It was my original intention to write an article about who else but Roger Federer. But after some browsing, the realization hit me that he is probably the most written-about player in tennis history (though I don't have the stats to back it up). What I have instead settled on writing about is the plethora of talent that is right behind (and ahead of) Roger.
The remainder of this article is going to focus on predictions for 2009, and a prediction of how many Grand Slam titles each of these young stars might win. Hard to not talk about Roger when we talk about tennis, so there will be a few lines about him as well. So without much ado, here we go.
2009: There are three things that I am fairly confident about this year. Roger Federer will reclaim Wimbledon (his one challenge will come not from Nadal, but from Richard Gasquet), Rafael Nadal will continue his dominance in Paris and Andy Murray will win his first Grand Slam title.
Given that Murray himself has proclaimed his love for the hard courts of Flushing Meadows and backed that up with a fine showing at the 2008 edition, the U.S. Open seems to be the most obvious Grand Slam for him. That leaves the Australian Open, well, open. This one is easier said than done.
It is going to be very hard for Djokovic to repeat, and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, the talented Frenchman, seems to be much too inconsistent to yet win his first Grand Slam. While this may not be much of a prediction, I believe the Australian Open will be won by either of the other three - Nadal, Federer or Murray, or simply be someone that isn't really on the radar. Here are some other predictions by player:
The Forerunners
Rafael Nadal: Surely, there isn't anyone close to the Spaniard on the red dirt, and he should win at least three more French Open titles, much to the frustration of one Mr. Federer. Besides that, Rafa will get maybe another couple of Grand Slam titles purely because of his grit and determination. An Australian Open title is probable and another Wimbledon is possible while a U.S. Open seems quite unlikely.
You have to wonder how long his body will withstand the immense physical stress his style of play demands, but if there is one thing we should know about Rafa by now, it is that this kid just does not quit. All said and done, Rafa should finish a great career with about ten Grand Slam titles, highlighted by seven Roland Garros titles and no U.S. Opens.
Roger Federer: Will he beat Pete Sampras' record 14 Grand Slam titles? Absolutely! Roger definitely has two more Wimbledons in him, and a couple of other Slams.
Unfortunately for him, barring a miraculous early round loss by Rafael Nadal in the 2009 French Open, Roger's trophy cabinet will not include one from Paris, the same title that has eluded former greats such as John McEnroe, Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, and most recently, Pete Sampras.
His fluid style of play will keep him healthy and competitive for three to four more years. All said and done, arguably the most illustrious career in modern tennis history will end with 17 Grand Slam titles—seven from Wimbledon, four from Melbourne, and six from the Big Apple.
Novak Djokovic: The talent is there. Unfortunately, so is the arrogance. More than half of the tennis world proclaimed Djokovic as the heir apparent to Roger Federer after Novak's title run in Australia e
25 comments Last one added 6 months ago — Leave a Comment
J.A. Allen 7 months ago
Lots of interesting points. I do not see Gasquet at all - because his mental edge is gone...perhaps he can find it--but i don't believe he will. I never see Nadal winning on hard courts...Australian is too early and US Open too late in the season for the flow of his game and his season. French, yes--Wimbledon--no, he will not repeat.
As to Tsonga and Murray and Simon and Del Potro and Djokovic - roll the dice and see who is still counting by the end...it is wide open...tortuous and thrilling to imagine in 2009!
you are brave, indeed, to go down this road less traveled by! bravo! jaa
Edit Comment Cancel
Long John Silver 7 months ago
are you sure about that -
Rafa not winning wimbledon again ?
is it wishful thinking ? or do you believe that
if its the latter - am willing you take your offer up on that
-----------
if we all take the same road, BR - Tennis, will become -
BR - Federer Tennis dont it jaa ?
---
Edit Comment Cancel
J.A. Allen 7 months ago
Hey Long - we have a bet about Wimbledon--what are you willing to put up? jaa
Edit Comment Cancel
Long John Silver 7 months ago
make an offer ?
Edit Comment Cancel
Long John Silver 7 months ago
if i pick a winner - you shud too ....
i dont like bets in which I say
x wins
and the other person says
x not wins
--------------
make an offer
Edit Comment Cancel
J.A. Allen 7 months ago
Ok - I'll take Federer to win Wimbledon and you take Nadal to win Wimbledon--right? Make an offer--yow! that is tough? If either one of them wins, then the other must__________________? the options are endless. But what happens if neither of them win? bets off? Let me ponder the stakes for a while...i am sure something delicious will come to mind!! jaa
Edit Comment Cancel
Long John Silver 7 months ago
yeah
I pick Raf -
-----
HUMOR ME >?
Edit Comment Cancel
Gil 7 months ago
Nadal will never play like he did this year at Wimbledon. Nadal had to come up with a 'more than superhuman' performance to subdue Federer...It happens once in a lifetime, Just Once, Doesnt get replicated...
so I should say, unless and until Federer gets thrashed by Nadal some 5 times before Wimbledon and this time not just of Clay, I dont see Federer losing again to Nadal at The Championships..
As someone said, Fed will know better than to let Nadal take a 2 sets lead now!
My bet too is on Fed to win his 6th Champion at SW19 next year, the Guy seems to be more hungry for that than nything else (incl the Number 1 title)
Edit Comment Cancel
Veeraraghavan Echambadi 7 months ago
I am going with J.A. here, but just for kicks, let me throw out Gasquet here as my pick (contrary to my article). Yes, it's more wishful thinking than anything else.
Edit Comment Cancel
Long John Silver 7 months ago
i actually think ree-shard
isnt gonna win anything of any consequence .... mate
cheers
Edit Comment Cancel
J.A. Allen 7 months ago
Hi Veera - so you are in on the bet and the consequences??? You take Gasquet? jaa
Edit Comment Cancel
Long John Silver 7 months ago
VEERA
at the expense of sounding blunt - reeshard wont do shit - dont fall into the bet
Edit Comment Cancel
Veeraraghavan Echambadi 7 months ago
what are the consequences? I didn't see that being mentioned anywhere here.
Edit Comment Cancel
simke mrzimglupeinduse 7 months ago
Djokovic arrogant? You completely missed it. Have you been following his latest interviews/statements. Ruling out such young tallented player at his 21 is utterly ignorant!!
Murray - a good player but defensive 80% of the time, keeps the ball in the court endlessly until frustrated opponent kicks it in the net or outside the field. Boring tennis as to Roger Federer's remarks in Dubai.
Edit Comment Cancel
V S 7 months ago
"Ruling out such young tallented player (Nole Djokovic) at his 21 is utterly ignorant!!" .... I can not agree more. Wait and see. Not only that he will defend the Australian open, but also he will win another master's turnamant - possibly US Open.
Edit Comment Cancel
TennisMasta1 7 months ago
Veera, well written piece. Sorry if it sounds predictable, but here are my predictions/reasons assuming Roger is healthy:
AO: Roger WILL get a number of break opportunities as always. If he converts half of them he will win no matter who plays how. That's as sure and scientific as you can get with tennis.
RG: Roger had 17 break points in the 2007 final, converted just one, but still lost in four sets. The big question is whether Roger will try something different this time if he faces Rafa. He has shown that he can beat Rafa on clay. If Rafa and Roger both fail, Djokovic can sneak through and snatch this one if he doesn't also run into Tsonga. Murray doesn't feel confident yet to win on clay.
Wimbledon: Again what are the chances that Rafa will convert 4/13 breakpoints and Roger will just convert 1/14? The interesting thing here is if the LTA will make the courts further slower or increase the size of balls so no one can put them away (even Roger). Then Wimbledon would have surely messed up tennis quite a bit if it hasn't already.
USO: NY fans will root for Roger. Hope he draws inspiration from that. If he manages not to take any matches to five sets then he will win.
What will not be boring is if Roger wins the Grand Slam next year. That would raise the profile of tennis among the general public tremendously.
Edit Comment Cancel
Dino Cardoni 7 months ago
Hi thre... Great article Veera.
I do think you are over hyping Murray though. Not many defensive style players do well at slams. How many world number one defensive players have we had? His style requires covering lots of court during his matches and it wears him down quickly. He knows this, that's why he's been practicing serve more than anything else to win cheap points. Look at his win over Federer at Shanghai and then his loss to Davydenko. You could tell he was already spent when he first set foot on court. Best of five sets at slams requires a different type of physical game Murray lacks. Certainly not 8.
Time will tell.
Edit Comment Cancel
Gil 7 months ago
" All said and done, arguably the most illustrious career in modern tennis history will end with 17 Grand Slam titles—seven from Wimbledon, four from Melbourne, and six from the Big Apple."
arent u making a wild prediction this??
17 is a lot you know..17 is something that one can put their necks out to say...'Wont be broken for a long long time if not never...'
but Federer can, say if he makes it 16 in a yr and a half, then he will want to make it 20! I havent seen a greedier player but thats what makes him such a winner...
So gotta get it back Roger, It has been missing for a while this season..the Eye of a Tiger...:d
You talk about Richard Gasquet, the prodigy of no consequence..Talk abt David Nalbandian..the 'sleeper' of the Tennis world. But hm, well he does wake up at the dead end of the year to do some serious work. Richard doesnt do even that...I am really surprised that a guy who can actually outclass (Yeah quite frankly) Roger Federer in a match (once he did that, and that hasnt recurred) has gone down as such a wasted Talent. I think Gasquet doesnt have the brain OR the heart to become the Champion his talent will support him to.
By the way, do u really think Djokovic is arrogant? His nose may have grown a bit after the phenomenal start he had to the season, But then the guy isnot really arrogant you know, he is just Immature and Bold. He says some things at the wrong place at the wrong time, as they say, someone needs to tell him what needs to be kept in the Camp...coz Rapair work is a strenuous job. But this doesnt mean he is 'cocky' exactly..I havent seen many other players who applaud if the opponent hits a great shot and often, be it after a win(exception - Andy Roddick at US Open 2008) or a loss, he is more graceful than any other on tour, or so at least I feel..
anyways, This has been a loooong Post, I cud have written an Article rather huh?
ON a serious note, Nice preview...2009 is gonna be a Cracker!
Edit Comment Cancel
sam tennisfan 7 months ago
By my calculations you have predicted that Feds, Rafa, Gasquet, Nole, Murray and Tsonga will win the next 20 slams at least; which accounts for a minimum of 5 years of tennis slams. You have neither factored in the fact that all these players will be approaching mid-20s (and Feds will be in his early 30s) nor have you factored in the fresh new talent that will emerge onto the ATP tour during the next 5 years.
I think this article grossly over-estimates in general particularly with regard to Murray (who I believe could win 2 or 3 slams at best), whilst also under-estimating the likely wins of Nadal; who is the most determined of all players in the ATP - only serious injury will stop Nadal, who in my opinion will win Wimbledon a further two times, as well as the USO.
I see no reason at all why Gasquet should win any slam; he was full of promise but never delivered, and I fear for him it is too late.
Edit Comment Cancel
Cindy Hopcus 7 months ago
As much as I am a "RAFA" fan, it must me said that Sam is right. The players you all have been mentioning will be aging in "tennis years" and we don't know what is coming around the corner. Remember when Roger came from be a good player to being extraordinary? What about the 19 year old Nadal that came to Paris for the first time and has taken home the trophy every year since! I think that 2009 will be a year of changes. We cannot discount any of the up an coming players like Del Potro, Simon, even Murray. It will be fun and I'm looking forward to seeing RAFA raise the cup in Australia this year. As for Wimbeldon.....I don't see Murray just yet (to much pressure), I think Roger and Nadal are on a collision course again and it will all depend on Roger's frame of mind and Rafa's knees! I don't place bets on such an unknown field! But its fun to think about!
Edit Comment Cancel
Veeraraghavan Echambadi 7 months ago
Sam: I did notice that as well - point well taken. I guess I didn't make it very clear, but the number of Slams mentioned here are more to each person's potential in my opinion, rather than an absolute prediction. Again, yes, I have been a little aggressive with Murray, but his improvement over the last one year has impressed me. And no, Nadal will not win the USO, maybe a Wimbledon more and certainly more French Opens, but I really don't see a USO in him.
Edit Comment Cancel
Braca Djordjevic 7 months ago
I just think you greatly underestimated Novak. He is probably as talented as Roger himself, maybe even more, and if you look at the really great field of today's young stars, he is - I would say - the most versatile of all. Maybe even the only one who could repeat Aggassi's feat and win all four Grand Slams during his career (he proved he can play on grass reaching semi at Wimbledon in 2007, when he would probably beat Nadal if he wasn't injured and exausted from Baghdatis match).
And the arrogance you are talking about is simply not true. He is very well mannered young man, who, let's face it, is still a kid, basically. He is way below, let's say McEnroe in that regard (I personally think Roger is the most arrogant player today, probably best ever, but still very arrogant) , and just think of how well and sportsmanlike he handles defeat, as oppose to Federer, who (to be honest just) lately always has an excuse for it (before he didn't need it, since he was winning all the time).
So, just wanted to point out that you downgraded a guy who started and ended a year with big wins, and who, at least I think, might easily be a number one at this time next year. But who knows, maybe that's goping to help, since, as he proved just last month, Novak is at his best when people wtite him off.
Edit Comment Cancel
Braca Djordjevic 7 months ago
I just think you greatly underestimated Novak. He is probably as talented as Roger himself, maybe even more, and if you look at the really great field of today's young stars, he is - I would say - the most versatile of all. Maybe even the only one who could repeat Aggassi's feat and win all four Grand Slams during his career (he proved he can play on grass reaching semi at Wimbledon in 2007, when he would probably beat Nadal if he wasn't injured and exausted from Baghdatis match).
And the arrogance you are talking about is simply not true. He is very well mannered young man, who, let's face it, is still a kid, basically. He is way below, let's say McEnroe in that regard (I personally think Roger is the most arrogant player today, probably best ever, but still very arrogant) , and just think of how well and sportsmanlike he handles defeat, as oppose to Federer, who (to be honest just) lately always has an excuse for it (before he didn't need it, since he was winning all the time).
So, just wanted to point out that you downgraded a guy who started and ended a year with big wins, and who, at least I think, might easily be a number one at this time next year. But who knows, maybe that's goping to help, since, as he proved just last month, Novak is at his best when people wtite him off.
Edit Comment Cancel
Veeraraghavan Echambadi 7 months ago
Respectfully disagree on your assessment of Roger for sure. Roger is one of the most well respected and well-mannered players on tour. And respect for him doesn't come from just his wins but also the way he conducts himself. Just look at the number of "Stefan Edberg Sportsmanship" awards he has won in a row - this award is given not because of what he has won, but because of how he has conducted himself. You would never see Roger do the ugly imitations of Nadal that Novak did at the 2007 US Open. And besides, if he can "joke" about people, he should also be able to take jokes from people like Roddick like at this year's US Open, which Novak couldn't handle when the joke was on him.
As to him having big wins, of course, I agree Novak has had a great year. I just think other youngsters are catching up to him and it is going to be difficult for him to dominate. I still think he has maybe 3 more slams left in him as I mentioned in the article.
Edit Comment Cancel
Braca Djordjevic 6 months ago
Respectfully, but those immitations were not ugly, and he has grown away from that definitely. And as far as Roddick joke, he did react bad to it, but he also apologized right at the press conference after the match, and mentioned that Andy and him straighten that out in the locker room (fist fight I guess :)).
Youngsters might be catching up to him, but i predict they will not catch him, just like Murrey won't. We'll see, but I think he could go for ten GSs in his career, and as I mentioned, maybe collect all four.
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.