Ted Robinson’s Matchpoints

Messages are flooding the e-mail; text messages are jamming the cell phone.

From the States comes word that this Wimbledon final mattered, that Fed and Rafa have registered with the American sporting public.

Except the order must be changed – it is now Rafa and Roger.

John McEnroe said it in the moments after the match – Nadal is No. 1. I don’t challenge John’s opinion. Rather I only question how anyone can be No. 1 with minimal success on hard courts.

But that does not detract from a classic Wimbledon final. One that legions, including John, are calling the best ever played.

Now John can’t be objective, and other longtime observers claim it is in contention with 1980 Borg-McEnroe for the “best ever” claim. This match, though, will grow in statue with time. Our appreciation for two champions willing to dig so deep physically, willing to fight so hard for something, wanting something so badly that they defy any physical limitations, is immense.

Their effort through a wet afternoon and evening at Wimbledon was cause for adoration. They are simply the best rivalry in sport since Ali-Frazier, Leonard-Hearns, and Nicklaus-Watson. The champions fully respect each other and the vibe emanates to all.

What decided this Wimbledon?

BREAK POINTS: They have played 10 sets in the last two Wimbledon’s and Nadal has only had his serve broken four times. This is the man with few aces but increased power and terrific play behind his serve. In Sunday’s final, Nadal played five-plus sets and was broken just once. This final resembled the 2007 French in that Roger had chances but Rafa was better on those big points.

NO FIFTH SET TIEBREAK: Which was likely Rafa’s biggest advantage. Federer has won five sets from Rafa in the last two Wimbledons and four have been in tiebreaks. Roger can’t break Rafa and the fifth set requires a break. Without one, Roger was at the whim of Rafa’s return game.

MENTAL STRENGTH: Perhaps the French Open hangover reared its head in the fifth set. Perhaps in the critical moment when one break would decide the match, it was Rafa’s belief that he could handle Fed’s serve that was decisive. Perhaps Rafa had the belief this year that he lacked last year because of the French final.

DUELING DELAYS: No doubt the first rain delay, in the third set, benefited Federer. But before a 2004 final could be written again (Fed was 1-1, 2-4 in the third when rain struck. Upon a resumption of play, he dominated Andy Roddick), a fifth set delay struck. At the time, Nadal’s faith was wandering. No rain and I believe Federer wins 6 in a row. But the last delay steadied Rafa and he survived into the “overtime.”

What does this mean?
 
Federer told Johnny Mac in our NBC interview that “it hurts.” I had never heard Roger say those words. John told me that Roger was intensely emotional. The effort expended in such a match could take time off the career of a champion who will soon turn 27.
 
Nadal has a terrific chance to finally ascent to the #1 rank by year’s end. Huge question: can he hold up on hard courts? Can he play enough tennis, and succeed in the US Open, to sustain the momentum generated by this historic double?

We are so lucky to watch this duo. Tennis is blessed to have two so fine. (Novak Djokovic is not yet worthy of inclusion with this pair.) All we can hope is that they persevere to do this again and again and again.

Without question, the most astounding moment of Friday at Wimbledon occurred at 11:30 AM, long before the first ball was struck with purpose on Centre Court.

Court 5 stands amongst the dozen “side courts” that ring Centre and Court 1. They are courts that allow players to feel like creatures in a zoo; spectators walk around the courts in constant conversation while player sometimes no more than 10 feet away are playing a significant match. It toughens some players and weeds out others.

But the proximity is special, achieved nowhere else.

And that’s what drew a throng to Court 5 in the morning. They ringed the court 6-deep and security personnel were preventing people from accessing some perimeter walkways.

The attraction: Rafa Nadal was hitting with John McEnroe.

Think about this: the morning of his Wimbledon semi, a young man born 2 years after Mac’s last Slam title asked the 49-year-old legend to share a warm up hit.

Needless to say, John was flattered. And the Wimbledon ticket holders were entertained.

The moment spoke volumes about Nadal, his respect for the game, even for a champion he never saw play. It speaks to Nadal’s assurance that he was winning to endure the large throng of fans without losing his focus on his match four hours hence. And it speaks to Rafa’s soul that he remembered it was a hit and that he takes pains not to show up a great player more than twice his age.

I watched about 5 minutes, mainly because my 6-3 standing allowed me to see over the crowd. More interesting to me was John’s post-mortem which was my privilege to receive in our NBC booth and some of which John shared on-air.

John repeatedly talked about Nadal’s backhand; the improvement in the stroke now allows him to hit winners from anywhere. And John astutely noted that the better backhand should allow Nadal to not expend energy in hitting run-around forehands.

I have seen John hit with many great players. Rarely have I seen him so impressed. Nothing that happened on the court Friday altered anyone’s view on Nadal. Nor should it with Roger Federer. They are both peaking and it’s a gem when two champions meet with both playing at peak levels. That is what awaits us Sunday.

PIck up a Sunday paper in London and the first 7 pages of every sports section are Andy Murray. There is a dissection of his entourage, a team of 7 that replaced the solo coaching of Brad Gilbert. There are columns from his mum and big brother, a doubles player of moderate success.

Being a prominent sporting figure in these parts is lucrative. After all, there is little competition in that arena.

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

Winning Wimbledon, though, would make Andy Murray a sporting hero.

And what’s funny is that his game might allow him, and a nation, to dream.

Murray has always had the talent, now he has some sound grass -court experience, and finally, he seems to have grown into his body and out of his immaturity. His Saturday win over Tommy Haas featured high level play on grass, including the short variety that endears Murray to all who truly love the game.
 
What struck me was his body language- it was less mopy, less Gumby-shouldered, less negative. A wise person recently commented that the difference with John McEnroe was that John used anger as fuel. It was often a positive for John while Murray seemed to drag himself down through his behavior.

Now, Murray looks and acts like a man who believes he can someday become a British hero. Perhaps not now, with Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal in their prime, but someday soon.
 
Nadal followed form with a decisive win over Nicolas Kiefer – after a first set in which the over-30 Kiefer turned bacvk the clock. He struck serves in the mid-130’s, moved adeptly and struck the ball with significant pace. Pushed to a tiebreak, Rafa delivered the goods, then broke Kiefer’s spirit in the next two sets. A potential Nadal-Murray quarter is still a delicious thought
 
I lamented here how frustrating it is to pull for James Blake. Perhaps Richard Gasquet is that man for the French. He bails on Davis Cup, wanting no part of an indoor match with Andy Roddick. He bails on Roland Garros, the tournament where he clearly cannot handle the pressure. But at Wimbledon, he is a different player, again in the round of 16 and a legit threat to disrupt the Nadal-Murray match. Wimbledon is to Gasquet what the US Open is to Blake, their one major to shine.
 
Jelena Jankovic wanders through the first week in anonymity, although her third-round win owned a share of drama. A hyper-extended knee hampered, followed by a tape job that hampered Jankovic enough to cause her to remove it in the third set. She is always injured, always bandaged and always calling trainers on-court. Yet she is still No. 2 in the world and still a darkhorse threat in Week 2.
 
Monday is Williams day. But I hope that Bethanie Mattek seizes the moment to make people talk about her tennis rather than her wardrobe.

The stat came in the third set of Rafa Nadal’s first-round win over Andreas Beck. After nine service games, Nadal had lost a total of 8 points.

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

It reminded me of last year’s Wimbledon final – through four-and-a-half sets, Nadal’s serve had been broken once. By the best player on the planet. On grass. With one ace.

There is the essence of Nadal. He doesn’t blast serves. He doesn’t win a free set with aces as Roger Federer did in last year’s classic five-setter.

Nadal just holds serve.

How? I keep recalling Johnny Mac’s statement last July that Nadal was the modern-day Bjorn Borg, the player who won matches through physical play — the player that John remembered as being “impossible to get a ball past.”

And there is an apt description of Nadal, even on grass where he hugs the baseline.

* * *

Our wait for an American to make a 2008 push continues. Sam Querrey, John Isner and Donald Young (to fellow American Jesse Levine) all lost in the first round. Young has lost first round in both Paris and Wimbledon — same with Querrey, although he drew Federer in Paris.

Isner had a tough draw at Wimby with Ernests Gulbis, but as some point one of the young Americans needs to win some tough matches.

Like Wayne Odesnik taking out Guillermo Canas in Paris or Bobby Reynolds winning first round at Wimbledon.

* * *

Well done by Lindsey Davenport in overcoming a significant leg injury that required sophisticated taping. Davenport was pushed to the third set by an anonymous European but managed to call on her classic ball striking to survive. Her third round, against Elena Dementieva, could be tough.

* * *

Great Britain’s hope is that Andy Murray can reach his first slam quarter where he would likely meet Nadal. Murray comes across in interviews as calmer than the player derailed by “court rage” in the past. Can he handle, as Tim Henman did so well, the heat of a country’s intense focus?

Rafa Nadal stood on the grass of the Queen’s Club in London, 7 days after winning his fourth consecutive French Open, and lifted a championship trophy. Seven days after reestablishing his dominance on clay, Rafa beat Andy Roddick and Novak Djokovic on grass.

He may not win Wimbledon this year, but no one should doubt Nadal’s abilities on grass.

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

In the Roddick match, Nadal was the better man on grass. That’s a stunning statement, I admit, and Roddick owns the dominant serve that always gives him a “puncher’s chance” (John McEnroe’s fitting words) at Wimbledon, but it was Nadal who moved more smoothly, volleyed with great touch and served well enough.

Greg Rusedski commented for BBC on the match and noted that while Roddick moves well laterally, Nadal is better moving forward, the necessary quality to succeed on grass.

I watched NBC’s replay of much of last year’s Wimbledon final during the French Open. What I had forgotten: Nadal broke Roger Federer’s serve more than Roger broke Rafa’s serve. During the match, John and I kept mentioning how stunned we were by that fact. And if Rafa had converted any of the now-infamous 4 break points in the fifth set, he may well have lifted the trophy.

The draw is due Friday and will always contain some intrigue, notably on which side Djokovic lands. But after watching London, and I’m sure Federer noted the results as he won the Halle warm-up, Nadal is no longer a surprise to win Wimbledon.

This Friday was one of mixed emotions depending on your viewpoint: for France, it was a day of joy as four men, (Paul-Henri Mathieu, Julien Benneteau, Jeramy Chardy and Florent Serra) advanced while for the U.S. it was a day of shock as the Sisters were sent packing in bookend matches to a long day of warm sunshine.

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

Venus falling, in the fading light of a Friday night was not a surprise. After all, she has never been a serious threat here, reaching one final in a year where she played Robin to Serena’s Batman. And she hadn’t played much since taking a break from the tour in March.

Watching the Venus profile on HBO’s Real Sports emphasized several points of interest: Venus is the most likable Williams, rooted in some measure of humility, more interested in personal growth than fame (evidenced by the pride she takes in her recent design degree- she wore her class ring at RG), and more comfortable in her own skin than little Sis.

Friday’s results proved one thing that I have believed: Venus will never again be a threat at a major other than Wimbledon. She is a 1-court star: Centre Court. At 28 by the time she arrives at SW19, she is retro only when she steps onto that hallowed grass. As a four-time champ, she must hope the Club schedules her accordingly and keeps her on her “home” away from home.

Serena is baffling. She was horrid Friday. There is no other way to candidly describe her performance. It was the universal view among commentators, many of whom are champions. How she could possibly play in such a manner, so lazy afoot, so sloppy of form, could only be explained by her own admission that she “didn’t want to be here.”

If true, then she should be back in Florida, SoCal or wherever she chases the fame that is so important to her. My partner John McEnroe couldn’t hide his feeling that Katerina Srebotnik deserved her day, an honest hard-working decent player whose previous bests had been in doubles. On one sunny day in Paris, she stood tall in Paris.
 
The French didn’t try to hide their chauvinism Friday, scheduling Michael Llodra and Mathieu on the main show court while sending Serena, Nadal and Djokovic, champions all, to the second court, a good show court but still number 2 in the rank.

Neither do the French try to honor their champion. Roger Federer was granted his wish for a Monday start, thus Rafa Nadal fell victim to rain and played his first 3 matches on consecutive days.

Fed plays a Monday-Thursday-Saturday first week while Rafa went Wed-Thurs-Fri. Surviving that siege gives Nadal a tremendous edge as he must now play only 4 matches over 9 days to win a fourth RG.

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.
 

It was still an hour before Pete Sampras and Roger Federer would take the court at Madison Square Garden. Two highly ranked 15-year-olds were playing an exhibition and there was already a buzz flowing from the crowd. Standing on the court while the youngsters hit, you could look up to the highest parts of the building and see seats filling and every suite occupied.

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

Although news reports told of scalper prices over $1,000 per ticket, it was still stunning to feel the vibe in the Garden last night.

There were champions everywhere and Tiger Woods made sure it wasn’t just a tennis crowd.

Tennis royalty, spanning generations, was honored. The three men with the most Slams were together for the first time as Roy Emerson joined Pete and Roger for on-court photos. Tony Trabert and Stan Smith were honored for their Davis Cup contributions, as was current Captain, Patrick McEnroe.

There was the odd sight of my partner, John McEnroe, greeting the event’s co-promoter, Ivan Lendl. Two men, never particularly close but linked through many memorable matches, including a pair at the Garden, finding some ease in their mid-life relationship.

So you get the idea — it was a New York night, a who’s who of tennis, sports executives and engaged fans.

The tennis was puzzling and uncertain. Johnny Mac visited the locker room 30 minutes before the match and came to the booth surprised by Pete’s level of tension.

It showed early in the match, especially to Federer who took the first set with ease.

When Roger eased up, displaying the respect that characterizes both of these champions, and seemed willing to carry Pete through the second set, something dangerous happened: Pete found his bearing. He became younger before our eyes. His serve ripped through the fast court and his volleys regained the crispness of better times.

Taking the second set, Sampras pleased a crowd that wanted more, although not necessarily Federer. And Roger charged through the first two games of the third set as if he wanted no mystery. But as McEnroe related from personal experience, regaining one’s edge is tricky once you let up. And Federer lived that through the rest of a third set that ended with Roger surviving an 8-6 tiebreak.

And at the end, as the friends embraced at net, most of the Garden, filled to 19,900, stood and cheered.

My inbox has delivered opinions from critics of this event and the concept of “Sampras Across America.”

Acknowledging that “purists” seem to find more enjoyment from the Umag qualies than any exhibition, I challenge anyone who was in the Garden to question the night.

This was a New York crowd. The U.S. Open plays in New York 2 weeks a year and smashed attendance records. But this event, on a Monday night in March, sold out in 3 weeks — to New Yorkers. They spoke with their wallets as well as their cheers.

No argument — this was entertainment. But it was provided by tennis. No one in the house could buy an argument that pairing the two greatest men’s champions in tennis, even for an exhibition, is a bad thing.

One of the best parts of the evening was seeing the cooperation within tennis. The ATP granted a waiver for Federer to play an exo the same week as a Masters, the USTA helped promote the event to its membership, and the Hall of Fame showed the event in its Newport, RI theater, one of 12 US locations to air the telecast.

Personal note: in a time of steroids, HGH, Spygate, Betfair, congressional hearings and a week that saw an Olympian enter jail, it was comforting to have a feel-good night in sports. All the better that tennis was the provider. And it should be guilt-free.

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.

Editor’s Note: Ted Robinson’s blog will be moving to a new platform in 2008. Please bookmark the following url so that you can continue to enjoy his entries for MediaZone Tennis.
http://blogs.mediazone.com/tedrobinsonmatchpoints/

Do we know enough about Russia now?

Anna Chakvetadze, one of the WTA top performers in 2007, was robbed in her Moscow home this week. Bound for 30 minutes, she escaped unharmed.

But hardly unaffected.

Do we understand that Russian athletes are targets? Do we wonder any more if some unsavory characters might have approached Nikolay Davydenko and reminded him that they knew where his family members lived?

I have no proof, but that rumor made the rounds of the tennis world after the Sopot scandal. And I am having a harder time dismissing the possibility.

Tennis should be worried.

I am worried for the sport that this country, moving away from the freedoms gained in the post-Gorbachev era, is producing huge amounts of talented players.

They are prone to the advances of organized crime that anyone in hockey understands. For years, whispers in the hockey world have wondered who is in “control” of the lives of the great Russian players.

Now tennis seems to be in this world.

Innocent players, as always, can get smeared in this world. But I don’t know how tennis can police this country. Trusting the individual players is the likely, if not foolproof, method.

Larry Scott, WTA chief, says “it’s not limited to one country, but it certainly includes Russia.”

John McEnroe rightly talks of how gambling is out of control in certain ways.

Davydenko’s lawyer talks of how the player has been wronged, treated “like a criminal.” Yet he doesn’t explain how Davydenko retired in the Sopot match with a stress reaction, yet won a match 6 days later in Montreal.

Tennis has confronted nothing so serious in years and as the year ends, I wonder how they possible confront the potential breadth of this problem.

* * *

After a season on college football, my appreciation for tennis replay has heightened.

Has it really been three years?

But here’s what I love: the tennis issue is decided promptly and without debate (admittedly, Roger Federer would dispute that claim after Wimbledon.)

I tired of watching 5-minute football replays after which confounding decisions were rendered. At a Notre Dame-Stanford game, replay overturned a call that was correct on the field. It was surreal — watch the replay 100 times and you see that the on-field call was correct 100 times, yet a replay official overturned the call.

We should all be grateful that it doesn’t happen in tennis.

In fact, those who decry the loss of “purity” in the sport lose sight of the essence of replay: it makes all the calls right. And after seeing football replay often butcher plays, I value that in tennis.