out of his comfort zone. For those who watched Phau’s performance against Rafael Nadal in the first round of this year’s US Open will know that Phau is a clean striker of the ball, and incredibly quick around the court. He is solid on both wings, but more so on the backhand side which is clearly his favoured side. He must be one of the few players with a one-handed backhand that runs around his forehand to hit a backhand on shots that land down the middle.

In the first set, Phau was targeting Roddick’s backhand too often, not making Roddick move enough and found himself paying the price for coming to the net too early as he got passed time and time again. Phau adopted a more aggressive approach in the second set trying to hit closer to the lines and changing directions more often, and importantly he was having more success at the net.

Both players held serve with relative ease in the second set. The crucial mini-break in the second set came when Roddick stuck his racquet out to volley a shot that was going potentially wide, and that was enough for Phau to take the set. The third set continued in the same vein for the first two or so games, until Roddick broke Phau’s serve on an extended game that featured four or so deuce points. Phau’s game quickly dropped off after that as Roddick cruised to a 6-1 victory in the third set.

Elsewhere in Bangkok, fans will be treated to an Australian Open final re-match between Novak Djokovic and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga after both players defeated their respective opponents in the semi-finals, Tomas Berdych and Gael Monfils. The match between Monfils and Tsonga, was a disappointing encounter as Tsonga cruised his way to a 6-0 6-3 victory against a sluggish Monfils. Tsonga, however, showed some good form, with both his serve and forehand firing nicely, and kept his errors down to a minimum which is the main measuring stick for him in terms of his form.

Nalbandian and Del Potro take Argentina to a commanding 2-0 position

The Davis Cup semi-final tie between Argentina and Russia promised to be a closely contested encounter on paper, but it didn’t turn out that way as Argentina took a comfortable lead winning both rubbers in straight sets. With Juan Martin Del Potro’s sudden rise up the rankings, Argentina are starting to look like a highly formidable team and they showed this yesterday as both Del Potro and David Nalbandian outclassed their Russian opponents in straight sets, Nikolay Davydenko and Igor Andreev.

The first rubber contested between David Nalbandian and Igor Andreev was a slightly inconsistent affair especially in the first set, but in the end, Nalbandian’s variety, tactical game and ability to play the big points was the decisive factor. For anyone that has seen Nalbandian play Davis Cup before, especially in Argentina, will know that Nalbandian thrives in Davis Cup playing for his country, and in this kind of atmosphere. He is especially animated in these kinds of matches and plays with more focus than in main tour matches.

Andreev, in comparison is hard to read in terms of what mental state he is in for these matches and seems to have his ‘game face’ on for the entire match. Andreev, himself has been known to perform impressively for his country on some occasions, the win against Fernando Gonzalez in Chile last year comes to mind specifically although this year, he also lost to Radek Stepanek at home, on clay in three convincing sets.

The match started off evenly poised in the first set with both players holding serve, and only one break point being fashioned which was on Nalbandian’s serve. The level of play from both players was inconsistent, but both were effective enough to take care of their own service games. Nalbandian looked flat-footed with his movement often coughing up errors getting caught out of position, although he was clearly not lacking in energy.

Andreev was efficient in his game, and stuck to his strengths during the match using his heavy and accurate serve to good effect and making use of his favoured off-forehand, although it started to look more predictable as the match went on. Despite some inconsistent play, Nalbandian looked ready for the battle and although he was lacking in execution, he wasn’t going to let it deter him and he continued to show purpose in his shot selections and strike his groundstrokes with conviction.

In the first point of the first set tie-break, Nalbandian missed a backhand return long by a couple of millimetres, which would have been a winner, then he later missed a forehand deep by a similar amount which allowed Andreev to take a commanding 4-1 lead in the tie-break. It looked like Nalbandian’s luck was all going against him when one of his shots clipped the top of the tape and was called out. But it was then overruled, which Andreev disputed to no avail. That changed the momentum as Andreev started to get tight and tried to bludgeon his way out of trouble with big shots, which appeared more forced than usual. Nalbandian then played his best point of the set to win the set moving Andreev out of position after an extended rally, and quickly seizing the opportunity at the net.

The second and third sets had a different tone, with Nalbandian starting to play with more confidence and looking like he had the match under control. His footwork was starting to look better and he was getting more comfortable in his movement, moving more effortlessly around the court.

As the match progressed, Nalbandian was starting to learn that he could open up the court, then approach to Andreev’s backhand and finish off the point at the net which was a lower risk strategy than what he was doing before. Andreev was finding it harder to take control of the points, although he was able to remain on serve until the final game in the third set. Nalbandian played the best game of the match to break serve to win the match, which he won with two return winners and a trademark backhand down-the-line.

The match between Juan Martin Del Potro and Nikolay Davydenko turned out to be a one-sided affair right from the outset, with the exception of the end of the second set where Del Potro nearly relinquished a double break advantage. Del Potro is currently on a run of good form winning 23 of his 24 last matches, and is a player on the rise. He had previously played two singles matches in Davis Cup for Argentina, but both away matches in Austria and Sweden respectively.

Given that this was his debut at home and that with his current run of form brings high expectations, it was a test to see if Del Potro could handle the pressure. Based on what I had seen of him in the last few months, I expected that he would react to the occsion positively, given his relatively calm demeanour, which he did. Davydenko, in comparison has been known to struggle to find his best tennis in this competition and is often slow to adapt to changing surfaces.

The match was characterized by long baseline rallies with both players playing controlled aggressive tennis, with the difference being that Del Potro was doing it much better with more margin of error on his shots (or so it seemed given how well he was playing) whereas Davydenko was trying to hit closer to the lines and was often the one making the errors at the end of points.

One telling statistic in the first set was the winners-unforced error count which was a mere 2-2 for Del Potro suggesting that he was winning the majority of points by forcing errors. Davydenko could not seem to get any advantage on his serve as they started to engage in extended rallies on the majority of points.

The second set started in the same vein as the first and it looked like it was going to be an embarrassing rout for Davydenko at 4-1 and two breaks down. Del Potro started to get nervous with more errors coming off his racquet while Davydenko started to get the upper hand in more of these long rallies. The game at 5-3 was the climax of the match, which was extended to five or six deuces until Del Potro finally served out the set.

One interesting thing I noticed in this match was how in these rallies, Del Potro looked every bit as impressive defensively as Davydenko. He doesn’t look as effortless with his movement and sometimes it looks as if he is taking a giant lunge (even though he isn’t) but he positions himself well and this was particularly evident in one point in the third set when he bent his knees all the way down to find an exceptional angle on the backhand passing shot winner.

As soon as Del Potro won the second set, normal service resumed and he continued to break Davydenko’s serve at will wrapping up the match with ease 6-1 6-4 6-2.

Russia take a comfortable 2-0 lead over Spain in the Fed Cup final

This weekend was the start of the Fed Cup final between Spain and Russia, played on red clay in Madrid, in what should have been one of the bigger events on the tennis calendar but it ended up being largely ignored.

Russia didn’t field their strongest team with Dinara Safina and Elena Dementieva opting to skip the tie, citing injuries, although both are expected to make an appearance a few days later in Tokyo. It is especially surprising that Dementieva, who thrives playing for her country, decided to not give herself another opportunity to lift the trophy. Regardless, Russia remained strong favourites with Svetlana Kuznetsova and Vera Zvonareva nominated as the two singles players. The Spanish team were the clear underdogs with their singles players consisting of surprise French Open quarter-finalist, Carla Suarez Navarro and Anabel Medina Garrigues.

Last night, I was trying to weigh the pros and cons of watching Fed Cup as opposed to watching the Bucharest semi-finals which were scheduled around the same time. That I am a huge fan of Davis Cup and the drama and atmosphere that surrounds it, raised a little bit of interest for me, and to see Carla Suarez Navarro who I find to be one of the most refreshing players on the WTA tour.

But on the other hand, the opening singles match between Anabel Medina Garrigues and Vera Zvonareva did not appeal to me at all. So I decided to watch the match in Bucharest between Jose Acasuso and Gilles Simon, a marathon of a match lasting almost three hours, which turned out to be a good decision then I switched over to Suarez Navarro and Kuznetsova afterwards.

Before writing about this article, I tried to find some thoughts on the Fed Cup matches that happened last night to back up my own, but I could not find one single comment of any of these matches (not its result) that was any longer than one sentence long, reflecting the complete lack of interest in this event, or maybe lack of television coverage.

The drama and atmosphere that I like to see in these team competitions was completely absent. The stadium has a capacity for 4000 spectators, and it is roughly around the same size as say Court 1 of Monte Carlo/Rome. The stands were only about a third full, giving the impression that this was like an early round match at a WTA event. Compare that to the upcoming Davis Cup tie between Spain and USA being played in the same city (Madrid), where it was reported that the players will be playing to a sold-out crowd of 21,000 people, although much of that is due to the appearance of Rafael Nadal. But regardless, every Davis Cup tie attracts significantly larger crowds than this.

Fed Cup doesn’t even come close to Davis Cup in terms of prestige and tradition, due to the frequent changes that had been made to its format over the years. It was only in 2004 when the Fed Cup started to adopt a similar format to the Davis Cup, where they started staging the ties in one of the competing countries, rather than at a neutral venue, and prior to 2002, there were only three rubbers in a tie as opposed to five. However, it still has its minor differences in that the doubles is the final rubber and that there is one less round and therefore half the number of countries in the World Group, and this is what allows them to play out the entire competition this early in the season. Since they have made these changes, Fed Cup has been better for it, although it still suffers from many of the top players not playing, usually picking and choosing depending on the circumstances of each particular tie. It looks like there is not much that can be done about it, with part of the problem being that the women play a more limited schedule and need to take care of their bodies more often, and the other being the lack of prestige which simply can’t be built up over a short period of time.

Back onto the tie itself, the match that I did watch between Suarez Navarro and Kuznetsova was disappointing. Suarez Navarro who impressed me so much earlier this year the French Open (especially her match against Flavia Pennetta), never seemed to be able to find the range on her groundstrokes and the match ended up to be a comfortable win for Kuznetsova in what was a relatively scrappy affair to say the least.

Suarez Navarro hits with a fair amount of topspin on her groundstrokes and her game is smooth and effortless. She plays what I would consider to be a stylish claycourt game, in the same vein of someone like Filippo Volandri on the men’s side, except not as stylish as Volandri. I find Suarez Navarro to be one of the most refreshing players on the women’s tour because she doesn’t possess that flat high-risk game that most of the WTA players seem to have these days. Kuznetsova, Mauresmo and Schnyder are the only others I can think of. Her trademark shot is the one-handed backhand, which reminds me of Alex Corretja’s backhand from a technical point of view, although she has the variety to either hit it with top spin or slice. She plays further behind the baseline than most of the top female players, to give herself more time to set up given her slightly longer backswings. When playing well and when given enough time to do so, Suarez Navarro has the ability to play a controlled aggressive game, using the full width of the court to move her opponents out of position to set herself up for the winner.

Unfortunately in this particular match, Suarez Navarro was unable to showcase any of that, as she found herself too often not being able to handle the heaviness and penetration of the Kuznetsova groundstrokes, especially on Kuznetsova’s forehand. Kuznetsova’s performance was inconsistent herself, but on most occasions, one or two penetrating shots from the Russian were enough to win her points. After the match, Kuznetsova said that, “The key to the match was not to beat myself. I started to rush and try to play too well and she came back but then I started to take my time again and got back on top.”

So Russia ended the day with a 2-0 lead as expected, where Vera Zvonareva had defeated Anabel Medina Garrigues earlier in the day 6-3 6-4.

Some of the other highlights of the US Open

Instead of concentrating of the back end of this year’s US Open and the major stories like Roger Federer breaking what would be a Grand Slam drought (for him!) or Andy Murray’s impressive run to the final, I decided to write about some of the more memorable moments of this year’s US Open as well as some other observations which may not necessarily be considered a highlight.

One of the most memorable moments for me would have to be the fourth set tie-break that was contested between Nikolay Davydenko and Gilles Muller. The first thing that struck me in this match was the determination and will to win that Davydenko showed. He was hustling around the court showing a sense of urgency in his movement and grunting louder, or should we call it breathing, because his grunt sounds like him taking a very deep breath? Keep in mind that it was only two weeks ago when Davydenko was quoted as saying that he had currently lost his passion in tennis, so it looked like playing in a grand slam event had fired him up.

The tie-break in this match was epic, extending all the way to 12-10 which Muller finally won. It was full of drama, intensity and backed up with high quality play from both players, with all of this occurring on Armstrong stadium with barely anyone in the stands. Muller, in comparison to Davydenko was calm and collected under pressure, often coming up with big serves and following them up with solid volleys.

Muller’s volleys are mediocre but he covers the net well with his large wingspan and he is an intimidating presence. Davydenko hit possibly the best shot of the tournament to get himself up a mini-break when he hit a running forehand crosscourt squash winner passing shot, with all of his body weight going backwards, moving from short in the court to the baseline.

From then on, every point was decided by winning shots from both sides until Davydenko thought he served an ace. Muller then challenged it and was successful, and what so usually happens when there is a delay in between first and second serves, Davydenko threw in a double fault to hand over the crucial break.

On the match point, Muller hit a drop volley that was backspinning wide to the doubles alley of the court but sat up high for Davydenko to put away, which he failed to do so, missing wide. Davydenko then smashed his racquet in disgust and I don’t mean one of those racquet bounces that you regularly see, then he collected himself to give Muller a warm handshake at the net.

Another match that had some of the same qualities was the fifth set between Kei Nishikori and David Ferrer. For me, it is one of the most fascinating things to witness, when a relatively inexperienced player is in a position to produce a big upset and one of the biggest wins of their career, and to have their opponent force them to come up with their best tennis to win the match.

Nishikori is one of the rising stars of the ATP tour, and first caught the attention of the tennis world when he captured the Delray Beach title while being ranked in the 200s defeating James Blake in the final, and later in the year pushed Rafael Nadal to three tough sets at Queen’s Club. Nishikori is a shotmaker and unlike some of the other young guns, he is able to quickly recognise an opportunity to come to the net and has the tactical awareness to switch between defense and offense quickly, although in the matches that I watched, he had a tendency to be a little impatient at times.

Playing in the first five set match in a Grand Slam against a tough competitor like Ferrer who had compiled an almost perfect five set record of 9-1 prior to this match, it seemed like a daunting task especially given that Nishikori had dropped the third and fourth sets after taking the first two. Nishikori served for the match unsuccessfully the first time at 5-4 and this started to look like another typical Ferrer match where he grinds his opponent down both mentally and physically.

Ferrer continued to make Nishikori work hard to win every point, but Nishikori put the disappointment of being unable to serve out the match out quickly and continued to go for his shots with authority. One of the best examples of this was the match point where it looked like Nishikori had just about won the match, then Ferrer threw up a high defensive lob that landed deep about a metre from the baseline to essentially restart the point. Nishikori then got it back deep and folllowed it up with a winning forehand down-the-line to win the match.

The best match of the first week of the US Open was surprisingly between Donald Young and James Blake, which looked like it was going to be a rout at least on paper. It turned out to be just that in the first set, and the first thing I noticed about Young is how fidgety and impatient he looks when he is playing, and he started off the match rushing on most of his shots. I had heard a lot about Young’s apparent variety and court smarts which made him different from the other American players. But in the first two sets, what I saw was poor shot selection and erratic play from both players, with Young often wanting to finish off the point far too quickly. What they did have was fast-paced rallies and plenty of ebbs and flows of the match which made for compelling viewing. Blake let Young into the match late in the second set when he dropped his own service games with three or four unforced errors and from that on is when the quality of the match picked up.

Young started to figure out that he didn’t need to play so aggressively and started standing a metre further back than he was from the baseline giving him a bit more time to react and started to open up the court much better with his forehand catching Blake out time and time again trying to camp out in the backhand side looking to run around it.

Young’s forehand is a dangerous shot. He is able to generate large amounts of racquet head speed on that side and that allowed him to produce flashy winners on that side on many occasions in this match. His backhand is compact and solid especially when given pace to work with. Blake’s shot selections were questionable to say the least and his shots were lacking in accuracy, but in the end, his greater experience (or his opponent’s lack of experience) won him the match.

But this match is memorable more because of Young’s performance, because of all the potential he showed, which for now, I can’t really pinpoint a spot in the rankings that he should be at, because while he does have an excellent all-round game, good shotmaking abilities and court speed, there are noticeable weaknesses in his game and there is a reason why he is ranked where he is now.

Other observations worth mentioning

• I enjoyed seeing Jo-Wilfried Tsonga back more than I thought I would. I couldn’t believe how well he was playing against Moya in the 2nd round given how long he was out for. He is such an explosive player that it is hard not to be excited when he puts it all together. Unfortunately he was not able to back it up in the next round against Tommy Robredo where he tried to force himself to raise his energy levels, but it didn’t work and he ended up not being anywhere near as consistent as he needed to be.

• Both Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Gael Monfils won over the crowd with the enthusiasm and energy they showed in their tennis and their interaction with the crowd. Is it me or does Monfils slip and slide around even more when there is a big crowd and they respond to him? While I admit that it was somewhat enjoyable watching both of them this US Open, I don’t think it would be the same watching them play in front of a crowd that didn’t make any noise where they wouldn’t be feeding off the energy of the crowd. Having said that, I didn’t enjoy Monfils’ matches in his run to the French Open semi-finals this year at all, especially his matches against Ferrer and Ljubicic.

• Has anyone noticed that since Richard Gasquet started working with Guillaume Peyre, he has reverted to playing a more aggressive game, but often in the matches he has lost, like the matches against Haas (at the US Open), Tursunov, Nadal and Murray, he was far too quick to go for big shots in the closing stages of the match and ended up losing convincingly in that final set. His forehand which was criticised for being too loopy and landing too short, now sometimes flies on him when he tries to accelerate through it. I find it interesting that he has gone from being too defensive at times, to the other way around, but most of all, I’m curious to see if he can end up finding the right balance.

• The two best matches that I watched in the tournament were between Gilles Simon and Juan Martin Del Potro, and the semi-final match between Andy Murray and Rafael Nadal.

• When is there going to be an official pay live stream of the US Open and other grand slams (excluding Wimbledon)? Wimbledon is really the only grand slam that offers this worldwide, with their coverage extending to eight simultaneous courts and all of those matches being available on-demand. Eurosport have had their Eurosport Player service where Europeans are able to pay to watch from a choice of five courts for a couple of years, but no such luck for the rest of us. I was frequently hopping onto my computer hoping that there would be a live stream of the match that I wanted to see. It was a difficult decision to make everytime I found one that was in poor quality (usually on justin.tv) to decide whether that would be worse than watching a match that I was not interested in, but could see what was going on. I usually prefer not to watch early round matches featuring Federer, Nadal or Djokovic if there are other choices unless if they have a match that looks more difficult on paper than usual. I think this is an opinion shared by many tennis fans, but TV coverage is catered towards casual fans which is why there needs to be better online coverage.