Niemand won in 2009 meer wedstrijden dan Novak Djokovic. De Serviër bereikte vijf keer de finale van een Masters Series-toernooi en heroverde onlangs de derde positie op de wereldranglijst van Andy Murray. En dus kan de Australian Open kampioen van 2008 terugkijken op een geslaagd seizoen, toch? Op de Baseline vindt van niet.

Novak Djokovic is deze week in de ogen van veel kenners de grootste kanshebber op de titel bij de ATP World Tour Finals in Londen. De titelverdediger kende een droomherfst, met eindzeges in Peking, Basel (met winst op Roger Federer) en bij het Masters Series-toernooi van Parijs (met winst op Rafael Nadal).

Hoe succesvol Djokovic ook geweest mag zijn na de US Open, elke liefhebber weet dat reputaties gebouwd worden rondom de Grand Slam-toernooien. En aangezien Djokovic aan het begin van 2008 zijn eerste major wist te winnen, was het logisch om te verwachten dat hij dit jaar zou schitteren tijdens de vier grote toernooien. Maar dat kwam er niet van.

Djokovic voldeed in 2009 niet aan de verwachtingen bij de Grand Slams

In Australië maakte Djokovic een onprofessionele indruk, door in de kwartfinales op te geven tegen Andy Roddick vanwege uitputtingsverschijnselen. Het is algemeen bekend dat de temperatuur in Melbourne tijdens de Australian Open hoog op kan lopen, maar daar bereidt elke tennisprof zich op voor. Djokovic is wat dat betreft nalatig geweest en dat is hem – terecht - op veel kritiek komen te staan.

In het voorjaar presteerde Djokovic sterk op het gravel met finaleplaatsen in Monte-Carlo, Rome en winst in Belgrado, maar tijdens Roland Garros liep de Serviër in de derde ronde tegen een onverklaarbare nederlaag op tegen de Duitser Philipp Kohlschreiber. Enkele weken later weerhield diens landgenoot Tommy Haas de naar plaats vier afgezakte Djokovic uit de halve eindstrijd van Wimbledon.

Op de US Open bereikte Djokovic dan wel naar verwachting de laatste vier, maar de manier waarop hij zich in de halve finales gewonnen gaf tegen Roger Federer was pijnlijk om te aanschouwen. Djokovic geloofde geen moment in zijn kansen. Toen hij een break voorsprong nam in de eerste set speelde hij direct zijn slechtste servicegame van het toernooi. Wanneer de spanning toenam aan het einde van de sets, was het telkens de Serviër zelf die met onnodige fouten de punten aan Federer schonk.

Djokovic leek in New York, en voor het grootste deel van het jaar, in niets meer op het talent dat in 2007 en 2008 fanatiek de strijd aan ging met iedereen, en altijd geloofde in zijn winstkansen. De pitbull van weleer was verworden tot een schoothondje.

Maar terwijl Federer, Nadal, Andy Murray en Juan Martin del Potro het rustig aan deden na het afsluitende Grand Slam-toernooi van het seizoen, begon Djokovic weer te winnen. In Parijs won hij op de valreep zijn eerste Masters Series-titel van 2009, na vier eerdere finales verloren te hebben. En daarmee eindigt de 22-jarige man uit Belgrado zijn seizoen toch nog met een positieve noot.

Eén halve finale op Grand Slam-niveau, vier verloren Masters Series-finales en één grote titel, naast vier kleinere toernooioverwinninkjes. Is dat echter genoeg voor een nummer drie van de wereld die een jaar ervoor zijn eerste Slam veroverde en altijd heeft gezegd dat hij de beste wil worden? No way Nole. Zelfs een overwinning in Londen deze week kan daar niets meer aan veranderen.

Foto © Niels de Water

scorespro.com offers live sports scoring including Tennis matches. Keep up on the latest via your iphone too. There’s an app.

One of the most effective tennis serves you can hit is what is sometimes known as the “can opener”.

You see Federer and Nadal hit this serve a lot of the time.

This is when you slice the serve out wide and drag your opponent out of the tennis court.

It can often result in an ace or error but can also leave your opponent so far out of court that even if they do return the ball you have the whole court at your mercy to take advantage of.

But, so many people still struggle to hit it well.

Well, try this.

If you are a right hander hitting it from the deuce (right) court then just move your right foot to the right a touch (towards the right tramline) when you are setting up (I am obviously assuming your right foot is normally further from the right tramline than your left foot in your normal service stance).

This will line your body up more towards your target and make hitting that area by the opposite tramline sooooo much easier.

Note for all you leftys, just reverse the above instruction i.e. serve from the left etc.

For those of you worried about telegraphing the serve to the opponent – don’t worry.

If you are unable to hit the wide serve from the “normal” stance, you AND your opponent are unlikely to be at the level where reading and taking advantage of serves are a natural part of the game.

PLUS!!!

If you hit it well enough, it is still a difficult serve to deal with.

I saw Pete Sampras (who Federer copied) serve every ad serve (from the left) at the French Open, Roland Garros from wide out towards the tramline with kick.

Everybody knew where most of the serves were going but like I said earlier if you hit these wide serves well the worst that can happen is that you end up with an empty court to play into on the next shot.

He lost in the Semi-Finals!!

I also saw him serve nearly every serve in the Australian Open final against Thomas Muster (a lefty) as a can opener from the right (deuce) court.

He Won!!

Listen, it’s really important for right handers to have this serve against a lefty.

I say this because it seems that all leftys have this serve when they play us right handers……dammned leftys

Start working on it today!!

P.S. if you are a lefty and don’t have it as part of your service arsenal…………get it going

Dear ATP Chairman,

When is this going to stop?  When do we finally say that the top players (top 100) should have an off season, just like other major sports?  Having the Masters half-way through November is ridiculous.  The U.S. Open ended on September 13, 2009.  The Masters is over two months removed from the year’s final slam.  Why can’t the Masters be two weeks after the open and then call it a season?  Give Fed and the boys October, November, and December off.  They want it off.  Fed said that he wanted to take the rest of 2009 off after the Open and Davis Cup play so that he’d be better prepared in January for the Australian Open.  The Slams are the most important tournaments, so let’s treat them that way.  The year starts in Australia and ends in New York, with one special week for the Masters.  That’s it.  Who cares about the Paris Open, or whatever it’s called?  Not Federer.  He bowed out in the first round and has never made it past the quarters.  Wonder why…

He wants to be with his family over the holidays like a normal person.  Let him do that.  It will lengthen his career and keep him motivated going into the next season.  The results and matches at the Australian will be more exciting because all the players will be fired up to start again after a healthy and much deserved respite from their vocation.

I beg of you, Mister Chairman, please consider the long-term need to keep our stars from burning out in a sport where they have no teammates to rely on when they are exhausted.  Consider quality over quantity.  Consider making the professional tennis season 9 months instead of an eternity.

Gene

This theme music was played as an intro to grand slams (tennis) on ESPN in 2009. The following clip is an excerpt from a larger piece, but I can’t find the rest of it. If anyone knows what this piece is called, who composed it, or where it comes from, please comment! It really is beautiful music.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh9sceO8PcM

If you want to make money online, click here: http://tinyurl.com/yfk7wqj

Marat’s moment

Tennis star Marat Safin played the last match of his professional career today, losing 6-4 5-7 6-4 to Juan Martin Del Potro in the second round of the BNP Paribas Masters in Paris. It was the former two-time major winner’s final appearance in a tournament after announcing his plans to retire at the end of the of season earlier this year.

Safin’s presence on the ATP tour will be sorely missed. The Russian soon became a dominant force when he burst onto the scene at the turn of the century, pulverising shots past his opponents whilst commanding the court with an intimidating wealth of charisma. However despite his immense power he still retained an exciting and unpredictable edge. Fans of Safin would soon learn to expected the unexpected. Whether it be a tirade at an official or even displays of anger towards himself, Marat left everything out on court and did so with an endearing quality that was difficult to dislike.

Therefore it was fitting that his final match was to be filled with many of the infamous ‘Safinisms’ that fans have grown to know and love over his 12 year career. As BBC Radio 5 live’s Jonathan Overend explains: “It took 2 minutes for Safin to have his first argument with Umpire Bernades, 15 minutes for the racket to fly for the first time…classic”.

Despite such antics, Safin’s career was an illustrious one. Perhaps his greatest moment was winning his first Grand Slam title at the US Open against Pete Sampras in 2000 (see left), in doing so he became the first Russian to win at Flushing Meadows and did so as the tallest world number one in history at 6ft 4 inches.  Marat had to wait five years for his second and final major triumph at the Australian Open against Lleyton Hewitt in 2005.  After a succession of injuries and near misses at the tournament (a losing finalist both in 2002 and 2004) the Russian defeated the home town favourite in four sets, just days after putting out world number one Roger Federer in an epic 5-7, 6-4, 5-7, 7-6 (8-6), 9-7 semi-final encounter. Four years on it remains his last tournament victory in singles competition.

However Safin’s actions off the court would hit the headlines as often as his achievements on it. A brutally honest and outspoken figure on tour, Safin has been quick to share his views on hawk-eye: “I am totally against it. I think it will destroy the game.” Wimbledon: “I don’t like how they treat the players.” and recently on Andre Agassi’s drug-use: “He is completely stupid…There are times you need to be able to shut up.” No, Safin was never going to be the shy retiring type.

Despite his unreserved nature, the 29-year-old was well liked on tour and often carried himself with a jovial and sincere warmth off court. The affection for Safin within the dressing room became clear earlier today when the likes of Novak Djokovic, Gilles Simon and Ivo Karlovic joined a post match ceremony to celebrate Safin’s career. Several other leading players expressed their sadness at his retirement in a video package shown soon after the match.

It was Safin’s philosophy on tennis that helped win him so many admirers, he felt passionately about entertaining the audience and ensuring that fans were satisfied. “You have to make the people happy and hopefully they go home happy. You have to do everything that is possible to satisfy them. This is my job.” he said. “It’s part of the show. The people that come to tennis know what they want. They want tennis. Of course they don’t want to see robots, but they want to see some emotion, some nice matches, some nice points.”

His views always offered fans and reporters alike a fascinating insight into the psyche one of tennis’s most intriguing stars. Safin will be remembered as a great player, a great character and now sadly a great loss to the game.

Veertig jaar geleden zette Rod Laver (71) een van de grootste prestaties in de tennisgeschiedenis neer. Nadat de Australiër in 1962 al de vier grootste tennistitels had veroverd in één jaar, kon hij op de US Open van 1969 dat succes evenaren. Met de eindzeges van de Australian Open, Roland Garros en Wimbledon op zak bleek Laver uiteindelijk ook in New York de beste. Zo slaagde hij er als enige tennisser in de geschiedenis in, om twee keer in zijn carrière een Grand Slam te winnen, in de traditionele betekenis van het woord. 

Vraag een willekeurige tennisser naar de term ‘Grand Slam’ en hij zal beginnen over Wimbledon, de US Open, Roland Garros of misschien de Australian Open. Elk van deze toernooien is immers een ‘Grand Slam’, toch? Nou… nee. Althans, officieel gezien niet. “De toernooien zijn zichzelf na verloop van tijd onterecht zo gaan noemen”, schrijft de legendarische Amerikaanse tennisjournalist Bud Collins in zijn eigen boek The Bud Collins History of Tennis. “De toernooien zijn majors. Door deze alle vier te winnen bereik je een Grand Slam.”

Oorsprong
De term Grand Slam werd voor het eerst voorzichtig geïntroduceerd in de tennissport in 1933. Jack Crawford had de kampioenschappen van zijn eigen Australië, Frankrijk en Groot-Brittannië gewonnen, toen hij naar New York afreisde om te strijden voor de Amerikaanse titel. Deze vier majors worden samen ook wel de ‘Big Four’ genoemd, een reputatie die is ontstaan uit het Davis Cup succes van de betreffende landen (tot 1974 was er geen ander land dat de trofee wist te winnen).

Crawford bereikte de finale, maar ging na een 2-1 voorsprong in sets toch nog onderuit tegen de Brit Fred Perry. Een columnist van de New York Times, John Kieran, schreef over Crawford: ‘Als hij had gewonnen, dan zou zijn succes iets zijn geweest als een ‘grand slam’ in bridge.’ 

Arthur Ashe Stadium in New York: met 23.000 zitplaatsen het grootste tennisstadion ter wereld

Geheime missie
De Amerikaan Don Budge zette vijf jaar later op 23-jarige leeftijd wél die laatste stap. Toen Budge met de Verenigde Staten de Davis Cup won in 1937, kreeg hij het aanbod om professioneel tennisser te worden. Dit betekende echter dat Budge niet meer zijn land mocht vertegenwoordigen en in de belangrijkste toernooien kon spelen.

Tennis was officieel nog altijd een amateursport en professionals werden geweerd uit het circuit. Zij speelden alternatieve evenementen waar meer geld verdiend kon worden, maar minder eer te behalen viel. Gedreven door vaderlandsliefde besloot Budge nog één jaar als amateur door te gaan, omdat hij graag de Davis Cup-titel wilde verdedigen. Als extra uitdaging nam Budge zichzelf voor om in zijn afscheidsjaar de titels van de Big Four winnen. Het was een missie waar niemand vanaf mocht weten, behalve zijn dubbelpartner Gene Mako.

Ironisch genoeg was precies Mako de laatste horde voor Budge in de finale van de Amerikaanse kampioenschappen. Budge behaalde zijn Grand Slam – de benaming werd wederom geopperd door de New York Times en sloeg aan – met een vier sets overwinning en veroverde met de Verenigde Staten opnieuw de Davis Cup. Hij kon met een gerust hart overstappen naar het proftennis. 

Eerste vrouw
Het duurde tot 1953 voordat Maureen Connolly de eerste vrouw werd die een Grand Slam behaalde. Een glorieuze carrière leek in het verschiet te liggen voor de pas 18-jarige Amerikaanse – ze verloor in haar eerste vier jaar slechts vier partijen -, maar haar leven nam al snel een tragische wending. Het aansluitende jaar raakte ze betrokken bij een ernstige aanrijding, terwijl ze aan het paardrijden was. Connolly liep onherstelbare schade op aan haar been en overleed uiteindelijk op 34-jarige leeftijd aan kanker. 

Margaret Smith Court (1970) en Steffi Graf (1988) waren de twee andere vrouwen die de vier grote titels in één jaar wisten te winnen. Met totaal respectievelijk 24 en 22 gewonnen majors zijn zij de twee absolute recordhouders van het vrouwentennis. Het succesjaar van Graf in 1988 werd nog extra aangekleed met een olympische titel in Seoul, waarmee de term Golden Slam was geboren. 

De Rod Laver Arena in Melbourne; Federer en Nadal in actie tijdens de Australian Open finale 2009

Twee Grand Slams
De meest opmerkelijke Grand Slammer van allemaal is echter ongetwijfeld Rod Laver. Nadat hij in 1962 als amateur de vier grootste prijzen in de wacht had gesleept, herhaalde de Australiër dit kunstje in het eerste volledige jaar van de Open Era (de samensmelting van amateur- en proftennis) in 1969. 

“Don Budge was ongetwijfeld de beste tennisser ter wereld in zijn tijd, ondanks dat hij amateur was”, schrijft Laver in zijn autobiografie The Education of a Tennis Player.”Ik kon mijzelf echter onmogelijk de beste noemen in 1962, terwijl er zulke geweldige spelers als Pancho Gonzales, Ken Rosewall en Lew Hoad in het profcircuit rondliepen.”

Laver werd vervolgens zelf ook prof en kreeg gelijk het deksel op zijn neus. “Van mijn eerste dertien wedstrijden won ik er twee”, memoreert hij in zijn boek. Laver verloor zeven keer op rij van landgenoot Hoad en won slechts twee uit zes ontmoetingen met die andere Aussie, Rosewall. 

Het had er alle schijn van dat Laver zijn jaren zou slijten in de anonimiteit van het profbestaan, tot in 1968 de sport werd opengebroken en hij de kans kreeg de kroon te zetten op zijn carrière. Als enige speler ooit veroverde de linkshander een tweede Grand Slam in 1969 en ditmaal waren alle toppers van de partij. “Dit jaar was een stuk moeilijker dan 1962”, zei Laver na zijn afsluitende overwinning op de US Open. “Ik kwam er pas achter wie de besten waren toen ik in 1963 professional werd en er gehakt van me werd gemaakt gedurende de eerste zes maanden.” 

Wimbledon finale 1969: Rod Laver verslaat landgenoot John Newcombe

In zijn begin jaren ’70 verschenen biografie zegt de man die in totaal 11 majors won: “Ik vraag me af of er ooit nog iemand zal zijn die een Grand Slam zal behalen. Ik betwijfel het.” Vooralsnog zat hij er niet ver naast. Bij de mannen is het veertig jaar na dato nog altijd wachten op een opvolger, maar Court en Graf hebben namens de vrouwen wel Grand Slam-succes mogen vieren.

Alternatieve ‘Slammers’
En dan waren er nog drie gevallen waarbij een speelster alle vier de grote titels tegelijk op zak had, zij het niet in één kalenderjaar. Meest recent was dat Serena Williams, die na het winnen van de Australian Open in 2003 kampioen was van alle Big Four toernooien. Gekscherend werd er gesproken over een ‘Serena Slam’. Martina Navratilova en ook Graf hebben een vergelijkbare prestatie geleverd. Maar zij komen daarmee niet op een speciale plaats in de recordboeken. Er is namelijk maar één echte definitie van een Grand Slam.

Tijdlijn van het Grand Slam: van introductie tot de winnaars

Dit artikel verscheen oorspronkelijk in Tennis Magazine.

Rafael Nadal has not won a tournament since the Rome Masters in May. Since then, the No. 2-ranked Spaniard has gone seven straight tournaments without a win, while losing his No. 1 ranking to Roger Federer on July 6. Most players would consider the 23-7 record Rafa has posted in that span a success, but not Nadal. Particularly telling is the fact that six of the losses were in straight sets and the other a four-set pummeling by Robin Soderling in the fourth round of the French Open. Definitely chinks in the armor. Plagued by injuries off and on since the end of last year, Nadal has clearly not been “le bete sauvage” who won four straight French Opens (2005-08) and was virtually invincible for 46 straight weeks at No. 1. Some wonder if Nadal’s overzealous schedule and relentless style of play have finally worn him down. After retiring against Nikolay Davydenko in the quarterfinals of the Paris Masters last November, Nadal packed it in for the season to rest his weary knees. Rejuvenated by the time off, Nadal won the Australian Open in January as well as four other tournaments, while posting a 38-3 mark. Nadal failed to win his fourth straight clay-court tournament of the spring when he dropped the final of the Madrid Masters to Federer two weeks after Rome. The Spaniard hasn’t been the same since. After losing at Roland Garros, Nadal shut down for over two months to calm the tendinitis in both knees. A difficult decision since he was the defending champion at Wimbledon. The Spaniard returned in August and played two hard-court tournaments leading up to the U.S. Open. He strained a stomach muscle at Cincinnati and then re-agravated the injury at Flushing Meadows before losing to eventual champion Juan Martin del Potro in the semifinals. After some more down time, the 23-year-old Nadal returned this month. The results weren’t good as he was scorched by Marin Cilic in the semifinals at Beijing and Davydenko in the final at Shanghai. Nadal has two more tournament this season – the Paris Masters in two weeks and the season-ending Masters Cup in London at the end of the month. After leaving Shanghai, Nadal was philosophical about his current state. “I can just say I am going to work hard to be at my best as soon as possible and I am not seeing myself very far off that. I would love to have a title, but if I am still playing like this in Paris and London, it’s difficult, sure,” he said. “The best players are there. But in Paris I expect to have another chance to play a good tournament. And if you are there all the time semifinals, final, you’re going to win. I don’t know when, but you’re going to win.” If Nadal is to regain the form that led to his reign at No. 1, he needs to remain injury free. His style of play dictates that he competes on sound knees.

The International Tennis Federatrion is considering fining Serena Williams $500,000 and taking her spot in the 2010 Australian Open for her recent ESPN magazine spread.

By ASHLEY BROWNE

The politics of tennis make headlines about as often as, well, an Australian winning Wimbledon. But The Age has been running hard with the battle for the presidency of Tennis Australia between the incumbent, Geoff Pollard and challenger Paul McNamee.

The presidency of TA is actually a full-time position and from 1989 until 2005, Pollard was the all-powerful head of tennis in this country. But following a searching review of the sport, it was decided that TA needed a chief executive as well as a president and Steve Wood, a one-time promising Australian player with a strong background in IT, was headhunted back from the US to assume that position.

It was at about this time that McNamee’s reign as the general manager and tournament director of the Australian Open was coming to an end. In his time at the helm, McNamee repositioned the tournament as the “Grand Slam of the Asia-Pacific” and lifted its status to become much more an equal partner with the other Grand Slam tournaments. Under his watch, Melbourne Park was redeveloped, night tennis boomed and tennis pretty much took over the nation for the last two weeks of January.

So successful has the Australian Open become that it largely underpins the finances of the sport in Australia. But those in the tennis industry – but not in the employ of TA – will tell you that while the Open has never been stronger, the Australian tennis itself is in a parlous state, with large question marks hovering over player development, participation and finances.

Australia has long been eliminated from the World Group of the Davis Cup and a look at the rankings, with just two Australian men (Lleyton Hewitt and Peter Luczak) and two Australian women (Samantha Stosur and Jelena Dokic) in the respective top 100s, those with concerns would appear to be correct.

McNamee shook the Australian Open to its foundations and it emerged bigger and better. He hasn’t outlined his vision for the sport in public just yet and probably doesn’t need to given that the presidency is not decided by popular vote but by state delegates behind closed doors.

But he has picked up an interesting and surprising supporter – Lleyton Hewitt – who has written an article on his official website advocating change and supporting McNamee.

The argument for change at the top of TA appear to be sound, although McNamee’s elevation to the presidency would likely lead to more sweeping changes within an organisation that has reportedly experienced a huge turnover of staff over the last two years.

Our prediction? Some sort of succession plan in which Pollard gets to leave on his own terms (such as presiding over one last Australian Open) with McNamee then taking over and moving swiftly in a bid to restore tennis to its once exalted place in the Australian sporting landscape.

I’m a bit late to this news, but just to make it official: Justine Henin has been granted a wildcard for the 2010 Australian Open. There. Now you know.

The Comebackhand will reportedly begin in Brisbane, where Kim Clijsters will also be playing.

He said, he said: Apparently, Lleyton Hewitt was snubbed by Aussie up-and-comer Bernard Tomic when the former No. 1 asked to hit with the U.S. Open 2009 junior champ sometime before Wimbledon. It was recently revealed by the Tomic camp that the request was turned down because of swine flu.

”I mean, if I get the chance, look, I would love to,” Tomic said, referring to hitting with Lleyton. ”He’s an idol and an icon for Australian tennis. I was watching him as I was growing up, a lot, and I loved his game and it would be a pleasure to hit with him any time, anywhere, I think.”

The Hewitt entourage counters that Tomic just went with someone else — Juan Carlos Ferrero — and thinks that the ailment excuse is all hogwash.

Wait — is this even news? Why was this published? Oh, that’s right — the organizers of the Australian Open have officially “launched” the tournament (how does one “launch” an event?), which means we’ll have media squeezing Aussie lemons to make tart, sour tennis lemonade like this Tomic/Hewitt row (thanks, The Age!) between now and January 18, 2010, when the event begins. Brace yourselves, folks.

On the flipside: There are a few things to get excited about. First, a wonderful teaser ad (click above) using the blue tint of the Melbourne Park courts as a motif. Second, the return of our Belgian munchkin Justine Henin. Third, the Woodies — Mark Woodforde and Todd Woodbridge — get inducted into the Australian Tennis Hall of Fame. And fourth, Pat Rafter and Goran Ivanisevic will play a rematch of their ‘01 Wimbledon final (which Ivanisevic won 9-7 in the fifth). Squee!

(Tomic photo via The Age; AO ad screengrab from YouTube)

Two more weeks to go.   Got 2010 Australian Open tennis tickets today,  China visa a while ago, got all our shots, it looks like snow, can we go now!

More later.

Tickets are now available for the Australian Open.

 Click here for more information.

Well, there have been a ton of questions as to what’s neXt for Wilson in 2010?

Here’s what we have for you right now.

Enjoy!!

Ilie Nastase. Boris Becker. Andre Agassi. Bjorn Borg. Pete Sampras. John McEnrowe.

Toti acesti sportivi au scris istoria tenisului de-a lungul anilor. Pe unii i-am vazut de curand pe iarba sau pe zgura, pe altii nu i-am apucat dar am vazut unele faze la televizor sau pe net… Nici nu mai conteaza. Important este ca au lasat in urma istoria rachetei de tenis, istorie care in zilele de azi este scrisa de multi tenimeni, insa doar unul e cel mai bun. Si nu e doar cel mai bun al zilelor noastre sau al ultimilor ani, e cel mai bun al tuturor timpurilor. Nu o spun eu, nu o spune nimeni, o spune statistica, si tot ea mai spune ca e greu sa ne imaginam ca in viitorul apropiat ar putea fi depasit.

Roger Federer s-a nascut pe data de 08.08.81 (8 augusut 1981) in Elvetia, localitatea Wollerau. A facut primii pasi in tenis de cand avea sase ani. Primul sau turneu de profesionisti a fost la Gstaad, in anul 1998. Un an mai tarziu avea sa faca parte din echipa de Cupa Davis a Elvetiei, iar la finele anului avea sa ocupe locul 66.  Totodata, acest an avea sa consemne primul sau turneu Grand Slam la care a participat, la French Open. In 2000 Federer avea sa participe la Olimpiada de la Sidney, la proba de tenis de camp, proba unde a ajuns pana in semifinale. Primul sau turneu de profesionisti castigat a venit in februarie 2001, la Milan Indoor, iar mai tarziu dupa sferturile de la Wimbledon si Roland Garros ajunsese locul 13 mondial.

Roger Federer si sotia sa, Mirka Vavrinec

Pentru cel poreclit si “FedEx” anul 2002 a fost un an destul de ghinionist. Dupa ce ca a iesit devreme in mai toate turneele de Grand Slam ale anului, elvetianul a avut de suferit in urma pierderii antrenorului sau, australianul Peter Carter. Totusi, in acest an 2002 avea sa joace semifinalele Turneului “Tennis Masters Cup”, unde a fost invins de liderul de atunci, Lleyton Hewitt. Anul 2003 a fost unul cu reusite destul de multe la turnee mai mici decat Grand Slamurile, s-a descurcat binisor si la seria de Masters-uri, insa la Australian Open, French Cup, Wimbledon sau US Open nu a trecut nici de primele tururi. Totusi, finele anului l-au prins pe Roger pe locul 2 in lume, fiind depasit doar de americanul Andy Roddick, aflat in forma maxima in acea vreme.

2004 a fost probabil cel mai dominant an pentru Federer, avand un “golaveraj” de 74 victorii – 6 infrangeri ce i-a adus in vitrina nu mai putin de 11 trofee. Totodata putem consemna primul Mare Slam castigat, Australian Open (care i-a adus si primul loc in clasmentul ATP), succedat de o infrangere la French Cup, si victorii la Wimbledon si US Open. Totodata, putem nota faptul ca in acest an elvetianul l-a intalnit prima oara pe Rafael Nadal, meci ce s-a terminat cu victoria spaniolului. Avea sa fie prima victorie a lui Nadal dintr-un lung sir. In 2005 a castigat doar doua Openuri (Wimbledon si US Open), invingandu-i pe Roddick respectiv Agassi.

Federer si rivalul sau etern, Rafael Nadal

Anul 2006 a fost un alt an dominat de Federer. A castigat 3 Grand Slamuri, stabilind o diferenta de mii de puncte intre el si urmatorul tenisemn din Clasmentul ATP, Rafa Nadal. A inceput anul cu victorie la Australian Open intr-o finala contra lui Baghdatis. La Roland Garros a pierdut finala tocmai impotriva lui Nadal, spaniolul invingandu-l pe FedEx in multiple randuri in 2006 (French Open, Rome, Monte Carlo, Dubai). La Flushing Meadows l-a invins in finala pe favoritul tribunelor Andy Roddick. La Shanghai i-a distrus pe rand pe Nalbandian, Nadal iar in finala pe Blake. Anul 2007 i-a adus alte 3 Grand Slamuri (Australian Open, Wimbledon si US Open). Da, lipseste French Open-ul, pierdut din nou in favoarea lui Nadal.

Anul 2008 a fost primul an in care a coborat de pe primul loc in Clasmentul ATP, pozitie ocupata inca din 2003 de elvetian. Dupa trei titluri castigate consecutiv la Australian Open, a venit si vremea pauzei, intrucat a fost invins in semifinale de castigatorul turneului, Novak Djokovic. A urmat cosmarul de la French Open, unde a patruns pentru a patra oara consecutiv in finala, pentru a patra oara consecutiv a jucat finala contra lui Rafael Nadal si tot pentru a patra oara a pierdut finala French Cup. A sosit si momentul adevarului la Wimbledon. Acolo, aceiasi tenismeni au continuat rivalitatea cunoscuta in intreaga lume si au jucat o finala in care Federer putea sa doboare recordul lui Borg, sau putea sa isi piarda pozitia de lider mondial. Dupa un meci ce a durat ore intregi fiind oprit de doua ori din cauza ploii, meciul s-a terminat cu victoria spaniolului (6–4, 6–4, 6–7(5), 6–7(8), 9–7). Federer avea sa mai coboare o treapta in ierarhie. Totusi, la US Open a castigat pentru a cincea oara consecutiv finala.

O poza epocala, cu "Regele" plangand la finala Australian Open, pierduta in fata lui... Nadal

Anul 2009 a fost unul destul de reusit pentru elvetian. La Australian Open a pierdut finala in fata lui Nadal, iar la decernarea premiului a izbucnit in lacrimi, fapt ce l-a emotionat pana si pe Rafa. La Roland Garros avea sa se petreaca doua lucruri foarte importante: pe de o parte infrangerea din sferturi a lui Nadal in fata suedezului Soderling; pe de alta parte victoria din finala a lui Federer in fata suedezului. Distanta dintre cei doi s-a scurtat teribil. Dupa partida pierduta, Nadal a anuntat ca nu poate participa la Wimbledon datorita unei accidentari la genunchi. Asta insemna ca daca elvetianul castiga la Wimbleon, redevine lider mondial. Roger a ajuns in finala, unde l-a infruntat pe Andy Roddick, intr-o alta finala epocala. Ajunsi in setul decisiv, niciun dintre ei n-a reusit sa faca un break (scor final 5–7, 7–6(6), 7–6(5), 3–6, 16–14). Desi probabil ca nu avea in plan sa recucereasca atat de rapid prima treapta a Clasamentului ATP, Federer a reusit sa produca minunea. In septembrie a jucat finala US Open contra lui Del Potro (cel care il distrusese pe Nadal in semifinale, scor 6-2, 6-2, 6-2). Din pacate pentru elvetian, a pierdut sansa de a castiga pentru a sasea oara la Flushing Meadows.

In 2008, Roger Federer lifted the US Open trophy in New York and ended what could arguably be called his worst year. Federer’s worst year coincided with Raphael Nadal’s best season till date. In 2008 Roger made it to three finals and lost two, Nadal on the other hand made it to two finals and won both.

Nadal was at his imperious best on Paris clay, where he blasted Federer in three sets and handed the Swiss the worst defeat of his glorious career.

At Wimbledon, Nadal and Federer played what is regarded as the greatest match of tennis history. The Wimbledon final that ended almost in darkness seemed like the beginning of a new era; the era of power tennis, endless energy and the street fighter’s attitude. Along with Wimbledon, Nadal also took the World Number 1 rank, a few weeks later; ending the longest streak by any player at the top of the table.

It was on September 22, 1997 that 16-year-old Federer debuted on the ATP computer. As documented in the book On This Day In Tennis History, Federer was less than two months after turning 16 when he debuted on the ATP computer with a world ranking of No. 803. Six and a half years later Federer had climbed to the number 1 spot.

As the 2009 season progressed Federer found his feet and defeated Nadal in the clay court tournament played in Madrid as a run up to the French Open. He then lifted the French Open for the first time by beating Soderling, who had shocked the tennis world a few days earlier by eliminating Nadal.

Against Tommy Haas earlier in the tournament, Federer was down two sets and serving at 30-40, 3-4 in the third when he played a blazing forehand that turned his year around. Just five points away from being out of the tournament, Roger ran to his left and cracked an inside out forehand that sailed over the net and flew without any hint of fear to land just inches short of doom. He won nine straight games after that.

Unlike Nadal, whose physical style is unleashed in grunts, Federer operates in relative silence. Having finally won the tournament that had eluded him for so many years in Paris, Federer added one more Wimbledon title to his tally in another marathon five-setter against a rejuvenated Roddick.

In 2009, Roger Federer reached the finals of all the four Grand Slam tournaments and faced a different opponent at each venue. The two finals he lost were both five setters in which a poor final set by Federer sealed the match he otherwise looked more in control of. With 15 Grand Slam titles, he is already in unchartered territory and fit to play for a few more years.

“The argument for Federer as the greatest player in men’s tennis history starts from the ground up, with feet snug in lightweight custom Nike sneakers, with muscles sculpted from training sessions in Dubai, with movement that makes Hall of Famers marvel,” wrote Greg Bishop in The New York Times. When Federer struggled in 2008, he had missed three of his usual training sessions in Dubai because of mononucleosis, the Beijing Olympics and a bad back.

Even ballet dancers are impressed by Federer’s footwork. Kathryn Bennetts runs the Royal Ballet of Flanders in Belgium. She grew up in Australia with tennis courts all around and when she became a professional dancer she saw a correlation of movement between both the passions.

“Elite dancers combine speed, dexterity, power and coordination. Grace stems from their awareness of their feet and the way movement flows from there. They move easily, in balance, made to appear that way through thousands of hours of repetition. In Federer, Bennetts found the Mikhail Baryshnikov of tennis.”
“He has this smoothness to him,” she said. “He’s an artist, so refined. Like how dance transports you to a different place, so does he,” Kathryn was quoted by Bishop in a story about Federer’s footwork.

At his best Federer glides on the tennis court, the economy of his movement apparent in every move he makes. To former player Jim Courier, Federer looks like he’s almost floating over the court. In 2009 he had a good chance of winning all four Grand Slams in a calendar year. In Federer’s case it is still possible if he can manage to keep his feet above the ground.

She wasn’t the biggest, but during her time in the sport, she was one of the best.  Justine Henin has made the announcement that she is making her return to professional tennis.  Henin is only 27 years old and has been retired for a year and a half already, but the game has truly missed her.  She is the holder of seven grand slams and one of the sweetest one-handed backhand shots in the women’s game.  This announcement comes just a week after countrywoman Kim Clijsters beat Caroline Wozniacki to win the US Open after she came out of retirement earlier this year.

She will compete in a couple tune up tournaments including Charleroi, Belgium and Dubai and then she is slated to make her Grand Slam return down under at the Australian Open.  After her early retirement, she had sworn off coming back, but she admitted now that “The fire burns within”.  This is great news for women’s tennis as apart from Serena and Venus Williams, the WTA has been quite lackluster.

The former number one will not be ranked for the upcoming Australian Open, but still, look for Henin to advance pretty far, that is depending on her draw.  Right now, Justine is probably a top 10 player right now even though she has taken a year and a half off.  Before her retirement, the diminutive Henin had increase the speed on her serve to go along with her already deadly placement on her groundstrokes making her a credible #1.  Safina, who is the number 1 right now, has all the tools to win a major, but just lacks the mental make up to go over the hump.

At this time next year, look for Henin to make that assault on the rankings like Clijsters has done.  Now in women’s tennis with Henin and Clijsters added into the mix of Venus and Serena Williams, this should make women’s tennis more interesting for the next calender year and definitely more exciting.

source: tennis.com

BThomps

Justine Henin maybe eyeing a comeback, but keeping it quiet.

Courtesy of MySecondServe.com

A week after Kim Clijsters grabbed an unlikely win at the U.S. Open, another Belgian star, Justine Henin, is reportedly ready to announce her comeback to professional tennis. Henin was ranked number in the world when she called it quits in May 2008.

Two of Belgium’s top newspapers, the La Derniere Heure and Le Soir reported the comeback on Monday. Henin holds seven Grand Slam singles titles including four French Open wins and two at the U.S. Open.

Clijsters quit when she was at the top of the women’s game citing a variety of physical issues that would never allow her to return to the tour.

There’s been a great deal of speculation regarding her return to tennis, but Henin herself has yet to release a statement.

Henin did take the take the time to congratulate her countrywoman on her website after Clijsters knocked out both of the Williams sisters en route to her U.S. Open title win earlier this month.

I went to a preview screening of Clive Owen’s new film “The Boys Are Back” this week and was amused by one of the key plot points and how it relates to current sports journalism.

In the film, inspired by the memoir of Australian sports reporter Simon Carr, Owen plays Carr who must deal with the recent death of his wife while trying to raise his seven-year-old son on his own. Things get complicated when his older son from a previous marriage moves in as well.

One of the key moments of the film is when Carr must cover the Australian Open but doesn’t want to leave his two boys on their own for two weeks. His plan – cover the entire event from home by watching the whole thing on tv. This almost works until his editor announces he will attend the men’s final and looks forward to seeing Carr there.

What struck me was the fact that because of live tv and now live online streaming, one really doesn’t have to attend a sporting event in order to cover it properly. Even the player press conferences are available online now. Of course, not being on site does limit one in being able to interview players or be close to a breaking story (especially if you want to break it).

In any event, the film does have some nice shots of Rod Laver Arena and the press booths. Having never been to the event (yet) it was a nice bonus to the film, which I have to say, was not as overwrought as I expected it to be. 3 and half stars out of five.

Here’s a link to the trailer.

This years US Open was one of the more exciting tennis tournaments in recent history. The men’s final was yet another 5-set battle, 17 year-old Melanie Oudin made a splash by taking out Elena Dementieva, Maria Sharapova and Nadia Petrova, fan favorite Kim Clijsters made an epic return to the game and Serena Williams scared the hell out of…well, everyone. But ultimately, when I look back upon this tournament, what sticks out the most is how the women’s game is in complete shambles.

Close, but not quite number one on the WTA tour

Can you name the number one player in the WTA tour? Chances are, you immediately think of one of the Williams sisters. Venus and Serena have combined to win the last three Wimbledon’s, the Australian Open and last years US Open. They also won this years Australian, Wimbledon and US Open doubles titles. However, they both fall short of the number one ranked player in the world, Dinara Safina. Safina, who has never won a major title (ever), leads Serena, ranked number two, by over 1,000 points.

I’m not necessarily against this ranking. Safina has accrued points by playing and winning several Masters Series events which fall just below the Majors on the points scale. Long has been the criticism of the Williams’ that they don’t play enough tournaments and are now taking the punishment for it. In the grand scheme of things, I don’t think they really care: when you look back on history you’ll count the championships they won, not the fact that they weren’t ranked number one while doing so. But it’s troubling when your “number one” player hasn’t, and seemingly can’t (0-3 in major finals), win the big one. Tough to market.

Speaking of which, Serena did her best to market the women’s game over the men’s at this years French Open, saying the women’s game is better because, “it’s just way cattier, so it’s way more exciting to watch.” Clearly, Serena felt an overwhelming need to prove this point a few months later at the US Open. Serena, after being called for a foot-fault, which looked to be a poor call, berated and threatened an official so much that she was docked a point. Unfortunately for Serena, it was on match point and she lost in two sets to Kim Clijsters. Catty is one thing. This was just scary.

When Steffi Graf and company retired, so did parity in the women's game

Kim Clijsters went on to recover from the shock of Serena’s outburst to win the US Open over Caroline Wozniaki (who?). In the long run, this will be a good thing for the WTA because Clijsters was a fan favorite when she left, and having her back can only help. But how is it possible that a woman can take two years off, have a baby, play in two warm up tournaments and win the US Open? Some may call it a remarkable effort, and not to take anything away from that because it is an amazing story, but I think this shows a serious lack of stars on the WTA tour. After the win, Clijsters said she was just trying to “get a feel for” playing in a major again so she “wouldn’t have to learn it again next year.” Some feel. Long gone are the days of Steffi Graf, Martina Hingis, Monica Seles, Arantxa Sanchez Vicario and Lindsay Davenport battling it out for each tournament. Now, it’s Venus, Serena and pretty girls in tight white outfits. Just ask Wimbledon. And while you may argue that Federer and Nadal have done similar things to the men’s game, those two have consistently produced classic matches with each other and with others on the way to winning majors. The Williams’ run through everyone, then play an awkward, error prone match in the final. Not ideal.

Hopefully, this is all just a small downturn for the WTA tour. If Melanie Oudin continues to succeed, Sharapova gets back to her pre-surgery form and Safina finally wins a major, we could see some parity back in the women’s game. The way to get the WTA back to full steam is through competitive, exciting tennis matches, not through “catty” behavior and small clothes (ok, small clothes aren’t the worst thing in the world). Lets hope the WTA gets on the right track.

On a side note, I’d like to state that I never really gave up on my Federer being done theory. Ok, so I was terrified and basically abandoned it. But it was blatantly obvious that Del Potro wanted the win much more than Federer when it came to the final set. Motivation is the biggest factor in a 5-set match, and what more does Federer have? As he said after the match, “Sure, I would have loved to win those two as well. Being so close, I think I was two points from the match. That’s the way it goes sometimes. But the year has been amazing already and it’s not over yet. I got married and had kids, I don’t know how much more I want.”

Of course, he also said he had an “unbelievable run.”

The theory lives on.

Until next time, Ball Hard.

Juan Martin del Potro rallied from a two-sets-to-one deficit to defeat five-time defending champion Roger Federer 3-6, 7-6 (5), 4-6. 7-6 (4), 6-2 in the final of the U.S. Open yesterday. The 20-year-old Argentine, shaky and nervous in the beginning, served big when he needed to and pounded bazooka forehands that gradually wore Federer down in an ebb-and-flow contest that lasted four hours and six minutes. Federer was going for his 16th career Grand Slam title and third of the year after winning the French Open and Wimbledon earlier this season. No. 6 del Potro, while not a household name outside tennis circles, had his breakthrough last summer, winning 23 matches in a row and four straight hard-court tournaments. The 6-foot-6 Argentine, who administered an impressive beatdown of Rafael Nadal in the semis on Sunday, had lost his previous six matches against Federer. “Maybe I look back and have some regrets about it,” said Federer, never beaten by anyone other than Nadal in a major final. “But, you know, you can’t have them all and can’t always play your best.” Federer struggled with his serve throughout the match, committing 11 double faults and connecting on just 47 percent of his first deliveries. It didn’t matter at first as del Potro came out listless and uninspired. But the sleeping giant awoke in the 10th game of the second set, breaking Federer to even the set at 5-5. Del Potro won the tiebreaker and was in the match. Two straight double faults by the Argentine at 4-5 in the third set gave Federer the break and the set. Perhaps a little gun shy after the double doubles, del Potro took a little off his first serve over the final two sets and got a much higher percentage in. The tactic worked as Federer, uncharacteristically edgy and out or sorts, was most troubled by the 100 mph forehands del Potro was blasting at him. “When I would have a dream, it was to win the U.S. Open, and the other one is to be like Roger. One is done,” del Potro said during the on-court ceremony. Addressing Federer directly, del Potro added: “I need to improve a lot to be like you. I’d like to congratulate you for fighting ’til the last point.” The Argentine had more winners, 57 to 56, and committed fewer unforced errors, 60 to 62. Del Potro became the first player other than Federer, Nadal or Novak Djokovic to win a Grand Slam since Marat Safin won the Australian Open at the beginning of 2005.

By ASHLEY BROWNE

For all intents and purposes, the tennis season is over and the Australian Open is now on the clock as the next tennis tournament that counts. But in the words of former tournament spruiker Paul McNamee, it is never too early to look ahead to January at Melbourne Park.

This year’s US Open was as memorable as it was long and has thrown up several storylines that should help sell plenty of tickets when the tennis circus gets here next year.

Serena Williams: A fine of just $US11,000 for her outburst at a lineswoman is a disgrace. As was taking the best part of three days to finally appear contrite. Another zero should have been added to the fine and she should at least be sweating over whether she will be permitted to play in Melbourne.

But rest assured, she will be here and her spin doctors will be ensuring that it will be Sweet Serena who graces us with her presence. This will probably mean a trip to the Phillip Island penguins and perhaps to the sick kids at the Royal Childrens Hospital. But just wait till that first foot fault.

Roger Federer: Couldn’t quite get it done against Juan Martin del Potro in Monday’s final. But he has had a phenomenal year, perhaps his best ever, breaking his duck at Roland Garros and prevailing in the epic Wimbledon final against Andy Roddick. He’ll set himself for Melbourne, wanting to avenge the five-set loss to Rafael Nadal in this year’s final.

Rafael Nadal: Brilliant at his best, when his body lets him. Nadal has been ailing for much of the year and has now pulled out of Spain’s Davis Cup semi-final against Israel this weekend. What would be great is if he finished playing for the rest of the year and instead chose to build up his strength and fitness for Melbourne.

Kim Clijsters: The story of the US Open. The first mum to win a Grand Slam in 29 years. Will start the sentimental favourite in Melbourne, even if Sam Stosur or Jelena Dokic are at the other end of the court.

Juan Martin del Potro: Quarter-finalist here this year and now clearly has the game to go further.

Andy Roddick: Was supposed to have turned the corner with his mighty effort at Wimbledon. The photographers (and blokes sitting near the players box) will be hoping Mrs Roddick makes it to Melbourne.

Caroline Wozniacki: Apparently “Caroline Wozniacki Breasts” was the fourth most searched term on Google in the hours before her quarter-final against Svetlana Kuznetsova last Tuesday. Those who go to Melbourne Park in January might found out why the beaten US Open finalist is so popular.