ESPN Tennis

Stillness helps Novak Djokovic recharge, so it’s fitting he made a major move without stepping on court this week.

Djokovic, who credits his daily silent meditation sessions for improved clarity, reached a milestone in becoming the ninth man in ATP history to hold the world No. 1 ranking for 100 weeks. But is hitting the century mark a prelude to an extended run or a sign of a pending expiration date?

“The simple answer to that question is it depends on Djokovic’s rivalry with Nadal,” said ESPN announcer Cliff Drysdale, who has covered all nine men to reign for at least 100 weeks at the top. “When Djokovic was beating Nadal, he could take his time and wait for the short ball and then jump on it. And it didn’t matter how long it took for that ball to come -- he was ready for that moment. Lately, Nadal is taking that opportunity away from him, and that is really what has changed in their rivalry. And the solution to that is for Novak is to become a little more aggressive more quickly in their rallies.”

They may be swapping spots soon. Barring injury or inactivity, a resurgent Rafa, who leads Novak by 2,905 points in the ATP Race, will almost certainly surpass the Serbian to seize the year-end No. 1 ranking for the third time in the past six years.

Two-time year-end No. 1 Djokovic, who is defending 3,000 ranking points over the rest of the season, has lost six of his past seven matches to Nadal. Djokovic has also dropped his past two Grand Slam finals, and the four-time Australian Open champion is 2-6 in major finals contested outside of Melbourne.

Djokovic drove his two-handed backhand to counter Nadal's crosscourt forehand in winning seven straight matches between the pair from March 2011 through the 2012 Australian Open. But the 13-time Grand Slam champion has played more assertive tennis and has been a more convincing closer in matches preceding his clashes with Djokovic.

“Djokovic still believes he can beat Nadal, but it’s the matches before he gets to Nadal that are important for him beating Nadal,” Hall of Famer and television analyst Fred Stolle told ESPN.com. “I think Djokovic lost a bit of his edge in both the Wimbledon and the US Open finals because both of his semifinals went the distance. The 54-stroke rally Nadal and Djokovic played in the US Open final was the best rally I’ve ever seen -- each guy hit 10 winners and each of them responded to those winners with interest in that rally -- but when Djokovic has to deal with Nadal’s relentless pursuit of perfection, it’s just bloody hard, particularly when he had to go five with Stanislas Wawrinka a few days before.”

Consider that five of Djokovic’s nine losses this season have come to opponents ranked outside the top five and you can better understand that the physicality of today’s tennis means free points don’t come easily. The 26-year-old Serbian has not won a title since he snapped Rafa’s eight-year reign in Monte Carlo in April.

With a healthy, hungry Nadal rampaging through the tour, registering a 22-0 mark on hard courts and a 17-1 record versus top-10 opponents this season, Djokovic’s short-term hold on the top spot is tenuous, but his long-term future at No. 1 is tremendous. Here are five reasons why Djokovic will make an extended run at No. 1 and climb the longevity ladder among the sport’s iconic champions even if he drops to No. 2 as expected:

All-Surface Acumen

Although hard court is his best surface, Djokovic’s ability to adapt to all surfaces is a major asset. He is the only top-10 player with a winning percentage of .825 or better on every surface in 2013.

“He’s so good. Really, even though the players are great today, I think he really only has to be concerned with a couple of them,” Pete Sampras, who held the year-end top spot for a record six straight years, said earlier this season. “I see him -- if he stays healthy -- staying on top for as long as he wants to be. I just think he’s that good. He wins on hard court; he wins on clay; he wins on grass.”

Adaptability

Djokovic’s skill in shortening his backswing to take the ball early makes him a sniper on return. His work sharpening his serve and forehand were key components to his commanding 2011 season, when he won 10 titles in 11 finals, including three Grand Slam crowns.

“The mechanical changes he made to his swings -- he clearly changed his forehand and even more dramatically his serve -- have made a world of difference, and I think he can get more juice on his first serve,” Drysdale said.

Quality Control

You can focus on the fact that Djokovic is 2-4 in his past six Grand Slam finals, but consider he’s riding a streak of 14 consecutive major semifinal appearances and his 14 career Masters 1000 titles puts him fourth all-time behind Nadal (26), Roger Federer (21) and Andre Agassi (17). When you repeatedly put yourself in position to play for the most meaningful titles, as Djokovic does, it ensures a place among the elite.

Staying Power

Health is an essential element to longevity, and Djokovic, who tapped out of matches in three of the four majors early in his career, conceding his body felt like it was “breaking down,” has become one of the fittest men in the game since breaking from bread. The gluten-free Novak has played at least 60 matches a year for seven straight years and owns a 20-7 record in five-setters (.741 winning percentage).

Premier Return

Djokovic's elastic ability to attack and defend off the return has prompted Agassi to call him the best returner he’s ever seen. Djokovic is No. 12 on the ATP in break points converted (43 percent), while Nadal is No. 2 (47 percent), and is No. 3 in return games won (33 percent). But if Djokovic is slashing his return down the line, it opens the court against even his fiercest rival.

“The Djokovic return to the Nadal forehand, particularly off the first court, is the key stroke in their rivalry,” Stolle said. “Djokovic has learned to tag that return of serve right down the line to the forehand, and Nadal moves to his right after serving to set up his forehand so space is there. Nadal served well at the US Open, so it comes down to confidence with both of them trying to take control, and I do think the rivalry will continue to go back and forth.”

Maria Sharapova and Jimmy Connors. Stop and think about it: It sounds like a shotgun mixed-doubles team at an exhibition, not a formal arrangement between player and coach. But in the aftermath of Wimbledon, where Sharapova suffered a second-round loss, it was announced that the two would be working together for the foreseeable future.

There has been little else mentioned about the pairing -- other than that Sharapova’s former coach, Thomas Hogstedt, couldn’t commit to the travel required of the job -- and we’re left with even more questions than usual about a high-profile tennis union. Perhaps it is the sport’s answer to the Miami Heat’s Big Three -- huge personalities coming together; whether they’ll neatly join or collide and clash remaining to be seen.

We know one thing before Sharapova ever strikes a ball with Connors in her corner: There will be immense pressure on both parties to perform. Sharapova, one of the top stars in women’s sports, likely isn’t starstruck by anyone anymore. But when it’s an eight-time major champion watching your every move instead of someone with which an established comfort level exists, it will surely be a different experience. There will be an added level of scrutiny, and unfairly or not, what Sharapova does or doesn’t do will be tied back to Connors. The focus may periodically waver from Sharapova because of her new coach’s status, but the spotlight will undoubtedly be more intense.

Then there’s Connors, whose previous coaching stint with Andy Roddick produced mixed results -- and not one Grand Slam title. He’ll be thrown into the fire right away, with Sharapova not scheduled to return until Toronto, a scant few weeks before the US Open begins. Assuming their partnership lasts beyond 2013, they’ll have months’ worth of tournaments to prepare for 2014, but the bulk of this season is behind us, and Sharapova’s final shot at a Slam is fast approaching. What can Connors teach Sharapova that she can implement in such a short time frame? Again, we’re left with questions.

I’m going to guess that, in the short term, we should expect much the same from Sharapova, with any radical changes to come gradually, over time. Even the very natural pairing of Ivan Lendl and Andy Murray took time to materialize into what it has become today. The Scot seemed to be stuck in his old, passive ways for a while, even with a new voice and perspective running his practices. But Lendl’s persistent assistance seems to have played a big part in Murray’s rise, and that might be the best news for those who want to see Sharapova take a different kind of leap. Already a winner of the career Slam, the never-satisfied icon likely wants to become a truly dominant No. 1 while she still can.

It’s not an unreasonable desire. At 26, Sharapova is firmly in her prime and is the prohibitive favorite against all but a few of her contemporaries. It’s also worth wondering if Sharapova got the most out of the relationship with Hogstedt, and if Connors, whom Sharapova briefly worked with in 2008, might be the missing link. The timing may be right for a change.

Ultimately, whether this coaching change works will come down to Sharapova. Connors can instill his experience and tactics all he wants, but Sharapova is nothing if not a stubborn player. She plays at one volume: loud. Not just with her voice, but with her bold, flat groundstrokes, and with a serve that continues to walk the tightrope between aggressive and reckless too often.

Here’s another thing I can predict: Expect the cameras to pan to Connors after a groan-inducing Sharapova double fault. The American would be considered a genius if he could eradicate those from the box scores. But again, it’s Sharapova who will hit those second serves, and the one who, when tossing the ball skyward beforehand, will have to stop and think about everything.

Clay-court tennis has evoked expressive variety in Serena Williams this season. The world No. 1 has captured clay-court championships in three different countries -- and delivered victory speeches in three different languages: English (Charleston), Spanish (Madrid) and Italian (Rome).

Williams roars into Roland Garros on a career-best 24-match winning streak and has cleaned up on clay, posting a 16-0 clay-court record this year and a 33-1 mark on the dirt since the start of the 2012 clay-court season. She blasted former No. 1 Victoria Azarenka off the Rome red clay, 6-1, 6-3, to collect her 51st career title and regained the Rome crown she last won in 2002 when she beat Jennifer Capriati and Justine Henin back-to-back and solidified her status as the woman to beat in Paris.

Here's a look the leading contenders for the French Open title.

Serena Williams

Why she’ll win: An iconic champion is inspired to regain the Roland Garros championship she last won 11 years ago. That may sound like a lifetime ago in tennis terms, but consider Williams' 2012 U.S. Open crown came 13 years after she won her first Flushing Meadows major in 1999. She's playing some of her best tennis right now, and she has won two of the past three majors. You know she will be pumped up for Paris, where she owns a home and has trained with coaching consultant Patrick Mouratoglou. Although dirt does blunt her power a bit, it expands her variety. Serena has used her slice serve out wide to set up her first strike; she ripped some emphatic running forehand winners against Azarenka; she plays the short, sharp-angled backhand more; and she has even deployed the drop shot on occasion during her unbeaten clay run.

Why she won’t: The dirt diminishes her most imposing weapon -- the serve -- which can bail her out of trouble with one swing on other surfaces, but if it's a damp fortnight and the terre battue becomes an even slower track, that could create complications. Although Williams is the dominant player in the sport, she has not reached a French Open final four in a decade and has played tight, tentative tennis in Paris in the past. Serena was 46-0 in the first round of Slams and undefeated on clay in 2012 before suffering a shocking 4-6, 7-6 (5) 6-3 upset to 111th-ranked Frenchwoman Virginie Razzano in the opening round.

Maria Sharapova

Why she’ll win: The reigning Roland Garros champion has been dynamic on dirt. Five of Sharapova's past six titles have come on clay. At her best, the aggressive baseliner can command the center of the court, dictate play from the first strike and is a tremendous fighter. Sharapova has won 17 of her past 19 three-setters with only Azarenka (2012 U.S. Open semifinals) and Serena Williams (2013 Miami final) scoring wins in that span. She once famously compared her movement on clay to "a cow on ice," but Sharapova has found her footing in Paris, reaching at least the quarterfinals in four of the past six years.

Why she won’t: Sharapova finds beating Serena is a task as easy as leaping the Seine in a single bound. Williams has 12 consecutive wins over Sharapova, winning 24 of the past 27 sets they've played during the past nine years. Sharapova has never successfully defended a major title and while her flat serve can effectively set up her first strike when she's landing it, she can also lose the serving plot under pressure. Sharapova has hit 141 aces against 163 double faults and can become skittish on serve against heavy hitters. A viral illness forced Sharapova to withdraw from her scheduled Rome quarterfinal against Sara Errani last week, causing some concern about her health for Paris.

Victoria Azarenka

Why she’ll win: The two-time Australian Open champion is a sniper on return. Vika has won nearly 57 percent of her return games and converted nearly 55 percent of her break-point chances this season. "Vika is probably the best returner in the game," says Marion Bartoli. Her bold two-handed backhand is one of the best in the game, and she's one of only two women to beat top-ranked Serena this year with a 7-6 (6), 2-6, 6-3 victory in the Doha final. She has been a major player in Grand Slam tournaments recently, reaching the finals in three of her past five majors. Though 15 of her 16 career titles have come on hard courts, Azarenka was 12-3 on clay in 2012, registering runner-up appearances in Stuttgart and Madrid.

Why she won’t: Recent history reinforces the tough task she faces. No woman has won the Australian Open and Roland Garros in succession since Jennifer Capriati's comeback fight against Kim Clijsters in the 2001 French Open final. The slower clay courts can diminish some of the sting from her groundstrokes, and while she's a sound lateral mover, Azarenka is still developing her transition game and can be a plodding player when dragged forward into the front court. Consequently, she's vulnerable to the drop shot and short slice on dirt and is 0-4 combined in clay-court meetings with former French Open champions Williams and Sharapova. Azarenka has not exactly peaked in Paris in the past. She has fallen in the first round three times and has failed to survive the fourth round in five of seven French Open appearances.

Li Na

Why she’ll win: An agile, athletic player, Li electrified the City of Light defeating Petra Kvitova, Azarenka, Sharapova and defending champion Francesca Schiavone in succession to capture the 2011 French Open. Working with coach Carlos Rodriguez, who guided Justine Henin to four French Open championships, Li is applying her all-court skills more effectively. She's constructing sounder points, and she's shown the ability to elevate her game on major stages. An extremely fit player, the 31-year-old advanced to her second Australian Open final in January, was the runner-up to Sharapova in Stuttgart and advanced to at least the semifinals in four of her first five tournaments in 2013.

Why she won’t: Despite her historic triumph in Paris as the first Asian player, male or female, to win a major singles title, clay is Li's least favorite surface. She has failed to surpass the round of 16 in five of her six Roland Garros appearances and only one of her seven career titles have come on clay. Li's emotional intensity can be a strength -- when she channels it into positive action -- but she has been prone to implosions under pressure. When she gets tight, Li can lose the shape of her swing on the forehand and serve and sometimes flat-line those shots into net, which can cause streakiness. Li opened her clay season by reaching the Stuttgart final, but was underwhelming in both Madrid and Rome, winning just one match at those two important French Open tune-up tournaments.

Petra Kvitova

Why she’ll win: One of the purest ball-strikers in tennis, the left-hander's ability to detonate points with a single swing disarms opponents, denying them the rhythm that comes from playing longer rallies. When Kvitova is on her game, she is dangerous off both serve and return and is a well-balanced player who can rip the ball off both forehand and backhand. She can impose her game on almost anyone. Kvitova's flat blasts can rob opponents of time and make them feel as unsettled as if they're operating at the wrong end of a shooting gallery. "She hits so strong," 2012 French Open finalist Sara Errani said. "It's tough to move her. It's hard to play because her ball is very flat." The 2011 Wimbledon champion has played deep into the second week of majors before. Kvitova is a 2012 French Open semifinalist and has reached the final four of every major except for the U.S. Open.

Why she won’t: She's an explosive force, but Kvitova can be extremely erratic and prone to the mid-match malaise when her mind wanders and shots stray. When she loses the plot, Kvitova sometimes looks unsure how to regain her rhythm and can spray shots with abandon. The 23-year-old Czech is fitter this season, but court coverage is not an asset, which can make her suspect against quicker players who can withstand her pace and counter on the run. Though Kvitova opened the clay-court season reaching the Katowice final, little has come easy on clay since then: She's 5-4 on dirt since then and has been pushed to three sets in seven of those nine matches.

The ATP, as you probably are aware, decided to crack down on slow play this season. The tour has had a 25-second time limit between points for years, but in the past it was very loosely enforced. Its edges have been pushed and often overrun for years by many players, including two of the best, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Rallies were lasting longer, and the rest time between them seemed to have been unofficially lengthened as well. Rafa and Nole managed to make a three-set match, in the 2009 Madrid semifinals, take more than four hours. It was a classic, no doubt, but it took a while.

The tour's patience was finally broken by another, longer epic between them: a 5-hour, 53-minute Australian Open final last year. Nadal and Djokovic were the game's marquee players, the ones playing all of the Grand Slam finals at the time, and the specter of ever longer contests between them wasn't one that the ATP, or its TV partners, wanted to contemplate. Nadal and Djokovic staged grueling rallies, but it also seemed that, because each of them played slowly, they felt liberated to take even longer when they faced each other.

The tighter time enforcement that began at the start of 2013 has had its ups and downs. The players' reactions have been a mix of anger, disbelief and occasional acceptance, and the chair umpires haven't always used their best discretion in punishing them. Calls for a shot clock for the players to see on court have multiplied. Nadal himself has continued to criticize the enforcement, saying that it would destroy the modern game. If we wanted the epic rallies and matches, he said, we had to give them time to recover.

All of that was a prelude to this past Sunday, when Rafa and Nole played their first match under the new system, in the final in Monte Carlo. The ATP brought out its best umpire, and the one who so far has had the most success in enforcing the time rules, Mohamed Lahyani. It was a smart move, and the result was a step forward for the new rules. For the first time we could see that they make a difference.

Nadal and Djokovic played 21 games in Monte Carlo; they lasted 1 hour and 52 minutes. Last year, in the Rome final, on the same surface, they also played 21 games; those took 2 hours and 20 minutes. There were, as far as I saw, no official time warnings handed out by Lahyani, and both Rafa and Nole were moving with dispatch between points. Over the course of the tournament, it looked to me as if Nadal had even stopped cleaning the entire baseline with his foot before he began his return games, proof that he can give up at least one his rituals and still be OK -- though having lost for the first time in 10 years in Monte Carlo, Rafa may not see it that way.

Points were shorter than they have been in some of their past matches, but the play between Nadal and Djokovic was just as high quality as always. The physical push and pull of their rallies was just like old times, and if less recovery time made them try to be more aggressive and end points a little more quickly, I'd say that's a good thing.

This isn't the end of the growing pains, by any means. There will be more arguments, more bad decisions by umpires, and more (unwarranted) talk of a shot clock. For now, I would recommend one thing to the ATP: When Rafa and Nole get together, do what you can to get Lahyani in the chair.

It's a sign of the times that only two of the ATP's big four reached the semifinals at Indian Wells. Next up is Miami, the second leg of tennis' monthlong, cross-country hard-court tour; two-time champion Roger Federer and newly crowned Indian Wells champ Rafael Nadal are absent; they are skipping this Masters event."

So if you think Indian Wells offered up some surprising results, odds are that Miami could be even more chaotic.

But we have to put that statement in relative terms. "Surprising results" these days consist of Juan Martin del Potro, ranked No. 7 in the world, beating a man just four places above him, Andy Murray. Now, del Potro's follow-up win over world No. 1 Novak Djokovic was undoubtedly a stunner, especially considering the Serb led 3-0 in the final set. But Djokovic, who headed into Indian Wells unbeaten this year, can certainly be forgiven for losing to a fellow top-10 player. Right?

To even think of asking that question, let alone posing it, is another testament to the top tier's unquestioned authority.

As for the "chaotic" nature of Indian Wells, well, that refers to del Potro, Nadal and Murray being joined in the semifinals by a true "Cinderella" ... the world No. 6, Tomas Berdych. George Mason or VCU he ain't, college hoops heads.

What I'm getting at is, even though Roger and Rafa are removed from the Miami draw, look for much of the same come late next week -- a top-heavy final four.

In particular, look for Djokovic and Murray to erase any thoughts of temporary decline you may have experienced after watching them fall like redwoods -- OK, tall cacti -- in the California desert. The two have combined to win four of the past six Miami Masters, with Nikolay Davydenko (in 2008) and Andy Roddick (in 2010) the only others to do so in that span. The only other active player to have won Miami is the missing-in-action Federer (remember, the now-retired Roddick will be watching on TV along with you and me).

That said, chalk doesn't always advance, as many of you will discover once the NCAA basketball tournament gets under way. Which players could bust the men's Miami bracket?

Even though Thomaz Bellucci has struggled badly this season, I think he is the unseeded player with the best chance of causing a major upset. Like Ernests Gulbis, who beat two seeded players and nearly ousted Nadal in Indian Wells, Bellucci possesses the powerful shots needed to challenge the elite. He'll need to stick around long enough to prove that, of course. Bellucci lost his opener out west, but shouldn't in Florida, where he'll face wild card Christian Harrison. Bellucci should be well-rested and, perhaps more importantly, eager to perform in front of a South American-friendly crowd. Remember, the Brazilian beat Murray and Berdych in the 2011 Madrid Masters, and won a set versus a practically invincible Djokovic.

As for seeded players, keep an eye on Nicolas Almagro (No. 10 seed), Milos Raonic (No. 14) and Sam Querrey (No. 17). They all own huge serves, yes, but they're also each in Berdych's quarter of the bracket. The Czech is a big beneficiary of the big-name pullouts this week, but he's earned his good fortune with a splendid 18-5 record this year. But as good Berdych is, he can still throw in the occasional clunker. Almost all of his losses in 2013 have been to upper-echelon players, but I think it's asking a lot of Berdych to go deep yet again, right after Indian Wells. One of these three ball-bashers should be able to take advantage.

Speaking of beneficiaries, David Ferrer, who fell to No. 5 in the rankings Monday, gets to lead a quarter as the third seed. In his Indian Wells opener, the Spaniard was unlucky to face Kevin Anderson, but nonetheless disappointed in a three-set loss. Ferrer should fare better in Miami, though Jeremy Chardy or Kei Nishikori, the Bollettieri Academy product who should have plenty of local support, could prove troublesome in the fourth round.

But it's the quarterfinal round where I see Ferrer's run ending. That's when he should meet del Potro, who will surely be inspired at the Grand Slam of Latin America. The Argentine couldn't have asked for a better draw, and if he hits his forehand as well and as consistently as he did in Indian Wells, a semifinal rematch with Djokovic looms.

It was a bit of a surprise to see that semi last week, but it wouldn't be a shock at all if it came to pass in Miami. But I think the more things change, the more they'll stay the same. Meaning, look for Djokovic to earn some revenge; the Serb has held the key to winning Key Biscayne in each of the past two years.

Petra Kvitova made the Dubai hard court look like a sand box. Kvitova's deep blasts displaced opponents who looked like they were spinning their wheels on sand in a futile effort to gain ground on the 2011 Wimbledon champion.

Kvitova shook off a second-round Australian Open loss by leveling the field. She sandwiched sweeps of former No. 1s Ana Ivanovic and Caroline Wozniacki around a quarterfinal thumping of fourth-ranked Agnieszka Radwanska before defeating French Open finalist Sara Errani, 6-2, 1-6, 6-1, to take the title.

Changing direction of her flat drives brilliantly, the 6-foot Czech's all-court attack made even clever counter-punchers feel as though they were operating at the wrong end of a shooting gallery.

"It was just two short balls and it's over," said Radwanska, who fell to 1-4 lifetime against Kvitova. "It's a bomb coming from the other side."

The left-hander's ability to detonate points with a single swing disarms opponents, denying them the rhythm that comes from playing longer rallies while presenting a fundamental problem. How do you solve an opponent who refuses to let you rally?

"The problem is not that she's tall; the problem is that she serves very good. She hits so strong," Errani said. "It's tough to move her. It's hard to play because her ball is very flat. I don't have time to do the points that I want to do, to play the game that I want to play. All the points are very short, and it's very tough."

The powerful performance served as a reminder that Kvitova, who was two wins away from the No. 1 ranking at the 2012 Australian Open before stumbling through a trying season plagued by inconsistency and illness, can be a force at the top of the game when she's right.

Kvitova's course to her 10th career title and first since she won New Haven last August was considerably smoother given the world's top three players -- Serena Williams, Victoria Azarenka and Maria Sharapova -- did not play Dubai. And though this is a significant step, she's still facing a desert-sized gap to regain a spot in the top three.

The world No. 7 trails the top-ranked Williams by more than 5,000 ranking points; she is not nearly as quick around the court and doesn't deploy the array of spins Serena can, particularly on serve. She's not as consistent as Azarenka, whom she has not faced since the 2011 WTA Championships final, and she doesn't evoke the fierce ruthlessness of Sharapova on a point-to-point basis. That explains Kvitova's combined 6-10 career record versus the world's top three, including an 0-4 mark against world No. 1 Serena and a 2-4 record against third-ranked Sharapova.

Yet those stats don't detract from the fact her upside is immense. Kvitova, who celebrates her 23rd birthday on March 8, is the second-youngest player in the top 10. She can dictate on serve, dominate on return and owns the most complete game of any woman not named Serena. She is an all-surface threat who has won titles on hard court, grass and clay and has reached at least the semifinals of every major except the U.S. Open.

When she's on her game, Kvitova is a brilliant ball-striker, whose shots are as tough to read as an SOS message scrawled across the surface of a lake.

"Petra played unbelievable; I think she was just hitting shots I had no chance to get," said Serena after roaring back from a 4-1 third-set deficit to defeat Kvitova in Doha earlier this month. "I don't think anyone on this tour could have gotten them."

Though she was prone to periods of erratic tennis last season, Kvitova is much more than a mindless baseline-blaster. Her frontcourt finesse makes her backcourt power even more menacing. When opponents drop back behind the baseline and defend in an effort to coax errors, as Wozniacki did in Dubai, Kvitova is comfortable closing at net. She won 15 of 17 trips to net versus Wozniacki, unleashing drive, drop and angled volleys to create closure.

She must still sharpen her shot selection. When the 5-foot-4 Errani rushed the net with regularity in the second set of the final, Kvitova opted to try to drill flat passes by her rather than playing high-percentage lobs over the diminutive Italian's head. And sometimes it looked like Kvitova was oblivious to the situation when she sails returns beyond the baseline. But the fact Kvitova captured the title while her longtime coach, David Kotyza, was on vacation, should give her confidence in her problem-solving skills.

A year ago, Kvitova often looked like she was battling two adversaries during singles play: Her opponent and her asthma, which is exacerbated playing in heat. She looks fitter and fresher now, has won nine of her past 10 matches, and if she can sustain her health and current level of play, look for Kvitova to gain ground at Premier events in Indian Wells and Miami, where she won just one match last season.

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."

Petra Kvitova made the Dubai hard court look like a sand box. Kvitova's deep blasts displaced opponents who looked like they were spinning their wheels on sand in a futile effort to gain ground on the 2011 Wimbledon champion.

Kvitova shook off a second-round Australian Open loss by leveling the field. She sandwiched sweeps of former No. 1s Ana Ivanovic and Caroline Wozniacki around a quarterfinal thumping of fourth-ranked Agnieszka Radwanska before defeating French Open finalist Sara Errani, 6-2, 1-6, 6-1, to take the title.

Changing direction of her flat drives brilliantly, the 6-foot Czech's all-court attack made even clever counter-punchers feel as though they were operating at the wrong end of a shooting gallery.

"It was just two short balls and it's over," said Radwanska, who fell to 1-4 lifetime against Kvitova. "It's a bomb coming from the other side."

The left-hander's ability to detonate points with a single swing disarms opponents, denying them the rhythm that comes from playing longer rallies while presenting a fundamental problem. How do you solve an opponent who refuses to let you rally?

"The problem is not that she's tall; the problem is that she serves very good. She hits so strong," Errani said. "It's tough to move her. It's hard to play because her ball is very flat. I don't have time to do the points that I want to do, to play the game that I want to play. All the points are very short, and it's very tough."

The powerful performance served as a reminder that Kvitova, who was two wins away from the No. 1 ranking at the 2012 Australian Open before stumbling through a trying season plagued by inconsistency and illness, can be a force at the top of the game when she's right.

Kvitova's course to her 10th career title and first since she won New Haven last August was considerably smoother given the world's top three players -- Serena Williams, Victoria Azarenka and Maria Sharapova -- did not play Dubai. And though this is a significant step, she's still facing a desert-sized gap to regain a spot in the top three.

The world No. 7 trails the top-ranked Williams by more than 5,000 ranking points; she is not nearly as quick around the court and doesn't deploy the array of spins Serena can, particularly on serve. She's not as consistent as Azarenka, whom she has not faced since the 2011 WTA Championships final, and she doesn't evoke the fierce ruthlessness of Sharapova on a point-to-point basis. That explains Kvitova's combined 6-10 career record versus the world's top three, including an 0-4 mark against world No. 1 Serena and a 2-4 record against third-ranked Sharapova.

Yet those stats don't detract from the fact her upside is immense. Kvitova, who celebrates her 23rd birthday on March 8, is the second-youngest player in the top 10. She can dictate on serve, dominate on return and owns the most complete game of any woman not named Serena. She is an all-surface threat who has won titles on hard court, grass and clay and has reached at least the semifinals of every major except the U.S. Open.

When she's on her game, Kvitova is a brilliant ball-striker, whose shots are as tough to read as an SOS message scrawled across the surface of a lake.

"Petra played unbelievable; I think she was just hitting shots I had no chance to get," said Serena after roaring back from a 4-1 third-set deficit to defeat Kvitova in Doha earlier this month. "I don't think anyone on this tour could have gotten them."

Though she was prone to periods of erratic tennis last season, Kvitova is much more than a mindless baseline-blaster. Her frontcourt finesse makes her backcourt power even more menacing. When opponents drop back behind the baseline and defend in an effort to coax errors, as Wozniacki did in Dubai, Kvitova is comfortable closing at net. She won 15 of 17 trips to net versus Wozniacki, unleashing drive, drop and angled volleys to create closure.

She must still sharpen her shot selection. When the 5-foot-4 Errani rushed the net with regularity in the second set of the final, Kvitova opted to try to drill flat passes by her rather than playing high-percentage lobs over the diminutive Italian's head. And sometimes it looked like Kvitova was oblivious to the situation when she sails returns beyond the baseline. But the fact Kvitova captured the title while her longtime coach, David Kotyza, was on vacation, should give her confidence in her problem-solving skills.

A year ago, Kvitova often looked like she was battling two adversaries during singles play: Her opponent and her asthma, which is exacerbated playing in heat. She looks fitter and fresher now, has won nine of her past 10 matches, and if she can sustain her health and current level of play, look for Kvitova to gain ground at Premier events in Indian Wells and Miami, where she won just one match last season.

Great athletes often become known by a number. Wilt Chamberlain scored 100 points in a game. Hank Aaron hit 755 home runs. Jack Nicklaus won 18 majors; Roger Federer has won 17. The movie about Roger Maris was called -- what else? -- "61*." But Esther Vergeer, the wheelchair tennis champion from the Netherlands who retired this week, may go down in history with the most impressive number of all affixed to her name: 470.

That's how many consecutive matches Vergeer won from January 2003 to the 2012 Paralympics, where she won her third gold medal in her final match. Only her own decision to stop playing could bring her streak to a close. It may not be the first comparison that comes to her mind, but Vergeer is as close to Rocky Marciano, the heavyweight fighter who retired undefeated, as tennis will ever get.

There's obviously more to Vergeer than any single number, or set of numbers, can convey. But I can't think of another athlete whose statistics are as fun to recite. Her career was about dominance, and each stat brings a fresh smile of astonishment with it.

• Before her 470-match streak, she had won 89 straight. That makes for a tidy 559 wins in her last 560 matches.

• During her longer streak, she won 95 matches 6-0, 6-0 and 348 sets 6-0. Her opponents won an average of 1.4 games per set.

• Vergeer spent 668 weeks, and 13 straight years, at No. 1. She won 21 singles Grand Slams and four Paralympics singles golds.

• She faced just one match point during the streak, to her countrywoman Korie Homan in the gold medal match at the 2008 Paralympics. Homan netted a backhand.

Vergeer later said that her mind was swirling as she wheeled herself to the baseline to serve when she was down match point. What was she thinking about? "I was thinking, 'What are my parents going to say? What is the press going to say? Am I going to cry?'"

These were honest words of vulnerability from a woman who showed none of it on court. But they weren't uncharacteristic. Vergeer always sounded genuinely thrilled to be mentioned by other tennis greats like Federer (he authored the foreword to her new autobiography) and Serena Williams. And after posing nude for the cover of ESPN the Magazine's Body Issue in 2010, she admitted later that she had been surprised and hurt when some people questioned the photo's appropriateness.

What set Vergeer apart as a competitor wasn't the arrogance of a champion, but her simple, practical desire to continually get better, to put the process first and let the results come. Years into her streak, she began working with her countryman Sven Groeneveld, a widely experienced pro coach. Groeneveld said he wondered what he could possibly teach someone who hadn't lost in six years, but he was quickly amazed by her willingness to try to get even better. It makes sense that the 31-year-old Vergeer says "improving" herself however she can will be one goal of her life after tennis.

Vergeer, in a way, almost made it look too easy to win. You might wonder: If her opponents were only getting 1.4 games per set, how hard could it have been for her? The answer is that her achievement was different from that of athletes who learn from their losses or take years to reach their potential. Anyone who has ever played a sport, especially an individual sport, knows that there's nothing more nerve-wracking than trying to beat someone you're supposed to beat. Vergeer faced those nerves every time she played, for 10 years, and never succumbed to them. That's the real meaning of 470.

Tennis meant more from the start to Vergeer than it does to most of its able-bodied players -- it gave her a life back. She was paralyzed after a spinal surgery at age 8 went wrong. "In the beginning, it was hard," she said. But tennis, which she took up at 12, "made me realize that the world doesn't end."

In this, and in what she achieved, Vergeer is more than just a tennis player. The sport should be proud of her, but in this case it should also be proud of itself. Wheelchair tennis began in California in the 1970s; few then would have believed that, three decades later, one of its players from the Netherlands would make the cover of a magazine dedicated to what the body can do, rather than what it can't. Few then would have thought that a disabled tennis player could put herself in the conversation for "most dominant athlete of all time." Esther Vergeer was (even) more than a number.

Of all the tournaments Rafael Nadal could have made his return at, the VTR Open in the Chilean resort town of Vina del Mar is one of the least likely, based on the Spaniard's scheduling history.

Nadal's South American sojourn got me thinking: What other unlikely tennis happenings might come to pass under the right circumstances?



Here are three, all quite inconceivable at the moment -- but in sports, you can never say never.

Roger Federer plays Newport: This is the grass-court equivalent of Rafa's visit to Vina del Mar. The Hall of Fame Tennis Championships in Newport, RI is one of just six grass-court tournaments on the ATP calendar, but it's the only one held after Wimbledon.

The venue -- on the grounds of the International Tennis Hall of Fame, as you might guess -- can't be beat, and the tournament's history shines no matter who comes to play, with grass courts abutting the show court on each side, and well-heeled New Englanders shaded underneath green-and-white awnings.

But even for a history buff like Federer, Newport probably doesn't offer enough incentive. He almost always takes an extended break after Wimbledon, his favorite tournament, and traditionally waits for the Canadian Masters to cross the Atlantic.

There's also the fact that Newport is just an ATP 250; even a title run would barely register in Federer's often voluminous mid-summer point total. Only if Federer wants to make nice with the induction committee will we see him in Rhode Island, but we all know that's unnecessary for the 17-time Grand Slam champ.

The Williams sisters play Indian Wells: For an entirely different reason, it's unlikely that we'll see Venus Williams and Serena Williams playing at the BNP Paribas Open.

Joel Drucker does an excellent job of recapping the controversy here. Essentially, neither sister has played Indian Wells since 2001, when Venus pulled out of a semifinal with Serena just four minutes before their match.

Afterward, Richard Williams, Venus' and Serena's father, was accused of orchestrating the withdrawal, and was allegedly the target of racist remarks during the final. Serena was booed heavily throughout the match, and later said she would not play Indian Wells in the future.

More than a decade has passed since the incident, and there's been nothing to suggest that the Williamses will return to Indian Wells any time soon. Furthermore, there are a dwindling number of seasons remaining in the sisters' playing careers, so if they wanted to do an about face and enter the event, the clock is ticking.

From a calendar standpoint, Venus and Serena have already committed to the Family Circle Cup in Charleston, which is played directly after the Sony Open in Key Biscayne, a U.S. hard-court tournament they've always entered. Miami may not have Roger Federer this year, but it will have Venus and Serena, something Indian Wells may never be able to say.

The Davis Cup comes to Forest Hills: This takes wishful thinking to an entirely new level. The West Side Tennis Club -- colloquially referred to as Forest Hills -- has seen far better days from a pro tennis standpoint. (As a club for recreational players, it's still lovely.)

The last tour-level event held there was in 2008, a 16-player WTA tournament, and you could literally count the number of patrons inside the dilapidated stadium.

That stadium, of course, played host to the U.S. Open before it moved to Flushing Meadows. But while players and fans from around the world now descend on the National Tennis Center, which boasts greater amenities, better sightlines, and ample parking, history will never leave West Side's stadium.

Its stands require substantial repair, but a gleaming hard court is already there, and all you need is one of those in a Davis Cup tie. The Winter Olympics probably have a better chance of returning to Lake Placid, but if the USTA decided to get nostalgic, I can think of no better place to host the competition.

Oh, and if U.S. captain Jim Courier wanted to stage a tie on grass? Forest Hills has those courts, too.

Maria Sharapova indulged her sweet tooth in launching her signature candy line, Sugarpova, before the 2012 U.S. Open. The player behind the brand will enter next week's Australian Open with more than maintaining a sugar high on her mind.

The second-ranked Russian withdrew from last week's Brisbane International to rest her injured right collarbone that had prevented her from serving and hitting overheads in practice.

"I still have quite a bit of time to prepare for Australia. I'm on the right track, been training really well, so I just don't want to jeopardize what I've gained in the offseason so far," Sharapova said after withdrawing. "I just have to make a smart move here."

She said she pulled out of Brisbane purely as a precautionary measure and doesn't expect injury-induced inactivity to hurt her hopes of Melbourne success. But consider the fact she hasn't played a match since suffering her ninth straight loss to Serena Williams at the WTA Championships in October and owns a combined 7-17 record against the two Australian Open favorites -- five-time champion Serena and defending champion Victoria Azarenka -- and a Sharapova return trip to the final may sound as realistic as the thought of Oompa-Loompas serving as linesmen in Oz.

Her injury, which comes less than four years after she underwent shoulder surgery to repair a tear in her rotator cuff, has limited her ability to address her serve, which can be the most suspect shot in her powerful arsenal.

Here are some of the major challenges the reigning Roland Garros champion faces gaining traction in Melbourne:

Match Play: Sharapova did not play a tuneup tournament before the 2010 Australian Open and flatlined in the first round, falling to former doubles partner Maria Kirilenko and suffering her first Grand Slam opening-round exit since the 2003 French Open.

Serve and Smash: Sharapova's serve has let her down at times versus Vika and Serena. Watch closely and you'll see she routinely eschews overheads, perhaps out of concern for her surgically repaired shoulder, in favor of swing volleys. Her collarbone injury prevented her from strengthening those shots with coach Thomas Hogstedt, which could cost her.

Shell Shock: Serena hasn't just beaten Sharapova, she's beaten her up in their recent matches. The three-time Australian Open finalist has not taken a set from Williams in four years and could bear the competitive scars of the humbling 6-0, 6-1 thrashing she absorbed in last summer's Olympic gold-medal match.

Mobility: Sharapova's movement doesn't exactly conjure comparisons to Evonne Goolagong in her prime, and though she has worked to refine her footwork, the sometimes extreme conditions in Melbourne -- scorching heat and whipping winds -- can make that part of her game even more vulnerable.

Predictability: Though she won at Roland Garros in June to complete the career Grand Slam, the reality is that Sharapova lacks a Plan B when her fast, flat drives aren't falling between the lines. She is often averse to changing up the spins and speeds of her shots, seldom plays the slice and, although she can hit the kick serve, tends to predictably play flat, providing little margin for error, especially in windy conditions.

Before you dismiss Sharapova's shot at reclaiming the Melbourne major, though, consider these assets she brings to Australia:

Past Success: The 2008 Australian Open champion has reached the final in three of her past five trips to Melbourne, and her five career semifinal appearances are the most she has made at any one major. Sharapova did not play a tuneup tournament before the 2008 Oz Open but still blew through the field to take the title without surrendering a set, sweeping former No. 1 Lindsay Davenport and four top 11-ranked players -- Elena Dementieva, Justine Henin, Jelena Jankovic and Ana Ivanovic -- in the process.

Toughness: Though she has battled injuries in recent years, when healthy, Sharapova is one of the toughest fighters in tennis. She sported a 14-1 record in three-setters last year, with her lone three-set loss coming to Azarenka in the U.S. Open semifinals.

First-Strike Prowess: The 6-foot-2 Sharapova remains one of the hardest hitters in the game, capable of detonating points with her flat baseline blasts. Her ability to shorten points, particularly off her vicious returns, can help her shorten points and preserve her strength for later rounds.

Clarity: Sharapova's ability to impose her strength on a match is central to her problem-solving skill. She understands defense is not her forte, so she tries to take the offensive from the first strike. Her ability to take the ball early, control the center of the court and dictate play makes Sharapova a threat against most.

Consistency: When it comes to recent majors, Sharapova doesn't melt down. She has reached at least the semifinals in five of her past seven Grand Slam events and has a habit of peaking for the premier events.

"I've have never been one to play a lot of tournaments because I don't think I physically can perform well at all of them if I do have a schedule with a lot of tournaments," Sharapova said. "So my philosophy has always been building around the ones that are most important me and trying to peak at those. Maybe not going into a tournament with as many matches as others would prefer but knowing that I'm healthy, that I'm ready."

It's tough to imagine Sharapova stopping Serena or Vika, but if the draw breaks her way, don't be surprised to see her still standing in the final weekend.

It all seemed to be going to so well for the U.S. Open, at least for a minute or two.

The tournament has been heavily criticized by players and media in recent years on at least two fronts: (1) for not having a roof in place, even as rain has forced the event to go a day longer than scheduled on five straight occasions; and (2) for clinging to the television-driven concept of Super Saturday, which makes it the only Grand Slam that forces the men's and women's finalists to play on consecutive days. Throw in the fact that, like the other Slams, the Open shared something in the range of 15 percent of its total revenue with the players, and you had one increasingly unpopular major event.

With that in mind, this weekend the Open announced that it would abandon Super Saturday for the first time in 35 years, in favor of a Sunday women's final and a Monday men's final in 2013, and that it would up the total prize money by $4 million. Andy Murray, a player who had complained publicly about the tournament's schedule in the past, said he was happy that officials had "listened to the ATP board." On the women's side, Serena Williams and WTA chief Stacey Allaster also signaled their approval.

This era of good feelings drew to a rapid close Tuesday, when the ATP came out against the Monday final, and called the prize money increases a step in the right direction, but nothing more. The tour maintained that it shouldn't be a problem for the Open to wrap up on Sunday and still give the finalists a day of rest; all of the other Slams pull it off. And while the extra cash was "appreciated," it still didn't "fully recognize the fundamental role of the players in driving U.S. Open revenues, which are the largest in our sport."

In the wake of these surprisingly strong words from the players, we've been told that the schedule change was just a one-year "experiment," and that things will likely be different when the tournament's TV contract with CBS runs out the following season.

We really do seem to be dealing with an emboldened ATP, when it comes to its dealings with the majors. At first glance, you might think that it's trying to have it both ways -- asking for more money while at the same time asking the tournament to dismantle Super Saturday, a keystone of its biggest TV contract. But the men are right.

Super Saturday was an alliance made by U.S. Open tournament director Slew Hester with CBS in 1978. That year, he had moved the Open to a new facility at Flushing Meadows. Costs, naturally, had been higher than anticipated, so he and the network got creative. Three decades later, the Open isn't that desperate. The time for back-to-back semis and finals is over; Super Saturday, once celebrated, makes less sense in this era of long matches and ultra-physical play. And there's no reason to push the event to Monday, one day closer to the Davis Cup ties that start the following weekend. Ratings are higher on Sunday afternoons.

One issue is the tournament's insistence on stretching the first round over three days, and six separate day and night sessions; Wimbledon, by contrast, gets the same number of matches done in two sessions. This lets the Open sell many more tickets, while CBS, which starts broadcasting the third round on Labor Day weekend, is given the best chance possible to show the sport's biggest stars -- Federer, Serena, Nadal, Djokovic, Sharapova -- twice over those three days. Meanwhile, spectators paying to attend one of the six opening sessions are much less likely to get a glimpse of those players, and the tournament's schedule is unnecessarily jammed up from then on. (It should be noted that whatever compromises the Open has made for TV, it has helped make the tournament the most lucrative Slam for the players for many years. The Open was also well ahead of the other majors in offering equal prize money in 1973.)

Contracts, as I've said, are set to run out. We'll see what happens, who's involved, and what the demands are after next year. But the ATP should continue to hang tough. It has finally changed how the tournament ends. Let's see if it can do something about how it begins.

The past few days could not have been easy for John Isner.

On Saturday night, with a spot in the national title game on the line, his beloved University of Georgia football team suffered a heartbreaking loss to Alabama. If tennis players ever introduced themselves on TV by announcing where they attended school, like on certain NFL broadcasts, the former Bulldogs great would be a natural. In the meantime, Isner has proclaimed his pride by occasionally wearing red-and-black apparel during matches, and a college cap to his news conferences.

But before the Dawgs failed to grasp a spot in college football's championship and tumbled into the Capital One Bowl, Isner experienced another sort of separation: He ended his coaching relationship with Craig Boynton.

The two made a great team since joining forces in Saddlebrook three years ago, as I saw in person when I met Isner for a Tennis Magazine cover story earlier this year.

That camaraderie and comfort surely had some correlation to Isner's career-best results this past season. In addition to cracking the top 10 for the first time, Isner defeated Novak Djokovic to reach his first Masters final in Indian Wells, and toppled Roger Federer and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in Davis Cup competition, with both upsets taking place on European clay, a historic quicksand for U.S. players.

All of these accomplishments made Isner's decision to part ways with Boynton rather puzzling, but the big man's quote in The New York Times was the trump card: "I just felt like it was time for a different voice."

In March, Boynton told me bluntly during an Isner practice session: "He's got to play shorter matches at Slams. There's no getting around that."

That was said shortly after Isner's five-set loss to Feliciano Lopez at the Australian Open, which happened one round after he beat David Nalbandian 10-8 in the fifth. Isner went on to lose five-set matches at Roland Garros, Wimbledon and the U.S. Open, none of which occurred during the second week.

It's not as if Michael Sell, Isner's new coach, can spin Boynton's words any differently -- it's clear as day what has been holding the American back from greater glory at Slams. But on the whole, Isner should be encouraged by this past season. He has proved that he can beat the best players in the world in best-of-five set play -- just not at the majors.

He did so with an ultra-aggressive mentality, a philosophy Boynton stressed during that practice session (especially on the return, which Isner used to great effect against Federer in Davis Cup) and one Sell should continue to cultivate. With his weapons and shortcomings, Isner can never be aggressive enough.

We know what Isner has to do on the court -- "be true to his game, and play the way that he has to play," as Boynton said.



Off the court, Isner should take a hard look at his schedule, which was packed in 2012.

Part of that was due to his success in Davis Cup, which accounted for three weeks' worth of travel, practice and play. But part of that was Isner's own doing. After helping the United States beat France in Monte Carlo, Isner skipped the Masters tournament there and flew across the Atlantic to play Houston, then returned to Europe for the red-clay swing. In between Wimbledon and the Olympics, both held in London, Isner played (and won) Newport, then reached the semis in Atlanta, an event he has a strong connection with. He also decided to play his hometown tournament in Winston-Salem, N.C., held immediately before the U.S. Open, which to his credit he won in dramatic fashion.

Choosing which tournaments to play, and which to say no to, cannot be easy decisions for Isner, an extremely likable man who's currently in demand.

"I definitely enjoy playing them," Isner told me in reference to the ATP 250s in Atlanta and Winston-Salem. "I'm lucky because, in a way I feel like I have two hometown events. Especially the one in North Carolina; although I'm playing a tournament, it doesn't feel like I'm on the road at all because I'm staying at home. After a match, instead of going to my hotel I went back to my house, threw the ball to my dog, had my mom's cooking, I felt like I was in high school."

It all comes down to the 27-year-old's priorities, and if he listens to the majority of the media, he'll eschew those smaller tournaments to better prepare for the peaks in tennis' yearlong slog. There will also be Sell's input to consider. The former coach of Monica Seles -- and perhaps as important, a four-time All-American at the University of Georgia -- should offer a new perspective that defines this important, upcoming season, with Isner still in the prime of his career.

But Isner should, of course, listen to himself first.

And why not? Based on his recent achievements, he's clearly doing something right.

Hops are home in the Czech Republic, which boasts the highest beer consumption per capita in the world. So it was fitting that Radek Stepanek celebrated his Davis Cup-clinching victory over Nicolas Almagro by vaulting the net twice after carrying more than 14,000 buzzing fans on a four-set thrill-ride in Prague earlier this month.

"I think I'm living the dream right now," Stepanek said following his 6-4, 7-6 (0), 3-6, 6-3 triumph in the decisive fifth match that lifted the host to a 3-2 victory over defending-champion Spain. "I believe all of us, the whole country, lives a dream today."

Pouring passion onto the court, Czech players delivered a double shot of elation to the nation.

In a two-week span, the Czech Republic swept both the Federation Cup and the Davis Cup, transforming Prague, the nation's capital, into the center of the international team tennis universe.

Lucie Safarova and Petra Kvitova powered the Czechs past Serbia, 3-1, to successfully defend the Fed Cup in the first week of November. Two weeks later, the 33-year-old Stepanek, who won his first ATP doubles title in Prague, and Tomas Berdych accounted for all three points in avenging the 2009 final loss to Spain and snapping a 32-year Davis Cup drought in winning the 100th Davis Cup final in history. Members of the 1980 Czech championship squad -- Ivan Lendl, Jan Kodes, Pavel Slozil and Tomas Smid -- beamed from the seats while the team danced on the court.

Players wrapped a white, red and blue bow around a season that spiked with a series of Czech points. Berdych and Kvitova started the year of the double-tailed Lion joining forces to win the nation's second Hopman Cup. Stepanek teamed with Leander Paes to capture his first career Grand Slam doubles title at the Australian Open. In his Wimbledon main-draw debut, 100th-ranked Lukas Rosol scored one of the biggest upsets in Open Era history in shocking Rafael Nadal in the second round. The Czech pair of Andrea Hlavackova and Lucie Hradecka, who won the 2011 Roland Garros doubles, reached the finals of both the Olympics and Wimbledon (losing to the Williams sisters in both title matches), and were semifinalists at the Australian Open and Roland Garros.

Czech success reinforces a fundamental tennis truth: Team play matters. Berdych and Stepanek own a Czech-best 12-1 record in Davis Cup doubles, Safarova won her first WTA doubles title in Charleston this season and Kvitova, who reached the Australian Open semis in January with a shot to claim the No. 1 ranking before struggling through an illness and injury-marred season, has won 11 of her last 12 Fed Cup singles matches.

Consider there are eight Czech women ranked in the Top 100, the sixth-ranked Berdych won two titles and beat Roger Federer to reach the U.S. Open semifinals for the first time and the ageless Stepanek possesses the all-court guile, sneaky-fast serve, bold two-handed backhand and prickly competitive skills to get under opponents' skin, and you can make a case the nation of about 10-and-a-half million can use its 2012 team success to launch a renaissance. Imagine if Stepanek's wife, former World No. 7 Nicole Vaidisova, who cheered her husband's heroics from her court-side seat, ever returns to action?

In recent years, excelling in the white-hot cauldron of international team events can infuse players with a confidence and competitive calm they can carry into tournament play. Italy won successive Fed Cup titles in 2009 and 2010; Francesca Schiavone, a member of those championship teams, won the 2010 Roland Garros and Fed Cup teammates Sara Errani and Roberta Vinci paired to win Roland Garros and the U.S. Open doubles titles this year with Errani reaching the French Open singles final and beating Vinci to earn a spot in the U.S. Open semifinal. Novak Djokovic posted a 7-0 singles record in leading Serbia to its first Davis Cup championship in 2010, propelling him to a masterpiece of a 2011 season in which he captured 10 titles in 11 finals, collecting three of the four majors.

The nation that was the toast of team tennis in 2012 could well brew up some singles success in 2013. Kvitova, the 2011 Wimbledon winner, owns one of the most complete games in women's tennis and if she can maintain her health and fitness, she will be a Top 10 presence and Grand Slam contender for years, says Slovak-born former No. 1 Martina Hingis, who compares Kvitova's clean ball-striking to another Czech standout, former Australian Open champ Petr Korda, who has coached Stepanek.

"I love Kvitova's game. She reminds me a little bit of Petr Korda as a lefty; the same fluid strokes like him," Hingis told us. "Even if she is in danger, Kvitova can still come out with great shots because she knows what she's doing. It's exciting to me to see someone so young with such a knowledge of the game."

There's Thanksgiving, and there's the thing that happens right before it: the turkey shoot. I'm thankful for a lot of things in tennis, but today I'm going in the opposite direction. It's time to recall five things I could have lived without in 2012.

The equal-pay debate: This retrograde argument seemingly had been settled at the majors until Gilles Simon raised it again in his first interview after being elected to the ATP Player Council. The Frenchman said that because the men play more sets at the Slams, they should be paid more. Let's put aside the fact that tennis players aren't paid by the set or by the hour; they're paid to win matches. The point is, if you want to make a case for why the men should get raises, you can do better than saying that the women, your co-workers and co-talents, should get less than you no matter what. Simon's position seemed to evolve over time, but it was picked up by others and became a theme of the season.

Ion Tiriac: My first reaction to his blue clay in Madrid was negative. It looked like just another hard court to me as well as a sponsor-driven gimmick foisted on the game by a hubristic maverick. But I came around to the blue look, and I wouldn't mind seeing it again, as long as it was done correctly. And that, in the end, was the problem. Tiriac the visionary didn't dot his I's and cross his T's -- he didn't make sure the surface was up to professional standards, so he has to go back to red like everyone else. Now blue seems less like a gimmick and more like an opportunity, at least for the moment, lost.

IMG: In the latest example of the conflicts that have always ensnarled tennis and kept it running in circles, IMG, the game's longtime corporate overlord, was reportedly behind the ATP's veto of a proposed prize-money increase at Indian Wells. IMG, of course, owns the rival tournament to Indian Wells, the Sony Open in Key Biscayne. Just when the players' new unity was producing results, and more money from the majors, the sport reverted to its old conflicted form.

The USTA and Taylor Townsend: The USTA told Townsend, the world's top junior at 16, that she needed to get fitter if she wanted the organization to pay for her trip to the U.S. Open. The story got too -- pardon the pun -- big too fast and became something in the public eye that it probably wasn't originally: a body-type issue. Townsend herself admitted that she needed to improve her conditioning. Still, the USTA denying funding for a young, already-accomplished African-American tennis prospect was a PR nightmare.

The shriekers: This was the year that the WTA finally came down on what can euphemistically be called "grunting" among its players -- in the future, that is. The tour claimed it could do nothing about today's noisemakers, but that it would work on taming the tongues of the next generation. This was welcome news to noted Decibelles Victoria Azarenka and Maria Sharapova, who compared trying to moderate her shriek to trying to change her grip in the middle of her career. Which might make sense if any of the grunters practiced with different grip than the ones they use in matches. Because if you've ever seen them on a practice court, you know that they can hit their screaming groundstrokes quite well in silence.