Ted Robinson’s Matchpoints

One immutable truth emerged from Wednesday’s men’s quarters: the Big Two are so far apart from the rest of the field (Novak Djokovic’s objection is immediately raised) that the men’s game is a race within a race.

Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal obliterated their foes; Rafa taking down a top-10 player (Andy Murray) so thoroughly as to render his five-set comeback career changing win in the fourth round irrelevant.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Federer and Nadal are ManU and Chelsea. They are the Yankees and Red Sox – in good years. They are the kings; Rafa owns clay, Roger owns hard courts and the grass is looking more like a tossup despite Roger’s five consecutive titles.

Mario Ancic had precedent in his corner as the last man to best Fed on grass. Three games into their quarter, it was clear that the 2002 result would never be repeated. The King served impeccably, dropping only 10 points. Ancic was destroyed in the first set, fought back after a two-hour rain delay to play with passion but never made a dent on Federer’s serve.

Tickets for the Nadal-Murray affair started at $3000 on the broker’s market. England was captivated by a marriage certified Monday night on Centre Court; Murray bonding with his fans for the first time.

Could the recently maturing Murray enter the “big time” with a resounding match in the biggest moment of his career?

Nadal has made his living the last 3 years smothering such hopes and dreams. Murray fell as many before him, working so hard to hold serve only to see Nadal, with a better serve yet few aces, be unbreakable. When Murray became engaged in baseline rallies, Nadal would uncork a winner from unfathomable positions, no different than if he was rolling in the red clay.

The general theme of the BBC commentary was that Murray simply wasn’t ready to match up with Nadal.

But who is?

And with Federer for that matter?

These are the two Kings. Djokovic may demand his place in a troika, but he must another major first. I am a Federer fan for Rafa has yet to prove his worth on the hard courts that dominate the tour. But it would be an utter shock, despite Marat Safin’s resume and 2005 upset of Fed in the Aussie semis, to see anything but a third straight Wimbledon final between the Kings.

This is a glorious time in tennis. Those of us blessed to watch and chronicle this should be grateful to have another Bjorn Borg-John McEnroe or Pete Sampras-Andre Agassi in our midst. We know it will be short-lived, that the game will claim these greats sooner rather than later thus we need to treasure them now.

An era was officially closed Monday as the USTA announced a new TV deal that will place the US Open on ESPN and Tennis Channel beginning in 2009.

This September will be the 25th and final Open to air on USA. The obvious disclaimer: this will be my 22nd as a play-by-play voice for USA’s coverage.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

And here’s what I have learned: no tennis event that I have been blessed to cover, which now includes 8 Wimbledons for NBC, generates more conversation than the Open.

The most frequent tennis comment I receive (after “What’s Johnny Mac really like?) is: “I plan my nights for 2 weeks around USA’s prime time coverage of the Open. I love listening to John, Tracy and you every night.”

It’s been flattering and it’s also a tremendous endorsement for the growth of the Open. Arlen Kantarian and his excellent staff have transformed the Open from a tennis championship to an EVENT. It is the only sporting championship contested on an annual basis in New York and the USTA has magnificently built that aura.

What we’ve learned is that it’s great TV. Not for USA, I acknowledge, for it’s the top-rated cable network and sports aren’t a part of that equation.

But for ESPN and Tennis Channel, partners now in the cable presentation of all Slams, it is perfect programming. And they will treat the Open well- fear not, the quality of the coverage will be high.  No time zone issues, LIVE tennis in prime time, and American players enjoying success are huge benefits.

It all pales, though, next to NIGHT TENNIS.

That is the Open’s magic, the buzz of a significant night match that can only be heard in New York. It is the two weeks every year when tennis truly matters in America. Great theater and entertainment are the byproducts of superior competition.

Writing this brings memories flooding back: Vitas Gerulaitis, truly one of the kindest and most generous people I have been blessed to call a friend, Jimmy Connors in ’91, Chris Evert’s last match, Martina Hingis waxing Anna Kournikova in a junior match, Sampras-Agassi ’01, the highest quality match I have ever called and Andre’s ’05 run.

There will be more time for these in the fall. For now, the hundreds of talented professionals involved in the USA telecasts will spend several months preparing for one more run at something we love.

* * *

There’s a severe shortage of intelligent writing about tennis. Fortunately, Paul Fein is trying to compensate, releasing his latest book, Tennis Confidential II. Mary Carillo writes the foreword and she presents Fein as a tennis version of baseball’s Bill James. Someone bright enough to address the game’s crucial debates and figures without being trapped in other eras; forward thinking, what a concept in tennisworld! I look forward to a good summer read.
 

The regard with which Andy Roddick and his US teammates hold Davis Cup was clear this weekend in Winston-Salem.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

How other great players around the world regard it was also seen in the attitude of Richard Gasquet.

Roddick clinched the tie; he is 10-0 in such matches, with a pulverizing straight set win over Paul-Henri Mathieu. The American closer, every bit as strong in that role as Mariano Rivera has been in baseball, never gave the French any hope.

His win pushed the US into the semi-finals, a road tie in Spain. And Andy addressed that tie in a post-match interview heard by the entire arena, “Even though Spain may put down a surface that is not to my strength, I guarantee one thing: I will be there.”

In contrast, we offer Gasquet. Wildly talented and equally erratic in mind, Gasquet came to North Carolina in a slump, and appeared disinterested in playing after experiencing the quick indoor court in practice.

After the Clement-Llodra doubles win Saturday, captain Guy Forget was seen in an animated conversation with Gasquet. A psychic was not needed to understand the purpose of this chat: to play or not to play, that was the question Gasquet had to answer.

Forget said he provided the answer on Friday, that Gasquet did not inspire any confidence from Forget that the player wanted the assignment.

But now France had a live Sunday with Mathieu, dispirited from his 5-set loss to James Blake, and a fatigued Llodra who would be challenged to play well on three consecutive days.

Gasquet practiced Saturday night and again Sunday morning. But it was decided that Mathieu would oppose Roddick and, if France produced an upset, that Gasquet would play the fifth match.

Roddick rendered the fifth match irrelevant. But the real point was the coercion needed to get Gasquet on the court.

It’s been a recurring theme in Gasquet’s life, and we won’t play amateur psychologist but we hope somehow a player with Gasquet’s skills can achieve some strength of mind. But Davis Cup should be an honor, not an obligation or burden.

For that, Roddick, as well as Blake, Mardy Fish and the Bryans, should be praised. They play anywhere, anytime and utter not a complaint.

Andy wrote another chapter in what is becoming his tennis legacy– his Davis Cup brilliance. Utterly confident, he smashed the No. 12 player in the world, winning his 29th Cup match, just one behind Andre Agassi for 2nd on the U.S. list.

Although they all know that clay and Rafael Nadal await them in September, this U.S. team will not need any persuasion to get them on the plane or in their clay-court shoes.

Lindsay Davenport wasn’t a mom on the court Sunday in Key Biscayne, she was a champ again. In this year of a woman and a black running for our highest office, sensitivities are high. Thus, emanating from the black hole of the blogosphere are comments that Davenport should not be labeled a mom making a comeback, just as we didn’t reference Andre A as a dad trying to win one more Slam.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Fair enough, but if we can put aside irrational sensitivity, what Davenport accomplished Sunday is precisely why she is praised: 9 months after giving birth she whacked the #2 player in the world.

Sorry but that is astounding.

To the match: Davenport struck the ball with power and precision from the first point. Whether Ana Ivanovic was in awe of Davenport’s returns or the experience of playing Lindsay herself is a matter only the Serb can answer. But for one hour in Miami, it was as if Davenport was again the champion and Ivanovic the upstart, rather than the reality of their current rankings.

By contrast, recall what Maria Sharapova did to Davenport in their second round Aussie Open match, Maria imposing her will on the former champ to remind Lindsay of the current pecking order.

The Miami draw opens for Davenport, she should be unthreatened until a potential semi against Jelena Jankovic. A few more wins and Davenport should hike her ranking high enough to ensure missing tough early-round matches. Meanwhile, Justine Henin and the Williams Sisters slug it out in the top half- can you believe that Serena and Henin may again meet in the quarters. Nothing should Serena more motivation to get herself out of the 8 seed.
 
It shouldn’t be hard to take a collection among the players for a nice retirement gift when Fabrice Santoro puts the racquet down. Again, he showed James Blake and the tennis world how you can survive among the bigger and stronger with lots of wile and guile. To me, Santoro is like a knuckleball pitcher – hitters hate facing them because they see them so rarely and they demand extreme patience.

I’ll miss Santoro because sport thrives on contrast. No one plays like Santoro, and Justin G predicted on our FSN telecast that no one ever will. If so, tennis will be poorer although many opponents will breathe easier.

Interesting to hear mixed reviews of Andy Roddick’s win in San Jose. Some feedback focused on strong play from Roddick, a sound strong backhand that he was willing to rip up the line, his potent serve (particularly in the final against Radek Stepanek) and a growing confidence as he rolled through the week (albeit against no top ranked players until the final.)

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Then there were the comments that ranged from concern to contempt for Roddick’s attitude. He derailed Japanese teen Kei Nishikori, conqueror of James Blake in the Delray final, and unloaded a verbal barrage in the process. Nishikori first claimed not to hear Roddick, then admitted an unwillingness to repeat the words publicly.

The esteemed Jon Wertheim, who shares with me a tendency to like Roddick, framed the San Jose incident in the light of recent transgressions, notably Andy’s explosion at umpire Emmanuel Joseph during his loss to Phillip Kohlschreiber in Australia, and wondered if there has been a sea change in Roddick’s demeanor. Fair question — is he being influenced by Jimmy Connors?

Here’s what I know: from an early age, Roddick understood his position as the heir to the Sampras-Agassi throne. As a sports fan, he was aware of tennis’ position in the American sports arena and went to pains to sell/promote the sport much more than himself. His triumphant media tour of New York after winning the 2003 US Open was masterful. It signaled that American tennis was set for the next 6-8 years.

Of course, we couldn’t have predicted Roger Federer. Andy could never have imagined not just Fed’s 12 Slams but also the 15-1 head-to-head dominance of Roger.

And for four years, imagine how many times Roddick has heard that line of questioning….Why is Roger so good? What can you do to stop him? Can you beat him? Is Roger the best ever? Think Roddick may tire of that?

Something else I know: Roddick has been great with young American players on tour. At Wimbledon, he has insisted on using the upper-tier of the men’s locker room, the area to which lesser players and juniors are relegated. There Andy hands with the group that has largely been his peers while the other top-ranked pros dress on the lower level. Roddick is also a thorough American sports fan, thus the concept of “talking” to an opponent may not strike him as foreign as it does many who love tennis.

Story I never forget: 2000 Davis Cup in Los Angeles. Johnny Mac, as captain, chooses 17-year-old Roddick as practice player. What Andy learned was that the role called for him to be “fresh meat,” in this case for Andre Agassi. The great Agassi punished Roddick on the court in their head-to-head practice match. And then Andre piled on a verbal assault. The cumulative effect was so fierce as to force Johnny Mac to halt the proceedings.

I have only talked briefly to Andy about that time, but I am fairly sure he has never forgotten. So when he “talks trash” to Nishikori, Andy may think it’s nothing compared to what he took from Andre. And to the treatment of umpires, well could Connors be advising Roddick that his flare-ups are nothing compared to the classics of Jimmy’s era?

The world of super models, high-stakes poker and private jets in which Roddick lives is another issue, one raised in a fair manner by Jon Wertheim. And I agree with Jon’s conclusion. If Roddick has veered in some ways, the Andy I know will return.

Lost in the news over Monica Seles’ retirement last week was the WTA announcement of an initiative to enhance player safety. Most importantly, criminal background checks will be conducted on player entourage team members and others seeking credentialed access.  It’s a terrific, if overdue, step after the litany of abusive parents (Jim Pierce, Damir Dokic and the horrid 2005 story of Evgenia Linetskaya) and coaches (Joe Giuliano.)

Rankings updates: Roddick, who took a wild card into Memphis (d. Gilles Muller (32) in first round), is still 6, a distance behind Nikolay Davydenko (5) and safely ahead of Richard Gasquet (7).

Biggest rebound is David Nalbandian, coming back from 25 last fall to his present 8.

Ivo Karlovic turns 29 this week and celebrates with a career-best rank of 21.

US rankings: Sam Querrey 63, Vince Spadea 70, John Isner 93, Mardy Fish 94, Bobby Reynolds 100, Donald Young 102 (d. Sam Warburg in 1R Memphis) and Robby Ginepri back to 108 after beating Blake to make the semis in San Jose.

Talked to Pete Sampras before his San Jose exhibition Monday night and came away convinced, though he admits temptation, that he will not come back to play, not even another Wimbledon.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

No Sugar Ray Leonard, Michael Jordan resurrections of an aging superstar are likely with Pete.

And Pete’s answer to the question cemented that view. “I don’t need it,” he said. That’s a very important distinction from wanting to play again, a feeling to which Pete admits. The aforementioned stars, and countless other greats, competed beyond their time because of the need to be in the arena, not simply desire.

Sampras is happy with his family, two young sons and a wife who is dabbling in her acting career. His time on court affords him the adulation any champion loves, without any of the accompanying pressure. He is playing more on Jim Courier’s Champions Tour but I sense the exhibitions, particularly with Roger Federer, are Pete’s true pleasure.

He is expansive talking about the friendship he has struck with the man stalking Pete’s record. They are similar people, Pete using the phrase “humble champion” to describe Federer, the very term so often used about Pete in his career.

Tennis will win as Federer approaches and likely surpasses Pete’s 14 Slams. Unlike baseball’s melodrama of last summer, Sampras freely says he wants to be on hand if Federer wins his 15th (Australia travel may be too much.) But if the day comes, and I think the last few will be tougher than most imagine for Roger, the passing of the tennis torch will be done with style and class.

One contrast is obvious: whereas Andre Agassi, Pete’s eternal rival, morphs into a multi-layered businessman with interests both philanthropic (schools) and profit-driven (resort hotels), Pete is adjusting to a life formed by a single-minded focus on tennis. So the search for post-playing options has been more involved.

It’s the price one pays for the mantle of champion. Pete admits he is most proud of his consistency — 5 consecutive years finishing No. 1 — but the cost of that is paid when the racquets are put away. That’s why Pete is playing again, casual though it may be, and why he and Federer, headed to NYC March 10, are slowly becoming linked as the two greatest to play the game.

Asides from San Jose: Another foreign-born but American-trained player is this week’s rage on the men’s tour. Kei Nishikori, 18 year-old Japanese-American, developed his game at the Bolletieri Academy on Florida. Beating James Blake in Delray Beach to win his first ATP title earned him a San Jose wild card. He won his first round and draws Andy Roddick tonight. A win over Roddick would catapult the teen into the Top 100 and grab everyone’s attention.

Meanwhile, a lost opportunity for Donald Young. His first round opponent, Hyung-Taik Lee, withdrew from San Jose with back problems. The late sub, American Wayne Odesnik, took Young out. Donald has some pressure to back up his strong year-end run with some main-draw wins while his rank allows him direct entries.

Even at the ungodly hour of 3:30 AM PT, the words jumped through the screen. Roger Federer was in his post-match press conference, reacting to a straight-set loss to Novak Djokovic.

Responding to a question, Federer admitted, “I’ve created a monster.”

It was the first time I have heard Federer acknowledge pressure that his remarkable streak has created.

(Pause for perspective: Federer had made 10 consecutive Slam finals. 10 IN A ROW! Second place: Andre Agassi with 4. This is a record we will likely never see matched.)

For the first time, watching Roger in Australia allowed us to consider the possibility that he is feeling some of that pressure.

Yes, he was sick before the Open. And he admitted afterwards what was obvious in comparison to Djokovic that his movement was off. He was a step slower. And Djokovic pounced.

Novak had tutored his pal Janko Tipsarevic on how to play Federer and it almost worked. Djokovic used much the same plan with his better set of tools.

The Serb served magnificently, turning on Federer the very weapon Roger had leaned on to survive his early rounds. Djokovic moved better and played with fearlessness and confidence borne from beating Federer in Montreal, and one month later, pushing him hard in the US Open final.

That confidence is what great players like Andy Roddick and James Blake lack. It comes from success and I think it why this match was when Federer fell. Someone who knew he COULD actually beat Federer had to be the one.

First set: Djokovic at 3-5, 0-30. He had changed racquets repeatedly, shown visible frustration and looked anything but the composed player needed to shoot down #1.

Somehow Djokovic holds for 4-5. Then, stunningly, Federer is broken serving for the set. And broken again after another Novak hold. Four straight games and the Serb has a 7-5 first set.

That changed everything and Roger admitted as much afterwards. That momentary slip that we always see Federer use against his foes (see Nadal’s 4 break points in the fifth set at Wimbledon or Djokovic’s 7 set points at the Open) finally befell Federer. And with it went his glorious streak.

Good for tennis that the man to take down Federer is terrific for the sport. Djokovic is smart, savvy, unfailingly polite and respectful. Yes, he has been torched for his in-match tactics, although sinus surgery 15 months ago has solved much of that, and his ball bouncing will still irritate someone to a bad point someday.

But what rings true about this match was that dethroning the king, slaying the monster was a job for a limited field. Really only 2 people have proved capable. Nadal never got the chance, but Djokovic didn’t fail.

The picture on the front of the Los Angeles Times was a blond-haired tot holding a racquet and wearing a bright smile. He was hitting a tennis ball and the accompanying story told me he was 6 years old.

 Immediate association: Andre Agassi. How many times have I seen the pictures of the child prodigy in Las Vegas?

Difference here: Jan Silva, born in Sacramento, went to a tennis academy at age 4. IN PARIS….FRANCE.

Seems that Marcos Baghdatis saw the kid hitting on the courts of Indian Wells. He called the man who trained him in Paris, the man who still runs an academy that he envisions as a Euro version of Bolletieri.

The man flew the kid and his entire family to Paris. He took the kid on the court and was stunned to see a 4-year-old with a one-hand backhand.

Before anyone could catch their breath, the family was offered an all-expenses paid move to Paris, free housing and an instructor position for Mom, who had taught tennis in Sac.

Now, the kid is 6 and happy. Dad shuttles to Florida to monitor his 12-year-old son at a Tampa academy. Mom, from Finland, looks at her son in what the husband calls a “Scandinavian approach. Just do the work.”

And so we wonder why America doesn’t produce the same number of top-flight players. Well, what the Silva family has chosen, within their rights, offends most American sensibilities. We don’t want a 4-year-old obsessed with a sport, or any other activity for that matter.

We want our 4-year-olds to be 4, to be messy and giggly and carefree and learning how to interact in the world, not to be concerned about their backhand.

We want our 4-year-olds to be with others that age, not surrounded 24/7 by adults who would ultimately profit from the young one.

At Christmas time, I found this story gripping. My fervent wish is for the Silva family’s joy.

But I can’t forget Andre Agassi, who was shipped against his will to Florida at a much older age than Jan Silva. It ruptured Agassi’s relationship with his father, one that has never appeared to heal.

And I hear Andre promise that he will not steer his children, born with the genes of two champions, to tennis. If they play, Andre says, it will be totally their choice.

And I wonder if Jan Silva will ever be given a choice?

Here’s what is great about the U.S. Davis Cup title: Mike Bryan answers a question during the Saturday new conference only to have Andy Roddick stop him with a “long answer” quip followed by James Blake’s “wrap it up.”

In the most individual of sports, a true team brought the Davis Cup back to the U.S.

Spend any time around tennis and you quickly weary of talk about agents, fees, sponsor contracts, fees, schedules, fees, empty alphabet organizations and what’s best for me, etc.

Perhaps there has been no better coaching job in sports than that of Patrick McEnroe, who conquered those seemingly insurmountable hurdles in molding this team over seven years.

Roddick was the first anchor, taking the mantle after Andre Agassi left the Cup scene for good. The Bryans had to prove themselves at the Slams before they were on board. Blake’s quick rise after his broken neck in 2004 cemented the last spot that had spun around Mardy Fish and Robby Ginepri.

So, those four became a team. A marketing mind dubbed them a “Band of Brothers” and, the obvious motivation aside, it’s spot on.

Roddick has set the tone, placing Davis Cup at a level of importance not seen by the Americans since John McEnroe. He has been the spiritual leader as well as the “clubhouse” force, leading the good-natured hazing of young guns like Donald Young just as Roddick was baptized by Agassi during a 2000 tie.

This win is great for Roddick, who has found the stage where neither Roger Federer nor Rafael Nadal perform.

It’s great for Blake, the arena where his Slam results are meaningless.

And it’s unworldly for the Bryans, twins in body but one in every way. A sideshow elsewhere in the tennis year, doubles shines in Davis Cup and no one has taken better advantage of that than the “excitable boys.”

Finally, think of Patrick. The New York Times compared him to Joe Torre this weekend, a compliment of massive proportion. Like Roddick, Patrick, a champion coach, has found in Davis Cup a niche apart from his brother, the champion player. No one deserves this good fortune more than the younger McEnroe.

Now, here’s what is wrong with tennis: Pete Sampras played an exhibition in Chicago Saturday. Wayne Bryan, a professional host nonpareil, had to beg out of his assignment to get to Portland for his sons’ finest moment.

This is not meant to pick on Pete, I’m sure there were other exo’s featuring top pros this weekend, but why can’t everyone just stop for one weekend?

Can’t everyone just pause and let the Davis Cup final on American soil stand alone?

Since April, it has been known that the Americans had a great chance to host the final? Can’t the game stop for a few days?

Had a terrific talk with Paul Goldstein at a dinner in the Bay Area this weekend. For those who don’t know, Paul is a Stanford product who has persevered for a decade on the pro tour, slogging through the Challengers and last year at age 30, cracked the top 60. He played the U.S. Open last month on a direct acceptance, likely his last major.

Having admired Goldstein from a distance, it was wonderful to have a chance to talk with him about what makes tennis special.

What struck me was Paul’s comment that the beauty of tennis is having no excuses: there is no coach restricting your playing time based on personality or style preference, there is no superstar blocking your progress, there is no label affixed to a player that he can’t play defense or hit lefties or block or pass. It’s all on a player to make his own success.

And, as Goldstein mentioned, if he loses in the same round of an event as Andy Roddick, they make the same prize money. There’s equality at the pro level of tennis that is highly appealing.

Paul appears to settling with his wife in San Francisco and is debating the next stage of his life.

Meanwhile, the reaction continues to be overwhelming from fans/viewers that I encounter on Andre Agassi’s appearance on USA during the Federer-Roddick match. Attending a seminar at TBS for the baseball playoffs, Agassi’s talk about Roger Federer’s dominance of points that last 6 or more strokes was cited as a perfect example of “first guess” commentary. He made the point before the match and we tried to reinforce it at several stages during play.

Also, the latest issue of Inside Tennis has a good transcript of Andre’s best points, many which inspired terrific conversation with Johnny Mac.

I continue to feel blessed to have been part of tennis’ “Dream Team.”

* * *
And last week marked a milestone. In a fit of crankiness mixed with bitterness, Atlanta-based baseball announcer Skip Caray referred to me as a “tennis announcer.” Now, for 21 years I have had the honor of broadcasting the US Open and trying to overcome the stigma of being a baseball guy showing up at a great major championship. For the first time, I feel legitimized in tennis. The relief is overwhelming.

And, if you catch any of the baseball playoffs on TBS and stumble into my voice on the Red Sox-Angels series, please be sure toremember that I am your humble “tennis guy” trying to call a ballgame!