ESPN Tennis

Andy Murray is not an ordinary tennis player. We know this. There is no other competitor on this planet whose every move comes with the same fierce scrutiny he faces.

So when Murray finally won Wimbledon, not only did it mark the end of a 77-year national nightmare, but it also meant he could finally exhale. For so many years, no matter what kind of success Murray had, he was a victim of his own ancestry -- a player who couldn’t escape years of futility by his predecessors.

His All England Club championship changed everything. It was so intense, in fact, that he probably still doesn’t realize what it means to have singlehandedly exorcized the biggest blight in Great Britain -- the ghost of Fred Perry. Understandably, this title, the pinnacle of every Murray aspiration, had to become a distraction as the season wore on. And that’s why Murray’s season-ending back surgery might be the best mental recovery he could have asked for.

Murray’s management company issued a statement that he plans on being fully fit for the 2014 season, which seems reasonable. He’s a methodical, if not relentless, worker. But this break will give him a chance to start anew and reclaim the same dogged determination he had before Wimbledon began.

Since his triumph in SW19, Murray won one match in Montreal, a tournament he had captured twice, before Ernests Gulbis took him down in straight sets. In Cincinnati, Murray lost to Tomas Berdych fairly swiftly before going down ignominiously to Stanislas Wawrinka 6-4, 6-3, 6-2 in the US Open quarterfinals. Murray spent a good part of that match berating himself, reverting into the same mercurial and moody player we were accustomed to seeing for years.

It’s fair to assume Murray doesn’t carry the same heavy burden anymore. And perhaps our biggest misunderstanding was thinking all that extra elbow room would serve Murray well moving forward. Clearly it hasn’t. The pressure of not winning gave him reason to succeed and push, to prove to himself and his country he could accomplish this extraordinary feat.

The truth is Murray needed a long breather after Wimbledon. The tennis season is long and laborious as it is. There is still the Asian swing, which includes the Shanghai Masters in three weeks, the Paris Masters and the ATP World Tour Finals. It’s not as if Murray is competing for the year-end No. 1 or Player of the Year award. A certain Spaniard is going to procure both of those. Murray is still ranked No. 3 in the world, but he’ll likely get passed by David Ferrer, who has just under 400 fewer points than the Brit. But chances are Murray won’t fall further than that. Roger Federer, at No. 5, will have to string together a fairly impressive run in order to pass Murray.

All this means that by the time the Aussie Open rolls around in mid-January, Murray wouldn’t have to face Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic before the semifinals. Ultimately, that’s all anyone could ask for heading into a major.

So take a break, Andy, heal your back and rest your brain. After all, there’s a good chance the spotlight will be pointed in your direction when you return. You don’t want to disappoint, do you?

With the Slam season now behind us, what better time to debate things we really don't need to debate. But that's just what we do. So without further ado, a few burning questions for this fall:

More impressive US Open title run, Serena or Nadal?

Serena Williams was expected to win -- and she did. Rafael Nadal was expected to win -- and he did. So the two players who have dominated much of the 2013 season strolled into New York, beat their archrivals in the final, snagged another Grand Slam title, and further etched their names into the greatest-of-all-time discussion. Predictable, eh? Perhaps, but consider this: No one in his right mind could have predicted Nadal was going to win the US Open, never mind string together an infallible 21-0 hard-court season. For a guy who had long been pigeonholed as a clay specialist, his latest feat is remarkable, knowing full well that cement can’t be anything but an impediment to the world No. 2’s health. This surely doesn’t diminish Williams’ run to a 17th Grand Slam title, especially the mental fortitude she showed against a determined Victoria Azarenka in the final. But anything less than a title for Williams would have been considered a failure.

Advantage, Nadal

Better success story in New York, Pennetta or Wawrinka?

What’s it like to play in relative obscurity? Stanislas Wawrinka, who has fought for any back-page real estate with Roger Federer, knows better than anyone. No further explanation needed. But at this year’s US Open, the unthinkable happened. Federer found himself reeling in another early-round defeat while Wawrinka played the tournament of his life, crushing defending champion Andy Murray in the quarters and then taking Novak Djokovic into a fifth set before finally conceding in the semis. Flavia Pennetta, on the other hand, helped put Italy back on the tennis radar after winning her much-ballyhooed match against countrywoman Roberta Vinci in the US Open quarterfinals. Pennetta cracked the top 10 four years ago but fell into the middle-of-the-pack matrix, never really making a name for herself until her latest Slam exploits. But considering she is 31 years old and entered New York unseeded and ranked 83rd, her accomplishment is pretty amazing.

Advantage, Pennetta

Who needs fall success more, Federer or Sharapova?

Roger Federer has been free-falling from mere mortal to ordinary since losing in the second round of Wimbledon. He played a couple of low-tier clay-court events after the All England Club, experimenting with a larger racket. That didn’t work out so well. He reverted to his 90-inch-square head for the US Open, and after a few seamless matches, Tommy Robredo, who was 0-10 against Federer entering the match, eviscerated the Swiss in three swift sets. If nothing else, it only validated what we all were thinking this summer: Federer is inexorably headed toward a life of drivers and putters. For Sharapova, her past couple of months have been marred by off-the-court histrionics. There was the Jimmy Connors coaching drama, the purported name change to “Sugarpova” and her withdrawal from the US Open with a right shoulder injury. The good news for Sharapova, though, is that as long as Serena is not staring her down, she can still beat anyone. Right now, Sharapova has an image issue. Federer’s problems lie in the wild ground game he showed against Robredo, which appears to be as much a mental challenge as anything else. Only match play will fix his summerlong mess.

Advantage, Federer

More important for Djokovic, Davis Cup title or year-end championship?

Here’s the thing: No matter what Djokovic does the rest of the way in 2013, he’s not going to be able to hang on to his No. 1 ranking -- unless Lukas Rosol and Steve Darcis conspire to kidnap Rafael Nadal. The Spaniard has zero points to defend, and for all intents and purposes, he just needs to show up and he’ll garner enough points to usurp Djokovic. But after another loss to Nadal, in the US Open final, the year-end championships would be sweet retribution for the Serb. But Djokovic is a team guy through and through. It was Serbia’s 2010 Davis Cup championship that propelled Djokovic to the force he is today. He rode that momentum into the Aussie Open a few months later, won, and then absolutely bludgeoned the field that year, going 70-6 with 10 titles and finishing both 2011 and 2012 as the top-ranked player. So though that streak is bound to end, he will lead his country into another Davis Cup final, this time against the Czechs. And if the Serbs win that championship again, well…

Advantage, Davis Cup

Isn’t it great to see three members of the tennis world's vaunted big four still battling on, even though the US Open has been over for nearly a week?

Roger Federer is the only one of that group who won't be swinging a racket this week, but there is one caveat: There’s no chance that any of the top three players in the world will actually end up playing each other.

If you haven’t been paying attention, it’s Davis Cup semifinal and world group playoffs week. And ATP no. 1 Novak Djokovic, No. 2 Rafael Nadal, and No. 3 Andy Murray are all taking part. It’s a fantastic week for this 113-year-old competition that has faced some serious obstacles in the Open era.

One of the major challenges has been the puzzling and unexpected indifference of what once was the largest tennis audience and market of all (at least until China popped Li Na among us), the United States. Who would have thought that the nation where the competition was conceived and brought to full splendor would suddenly lose interest in what is the world’s second most popular international team competition (after World Cup soccer)?

The ITF and its U.S. affiliate, the USTA, have traditionally had trouble selling Davis Cup to newspaper editors and television executives, and thus the viewing public, in the Open era. The fact that some top stars from various nations (led by Jimmy Connors) went lukewarm on Davis Cup, usually because of the relatively low material reward, didn’t help the cause.

Also, as the tour grew and became more remunerative, the Davis Cup commitment seemed more onerous. Although the competition takes place over just three days (Friday through Sunday), it’s really a one-week event -- just like most tournaments.

Thus, at least two of the teams must make the commitment of a full month to the effort. And while the current dates are somewhat inconvenient, at times in the past they were much worse. Overall, Davis Cup participation still is a lot to ask of a player like Nadal or Djokovic.

Also, the choice-of-ground tradition -- teams alternate hosting or traveling to their opponent’s venue each time they meet -- wreaks havoc on the increasingly rigid, pre-established schedules of the players.

For those reasons, the game is littered with erstwhile Davis Cup reformers who would like to see anything from a two-week “Davis Cup festival” that decides the entire competition at one site, to a return to some sort of “zonal” structure to ease some of the travel-related drawbacks.

So far, the ITF has instituted some reforms in the structure of the event, but it has held firm on the key and most controversial elements -– the calendar that requires four weeks from finalists and the alternating host rule.

That’s why Murray is currently busting a gut in Croatia, newly crowned U.S. Open champ Nadal is back in Madrid’s Caja Magica even though his next tournaments are in Asia, and U.S. Open runner-up Djokovic is basking in the love of his Serbian countrymen in Belgrade.

Now note that only one of those matchups -- Serbia versus the Czech Republic -– is part of the current competition’s semifinals. Djokovic is playing for the tennis equivalent of a Super Bowl ring, but Nadal and Murray are merely trying to ensure that their teams remain in the elite 16-member World Group that plays for the Cup.

That’s a little like Miguel Cabrera or Chris Davis going down to help their clubs’ Triple-A affiliates win their respective divisions.

All of this is great news for fans of Davis Cup. And it’s also a mild rebuke directed toward Roger Federer. Switzerland also is involved in the critical world group playoff battle (hosting Ecuador). Stanislas Wawrinka, the Swiss player right behind Federer, is playing the best tennis of his life (he was a U.S. Open semifinalist and ranks No. 10, just four ticks below Federer).

That means the Swiss could potentially win the whole thing next year, assuming they get past Ecuador this weekend and remain in the World Group.

The odds are good that the even without Federer, the Swiss will win out. The question then becomes whether Federer will play Davis Cup in 2014? I can think of some excellent reasons besides patriotic pride for him to do it, but for today, let’s just be happy with what we’ve got.

NEW YORK -- When Hank’s slow, agonizing quest to find Heisenberg finally gave way to the realization that the most nefarious drug lord in New Mexico was actually family, his bad dream became nothing short of a horror flick.

It was the seminal moment in an epically slow descent into chaos. The revelation of the mastermind behind the meth empire hit a lot closer to home than Hank could have ever imagined when he discovered the truth about his brother-in-law, Walt White.

We’re talking about “Breaking Bad,” of course. And much like some of today's tennis players, the show's forecast is a little murky. How it will end is anyone’s guess. (Feel free to speculate in our comments section, though.) With that in mind, here's who's breaking bad (in terms of results) on the court:

Filippo Volandri: With a 6-0, 6-2, 6-1 loss to John Isner in the US Open opener, Volandri has dropped his past 20 hard-court matches. The last time he won a Grand Slam match? Six years ago. To summarize, he’s breaking horrifically.

Mardy Fish: Gotta feel for the guy who is beset by life-threatening heart ailments. But he’s only 3-5 this season and has not played a single Grand Slam match. And no one would be surprised if he followed in James Blake’s footsteps and called it a career.

Samantha Stosur: She claimed she was playing the quality of tennis that led her to a win here in New York two years ago -- and then, of course, suffered a first-round loss to 297th-ranked Victoria Duval on Tuesday. But the good news for Stosur: She played a vital role in Duval’s "Rudy"-esque performance.

Jerzy Janowicz: With his run to the Wimbledon semis, Janowicz became the most uplifting storyline in tennis. This is a guy who had endured poverty for years, so much so that he slept in his car during tournaments. But with expectations at all-time highs in Flushing, he ignominiously lost to Maximo Gonzalez in his opener. But the good news for Jerzy Boy, who took home a nifty $610,000 from his Wimbledon display, he probably now has a few sweet options to snooze beyond his car.

Angelique Kerber: She’s failed to reach a major quarterfinal this season and her ranking has fallen to No. 9. In her past three events, Kerber has lost in the first round twice. Not the kind of momentum you want heading into the final Slam of the season.

Sabine Lisicki: Has a pretty interesting pedigree with her father a doctor and her mother an artist. So naturally Lisicki is a tennis player. She made the Wimbledon final, which included a win over Serena Williams. But the German has had an underwhelming summer (1-2 record) since tearfully losing to Marion Bartoli in the All England Club final.

Maria Sharapova: Hired Jimmy Connors. Fired Jimmy Connors. Hurt her shoulder. Seriously considered changing her legal name to Sugarpova. Dropped out of the US Open. Ugh.

Moments before his quarterfinal tussle with Marcos Baghdatis at the Citi Open, John Isner was asked what he needed to do to win. His answer was succinct -- and obvious. Serve well, he said.

Isner, of course, has one of the terrifying serves in tennis. He stands at 6-foot-10 and unfurls rockets from trajectories that seem unfair. Against Baghdatis, and then in his semifinal match against Dmitry Tursunov, Isner battered a combined 47 aces. It was a remarkable display of serving that thrust him into the final. But that’s where he ran into Juan Martin del Potro, another mountain of a man, who beat Isner 3-6, 6-1, 6-2 to win the title.

After struggling to greet the ball with any kind of consistency off Isner’s serve in the opening set, del Potro made a pretty bold tactical change. He moved back on his return; so far, in fact, that the linemen must have feared possible concussion, if not decapitation, every time del Potro set up for one of his voracious forehands. It was bewildering, almost comical, at first. But despite giving up all that landscape, the ploy worked quite brilliantly.

Del Potro was able to soften the blow from Isner’s serve and put the ball into play. But that maneuver, as beneficial as is was to del Potro, also showcased just how severely Isner is crippled by his inability to generate any kind of momentum when he’s not winning on his serve.

Isner has fared nicely since Wimbledon, reaching the semis in Newport, winning in Atlanta and finishing runner-up to del Potro in Washington, D.C. before losing his opener at the Rogers Cup. But for a guy who has a serve that big, Isner is still ensconced in no-man’s land when it comes to rankings and results at major events.

Is that a result of his all-court shortcomings? If you take a sweeping glance at the game’s top-flight players, you’ll notice they have very few impediments, if any at all. That’s the era of tennis we live in. The top guys are all five-tool stars. They move, defend, serve, volley and hit massive groundstrokes.

Let’s also remember, though, that Isner has a much different genetic makeup than players such as Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray. It’s not easy to maneuver with short bursts of speed at his elevation. So, in many respects, Isner has no choice but to play a one-dimensional game.

But this stat shouldn’t be overlooked: Isner has produced the best tiebreaker record in tennis at 29-10. As a matter of fact, in each of the past four years, he’s led the tour in tiebreaker wins, which is a testament to not only holding serve but his ability to cope under pressure.

How much would Isner have benefited from playing in the power paradigm of Boris Becker, Pete Sampras, et al? Sure, it’s not like Isner was going to squirm his way to a win against Sampras at the All England Club, but the reality was defense was less paramount than it is now -- especially given the speed of the grass and hard courts back then. I remember watching Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon and the US Open, and there were times when he wouldn’t even attempt to return serve if he knew he couldn’t break his opponent. He’d wait for a tiebreaker and rely on the fast courts and his hair-raising serve.

It wasn’t a horrible strategy. Ivanisevic reached the Wimbledon final four times, which included his long-awaited title in 2001. He also reached the quarters or semis in every other Slam. To date, Isner has one quarterfinal appearance (US Open, 2011).

For the most part, I subscribe to the theory that players should try win with their biggest weapon rather than spend boundless hours trying to hone their flaws, which, more often than not, will still be flaws at the end of the day. Look at Andy Roddick's backhand or Maria Sharapova's serve. They worked earnestly to improve those shots. And yes, both improved, but certainly not to the extent they had hoped.

And it’s not like there’s some kind of benign oversight on Isner’s part to become more well-rounded. Players know their weaknesses. But the bottom line is that is that whether Isner is too tall, not nimble enough or whether he just doesn’t have the ingenuity to leverage the rest of his game, we’ve essentially seen the same Isner for years.

In 2010, Isner won one title and finished the year ranked No. 19; in 2011, two titles and finished at No. 18; and last year, two titles and finished at No. 14. This year, Isner has slipped to No. 20, and to date, he has two titles.

Isner knows he can’t cede control of his biggest weapon, his serve, if he has any shot at succeeding. But because he struggles to break, Isner finds himself constantly knotted in tight matches. It’s an ugly irony when you think about it: All these free points he gets on serve lead to some lengthy matches. Eleven of his past 14 matches have featured at least one set that has gone to a tiebreaker.

And you have to wonder if all these laborious encounters take a toll. Despite leading the tour with 642 aces this year, more than 100 more than second place Kevin Anderson (in eight fewer matches, no less), Isner has a fairly vanilla 27-18 record.

So perhaps we should resign ourselves to the fact that Isner is what he is. He gives you exciting, protracted matches, and he gives the ace-count meter a darn good workout. He just doesn’t always give you the win.

Are you feeling like this stretch of the tennis season is a bit of a snoozer? Don’t fret too much, it’s going to pick up and all the stars will emerge and align again. And considering what happened at Wimbledon, there seems to be more possibilities than we would have envisioned a month ago.

With that in mind, here are the top 10 things I’d like to see as the US Open Series and US Open take shape:

10. I would like to see … Caroline Wozniacki regain her old form.

Wishful thinking, eh? Maybe. Maybe not. The good news for Wozniacki, who is perilously close to dropping out of the top 10, is that in a few weeks she will head to New Haven, where she has won four titles in five attempts. That means she generally enters the US Open with some confidence. The bad news, of course: Confidence alone doesn’t compensate for a Grand Slam career of foibles, if not failure. Last year, Wozniacki won all of four games in an opening-round loss to someone named Irina-Camelia Begu. But here’s to hoping for the best -- even if we know the best is a little dicey these days.

9. I would like to see … a Hall of Famer make a comeback.

Good news! We will be able to check this one off our wish list. Just three days after her enshrinement into the International Tennis Hall of Fame, Martina Hingis announced she is unretiring to play doubles at the Southern California Open and again in New Haven. If you’re scoring at home, this will be the third comeback for Hingis and her first WTA action since 2007. And if you’re concerned about rust, let me ease your anxiety. I saw Hingis play exhibition doubles in Newport this past week against Todd Martin and Mary Pierce. The Swiss can still bring it -- against old folks anyway.

8. I would like to see … Roger Federer win a Masters title.

The reality is that Federer probably isn’t going to win the US Open. He has only one title this year, and he’s spent some time meddling with his equipment, which only goes to show that he knows he’s not the front-runner anymore. But that doesn’t mean Federer couldn’t snare a Masters 1000 tourney in Montreal or Cincinnati in the next few weeks. He is the defending champ at the latter, and winning one of these events would be no small feat. Federer likely wouldn’t render a Slam-less, Masters-less season a successful one. It’s hard to fathom that he'll go an entire year without one, something that hasn’t happened since 2002.

7. I would like to see … an unheralded American woman continue her Slam success.

It’s kind of amusing (or is it sad?) how giddy we’ve become because an American player without the letters S-E-R-E-N-A in her name wins two or three Grand Slam matches. Sloane Stephens is still the leader of this respectable pack, but others, like Jamie Hampton, Madison Keys, Alison Riske and Bethanie Mattek-Sands, all had their own special moments at the Euro Slams. It’s really tough to say whether any will surge, but for a nation that’s failed to churn out a penthouse-esque player since the Williams sisters, we can only hope someone will continue this trend in Flushing.

6. I would like to see … Jerzy Janowicz hit a 150 mph serve.

The dude can flat-out hit missiles. At Wimbledon, this Polish phenom belted a tournament-high 103 aces, 14 more than second-place Andy Murray (who played one additional match). Of course Murray won the title, so there’s that. But nonetheless, Janowicz has a prodigious all-court game with the most important asset -- a nearly unreturnable serve. He smacked one at 143 mph at the All England Club, the fastest of anyone. And if he can sneak in a paltry 7 more mph, he’d join the exclusive club of radar-gun juggernauts who have registered 150 on the speedometer.

5. I would like to see … one new face to stay in upper echelon.

So back to the Janowicz guy. We’ve belabored the “Who’s Next?” narrative for so long that it’s hard to imagine such a person exists. For years, our prescience has devolved into nothing more than a pile of potatoes as player after player with worlds of potential has faltered. Guys like Raonic, Harrison and Dimitrov (to name just a few) have hung out in tennis purgatory, showing flashes of occasional brilliance but never really mounting any consistent assaults in bigger tournaments. There's Federico Delbonis, the unheralded kid who just beat Federer in Hamburg, but it's way too early to tell whether he will amount to anything. So what about Janowicz? First off, he did make the Wimbledon semis, which is even more impressive when you consider Poland doesn’t have one single grass court. Secondly, he has heart. The dude’s backstory is a tale of overcoming hardship. He slept in cars; he had no sponsorship for quite a while and he couldn’t afford flights to tournaments. You can feel how badly Janowicz wants to win when he’s on the court. Geez, I wonder if he could clock a 150 mph serve?

4. I would like to see … John Isner and Agnieszka Radwanska play mixed doubles.

Perhaps they’re the perfect matchup. One serves aces for a living, the other bears a deft counterpuncher's game that can drive opponents nuts. But who cares about on-court success and the such. Fans would flock to see these two finely sculpted creatures, who bared it all in ESPN The Magazine’s Body Issue, together in one spot. They could even brand themselves à la a WWE tag team (six-pack attack?). Win or lose, no team would attract more attention than this pair in the bare.

3. I would like to see … Jimmy Connors help Maria Sharapova in crunch time.

Is this what Sharapova needs? A hubristic in-your-throat mentor to help her get through those tense moments. Whether it’s a dream matchup or a clash-of-egos nightmare, Connors, a player who relished the limelight, is now the central figure in Sharapova’s corner. This pairing, odd as it may be, and it is odd, is about one thing: Serena Williams. The last time Sharapova beat Williams was so long ago, Rafael Nadal had a grand total of zero major titles. The problem, of course, is that when things get tough, Sharapova can’t simply tag in Connors; she’s going to be out there by herself. And so is Serena Williams.

2. I would like to see … Serena and Sharapova play in the US Open final.

So let’s say Connors and Sharapova do make it to the final of the Open. And let’s say Serena is on the other end of the court. Then what? Here’s the thing: It really doesn’t matter. The hype leading into this match will be tantamount to, well, pretty much every NFL game every week of the season. Think about all the storylines we can cling to: Sharapova has a new, famous coach; Sharapova has Serena’s old boyfriend; Serena said that beau has a black heart and Sharapova insinuated bad things about Serena’s new boyfriend. Do they need a tennis court, the octagon or a reality show?

1. I would like to see … Andy Murray-Novak Djokovic play anywhere, anytime .

I don’t know about you, but I dig good rivalries. And who better to represent this than the top two players in the world? The tennis community was visibly aghast when Nadal and Federer fell early at Wimbledon. But in retrospect, it was a strong reminder that if any players deserve purple velvet on their changeover chairs, and some robes, crowns and jewels for their postmatch attire, it’s Murray and Djokovic. And the cool thing about the Murray-Djokovic rivalry … is that it is a rivalry, unlike, ahem, the other two players mentioned in this graf. Nonetheless, make sure your DVR has enough storage when they play. It’s riveting stuff every time they clash.

PARIS -- What can you say about the big four? They’ve managed to win 13 straight Grand Slam titles and 31 out of the past 32. Either Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic has held the top ranking since 2004 and Andy Murray is your reigning Olympics and US Open champ.

By all accounts, you have to believe this is one of the most exciting eras the game has ever seen -- unless you’re Ernests Gulbis.

In a recent interview with L’Equipe, Latvia’s loose-lipped maverick went on a confounding rant. “Tennis today badly lacks characters,” Gulbis said … “I respect Roger, Rafa, Novak and Murray but, for me, all four of them are boring players. Their interviews are boring.”

Then, amid all the bluster, Gulbis admonished Federer for being “a perfect Swiss gentleman” and said it turns his stomach to listen to other players channel Federer’s diplomatic news conferences.

“When I hear them answer like Roger, I am terrified by phrases like, ‘I had a little bit more success at certain moments and that is how I won,'" he said. "If I win, the guy on the other side of the net, I [would] have sent him home.”

Wow.

To recap, today’s tennis has fostered four of the most accomplished players ever -- and Gulbis is bent out of shape because they’re nice guys. Let this NOT be a lesson to your children.

Perhaps, as Gulbis so desires, tennis should emulate boxing and add some punch to these humdrum pressers. Imagine this: Nadal is ripping Federer for his soft backhand, and just when you think the barbaric Spaniard is done talking, he then threatens to eat Federer’s children after he’s through smoking him in another French Open final. Game on.

Or maybe Djokovic goads Murray into a press-side rumpus by calling his mother a controlling, uh, witch. Yeah, baby. That’ll lead to a couple of rounds of fisticuffs.

For Gulbis, a fix of acrimony would help solve an era marred by all this toxic serenity and skill.

After all, who cares about record-shattering greatness?

Big four? What big four? Their hegemony was unexpectedly interrupted last week, with Rafael Nadal the only one to make it as far as the semifinals of the Mutua Madrid Open.

Nadal went on to win the title, while the rest headed to Italy with mixed feelings. Here's a reflection on their very different weeks.

Rafael Nadal

After making a slow start in both the Monte Carlo and Barcelona final, Nadal came out storming in Madrid against Stanislas Wawrinka and collected a record 24th Masters title, his 55th overall and his 40th on clay, tying Tomas Muster for second in that category. (Only Guillermo Vilas, with 45 titles, has more clay victories.)

It was a week of ebb and flow for Nadal. The Spaniard looked brilliant at times, showing superb improvisation and touch, but backed off at others and let his opponent get competitive. But he was in real danger only against compatriot David Ferrer in an all-Spanish quarterfinal, which was played in front of a packed home stadium.

How much danger? Ferrer was close to having two match points in the second set, only to have it snatched away by one of those brilliant moments from Nadal. After capturing the ensuing tiebreaker, Nadal again found himself facing break points at the beginning of the third but fended them off. The tour's most fabled competitor then stomped his good friend 6-0 to finish things off.

The two compatriots could face each other again in Rome this week, and if Nadal takes the title, he would overtake Ferrer and become the world No. 4. That will be a closely watched storyline, because Nadal getting to No. 4 would prevent the possibility of Nadal and Djokovic ending up in the same quarter of the draw at the French Open. (With Roger Federer at No. 3, all three could end up on the same half at the French Open if Nadal stays where he is.)

The only negative of the week: Nadal's knees continue to bother him, even though he can't always predict when. That means he might still be vulnerable at times, particularly if he happens to be playing a tough opponent. If not for that, the rest of the field might be tempted to pack up and head for the grass right now.

Novak Djokovic

After the boos Djokovic got last week, he'll be happy to be in Rome, the Masters event where his popularity is the highest. With his fluent Italian and outgoing personality, he has charmed the locals, and this is the one big event where crowds turn out to cheer for him as much as they do for Federer and Nadal (or even more).

That will be welcome as Djokovic licks his wounds from a physically and psychologically painful defeat in Madrid. Not only did he lose his opening match in three sets to Grigor Dimitrov, but the Serb got booed by the crowd and needed treatment on the same ankle he hurt at Davis Cup a few weeks ago.

Though Djokovic played through the injury to win Monte Carlo, he revealed that it had continued to trouble him afterward and almost kept him from playing last week. "For 12 days after Monte Carlo I haven't touched the racket," he said. "I didn't know up to Saturday if I'm going to come here or not because of the ankle."

Djokovic didn't get much sympathy from the Spanish crowd, which suspected gamesmanship when he stopped to get treatment at a set and 4-2 down and then got back on serve. Djokovic also drew their ire for drop-shotting Dimitrov when the Bulgarian was suffering cramps later in the set. It may have been smart strategically, but fans found it unsportsmanlike.

But the hostility had begun well before that, with Djokovic greeted by jeers and whistles when he asked the umpire to come down and check a mark. Though that also happened to other non-Spanish players during the week, it was ironic because Djokovic is extremely sporting about giving up calls and acknowledging his opponents' good shots.

"You know, in the first set, every single close call that I went to look at the ball and the chair umpire comes to see, I got whistled," Djokovic said afterward. "I don't see any reason for that. I didn't do anything bad. When I see the ball, it's good, I clear the mark. I give him a point."

Once it looked like Dimitrov might pull off the upset , the crowd barracked loudly for the 21-year-old. A resentful Djokovic apparently screamed an obscene remark in Serbian after winning the first set, but assuming most spectators had no idea, their treatment of him was a little harsh.

At least the physical damage didn't seem to be serious. "The ankle is not bothering me anymore, which is great news," Djokovic reported at Rome.

Roger Federer



While Djokovic's exit was full of drama, Federer's was largely anticlimactic in an error-filled loss to Kei Nishikori that didn't really stir the crowd one way or the other.

"I'm pretty disappointed with my play," Federer said afterward. "I'm not sure how well Kei thought he played. I didn't think he had to play his very best, either, which is even more disappointing.

"We're so accustomed to always finding that rhythm eventually, so it's even more disappointing if you never really find it, which was the case today," he added.

Much of that was attributed to rust. Federer was playing his first tournament in almost two months and rarely found any consistency from the baseline in his second match in Madrid. But his serve was in working order, and he did say he did not feel any pain during the week, a change from the back problems he suffered at Indian Wells.

The takeaway from the week? "I'm going to go back to the practice court, train hard, and make sure I don't have these kind of days anymore," Federer said.

Still looking for a patch of good form after running out of steam against Andy Murray in the Australian Open semifinals, Federer has seen his ranking drop back to No. 3 behind Murray. But the Swiss hopes the extra rest will pay off against top players -- if he gets to face them.

"Most of them have played two or three tournaments on clay and I'm still looking to get into it, but that can be a big advantage down the stretch," Federer said after arriving in Rome. "But for that, I need to start winning matches."

At least he made Nishikori's week. "To beat him, that was one of my goals for my tennis career," said the 23-year-old Japanese, who became the youngest player to defeat Federer.

As for the appearance-fee saga with his hometown tournament in Basel, Switzerland, Federer spelled out that he planned to play there in October for free. "For me personally, it's a place I look back on with a lot of great emotions as a ball boy, winning the title there eventually, and making my second finals there on tour," he said. "I've had a great time there always, and I don't want that to change just because of some business situation that couldn't get solved, you know.

"I wanted to diffuse the situation and announce that I'm going to play without getting paid and just enjoy myself over there. So that, for me, is the most important thing above everything."



Extra controversy was generated after Basel tournament director Roger Brennwald said he could no longer speak directly to Federer and phoned him in front of reporters to demonstrate. The move was criticized as a gimmick, and Brennwald later apologized, saying it was an impulsive response to a press-conference question. Federer declined to give a reaction, saying, "It doesn't matter. I don't discuss those things in the press like he does. I did the utmost, and that's all I need to know."

Andy Murray



Murray was practically invisible last week. He fell a little ill before the tournament and looked stiff and sore in his first match, which he said was exacerbated by Florian Mayer's unorthodox game. His next match against Gilles Simon was a marathon. The last match of the day, it finished close to 1 a.m., and Murray didn't get to bed until about three hours later, leaving him in less-than-ideal shape for a quarterfinal against Tomas Berdych.

Murray lost in straight sets, and his back started to bother him a little bit in the last two matches.



But with expectations always low for him during this part of the season, it was an acceptable showing overall. "I need to do a better job of taking my chances," Murray said, but otherwise felt he was improving after some intense training during the previous couple of weeks.

To talk of men's tennis in the past few years has been to talk of gripping rivalries and epic matches. Those have been produced by the ability and consistency of the top players, but also enabled by their remarkable capacity for playing a heavy schedule year after year without serious time off because of injury. The hole created last year when Rafael Nadal missed nine months shows how important the players' health has been in allowing this period to unfold the way it has.

But the big four have been looking a little creaky recently -- there's Nadal's knee, Roger Federer's back, and now Novak Djokovic's ankle. Andy Murray was last seen hobbling around on the court during the final of the Sony Open in Miami, but he might be the healthiest of the bunch right now. Here's a checkup of each of them.

Rafael Nadal

Nadal has a knee problem. People keep asking him about his knee, and he's tired of talking about it. "Talking about my knee every day is not helping me," he said, sounding weary. "If something is going very wrong that doesn't give me the chance to compete, I will let you know."

Part of why Nadal is uncomfortable is that it sounds churlish to complain about injuries when you're winning so much. He is coming off a title at the BNP Paris Open in Indian Wells, and going for a record ninth straight title in Monte Carlo. "I cannot say I'm not 100 percent when I won three of the four tournaments that I played since my return," Nadal said. "The other players would say that I am arrogant."

His triumphant return spells that it's the usual Nadal-dominated clay season for most observers, but for the Spaniard, his time off the tour means playing these clay tournaments again feels anything but routine. "A lot of big emotions happened for me in the past, but this year is probably more special," he said.

He had missed competing at something, Nadal told reporters in Monte Carlo, and had tried to substitute the urge by playing a lot of golf -- and got a lot better at it.

But will the king of clay get any competition in the next few weeks? Nadal says he doesn't expect as much from himself because his body is still readjusting to the tour, and would be surprised if he did as well as years past. Of course, that's also what he said at Indian Wells.

As for how the knee really is? It's not perfect, though "getting better every day."

Novak Djokovic

Djokovic's participation in the Rolex Monte Carlo Masters this week was in doubt until practically the last minute after the world No. 1 turned his ankle during Davis Cup competition last week. He reported being "really positive and strong" after the initial tests came back, insisting that the injury will not be a problem by the time the Madrid and Rome Masters come along. But to risk it by playing Monte Carlo? Why not take this week off?

Well, this is something of a home tournament, he explained. "I'm always feeling very inspired and motivated to perform my best in this tournament because I live in Monaco and I spend the majority of my time, when I'm not in tournaments, here in this club, practicing on these courts," Djokovic said.

Djokovic would have been a bit of a question mark even without the ankle, having fallen to Tommy Haas in Miami the last time he played. He's in a tough section of the draw, with Indian Wells conqueror Juan Martin del Potro leading the challengers, so Djokovic's form and fitness should be thoroughly tested by the time the week is over.

Andy Murray

With all his variety and time spent training in Spain early in his career, Murray might be expected to flourish on the clay. But his results have lagged behind those on other surfaces, and he's hoping this is the year that starts to change.

The world No. 2 is coming off a couple of weeks training in Miami with coach Ivan Lendl, working on his movement and talking to Lendl about how to play on the surface.

And he's healthy. "I'm in better shape physically because my back's not an issue like it was last year," he said in Monte Carlo.

To try and keep it that way, Murray has given up soccer and golf -- so there'll be no challenging Nadal on the course. "I used to play a lot of football and golf but I've stopped all that now," Murray said. "I've been playing tennis a long time and you pick up things so you have to manage your body."

Roger Federer

Federer isn't in Monte Carlo, choosing to take almost a two-month break after Indian Wells. He did make one addition to his schedule, however, announcing that he plans to play his hometown event in Basel in October.

Federer's participation in the tournament was in doubt, with the two sides having trouble agreeing on the appearance fee. After six months of talks, the tournament's reported date for Federer to make a decision arrived last week -- and he relented, saying he would not refuse to play even if there was no deal by then.

"I can play at Basel without any contracts or agreements, if I feel like it," he told Swiss newspaper Tages Anzeiger. "To compete on home soil is every special for me."

Federer, who has been at home in chilly Switzerland for the past few weeks, also said his back took longer to recover than he expected. But he is back training again, and set to return at the Mutua Madrid in early May.

Jennifer Capriati proudly took three or four steps from the front row of luminaries to the podium where she would get to tell her story. On a near-perfect Newport afternoon, Capriati tearfully delivered her enshrinement speech into the International Tennis Hall of Fame. She spoke poignantly of acceptance and forgiveness and what it meant at that moment to embrace everything she loved about the sport.

It was only a few minutes long, but she managed to squeeze in a lifetime of reflection. I was there that day some eight months ago and listened intently to a speech that was just as much about confession as it was a collection of achievements. Capriati, as she said, never left the game on her own terms, and that stung for someone who knew little else than the only place she ever really felt at home -- a tennis court. After all the arrests, the glazed-eyed mug shots, the injuries and the depression, gone were the days marred by all that melancholy.

Until now.

On Thursday, Capriati was charged after allegedly punching her ex-boyfriend on Valentine's Day. Although she was not arrested, Capriati now faces a series of offenses, including stalking and battery in North Palm Beach, Fla.

To be clear, I have no inside knowledge of what did or did not happen. For all we know, it's a terrible misunderstanding. Maybe it's not. Who knows? The point here is not to speculate and belabor this one incident or to admonish her for creating more damaging news. For a player whose career, whose life came crumbling down so many times, this matter, at least on the surface, seems low by comparison.

It's just sad to hear Capriati's name as the centerpiece to another tawdry headline when all her shortcomings seemed to vanish for good that day in Newport. Like anyone else with a modicum of compassion, I wanted the legacy of the newest hall-of-famer to end with that Hollywood moment. And yes, perhaps that's a bit hyperbolic. But think about her story in a nutshell: Teenage prodigy goes pro at 13. The next year, she reaches the semis at the French Open at the ridiculous age of 14. She wins a gold medal in at the 1992 Olympic Games in Barcelona by beating Steffi Graf. And then ... the shoplifting, the arrests, the marijuana. It would foil years of stardom.

All those transgressions led to a 14-month layoff from tennis and seasons of relative anonymity, even when she did return. And then defying any rational mind, Capriati would rock the tennis community with a championship at the Australian Open in 2001 -- eight years after her initial break from the game. Eight years! And, oh by the way, she vanquished the No. 1 player in the world, Martina Hingis, in the final. Capriati would then win the French a few months later, snare the No. 1 ranking in October and defend her Aussie trophy the next year.

So, if that's not the classic feel-good flick for a player who harbored and eventually conquered some very ambitious dreams, then what is, Rudy fans? Capriati had come so far in rediscovering her game, in rediscovering herself.

Newport was a celebration of her wins on the court but more so her win in life. And yes, that might sound hokey, and it is, but her adventure from a naive ponytailed S.I.-cover sensation to a player plagued by countless misfortunes, to the hall-of-fame champion she became, the Jennifer Capriati script was supposed to end right then, right there.

And that's why this latest incident, whatever it turns out to be, is so troubling.

The story started with his knee. It ended with his racket.

For nearly a year, we questioned and cross-examined what fraction of Rafael Nadal would be left when he eventually made his way back to the circuit. On Sunday, that interrogation finally came to a close. He squeezed by Juan Martin del Potro 4-6, 6-3, 6-4 to win the BNP Paribas Open at Indian Wells. It was a fitting end to a comeback already marked with various obstacles.

Now the narrative of a player beset by a career-threatening injury will finally take a healthier twist and focus on Rafael Nadal the tennis player. And that, as you might expect, should leave his many interested challengers rightfully frazzled.



For all the bluster heading into Indian Wells, Nadal looked very much like the spirited Grand Slam champion we've always known. There were no discernible signs of knee or any other physical woes. Against del Potro, Nadal found himself playing defensively and taking abrupt stops and turns for three sets, but he still showcased his imposing speed and finished points with the same jarring winners.

Nadal can now call himself a Masters 1000 champion for a record 22nd time, one more than Mr. Roger Federer. But this one has to be as much about relief as it does exultation, considering the ordeal he's been though.

For the uninitiated, and there's probably only one of you (so here's the cliff-notes version), Nadal went to Wimbledon last year and left broken. An unknown, Lukas Rosol, stunned the serial Grand Slam champ in five sets. That match knocked Rafa out of England and out of tennis for seven months with a damaged knee. Other ailments would eventually arise and delay even further any kind of return to the court.

In early February, Nadal's comeback finally began in Chile, where he lost in the finals, and it continued in two other smaller tournaments in Brazil and Mexico. Nadal won both of those titles, but they were played on the comforts of clay, and the level of competition -- well let's just say beating guys like Delbonis and Souza, even Almagro -- doesn't have the same cachet as taking down a hearty Masters 1000 field.

Amazingly, 346 days removed from his last hard-court match, Nadal's vintage game materialized with each passing round at Indian Wells, despite some laboring along the way. Ryan Harrison played him tight in the opener, and after a walkover, Ernests Gulbis had Rafa reeling before the Latvian realized he was, in fact, Ernests Gulbis and folded. But you can also credit that W to Nadal's cool championship demeanor, which, as it always does, belied his bone-crushing groundies.

But it was the big, ballyhooed "reunion of a rivalry" that set the tone of his comeback. From the moment the draw was announced, all eyes eagerly counted down the days until Nadal and Federer would square off again. The match had the electric feel of a Grand Slam final going in but left the fervent crowd flat after a straight-sets demolition. Nadal, like so many other times, appeared to have Federer beaten before they walked onto the court and then dashed through the defending champion 6-4, 6-2 with clean, crisp winners from the get-go.

Now after beating Tomas Berdych and del Potro in his last two matches, Nadal is at a near-perfect 17-1 this year, including 14 straight wins. That is, unbelievably, the best start of his career.

Against del Potro, Nadal found himself stretching and defending, chasing and clawing, but he managed to break del Potro early in the third set to solidify the win. Rafa will move back to No. 4 in the ATP World Tour Rankings.

Del Potro himself is no stranger to injury. After winning the 2009 U.S. Open, he missed 10 months to surgically repair his persistent wrist injury. But Saturday, the Argentine ended Novak Djokovic's 22-match winning streak, which dated back to last October, in the semifinals. This a day after dismissing Andy Murray from the tournament. Del Potro, who fell to 3-8 against Nadal, failed to win his first Masters 1000 title.

Sure, there are some detractors, justified or not, who will still shed a few doubts. Nadal, perhaps with the tennis lords giving him a little nudge, was able to safely avoid his other two archrivals, Djokovic and Murray, at Indian Wells. But this day, this tournament was about what Nadal did accomplish. It was about a cathartic end to a painful year, physically and most certainly mentally.

So now what? Nadal pulled out the Sony Ericsson Open, which starts later this week, as most suspected he would so as not to risk reinjury. Thus the onset of the clay season is next, and with that, the French Open, where Nadal will be the overwhelming favorite to win for an eighth time. And if Nadal was this good on a surface so evil to his knees, what's to stop him from rolling through the next few months?

Not Lukas Rosol, that's for sure.

Where were you the first time you saw Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal play?

For me, it was my final day at my previous job here at ESPN. I was sitting at my desk, packing boxes and glued to the final of the 2005 NASDAQ-100 Open in Key Biscayne (now the Sony Ericsson). It was the second time they had meet. Federer was far and away the preeminent player in the game. Nadal was a phenom, one of the few Next Big Things who would actually pan out.

Federer beat him, but he fell behind two sets to love against Nadal before winning. I remember thinking back then, "Hmmm, this could be a good rivalry for years to come." Turns out I was on to something. OK, so apparently, anyone who knew anything about anyone who hit little yellow fuzzy balls on blue, green and red tennis courts knew this, too.

Anyway, watching Federer and Nadal at Indian Wells on Thursday night had a much different vibe than just one moment in this storied history. We've spent so many years dissecting game plans and shot-making and turning points between these two. So much time parsing each match, each set. This one, though, spoke less about the current state of their respective games than it did about nostalgia and cherishing what's left of these glorious, insatiable battles.

You see, a year had passed since they last played. A year! At that match was here at Indian Wells. You can blame Nadal, er the world's most famous teetering knee that is, for the sojourn this rivalry took.

In the 29th chapter in this rivalry, a healthy Nadal beat down a now-ailing Federer 6-4, 6-2 to reach the semifinals of the first Masters 1000 tournament of the year. But this clash was merely a sidebar to a much bigger storyline: How much longer? How many more memories?

This isn't to say the offing is bleak and that we won't have many more Federer-Nadal matches. But we waited so long, and the future, as bright and hopeful as we want it to be, is more tenuous with each passing tournament.

What if Rafa can't withstand the intensity of the circuit the way he once did? What if Federer's tennis dotage finally catches up to him? It has to at some point, no? The squirrely back he had at Indian Wells, especially against Nadal, will only become more pervasive as time passes. What if Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray take the game over week in, week out. Sure, perhaps we're overreacting and being a little hyperbolic here, but the questions are legit, the apprehension justified.

Imagine no more Fed-Nadal, a rivalry that has withstood a generation of players and one that resonates well beyond tennis circles. Does anything in tennis even come close to giving you chills when they walk on the court? Is there a greater contrasting of styles between two stalwarts anywhere in sports?

But maybe the staying power of these two isn't going anywhere. Rafa is back and Federer never went anywhere. There aren't players outside Djokovic and Murray who can beat these two with any kind of consistency. Rafa's knee looks strong right now and we've been constantly proven wrong by Federer's capacity to ignore those vexing suggestions of what he should and shouldn't do. And, oh by the way, he's still the No. 2 player in the world. And the last time he lost any Grand Slam match before the quarterfinals, guys like Coria, Schuettler and Grosjean were relevant. So there's that.

And though we don't know what's left, we've reached the point in the Federer-Nadal history in which the rivalry itself far surpasses any singular, salient moment, or any one championship along the way. The collective credentials they've accrued is mind-numbing. Twenty-eight Slam titles, each owns a career Slam and they've snared an unthinkable 42 Masters 1000 titles. But the zeal that penetrates the sport when they meet is real -- and that's what matters now.

So when was the first time you saw Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal play each other? Was it the gutsy 2008 Wimbledon final? Perhaps one of their one-sided French Open affairs? The Aussie? World Tour Finals? Nonetheless, just relish the rivalry from here on out. Don't sweat the results. Because whether you are an ardent Rafa lover or a Fed fanatic, one doesn't feel right without the other.

The doubts were running high at times last week, but Rafael Nadal is looking set to play at the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells this week. And that means all of the big four members will be playing at the same event, the first time that's happened since Wimbledon eight long months ago.

Nadal has been the missing piece of the puzzle, with a knee injury keeping him off the tour for seven months until he returned in February. The Spaniard will be arriving in the California desert fresh off an impressive week in Acapulco (with an exhibition match in New York squeezed in) and has made it clear he hasn't lost his mastery on red clay. But now the attention turns to hard courts, where Djokovic currently rules. Here's how the big four have been faring ahead of the season's first Masters event.

Novak Djokovic

Djokovic underlined his early dominance of this season by taking the title in Dubai last week, bringing his record for the year to 12-0 and his winning streak to 18-0 (excluding a loss in Hopman Cup). Playing his first event since winning the Australian Open, Djokovic handled Juan Martin del Potro and Tomas Berdych in the last two rounds without dropping a set. On this surface, Djokovic's movement and ability to move the ball around is unmatched these days. And he knows it -- a source of confidence when matches do get close. "I feel I know how well I can play and I know what my qualities are and abilities," said Djokovic.

After winning Dubai, Djokovic took in a Los Angeles Lakers game and met some of the team ahead of taking part in the L.A. Tennis Challenge before heading to Indian Wells, where the golf course will probably be one of his first stops. Never mind, his tennis doesn't look like it needs much practice anyway.

Rafael Nadal

Nadal's 6-0, 6-2 defeat of David Ferrer in the Acapulco final was simply stunning, not so much the win but the astonishingly one-sided score line against one of the very best clay-court players. Even though it came against his friend and fellow countryman, Nadal sobbed into his towel with relief afterward, exulting at such a fine performance just three events into his comeback.

He has two titles and a final so far, and even more encouragingly, his knee has responded better at each tournament. "There were days in Brazil when it was really bad, and in Chile, during one match as well. But here, it didn't hurt. It just bothered me some," he said in Acapulco. "This was the first week where I could run with complete freedom and no limitations."

Now comes the first test on hard courts, the most difficult surface for the knee, and at what will be his fourth event in just over five weeks. He is in the difficult position of needing to play matches but also needing to save his knees as much as he can, a balancing act that will also come into play over the question of whether to play the Sony Ericsson Open in Miami a few days after Indian Wells ends.

Roger Federer

Another tournament, another tough loss for Federer, this time a semifinal defeat in Dubai against Tomas Berdych after missing three match points. "That's just disappointing right there, because the match was in my racket," said Federer. "You do all the right things for so long, and then at the end you've got to explain why you didn't hit two shots decent, you know."

Berdych is one of the handful of players capable of overpowering Federer from the baseline and sensed weakness in his opponent's net-rushing strategy. "That's just show[ing] that he definitely doesn't want to play the rallies with me from the back," Berdych said. "When he doesn't feel that he has it in his hands, you know, that he can control the ball, he can do whatever he wants, then, yeah, that's what he like."

Earlier in the week, Federer had a different theory about his net approaches, laughingly suggesting that his pink shoelaces made it too easy for opponents to see him coming. "Definitely not camouflage," he joked.

Less amusing for Federer is not being able to defend his titles in Rotterdam and Dubai last month, and he now must try to make another title defense at Indian Wells. If Federer fails, he could lose yet more ground to Andy Murray, who is quickly encroaching on Fed's No. 2 ranking.

Playing a reduced schedule this year will also hurt Federer's ranking prospects, but speaking to reporters before Dubai, he suggested he might play more next year. "I need to make sure I have enough time off, so that when 2014 comes I am in a position with options, which I almost wasn't this year to a degree," he said.

Andy Murray

Murray hasn't played since the Australian Open, choosing to train with coach Ivan Lendl in Miami instead. Not much has been heard from him since an appearance at the Queen's Club media day three weeks ago, except for the announcement that he is buying a boutique hotel near his hometown. It's where Murray's brother, Jamie, was married before it closed last February and was put up for sale. Murray plans to reopen the business and hopes it will help boost the local economy.

It wasn't long before potential names began pouring in, with Jumurrah and the Murriot among the suggestions.

Nadal, meanwhile, has purchased two hotels in Mexico, so these two may now have something else to compete over apart from their bitter PlayStation rivalry.

But it's the on-court rivalries that will be the focus over the next week and a half. Not only does Nadal's return complete the big-four summit, his comeback prospects will add a little mystery to this now-familiar cast of favorites.

NEW YORK -- He sprinted out to the service line at Madison Square Garden as the applause swelled.

Cliff Drysdale is 71 years old and has spent most of his life playing, organizing and broadcasting tennis, his sport of choice. Monday, he was introduced as a member of the International Tennis Hall of Fame's class of 2013, along with Martina Hingis, Charlie Pasarell, Ion Tiriac and Thelma Coyne Long.

Drysdale left the court almost as swiftly as he entered; his ESPN2 broadcast was only minutes from starting. Looked after by a security guard, he jumped into an elevator.

Was he surprised to be named a Hall of Famer?

"Yes," he said, looking touched. "It was very nice."

And then he jogged to the broadcast position, where he called the exhibition match between Serena Williams and Victoria Azarenka with partner Mary Joe Fernandez.

Although Drysdale was a formidable player in his day -- he was a finalist in the 1965 U.S. Open and a doubles champion there in 1972 with Roger Taylor -- perhaps his greatest contribution to the game was as an organizer. He was a co-founder of the ATP in 1971 and its first president.

Hingis, obviously, is the marquee name at the enshrinement ceremony set for July 13 in Newport, R.I. She slipped into the major mix after Steffi Graf and Monica Seles dominated and was fortunate to win five Grand Slam singles titles before the coming of the Williams sisters. Hingis, along with Justine Henin, was among the last of the mortal-sized multiple-major champions.

Pasarell, a nice player, too, joins Drysdale as an enshrinee in the contributor category. He was the No. 1-ranked United States player in 1967. More important, he was one of those who helped launch the ATP, which gave the players greater control of their collective destiny. He was an involved board member from 1971 to '78 and went on to build Indian Wells into one of the world's best tournaments.

This year, the ATP World Tour will stage 62 tournaments in 32 countries. Prize money is expected to exceed $95 million by 2014. Drysdale and Pasarell established the foundation that made it all possible.

Would Rafael Nadal be making a reported $1.5 million for a two-hour exhibition Monday night if those players hadn't been so brave?

This question was posed just as Nadal walked by Pasarell's front-row seat.

Pasarell smiled, shrugged and shook his head.

"Cliff and I were part of a very special generation of players," he said. "When the tennis went from the amateur days to the open days for professionals, that did not happen by chance. The best players were all pushing for that."

Although Roger Federer and Nadal have been vocal at times about the state of the game for the athletes themselves, they have done little to mobilize the players. The Grand Slams have increased prize money, but imagine if Rafa and Roger and their friends actually threatened a shutdown? That's what happened back in 1973, when the players united behind a suspended player, Niki Pilic, and threatened to walk at Wimbledon. The All England Club capitulated.

"We were made to look like the bad guys, but we did what we had to do," Pasarell said. "I'm not sure today's fans, or even the players, know much about any of this. We're proud that we helped give the players a say in how the business operates."

Brazilian Thomaz Bellucci, the world No. 35, is not a pushover. He demolished the relentless David Ferrer in Monte Carlo on clay last year and Janko Tipsarevic in the final at Gstaad. He's taken a set off Roger Federer twice and one off Novak Djokovic.



A left-hander with a big serve, Bellucci is like most players ranked in that 30-50 range: hampered not by insufficient weapons but by consistency. He's what opposing coaches and commentators would call a "tricky matchup," where he is hardly ever the favorite but isn't a guy anyone should take lightly either.

So his victory over John Isner last week in the fourth rubber of the U.S. versus Brazil Davis Cup tie in Jacksonville, Fla., wasn't as surprising as, say, Sam Querrey's victorious but serious struggle against noisy, unheralded 135th-ranked Thiago Alves in the clincher.

The importance of Isner losing is not reflected by his one-on-one matchup with Bellucci but by where he was at this time a year ago, where over a two-month period he had beaten Federer and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in Davis Cup and Djokovic at Indian Wells, losing to Federer in the final. From that streak, Isner knew he belonged and said as much.

"When I step on the court, with my serve, I believe I can beat anyone," he said at Indian Wells. His opponents were on notice.

Isner had become "The Guy You Don't Want to Play." He pushed into the top 10. The bigness of his game transformed his weaknesses from chronic to correctable. Once he smoothed out his wrinkles, he had the firepower to be major contender material.

The problem is that Isner's game hasn't matched the expectations created by that run last year, which, incidentally, placed him at a career-high No. 9 in the world. In all four majors last year, Isner lost in five sets, failing to reach the quarters in any of them.



While the supersized portions of Isner's game -- the big serve and forehand combination -- allow him to be scary, his fatal imprecision, inability to break serve, lack of balanced footwork that creates massive unforced error counts on both wings and the questionable stamina is what makes him ripe for upset against the Belluccis and Paul-Henri Mathieus of the world.

The Isner conundrum matters because a lingering heart ailment has made Mardy Fish's status a mystery. Andy Roddick is gone. Isner (now No. 16) and Querrey (No. 20) are the American standard-bearers. The first and fourth rubbers of a Davis Cup match now belong to Isner. The draw of a major will -- at least along these shores -- focus on Isner and his chances to get deep in to the second week.

Isner missed last month's Australian Open with a knee injury and flailed badly to end the 2012 season. He is one of the most candid players on tour and has admitted that, in addition to the inconsistencies of his game, he is not playing with a high level of confidence.

Since beating Jarkko Nieminen in the second round of the U.S. Open, Isner has lost three of his last four Davis Cup matches and eight of his last 11 matches overall, which doesn't include two exhibition losses to Kevin Anderson and Tsonga at Hopman Cup.

As the American No. 1, Isner is charged with projecting confidence not just for himself but as the player toward other American players will look, just as he and younger Americans did with Roddick. Whether he is ready or not, Isner has entered a new stage in his career. He is the leader.