Category archive: Roger Federer
Center Court: Men's Clay Court Preview
How about 2012? As good as he's been, Djokovic doesn't have a streak this time, and few are expecting perfection from Rafa again. But on paper, this clay season, which gets under way in earnest two weeks from now in Monte Carlo, could be the most dramatic of them all.
The primary reason for that is what's going to come at the end: A history-making, potentially era-defining French Open. Last year, Nadal came to Paris with a chance to tie Bjorn Borg's record six titles at Roland Garros, while Djokovic arrived toting his gaudy win streak. If anything, the stakes are even higher for both men this time around. Djokovic will have a chance to become the first player since Rod Laver in 1969 to win four straight majors -- the Djoker Slam. Rafa, meanwhile, could become the first man to win seven titles at Roland Garros. Djokovic has invaded Nadal's territory in London and New York, but thus far Rafa has held his ground in Paris.
Their duel in 2012 should begin much earlier. Both men are set to play in Monte Carlo in mid-April, as well as the Masters events in Madrid and Rome the following month. They might put on a two-man high-wire act all over Europe for the next eight weeks. If, at the end of that act, Djokovic does get the better of Rafa and win his fourth straight Slam, he'll have achieved something that neither Federer nor Nadal could pull off.
What about that third man of men's tennis, Roger Federer? Doesn't he have a say in this? He does, of course, but so far he's not scheduled to play anywhere until Madrid and Rome. That would leave him with five weeks off after his early loss in Key Biscayne, which is perhaps a good thing in a year in which he's targeting an Olympic gold medal. But the tournament director in Monte Carlo is holding a wild card aside for Federer and hoping for a late entry. If Federer takes it, he could potentially challenge Nadal for the No. 2 ranking, and No. 2 seeding at Roland Garros. Rafa is 900 points ahead at the moment, but has much more to defend.
On the one hand, Federer has performed well recently after long breaks. On the other, the last time he took a wild card into Monte Carlo, he went on to win the French Open and Wimbledon. Whether Federer shows up in Monaco alongside Rafa and Nole or not, men's tennis is ready for liftoff.
No reason to rationalize Federer's losses
And it is. The triple-major seasons and 81-4 records that he once made look routine aren't coming back. At the same time, though, Federer's recent run of mostly excellent play -- three straight titles to finish 2011, two more last month in Rotterdam and Dubai, and general domination of everyone other than Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal, is not the behavior of a man who is contemplating a second career as Mr. Mom anytime soon. After his win in Rotterdam, Federer didn't rule out playing until he's 36, à la Andre Agassi.
I doubt that he'll make it quite that far; how long can you live in airplanes and hotels? But the fact that he would even mention going through the tour grind for six more years should let us know that Federer, as he has been in so many ways in the past, will likely be a special case when it comes to his golden years as a player. In fact, there's little sense so far that he thinks of himself as having entered those years, or exited his prime, at all. If anything, with the help of his coach, Paul Annacone, Federer is playing better, more efficient and complete tennis than he was in his late 20s. All of which fits with an era when tennis breakthroughs are happening later in players' careers than they ever have.
Federer, a pro's pro, has mostly avoided rationalizing his defeats as the product of old age or diminished speed; he hasn't said that he's already won enough and that there's less on the line for him now. His first response to winning his 15th Grand Slam at Wimbledon in 2009 was, essentially, "Don't put me out to pasture yet." It's time for writers and his own fans to follow suit. The retirement questions aren't asked as often these days, but when Federer loses at the majors, many in the sport wonder again if he'll ever get No. 17. It will be a struggle, no doubt, and he may need some luck to break his way. But what may be more notable than his recent defeats at the big events is how close Federer remains to winning them. He hasn't exhibited any of the increased inconsistency that you might expect from an aging champ. Even two years after his last Slam win, he's still an upset of Djokovic or Nadal away from being the favorite at any major he plays.
If Federer hasn't set his sights any lower, or begun to rationalize his losses, there's no reason for his supporters to, either. He's still in the hunt, and I doubt he'd want us to think of him any other way.
Federer already has redefined how dominant a tennis player can be at his mid-20s peak. Now we'll see if he can redefine how well one can play, and how much he can win, after that peak has passed.
"I think it was my first emotional outburst on a tennis court because I was so exhausted on Sunday after winning singles, doubles and singles," Federer recalled. "It was a start of great things for me and I'm happy playing America again."
This weekend, American fans may get a little weepy as the 16-time Grand Slam champion makes his first Davis Cup first-round appearance since 2004, when he joins forces with Olympic gold medal-winning doubles partner Stanislas Wawrinka in leading Switzerland against the United States on the red clay of Fribourg.
An in-form Federer, who is 24-1 since the U.S. Open, is also a combined 9-1 lifetime versus probable American singles starters Mardy Fish and John Isner. The tie will be played on red clay, which has served as a sink hole for American Davis Cup fortunes in the past. Finally, the absence of American doubles standout Bob Bryan, whose wife, Michelle, gave birth to the couple's first child, daughter Micaela, on Jan. 31, makes Swiss closure seems as cleanly inevitable as erasing a clay-court ball mark with the swipe of a shoe sole, right?
Not exactly. Although American dreams have dissipated in the dirt of losing three of their past five Davis Cup ties on clay, they've won their past two clay-court ties on the road against non-powerhouse nations Colombia and Chile.
Obviously, Switzerland represents a significant step up in class. But if the U.S. can attack Wawrinka, who has won six of his past seven Davis Cup singles matches contested on clay, and can squeeze out a singles win in Friday's opening day of play, it has a shot to surprise.
That thought may sound as unconventional as appointing Bethanie Mattek-Sands as official U.S. uniform designer, but consider that Isner has beaten Wawrinka in two of their three meetings, including a straight-sets win in their lone clay-court clash in 2010. Fish is 2-0 against the man with the brilliant one-handed backhand, Wawrinka, and though neither American is a speed merchant, both are capable of playing all-court tennis.
The Swiss, who are playing a home tie on clay for the first time in six years, have selected the slow surface to negate American service strength and exploit the fact that neither American moves on clay like Michael Chang -- or Michael Russell for that matter. But the 6-foot-9 Isner possesses such a mammoth serve, he'd hit his share of aces if the service box were a swamp. And Fish can be a ferocious server as well -- a key quality in Davis Cup, which features no fifth-set tiebreaker.
In 2011, Isner led the ATP in service games held (91 percent of the time; Federer was second at 90 percent), and Isner and Fish finished in the top six in holding serve on clay last season. Although Isner has won just one clay-court Davis Cup singles match and breaks serve about as often as he breaks rackets, he's usually competitive on clay. He pushed Novak Djokovic to five sets on the red clay of Belgrade in the 2010 first round and stretched Rafael Nadal to five sets in the French Open first-round last May.
Fish will try to rebound from a disappointing Australian Open by trying to manage his emotion and the margins more effectively. He has gone the five-set distance in four of his past five Davis Cup singles matches.
The doubles pairing -- likely Mike Bryan and Fish or possibly Bryan and Isher versus Federer and Wawrinka -- could very well become a vital component. Bryan and Fish partnered to outduel Feliciano Lopez and Fernando Verdasco on the red clay of Madrid in the 2008 World Group and would be a formidable challenge for the Swiss, who lost their last Davis Cup doubles match to Lleyton Hewitt and Chris Guccione on an unruly grass court in Sydney last September, six months after the Swiss pair reached the Indian Wells final together.
Of course, for that doubles match to matter, the U.S. has to split singles on opening day in order to create a tear-jerker ending more than a decade after Federer single-handedly sent the Americans packing.
Can anyone derail defending champion Novak Djokovic?
He opened 2011 winning seven consecutive titles, residing in the rare air of a perfect 41-0 start. Novak Djokovic figures to be fueled by high-octane confidence as he launches his flight toward a fourth consecutive major championship. If you're concerned about his lack of recent match play, remember Djokovic did not play a grass-court match before winning Wimbledon for the first time last July and was commanding in dismissing Roger Federer and David Ferrer to win the Abu Dhabi exo. Producing an improbable run last season infuses Djokovic with the feeling that nothing is impossible this season.
"My success gives me a reason to believe that I can win again. Why not?" Djokovic said. "It doesn't make any sense to be anything other than optimistic." The top seed has won the Australian Open in two of his last four appearances Down Under, he's elevated his level of play in majors and if he can avoid a turbulent take off at the start of the event, Djokovic is a strong favorite to play on the final weekend in Melbourne.
Will new coach Ivan Lendl help Andy Murray win a major?
If these two stubborn personalities can combine their substantial strengths, Murray can win multiple majors. Eight-time Grand Slam champion Lendl lost his first four major finals, and if he can coax the sometime cranky counterpuncher to assert himself offensively rather than bob and weave at crunch time, hit his forehand with greater ambition and play with purpose and positive emotion instead of punching his racket face and railing at himself and his box for real or imagined injuries, the fourth-ranked Scot has the skills to end Britain's Slam drought.
Can Roger Federer carry his fall rise into Melbourne?
He's two years removed from his last major at the 2010 Australian Open, and he hasn't beaten Rafael Nadal in a major since the 2007 Wimbledon. He's also lost four of his past five matches to Djokovic and conceded just the second injury withdrawal of his career in Doha last week because of back spasms, so why is 30-year-old Roger Federer still a threat Down Under?
Federer has been a finalist in four of his past six appearances in Melbourne; he soared to a 17-match winning streak sweeping three consecutive titles to close the 2011 season and looks to be both fit and eager at the start of this Olympic year. Federer's autumn surge came indoors, where his attacking game is suited to the faster surface. Oz offers a slower surface (even if the roof is closed for matches), but Federer still possesses the most potent serve of the top four. If he's serving well and actively moving forward in the court, he will be a threat. His first-week approach will be interesting: Federer has talked about applying his all-court acumen by playing more attacking tennis but needs to practice it in the first week against lesser-ranked opponents if he's serious about effectively employing his net game at the money-end stages of majors.
How will offseason changes play out in Melbourne?
Aiming to add more sting to his serve, Rafael Nadal has added about three grams of weight to his Babolat AeroPro Drive racket, making it more head heavy. Tweaking weight and balance may help Nadal in the long run, though getting his toss out in front of him more and getting more of his body weight behind the ball, as he did when he served so well winning the 2010 U.S. Open, may well be more important factors to increasing power on serve.
Stanislas Wawrinka and Australian Bernard Tomic are both making more substantial equipment changes having switched from Head rackets to the more rectangular-shaped Yonex sticks. The change comes a year after Caroline Wozniacki switched from Babolat to Yonex. Djokovic changed from Wilson to Head prior to the start of the 2009 season and experienced early struggles before producing the best year of his career with Head in 2011, illustrating the fact even the best players sometimes need time to adjust to new equipment.
Who are the dark horses outside the top 10?
Because it begins weeks into the New Year, the Australian Open has seen its share of surprise champions (Petr Korda and Thomas Johannson) and first-time major finalists (Marcos Baghdatis, Fernando Gonzalez, Rainer Schuettler and Arnaud Clement) in recent years.
Our non top-10 dark horse picks include:
(11) Juan Martin del Potro: In the 2009 Melbourne quarters, Federer flogged a disinterested Del Po, 6-3, 6-0, 6-0 in a thrashing that was a turning point in the Argentine's career. Del Potro is one of the year players who can impose his game off both serve and return and is not intimidated by the top four.
(18) Richard Gasquet: If he can assert his all-court skills, the 25-year-old Frenchman owns the game for a second-week run and made his ambition clear by announcing his intent to return to the top 10 this season.
(25) Milos Raonic: Pounding his wrecking ball serve, the powerful Canadian cracked 35 aces in the final to win his second career title in Chennai. Raonic is the first man to win an ATP title without surrendering serve since Federer at the 2008 Halle and will be downright oppressive in Melbourne if he's landing his devastating serve.
Three not-so-deep thoughts as the post-Australian Open, pre-Indian Wells portion of the men's calendar wraps up:
If Roger Federer misses a shot and no one says anything, did he really make an error? Scrutinizing Federer's results -- both wins and losses -- is one thing. The 16-time Grand Slam champion's game has looked both outstanding and out of sorts in the past 14 months, and it's unclear where exactly his standing in the pecking order is. He is arguably the greatest player of all time; he is still active and winning tournaments; and at 29, he isn't going away anytime soon. Clearly, he warrants the reaction he receives.
But I wish crowds, critics and commentators would give the guy a break, if only during his matches. If Federer dumps a forehand into net at 1-all, 15-love in the first set of an opening-round match, prepare to hear fans groan -- as if to say, "How is that possible?" -- or yell in shock, as if they saw a ghost. Guys, he can't make every shot. Well, not anymore -- the invincible era came to an end in 2008. But it seems that people are still unwilling to accept Federer for what he is today: a great player with exposable flaws, particularly the backhand. When Federer lost to Novak Djokovic in the Dubai final, it was the Serb's third win over the Swiss since the U.S. Open. But that didn't stop a TV commentator from remarking, incredulously, "Don't often have to say this, but it's a must-win game for Federer!"
If a clay-court tournament is held and Rafael Nadal doesn't enter it, does it really matter? When it comes to French Open barometers, Costa do Sauipe, Buenos Aires and Acapulco are no Monte Carlo, Rome or Madrid, but we shouldn't entirely ignore them. Four men have already won multiple titles this season -- Nicolas Almagro, Djokovic, David Ferrer and Robin Soderling -- but none has received less publicity than Nico, who has won two tournaments and reached another final during February's Latin American swing. He embodies a paradox of the never-ending tennis calendar: It creates many champions, even those we don't have time to celebrate.
As for what his accomplishments mean going forward, it's tough to say. Almagro has now won nine clay-court titles (but none on any other surface), so it's not inconceivable that he could make a deep run in one of the Masters-level dirt draws in Europe. Lesser players have done so before, and we still don't know where Nadal's health is at. On the other hand, Almagro still hasn't proved that he can beat the elite -- he is a combined 0-14 against Nadal, Djokovic and Federer. And in a best-of-five-set format on the biggest stages, that's all that matters.
If fewer countries were in the Davis Cup World Group, would there be greater competition? I recently received an e-mail from a reader who wondered if, like the Fed Cup, the Davis Cup should admit only eight teams into its world group. He cited one big positive: Reducing the event by a round might coax more top pros into playing. I can think of another: There would be fewer blowout matches featuring haves and have-nots (which many of this weekend's opening-round ties will be).
But cutting the field in half may actually dilute the drama, even if the matches might appear more enticing on paper. The prospect of upsets in far-flung locales -- one of Davis Cup's many endearing qualities -- would largely be eliminated; we'd instead be subjected to many repeat matchups, year after year. And even if the schedule was shortened, it would still be spread out over the calendar, a primary player complaint. My thoughts? Stick with what we have -- but in true Davis Cup spirit, I can't fully commit.
It's almost that time again -- already. Time for a new tennis season to begin. The sport doesn't waste a second, rolling back into action by the very first day of 2011. All of which means we don't have much time to look ahead at the most intriguing storylines before they've actually begun. To start turning your mind from 2010 to '11, here are five questions that will be answered as the year progresses.
1. How "real" is Caroline Wozniacki?
On the surface, you might think that Serena Williams has done the world's No. 1 player a favor by pulling out of the Australian Open and leaving her one less (major) obstacle to hurdle in her quest for her first Grand Slam. But it's as much a curse as it is a blessing. Without Serena in town, the media in Melbourne will make Wozniacki's "legitimacy" as a No. 1 player the question of the tournament as far as the women's draw goes. If she fails, yet remains No. 1, it's a question that will likely plague her well into 2011.
2. Nadal or Federer?
Despite the occasional new contender, they've remained in a class by themselves for the past five years, having won all but two Grand Slams between them during that time. Each goes into 2011 looking as strong as ever. Rafael Nadal will be trying to become the first player since Rod Laver in 1969 to own all four majors at one time, while Roger Federer finished 20-2 after the U.S. Open and ended the season with a win over his rival. Sit back and enjoy these guys one more time, since it's unlikely anyone is going to challenge their authority. As for choosing between them, that's a toss-up: Federer looked to be the sharper, fresher and hungrier player as the year ended, and I think Paul Annacone has helped inject new ideas and desire into his game. But all that must be balanced by the fact that no matter how well Federer might play, Nadal has beaten him more times than not in the most important matches.
3. How much of a factor will Justine Henin be?
Serena's comeback, or non-comeback, has overshadowed the other big return story of 2011, Henin's. She looked set to make a big impact last year when she reached the finals in Brisbane and Melbourne. But an elbow injury at Wimbledon ended her season at the halfway point. With Serena out in Australia, this is the best chance that Henin will have to make good on that promise. It might even be her last: Henin turns 29 in June. She's gotten more fragile over the years, and she can't afford any more season-ending injuries.
4. Djokovic or Murray?
Each of these two has appeared, at various times, ready to crack the Federer-Nadal stranglehold at the top. Neither has succeeded. There's no real reason to think this is the year, either. Still, Novak Djokovic will be coming in on a high after Davis Cup, even if that event and a Grand Slam are two very different animals. Andy Murray has beaten both Federer and Nadal recently, but he's also taken his share of tough losses at the hands of both. When do the close calls stop giving him confidence that he can play with the best and start making him think that when it really counts, he can't?
5. Is there a surprise in store from anyone?
You'd never get rich betting on a Frenchman to win a Grand Slam. And you would have done even worse betting on Gael Monfils each time he has shown signs of fulfilling his vast potential. But there were signs late in 2010, with his win over Federer in Bercy and his win over Janko Tipsarevic in the Davis Cup final, that he might just be pulling things together mentally. Somewhere, though, I feel like I've said that before. The Monfils saga continues, and every new story feels a little like an old one these days in tennis.
Roger Federer's hunt for vindication
How should we assess the state of Roger Federer's game as he prepares for the U.S. Open? Even more than his beloved Wimbledon, this tournament has been his rock, his island of success when all else seemed to be falling apart. In 2008, he careened into Flushing Meadows after an epic defeat at Wimbledon and terrible losses in Toronto, Cincinnati and at the Beijing Olympics. Two weeks later he emerged from the heat of New York smelling like a rose, on top of the game, a champion once again.
As in '08, Federer has traveled to North America fresh off a rare loss at Wimbledon. Can we expect vindication again? He still likes the relatively slick hard courts at Flushing, and though he didn't win the event in Toronto last week, he did avenge his Wimbledon loss to Tomas Berdych before losing in two tight sets to Andy Murray in the final. Based on this evidence, he's in better shape than he was at the same point two years ago, when he lost an early-round match to Gilles Simon in Canada. And he is -- in 2008, he could barely keep a forehand in the court during the summer. But that's a very low standard by which to judge the progress of this player. Like it or not, the "monster of expectations" that Federer has created, and so aptly described, means that anything less than Slam-winning -- check that, Slam-smashing -- form is going to be seen as a sign of decline.
By that high measure, it seemed that every upside came with a downside for Federer in Toronto. He didn't drop a set in his first two rounds, against Chela and Llodra, but each of those second-tier players succeeded in bottling him up for most of the match. Against Berdych, Federer tightened the ship when he was down 5-3 in the third, but he also relied on some old-fashioned gagging from Berdych, who, after matching Federer shot for shot for two hours, suddenly remembered his place in tennis' pecking order. Just as significant was the way Federer lost the second set. Serving at 5-6, he double-faulted twice, hit a late forehand long and shanked a backhand into the back fence on set point. Federer admitted afterward that, after two straight losses to Berdych, he believed that this one would slip away as well. That isn't something we've heard much, or ever, from Federer in the past, but it showed in the way he lost that second set.
Although he didn't break down as severely against Murray, Federer still lost two close sets, sets he's specialized in winning in the past. He couldn't rely on Murray, who had beaten him six times before, to remember his place in the pecking order and give him any breaks. More important, unlike in the past, Murray didn't win by waiting for Federer to miss; he took the rallies to him and served big when he had to. Every champion relies on his name alone to make his opponents think twice when they try to finish him off. Contrary to some rumors, Federer is still as feared in the locker room as ever, as Berdych showed. It's still a very big and very nerve-wracking deal to beat him. This will be even more true at the U.S. Open, where his opponents will have five sets, rather than three, to mull over the possibility.
At the same time, Toronto showed another opposing truth about aging champions. It isn't that they lose a step; it's that there are always talented younger guys who are gaining them. Murray gained on Federer last year; this season it's been Berdych's turn. Although Federer played well with his back to the wall last week, there was an ad hoc sense to his performances. He couldn't sustain his vintage best for more than a set at a time, and his attempts to be proactive -- to hit big against Berdych, to come to net against Murray -- were largely thwarted. Maybe Paul Annacone can help him hone his first strikes (though whether they will form a long-term partnership seemed more up in the air as the week went on). But if the Rogers Cup is any indication, the famously smooth and serene Roger Federer will sweat through a few hot days and wild nights in New York ... and so will his fans.
Which players should you watch at Wimbledon this year? I say these three have the most to gain -- and the most to lose.
Status: Defending champion
Potential gain: Immortality. Federer is already the most accomplished player in the history of the game, but a win at Wimbledon this year could take him to a higher place. Although Federer won the title last year, he didn't have a chance to avenge his 2008 loss to Rafael Nadal, who pulled out of last year's tournament with a knee injury. A victory over Nadal in the final would put Federer's Grand Slam title tally at 17, almost certainly out of reach for many years, if not forever. It also would quiet the talk about Federer's losing record against Nadal.
Potential loss: If Federer loses at Wimbledon before reaching the final, the "What's wrong with Roger?" club will induct many new members. If he loses to Nadal in the final, we'll hear talk of Nadal surpassing Federer's Grand Slam record. (I'm not convinced Nadal can stay healthy enough to do it, but I digress.) Federer also might lose any chance of regaining the No. 1 ranking until next season. He has held the top spot for 285 weeks, one short of Pete Sampras' all-time record.
Status: First Wimbledon since 2007
Potential gain: Henin came out of retirement to win this tournament, which is the only major missing from her résumé. She has changed her game to accommodate faster surfaces and has modified her serve technique. If she wins the title, she'll solidify her status as one of the best players in the history of the game. A win also would give her confidence for the rest of the season.
Potential loss: Henin will be under the worst kind of pressure at Wimbledon: self-inflicted pressure. So far, her comeback has been a bit of a disappointment despite a fast start at the Australian Open, where she reached the final. She played erratically at the French Open and hardly looked ready for success on grass. If she doesn't win this title, she might begin to wonder whether she has taken the right approach since returning.
Status: 2009 runner-up
Potential gain: Venus, who turns 30 next week, could retire tomorrow and still have a fine legacy. But a sixth Wimbledon title would put her on par with Billie Jean King and one behind Steffi Graf. (Martina Navratilova won nine titles at the All England Club.) A victory here would make her the best grass-court player of her generation.
Potential loss: Venus stands to lose something very important at Wimbledon: one more chance to win a major title. As gifted an athlete as she is, she won't have too many more chances as she advances into her early 30s. This tournament suits her aggressive style better than any other. If she doesn't win this time, it might be another year until she has a real chance at another major -- if she gets another chance at all.
Roger Federer
Is this a blip or the beginning of the end? If it's the latter, the end may take awhile to reach. OK, Federer didn't make the semis of a Slam for the time since 2004. He made the quarters. At his worst major. And he fell to Robin Soderling, who had advanced to face Fed in the French final a year ago. That said, along with the 2009 U.S. Open final, this was the second time in three Slams that a younger, taller opponent overpowered him. The men's game isn't going to get shorter, or less powerful, anytime soon. Grade: B
Dinara Safina
She may just want to bail on this tournament next time. Safina followed up her memorable meltdown in last year's final with, if anything, an even more cringe-worthy opening-round collapse to 39-year-old Kimiko Date-Krumm. Safina led by a break in each of the last two sets, but by the end she couldn't hit a ground stroke in the court. Her piercing eyes used to communicate determination; this time all you could see in them was a fierce vulnerability. Grade: D
Sam Querrey
He bolted town early, saying he was tired of competing and tired of the road. On the one hand, it's a little like going AWOL from your job -- you might be tempted, but you know it doesn't work like that. On the other hand, he can't be the first pro tennis player to feel that way. Credit him for honesty, if not tenacity. Grade: C-
Maria Sharapova
She lost to four-time champion Justine Henin after having her on the ropes in the third set. Still, the way Sharapova got there, by digging herself out of a deep early hole, was a feat of pure willpower. This might, maybe, could be, the tournament that makes her feel like a contender again. Grade: B+
Andy Roddick
No, Roddick's preparation wasn't ideal. He skipped Rome to go on a second honeymoon and then got sick in Madrid. But at this point, his issues on clay aren't going to be solved in one tournament. As his loss to Teimuraz Gabashvili showed, his strokes aren't constructed for today's power-dirtball game. It's a weird thing to say for a guy known for his power, but he doesn't swing big enough. Grade: B-
Victoria Azarenka
It took Azarenka longer to wear down last year; she didn't hit bottom until the U.S. Open. This season it came with an early drubbing by Gisela Dulko at the French. You might blame injuries or overzealous scheduling, but the biggest problem for Azarenka in this match was one that will be harder to solve: her forehand. She couldn't find the court with it. Grade: D
Jurgen Melzer
The aging Austrian was the tournament's bearded Cinderella. He pummeled David Ferrer, survived Novak Djokovic, and gave Nadal his only (minor) scare of the tournament in the third set of their semifinal. It took a decade, but Melzer finally put two of the finest shots in pro tennis -- his two-handed backhand drive and his drop shot from the same side -- to good use. He'd make an interesting addition to the upper echelon of the game, but I'm not counting on seeing him scale these heights again. Grade: A
After one round at the French Open, there is much to praise -- and much to pan. Behold the three best (and worst) performances so far.
The Best
Roger Federer: A few weeks ago, the world No. 1 looked vulnerable. No longer. Federer breezed through his first-round match and seems to be peaking right on time (surprise, surprise). This would be the 24th consecutive major in which he reaches the semifinals or better.
Svetlana Kuznetsova: The defending French Open champion has had a miserable season so far: She hasn't won more that two consecutive matches since the Australian Open, and she lost three in a row leading up to this tournament. You wouldn't have known any of this by the looks of her in the first round. Kuznetsova, who has been the second-best clay-court player in the world, behind Justine Henin, for most of her career, is in a soft section of the draw and has a chance to go far.
Michael Yani: For the big-name players, a first-round win isn't much of an accomplishment. For 29-year-old Michael Yani, the former Duke All-American, it would have been the highlight of his career. Yani came oh-so-close to a thrilling victory before losing in five sets to Lukas Lacko 4-6, 7-6(5), 7-6(4), 6-7(5), 12-10 -- a record-tying 71 games (the most at the French Open since 1973, when the tiebreaker was introduced). Yani is still in search of his first ATP Tour victory; here's hoping he gets it soon.
The Worst
Ernests Gulbis: Many (including yours truly) thought the Latvian slugger had an outside shot at the title this year. Oops. Gulbis turned in a woeful performance in Round 1 and limped off with an injured hamstring. Bottom line: He has booming shots and a gift for gab, but he's not going to make a mark on the game without more practice (and more polish). There was a time when even Marat Safin worked hard. Gulbis needs to do the same.
Victoria Azarenka: Though Azarenka is no lover of clay, she's a lot better than a first-round loss. Since blowing a big lead against Serena Williams at the Australian Open, Azarenka has struggled. Most disappointing? Her attitude. It's one thing to have an edgy personality (that's good), and another to huff and puff after a loss and blow off a news conference (that's not good). She was fined $4,000.
Richard Gasquet: I won't pick on the Frenchman for choking in another five-setter, this time against Andy Murray. It happens, and as much as it's difficult to believe, Gasquet once dumped Andy Roddick at Wimbledon after trailing by two sets and a break. He is, occasionally, capable of great things. Here's his problem: He complains too much. Gasquet won a title in Nice over the weekend and asked for a Tuesday start in Paris. The officials at his home tournament said no and Gasquet griped about it. After the loss, he said the extra day might have made the difference. No, it wouldn't have. You might remember that in 2007, Gasquet withdrew from the U.S. Open because of a cold. His most famous excuse came last year, when he blamed his positive test for cocaine on a woman he had kissed at a nightclub. Amazingly (absurdly?), a panel of experts believed him. I'm skeptical, and I'm tired of listening to him.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Stephen Tignor (left) is the executive editor of TENNIS Magazine and SMASH Magazine. He writes "Concrete Elbow" on TENNIS.com and is the author of High Strung: Bjorn Borg, John McEnroe and the Untold Story of Tennis's Fiercest Rivalry.
Richard Pagliaro (middle) is a senior editor for TENNIS.com.
Ed McGrogan (right) is the online editor for TENNIS.com.