Bleacher Report - Articles by Marianne Bevis

Stefan Edberg and Pat Rafter Save 2009's Best Tennis Until Last

Marianne Bevis — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 10:53:44 -0500

Stefan Edberg, still golden, still polite, still with a touch at the net like a feather, stood at one end of the court.

Pat Rafter, exuding bonhomie, hair cropped short with that tiny white flash on the crown, still the most nimble of volleyers, stood at the other.

It was a match made in heaven.

They had met just three times before, almost 15 years ago. Edberg was about to retire while Rafter was just coming of age on the Tour. Edberg won all three matches.

So this week’s rematch, their first since those brief encounters, promised to be special.

That they were contending for the final tennis trophy of the year at the Aegon Masters in the picturesque oval elegance of London’s Royal Albert Hall added still more lustre to the event.

What better way to end the 2009 tennis season than with two of the most renowned exponents of the serve-and-volley game in the Open era?

Edberg’s tennis graced the world’s courts from the moment he became the first winner of the Junior Grand Slam in 1983 until his retirement in 1996. It was an entire decade that glowed with his elegant serve-and-volley play.

At 6-foot-2, he was able to deliver a good serve with both speed and swing. He then simply swept into the net and reached effortlessly for whatever return happened to arrive.

His volley did not require huge power since it was always placed to perfection—with swift and deft economy—to the most out-of-reach segment of the court. Should the return arrive near his feet, he simply reached down and touched it into space.

His ground strokes, too, were clean and piercing—apparently effortless. Always single-handed on the backhand, and with an unusually short-follow through, the Edberg racket finished like a conductor’s lifted baton in front of his body: minimal spin, maximum accuracy.

So eye-catching was his tennis that Edberg became the role model for many an aspiring player. Roger Federer has frequently referred to his influence—which is beginning to show itself in Federer's own fluid net game.

Another fan was the young Patrick Rafter, who was just climbing the men’s rankings as Edberg contemplated hanging up his racquet.

Rafter went on to assume Edberg’s mantle, delighting tennis aficionados with his mobile, flexible, and creative net game. Also with a single-handed backhand, a deep and swinging serve, and effortless volleying, the Edberg inheritance was handed over to the Australian.

They have more in common than their game, too. Both are renowned for their decency: Edberg won the ATP award for sportsmanship so many times that they named it after him, while Rafter gave half his winnings from his two U.S. Open victories to charity.

In this match, they would constantly acknowledge the good shots of the other, or apologise for some unseen misdemeanour such as a slight edge-of-frame on a winner.

Rafter’s admiration clearly continues unabated. His words—“Edberg was my idol”—may have made this week’s audience burst into laughter, but it was clearly heartfelt. The respect in his voice was palpable.

So here we were, this historic venue filled to the brim with fans old and new, to watch the 36-year-old Ozzie face his idol, the 43-year-old Swede.

How, the audience appeared to ponder, could they favor one over the other?

Those split loyalties were clear from the moment the players walked onto court: cheers for Stefan, cheers for Pat. It helped the general conviviality that Abba’s The Name of the Game blared out to welcome them.

The tone dropped, somewhat, with the arrival of a streaker during their warm-up. Yet even then, the players calmly smiled and took their time while the intruder had his minute in the spotlight.

Once play began, it was like Christmas come early.

Edberg, tall, willowy, boasting the best legs in the business, began by serving a storm, rushing in to pick off the returned shot with a crisp diagonal volley.

Occasionally, his volley was returned and a second volley, placed to the opposite corner, finished the job.

This was not blood-and-guts tennis, with cannon-ball serves followed by bullet-fast volleys. It was strong, perfectly placed serving followed by mathematical volleys, driven effortlessly into any part of the court. It gave time to revel in the mechanics of the shot-making and the grace of the execution.

Rafter, also more than 6-foot tall but of a slightly sturdier and darker build than Edberg, responded in kind. His serve, too, is in the 110 mph range, but his quick follow-up applies rather more action on the ball, slice keeping some volleys down, top-spin whipping them wide.

One of the delights of such net-attacking tennis is the pressure it places on the base-line receiver to come up with immaculate passing shots. These two men, great at the net, both know just what it takes to pass someone like themselves.

Edberg’s running forehand pass to break Rafter in the fourth game had both players tumbling outside the tram lines, one in his effort to make the shot, the other attempting to cut it off.

So while the rallies tended to be short and compact—five or six shots was around the average—every element is perfectly executed. Points are won rather than lost.

The pace in between points was also quick, no selection of the best ball, but simply taking the first ball proffered by the ball girls.

This did not mean that the simple courtesies were forgotten.

Both men have a patient, unhurried body language, and batted the balls to the right end of the court, thanked the girls for their towels, served after just a couple of bounces.

Their calm pace threw into even greater relief the speed with which both men silently glided to the net, how early they took the return of serve, how easily they retreated for overheads or rushed in to retrieve drop shots.

It all looked effortless, but course was not.

Accidents happen when a ball and two men are moving around the net at such close quarters.

In one incident, Rafter caught Edberg in the chest with a volley and the latter pretended to be poleaxed. Rafter rushed across to the prostrate Edberg and made as if to give him artificial respiration.

Questioned about it afterwards, Edberg said “That was something I need to think about, but I’d better do it later!”

As if to add icing to the Christmas cake, the men fought a very tight match. Edberg squeezed out the first set 7-6, and Rafter came back strong in the second, 7-5.

By now, though, the stresses were beginning to show on Edberg, who had played a tough three-setter against Greg Rusedski only 18 hours earlier. In contrast, the younger Rafter had played just seven games over 24 hours before, due to Goran Ivanisevic’s retirement with injury from their deciding tie.

Edberg began to stretch his shoulders and back at change-overs, while Rafter seemed to grow in energy, and the deciding Champions Tiebreak went Rafter’s way, 11-9.

It seemed somehow right that, having failed to wreak proper revenge on his 2001 Wimbledon nemesis, Ivanisevic, the day before, Rafter was able to take his first win from the man he admires so much.

The award ceremony could not have been warmer or more full of mutual admiration—little surprise there.

Rafter said that, as a teenager, he so loved to watch Edberg play that he decided to play that way himself. It was a great compliment from one champion to another.

Here’s another compliment. Whether or not the tennis between these two players produced the best, as well as the last, match of the year was not important. For many spectators in London, it was certainly one of the most enjoyable.

And—with apologies to Roger and Rafa, Andy and Novak—for this spectator in particular, it rated as one of the most pleasurable live matches ever.

Queens of the Court: Margaret Court Was The Queen Of Them All

Marianne Bevis — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 13:11:56 -0500

Let’s start at the top. There is, for Margaret Court more than any other player—man or woman—no other place to begin. For Court stands at the very top of tennis’ list of achievements.

Try this. She won a total of 62 Grand Slam titles: next in line is Martina Navratilova with 59, and both outstrip the next, Billie Jean King, at a mere 39. (The top man? Roy Emerson with 28.)

What about this? Twenty-four singles Slams: next in line is Steffi Graf at 22. (Roger Federer is way out of contention with his 15.)

Look at another. Court is the only person to win all 12 Slams at least twice. In fact, take out Wimbledon’s results (where she won only three singles and two women’s doubles), and she won the other 10 Slams at least four times.

And one more for good measure. Court is one of only three players to achieve a career “boxed set”—all three titles at all four Slams.

Not enough? Well, Court is one of only three women to win a calendar Slam (in 1970), and on four further occasions, she won three singles Slams in the same year.

Make no mistake, this woman dominates the record books now just as much as she dominated the opposition during her 17-year career.

While you absorb those statistics, consider this, too.

Between 1970 and 1975, the Australian Open did not hold a mixed doubles competition, and in 1965 and 1969, the mixed finals were abandoned due to bad weather (and Court was lined up to play in both). So it’s entirely possible that this remarkable woman could have won another half dozen Slams. Imagine it: 67 titles.

Court was a tall and powerful woman who nevertheless had to work hard to develop the physical attributes and co-ordination of her 5'9" frame. She was quietly determined and single minded, willing to put in gym and road time to reach her targets.

Sure enough, by the age of 17, Court was a Grand Slam winner, taking the first of seven consecutive Australian singles titles. (She would go on to win four more!)

The Mother of All Champions

But the story of Court’s achievements is all the more extraordinary because of her personal time-line. For when Court—or rather Smith, as she was at the time—married in 1967, she retired for 18 months. She took another year out to have her first child, and then a further year to have her second.

It was not until she found she was expecting her third child, mid-way through a major tournament in Detroit in 1977, that she retired for good, aged 35.

So while Court was setting new benchmarks in athletic achievement, she also managed—a rarity in the mid 1960s—to combine her globetrotting success with motherhood.

With all these facts on the table, it would be easy to make assumptions about this statuesque woman from New South Wales. On paper, she epitomised the newly-emerging “liberated woman," much as her contemporary and great rival, Billie Jean King did. But she and King, for all that they had in common, could not have been more different.

But let’s start with what they did have in common: their tennis.

The King and the Queen

For a decade, these two women dominated tennis. Between 1966 and 1975, one or both of them played 35 of the 40 singles Slam tournaments, and together won 24 of them. They played each other in one of the greatest of Wimbledon finals, in 1970, both carrying injuries yet fighting through 46 games to a 14-12, 11-9 victory for Court.

Both were strong, fit and determined. They played attacking serve-and-volley tennis, but were not afraid to thump out the ground strokes too. This was the era of grass—only the French Open was different—and their fast, powerful tennis was hugely successful.

Physically, though, they were like chalk and cheese. Court towered over King by almost six inches. The Australian was serious, quiet, unhurried to the point of looking languorous, though with an unspoken, steely confidence. She had the easy elegance that tall, athletic women often have, and dressed in an unfussy skirt and polo as if to emphasise her Greek-statue stillness.

The Mother’s Day Massacre

A common feature in descriptions of Court is that she took the admiration of the men around her almost for granted. She had a very traditional view of family life and for the proper regard men and women should have for each other.

She had grown up with elder brothers, played tennis against men—indeed was coached for a time by the great Frank Sedgman—and enjoyed the camaraderie of highly successful Australian men as the tennis tour travelled the globe.

Court undoubtedly demanded and won respect from both the men and women around her. So it’s hard to know whether she made the biggest misjudgement in her career due to her confidence in the “natural order” of things, or her naïve belief that the respect she enjoyed was also enjoyed by other women.

Whatever the reason, the famous “Battle of the Sexes” became a defining moment in the fight for gender equality and also between those old adversaries, Court and King.

Bobby Riggs, a chauvinistic, 55-year-old former Slam champion, was on a mission. He wanted to undermine the campaign for women’s equality on the tennis tour and also turn it to his own financial advantage.

So he put out a challenge—backed by a $10,000 purse—to the top female players of the day: King, Court, and Chris Evert. He was actually after King, who he called “the sex leader of the revolutionary pack,” but she turned him down. Court, however, missed the political nuances of the invitation, and accepted what she thought would be an easy-to-win exhibition match.

When King discovered that Court had accepted the challenge, she tried to convey the importance of winning to her rival: “This is not about tennis…You have to win this match. You have no idea how important this is.”

King later said, “Margaret didn’t see the bigger picture.”

Court had maintained a dignified distance from the campaign for equal pay and equal treatment on the tour, and so was less awake to Riggs’s motives. She did, in any case, have unwavering faith in her ability to win the match. “I just thought, here is a man who has quite a big mouth.”

Unfortunately for Court, Riggs was bit more savvy than that. He had been training hard, had been taunting the “women’s libbers,” and most importantly of all, had been studying Court’s game. She played tennis like a man, so he would undermine her game by playing more like a woman.

And on Mother’s Day 1973, that is precisely what he did. After presenting her with a dozen roses “for the nicest mother in tennis,” he played short serves, drop shots, lobs and every other technique to undermine Court’s powerful rhythm. In under an hour, he had beaten her 6-2, 6-1.

The loss was enough to provoke King to accept a rematch. Court, having realised too late the wider implications of her defeat, gave King a few tactical tips. King went on to win a famous victory, and the campaign for equality was right back on the agenda.

Different Path, Old Values

But the personal path of Court diverged from King’s in a quite dramatic way from that brief moment of unity. Court had been raised a Catholic and, by the mid-70s, her faith was to take on an ever-growing importance in her life.

She converted to the Pentecostal church, trained at the Rhema Bible Training College during the 1980s, and went on to become ordained as a minister in 1991.

Shortly afterwards, she founded the Victory Life Centre in Perth, and has since presented her own television show on the Australian Christian Channel.

In embracing the teachings of her church, Court became a vociferous campaigner against gay rights. In 1990, she condemned Navratilova and other lesbian players for ruining the sport of tennis. She also fought the Western Australia Government on proposed new laws on gay rights. Meanwhile, of course, King has devoted much of her life to campaigning for both women’s and gays’ rights.

Yet in one of her most recent interviews, for the U.K.’s Sunday Times, Court describes King as the best player she ever faced. “We’re very different in stature, personality, and style, but had respect for one another’s games and knew we had to be at our best to win.”

Bearing in mind that Court’s reign took in wins over Evert on clay, and over Maria Bueno, Rosie Casals, and Evonne Goolagong on grass—all in Slam finals—and you realise what a compliment Court is paying her old rival.

Hearing her talk now, at 67, settled back in Perth with her family and her faith, Court’s astonishing achievements seem light years away: “I love the work I do now just like I loved the gift God gave me in tennis.”

So take a moment to look again at what this retired wife, mother, and pastor did way back when. Few, if any, will ever match it.

Court regards her U.S. Open win against Casals in 1970 as the best moment of her career. It won her both the calendar Slam and the U.S. triple crown. This 10-minute video includes, appropriately, the intelligent commentary of King.

Read other articles in this series about great women players, and their contribution to the tennis:

Molla Mallory

Helen Wills

Suzanne Lenglen

Althea Gibson

Can Roger Federer Carry Off Pink?: The Top Questions from the O2

Marianne Bevis — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:17:29 -0500

The Tennis World Tour Finals has now answered some of the biggest questions of the tennis year. Let’s start with the easy ones. Who would end the year as No. 1? Easy: Roger Federer. Would the O2 arena be a fitting venue for the high spot of the men’s tour? Of course. Had Rafael Nadal really lost weight? No doubt about it. Would Andy Murray continue to be the “nearly man”? Afraid so. But there were many other tricky questions that, for some extraordinary reason, seemed to pass the media by. Like who took the missing blue balls from the entrance hall? So to help out those aficionados for whom tennis is more than simply “who will win?”, the following slides will try to shed some light on the “also rans” of those end-of-year questions.

Begin Slideshow

Rafael Nadal's Transition to "Rafa-Lite" May Signal Greater Times Ahead

Marianne Bevis — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:41:48 -0500

The fans are getting worried.

The media have begun to discuss it openly.

And this week, at London’s O2 arena, it was the first topic on the lips of almost every spectator—and not just between his fans.

The subject of all this attention is the diminishing musculature of Rafael Nadal since his extended break with tendinitis over the summer.

So in the light of Nadal’s poor results during the Round Robin phase of the World Tour Finals, is there real cause for concern? And is there any foundation for all this talk of weight loss?

There have been several “checkpoints” during the year from which to make a first-hand comparison of Nadal’s stature, thus removing from any debate the dictum that “television puts on 10 pounds.”

The starting point was the clay season—the photograph on the left was taken at Rome. Here the standard edition Rafa was on show, all shoulder, bicep, pectorals, and calves.

The next significant appearance was during the grass season of London where Nadal made a fleeting appearance at Hurlingham—the second photo from the right—to test his sore knees. In physique, he looked little different from the man playing in Rome, but his movement was far from the same. His serve motion had less spring and energy, and his forward motion and knee bend were inhibited.

It surprised few that he almost immediately announced his withdrawal from Wimbledon.

Fast forward a couple of months to Flushing Meadows, where a successful run to the semi-finals suggested that Nadal was getting back to full fitness. However, there did seem to be just a little less of him striding about the court.

Any change in appearance, however, was barely perceptible, hardly worth comment and, in any case, he had picked up an abdomen strain that inhibited his performance. If his hammer drive of a topspin forehand was a little less weighty than usual, there was an obvious reason.

Between New York and the Tour End Finals in London, there was a chance to catch up with a televised Nadal playing in Shanghai and then in Paris. By now, there was enough visual evidence of a slimming down to warrant some discussion by the Sky commentary team—prompted, it has to be said, by emails from viewers.

The team concluded, however, that the change in appearance was an illusion caused by the different kit that Nadal had adopted at the beginning of 2009: His arms, chest, and shoulders were less on show, and legs were more loosely covered. This was nonsense, of course, since the physical transformation had not begun until half way through 2009.

It was London, though, that provided the firm evidence for all the conjecture—witness the photos of Nadal in green. He was certainly thinner, and it was not simply in the main muscle groups that the volume was reduced. His waist was slimmer, his face more gamine, his calves leaner in outline. Indeed, his entire form was trimmer.

Along with the gradually shortening crop of his hair, Nadal appeared to have shed not only pounds, but also about four years. He could be the teenager who burst on the scene, again dressed in green, to win his first French Open.

So there did indeed appear to be some foundation to the “weight-loss” debate. But whether that should be a cause for concern is an entirely different matter.

This new format Nadal could, instead, presage a maturing change of direction designed to extend his playing career.

First, by reducing the proportion, and thus weight, of muscle in his body, Nadal is also reducing the strain on his knees. He and his team must be greatly encouraged that he has remained free of strapping since the early summer with no obvious reduction in mobility, despite this being the hardest phase of the tour.

Second, Nadal has been showing increasing enthusiasm for developing a more rounded, all-court game. This suggests a recognition that a flexible game comprising serve-and-volley, drop-shot, lob, and slice is less punishing on the body than the long, arduous rallies that have in the past characterized his powerful game of attrition.

The bulk and strength required to sustain the long bouts of heavy shot-making in Nadal’s “old” game can, therefore, evolve into a more lightweight, flexible physique that spreads the strain a little more evenly across the body. Indeed he may become even faster around the court than the Mk. 1 Nadal, and keep the rallies a little shorter into the bargain.

Tennis is a game of checks and balances. Nadal hit the very top of his form in 2008, yet even as he achieved his crowning glory at Wimbledon, he carried strapping around his knees.

The warning signs were already there, and the physical stresses of his playing style subsequently forced him out of Paris and the Masters Cup in Shanghai at the end of that season. The same problems reared their head even earlier in 2009, and despite extensive treatment on his knees during the spring, tendinitis flared up once again.

The beacon for Nadal, as he sees his No. 2 ranking under threat for the second time in a year, is that he has absorbed the hard-court and indoor seasons to their end without injury, and is still able to take part in the imminent Davis Cup final.

He has to view the hiatus from tournament winning as merely a transition to a different “Rafa model” that will be able to sustain a challenge against the rest of the competition in 2010.

He may carry a little less physical weight, and a little less weight on his shots, into this new phase, but his skills and technique are improving across the board. Rarely does he miss an overhead, for example, and his backhand slice is becoming a formidable offensive weapon.

What we can be sure of is that his desire to win, and his dedication to doing so, will remain second to none.

Inside London's Dome With The Best Men In Tennis

Marianne Bevis — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:45:44 -0500

London may be cold, grey and storm-ridden. Parts of this wintry country may be submerged in floods from the heaviest rainfall since records began. Yet the purple clouds that hang over one white dome crouched beside the steel-grey Thames prefigure a purple rectangle of delight nestled below. For the best tennis players in the world have lit up the capital like a dose of sunshine. What’s more, the closing finale of the men’s tour is threatening to put the green-and-white brilliance of Wimbledon in the shade. Because amongst the eight elite men competing for the year-end title is a Brit. London is holding its breath in the hope of a home champion.

Begin Slideshow

Queens of the Court: The Heart and Stomach of a King—Billie Jean King

Marianne Bevis — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:48:46 -0500

A tribute to a personal heroine who celebrates her 66th birthday on 22nd November.

A first impression

What was it about one particular woman, wielding her wooden racket in the black and white world of 1960s television, that imprinted itself in this fan’s memory? She came from another country, and she played a game I had barely learned to understand, let alone master.

To me, she looked middle-aged even though still in her early 20s. She was ordinary in appearance but unusual in demeanor.

I knew nothing of her background nor of her achievements in tennis—other than she had just beaten the homely, and British, Ann Jones. But once I heard her name, I never forgot it.

Billie Jean King.

Her story has been simmering in the bloodstream ever since, because her name takes me back to my very first monochrome memories of tennis and of Wimbledon—for it was only Wimbledon that made its way into British living rooms back then.

These were impressionable years for a girl heading towards adolescence. It was the uncomfortable realisation that my mother seemed quite embarrassingly enamoured of the Santanas and Newcombes. It was also the uncomfortable realisation that King was being undermined by that mother’s slights about her appearance, her manner, and her attitudes.

It’s in unexpected places that children on the verge of adulthood have their opinions formed, and King was one of those places.

I immediately responded to her and the way she played. She had a powerful, nimble, forward-moving game. She was as fit as a flea. She had little vanity but great pride. She didn’t conform to the elegant ideal of Margaret Court, nor the girl-next-door safe of Jones, and certainly not to the pretty new star on the block, Evonne Goolagong. She wore glasses, was short, and often battled with her weight.

All of this was strangely reassuring to a girl bombarded by the glamor of the “swinging '60s,” Twiggy, and Sgt. Pepper.

But King’s absence of glamor allowed her strong personality and talent to take centre stage. By the time King, then still only 23, was having her impact on this fan in England, she had begun not only to stamp her achievements on the tennis record books, but also to make her mark in social and political issues off court.

It started with the tennis

No, it started with her name.

When she was born, in Long Beach, CA in 1943, Billie Jean was to be Michelle Louise. But her father, Bill Moffat, was away at war, and so her mother named her baby daughter in his honour.

King had a conservative, working-class upbringing, but very soon showed a special blend of two important strands. She had natural sporting ability, and she was bright. The young Billie Jean could have gone to Stanford had her parents been able to afford it. Instead she went to California State University in Los Angeles.

She had her first tennis lesson at the age of 11 and was so hooked that she bought her first tennis racket for eight dollars, using money she had saved up from odd jobs.

“I knew I had found my destiny. I wanted to be the No. 1 tennis player in the world.”

She claimed that, by 12, she already saw things she wanted to change, and knew that if she could be No. 1, people would listen. “It was all white people, dressed in all white clothes, playing with white balls before a crowd of polite observers. I wanted people to get excited, to be fans and participants, not observers.”

At 15, she entered her first U.S. Open. Then in 1961, at just 17, she played at Wimbledon. That occasion marked the very last time she failed to reach at least the singles quarterfinals, though she continued to compete at her favorite tournament until 1983. She didn’t, however, come away empty-handed in 1961: She won the first of her 14 doubles titles.

By 1963, she had reached Wimbledon’s singles final, and by 1966 she was the singles champion.

In the year that she reached out to one girl in England—1967—she won the singles, doubles and mixed doubles at both Wimbledon and the US Open. She went on to win the Australian Open as the year turned to 1968 (one of the rare times she played that event) and then won Wimbledon again.

By the end of 1968, she needed knee surgery (as she would do twice more in her career). That did not stop her playing, in 1970, one of the greatest Wimbledon finals against long-term adversary, the towering Court. It was a straight sets loss for King, but the women played 46 games: 14-12, 11-9.

In 1972, King added her only French title to further Wimbledon and U.S.Open wins.

Her style of play illuminated not only her lack of the enthusiasm for, and success on, clay, but spoke volumes about her character.

She was a hard-hitting shot maker, and a great volleyer despite her 5'4" stature. She felt her forehand down the line was weak, so she made a point of hitting it more often. She was a woman to tackle problems head on, a characteristic that pigeonholed her as aggressive rather than driven or courageous.

“Any woman who wants to achieve anything has to be aggressive and tough, but the press never sees us as multidimensional.” It took many more years before the media truly appreciated the multifaceted King.

Breaking down the barriers one by one

While King was embarking on the golden road to tennis fame, she was also finding out about the ways of the world. At university, where she was already the most lauded athlete, she met her future husband, Larry King. It was he who pointed out to her that he had a tennis scholarship when she did not solely because she was a woman. The campaign for equal rights beckoned.

First, she took on what she called the “shamateurism” accorded the women’s tour, a world where the top players were paid under-the-table fees to grace the major tournaments rather than being paid as professionals.

In 1970, she joined the new Virginia Slims Circuit, the first women-only tennis tour. She helped to form the Women’s Tennis Association (W.T.A.) in 1973, and a year later, she founded the Women’s Sports Foundation dedicated to advancing women’s sports.

As the first W.T.A. president, King threatened to lead a boycott of the 1973 U.S. Open if female players weren’t awarded the same prize money as the men. As a result, it became the first Slam to do just that.

Weeks after the Open, King took the fight for gender equality by the throat in possibly her most famous match, known as the “Battle of the Sexes.” The 55-year-old Bobby Riggs was a former Wimbledon and U.S. Open champion, and had challenged the top female players as a publicity stunt, saying that “women just don’t have the emotional stability for the game.”

In May, he had beaten Court in what became known as the “Mother’s Day Massacre.” King had originally turned down Riggs’s offer to play, but after seeing Court embarrassed 6-2, 6-1 by Riggs, she felt she needed to take up his challenge. “I thought it would set us back 50 years if I didn't win that match.”

His comment? “I want the women’s lib leader.”

The records of King and Court between 1966 and 1975 had followed similar paths. One or both of them played 35 of the 40 Slam singles tournaments held during this period, and together they won 24 of them.

They were like chalk and cheese in looks, in playing style, and in their personal lives. But they became united in this common cause.

After studying a tape of Court’s match, King became incensed that Riggs had presented Court with a bouquet of flowers before it started. “She should have belted him over the head with the flowers rather than accept them!” What Court did do, however, was exchange notes with King on tactics.

The match became the most watched—by 50 million—in tennis history.

But even there, King had an eye to equality. She noted that not a single sportswriter covering the event was a woman. She knew her worth and used it to advance her cause. A couple of days before the match, she told the head of ABC, who had paid $750,000 for the broadcasting rights, that she wouldn’t play if the network used Jack Kramer, whom she believed to be anti women’s tennis, in the commentary box.

She won. She also won the match, 6-4, 6-3, 6-3.

This is, perhaps, an appropriate point to look at King’s views on the three-set versus five-set debate. She never had an issue with men and women playing the same length of match—as her Riggs encounter proved. What she did, and continues to, favor is the three-set format for all players, particularly in the context of the modern game.

“I want every player to play as long as possible and I think the long five-setters are taking a toll on the longevity of the men’s careers...I think two out of three is better so we can see more of them.”

Courage and controversy

King was always unafraid to take on the establishment in her professional life. But she eventually had to face it in her personal life too.

She was one of the first professional sports woman to admit she was gay, or rather she was forced out of the closet, in 1981, by the revelations of her P.A., Marilyn Barnett. The greatest barrier to admitting her sexuality sooner had been her parents. It’s worth quoting her own words about what was clearly a major internal conflict.

“One of my big goals was always to be honest with my parents and I couldn’t be for a long time. I tried to bring up the subject but...I was pretty easily stopped because I was reluctant anyway. I ended up with an eating disorder that came from trying to numb myself from my feelings. I needed to surrender far sooner than I did.”

On top of the family conflict, she feared the homophobia that was more widely prevalent: “I had people tell me that if I talked about what I was going through, it would be the end of the women’s tour.” As it was, she estimates that the revelation cost her millions of dollars in endorsements.

King and her husband had experienced controversy before, when he revealed, without her permission, that she’d had an abortion in 1971. Nevertheless, they rode out their relationship together until they divorced in 1987. After they agreed to pursue separate relationships, he asked her to be godmother to any child he may have, and she is.

Still embracing challenge and change

King retired from singles tennis in 1984, and became commissioner of World Team Tennis, which she and her husband had helped to create in 1973. She still serves on the board of the Women’s Sports Foundation, which in 2008 opened the Billie Jean King International Women’s Sports Center, the first museum dedicated to women’s sports.

She, along with John McEnroe, still strives to bring tennis to the masses, to make it fun and accessible. After 30 years, she has brought the World Team Tennis brand back to New York, with the intention of getting locals up close and personal, at an affordable price, to the big tennis stars such as Venus and Serena Williams.

It comes as no surprise that she welcomes technological advances as enthusiastically as social ones. The new roof over Wimbledon’s Centre Court, far from being “sacrilege”, is “beautiful…like a functional piece of contemporary art.”

The powerful modern rackets help players in the local park to “feel like they can, even for a few points, hit as cleanly as the pros.”

She’s a great supporter of “hawkeye” technology, both for the fairness it brings to the tennis and the excitement it brings to the fans.

“With all of the information, equipment advances and technology…players get better every generation...I would be having so much fun if I was playing today, my personality would fit the modern game!”

Yet she still sees much to achieve.

She works with long-time friend Elton John on AIDs awareness.

She is co-founder of GreenSlam, an environmental initiative for the sports industry.

And she still sees discrimination against gay women in the media, and even within the W.T.A. where the names of players’ male partners are mentioned, but not the females’ partners.

And still she inspires

What was it, then, from this catalogue of achievement, that made such an impression on a very young, very unworldly British schoolgirl all those years ago?

No-one could foresee that King would win 129 singles tournaments, 12 of them in Grand Slams, nor that she would claim a record-setting 20 Wimbledon titles.

It was impossible to imagine that the prestigious home of U.S. tennis would be named in her honor, or that she would receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her work on the rights of women and gays.

Her worldwide status could be measured by awards: the Sunday Times Lifetime Achievement Award; the Champion of Justice award from the Public Justice Foundation; the Arthur Ashe Courage Award; and many more.

Whatever it was, the emotion was rekindled by a brief, live encounter at the eponymous U.S. National Tennis Center. King was, as she has always done, enthusing the public about tennis with a new Champions Invitational event that pitted three co-ed teams against one another in her beloved W.T.T. format.

A crowd spanning all ages gathered around the perimeter of one of Flushing Meadows’ outside courts to enjoy a line-up of Grand Slam champions and finalists under the leadership of three of the greats of the game: Pat Cash, Ivan Lendl and, the real star of the show, Billie Jean herself.

Looking trim, and unexpectedly petite, in black tracksuit and trademark spectacles, King lounged casually in her team’s corner, just meters from the excited spectators. She was the quiet center of the hubbub, yet her name was on everyone’s lips. If I had thought I was the only person in awe of her presence, I was sorely mistaken.

She was asked recently what it was about her life that gave her satisfaction: “All the off-the-court stuff. After I die, it will still be there, affecting people’s lives.”

Never was a truer word spoken.

The title refers to words attributed to Queen Elizabeth 1: “I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a king.”

Read other articles in this series about women and their contributions to the game:

Men's Tennis Power Rankings: Djokovic Gets the Better of Federer and Nadal

Marianne Bevis — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 19:19:04 -0500

The last fortnight has been a nail-biting time for many men in the top 15 or so places of the A.T.P. rankings.

Even as the final Masters of the year began this week in Paris, two guaranteed spots at the Tour End Finals were still up for grabs. For some of the players, their destiny was not even on their own rackets.

Nikolay Davydenko, for example, failed to confirm his place in Valencia and had to wait for Fernando Verdasco to lose in Paris.

Verdasco himself, poised at No. 8, had an even more agonizing wait, with his fate in the hands of Fernando Gonzalez, Robin Soderling, and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. Not until Rafael Nadal’s defeat of Tsonga on Friday did Verdasco heave a sigh of relief.

What did become increasingly clear, however, was that Novak Djokovic was the man to beat not only in Paris but also at the Tour finale.

The Top Ten

1. Novak Djokovic (1,405 points)

(Last Power Ranking: 2, ATP Ranking: 3)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [Winner], Basel [Winner], Shanghai Masters [SF], Beijing [Winner]

It’s hard to believe that Djokovic, despite reaching four Masters finals, had not won a single major this season.

Coming into Paris, the Serb was carrying losses to Nadal in Monte Carlo and Rome, a defeat by Roger Federer in Cincinnati, and a defeat by Andy Murray in Miami.

In winning both Paris and Basel he not only took his first Masters of 2009, but also the scalps of Federer and Nadal.

In beating Gael Monfils in the Paris final, he showed stamina and impressive focus. No wonder his roaring, unsmiling celebration was the most pumped up we’ve seen all year.

Prospects for London: he has no injuries, has the best end-of-season record, and is the defending champion— he is one of the favorites.

2. Gael Monfils (656 points)

(Last Power Ranking: NR, ATP Ranking: 13)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [Final], Valencia [R16], Vienna [QF], Shanghai Masters [R16]

All the talk in recent weeks had been of Monfils’ compatriot, Tsonga: Would he repeat his Houdini act of last year to qualify for the Tour End Finals by winning his home tournament?

In the event, it was Monfils who had the French crowd on their feet as he stormed into his first ever Masters final.

A player of enormous promise and potential, Monfils has a flat speed, it is claimed, of 10.4 secs for the 100m. He used all that speed and boundless talent to push Djokovic to the wire. At stake for Monfils was a top-10 ranking and a reserve seat for London. By losing, he handed Tsonga that reserve spot.

3. Rafael Nadal (582 points)

(Last Power Ranking: 3, ATP Ranking: 2)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [SF], Shanghai Masters [Final], Beijing [SF], US Open [SF]

Nadal continues to ride high in the power rankings despite this being, in the past, his least successful phase of the Tour.

He has never won the indoor Paris event. Indeed last year he had to pull out with injury and missed the Masters Cup in Shanghai. But with his extended layoff over the summer, Nadal has posted some decent results on the indoor hard courts. A semifinal place on the very fast Bercy court may not have been what he wanted, but he came through some strong challenges along the way—especially against an inspired Tommy Robredo—and fell to what can only be described as a white-hot performance from Djokovic.

Prospects for London: He seems recovered from injuries, but some have suggested a loss of weight or conditioning. By Nadal’s standards, it’s been a decent run through his least favourite season: He has not won an indoor title since Madrid 2005. Expect him to make the semis, and then he is bound to be a contender for the title.

4. Radek Stepanek (501 points)

(Last Power Ranking: NR, ATP Ranking: 12)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [SF], Basel [SF], Vienna [QF], Shanghai Masters [QF]

Stepanek clearly loves the hard courts, and the indoor hards in particular. He opened 2009 with two wins and a final, and he has hit good form again with the Tour’s return to the hard indoor courts.

Stepanek is at his highest ranking since the summer of 2006: not bad for a 30 year old. His fast serve-volley game, when on song, is a joy, even though his demeanor rarely shows the same grace.

Had he held onto his advantage over Djokovic in Basel or gone on to beat Monfils in Paris, he could have bagged a reserve place for London. As it is, he will pose a real challenge in the Davis Cup final against Spain in December—or would if the indoor court was hard instead of clay.

5. Andy Murray (386 points)

(Last Power Ranking: OLI, ATP Ranking: 4)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [R16], Valencia [Winner], US Open [R16], Cincinnati Masters [SF]

After his long layoff, there were question marks over Murray’s fitness as he came into Valencia. Those were quickly dispelled when he won the tournament, despite a rusty start.

His showing in Paris was not entirely convincing, as he struggled past James Blake in three sets, and went down to Stepanek in three. Murray’s wrist seemed to be holding up, but he showed worrying signs of a groin strain by the end. He will be glad of a week’s rest to recuperate before London.

Prospects for London: The Paris result was his first indoor loss of the season, and Valencia was his sixth title. He is bound to come on strong, on home ground and indoors: a strong semi prospect, with a decent shot at the title.

6. Juan Martin del Potro (382 points)

(Last Power Ranking: 7, ATP Ranking: 5)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [QF], Shanghai Masters [R32], Tokyo [R32], US Open [Winner]

Del Potro continues his poor post-U.S. Open run. He pulled out of Basel, and then had a tough three-setter against Marat Safin at Paris. He looked close to retirement in the next round until his opponent, Fernando Gonzalez, took those honors at one tie-break set apiece.

Del Potro never looked like he was going to make it through another round, and unable to serve, he retired with an abdomen strain at 4-0 down against Stepanek.

Prospects for London: There is currently no further news of his injury, but he looked a tired man even before his Paris retirement. The RR format could well be a step too far for the Argentine.

7. Nikolay Davydenko (380 points)

(Last Power Ranking: 1, ATP Ranking: 7)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [R16], Valencia [SF], Moscow [R32], Shanghai Masters [Winner]

Davydenko remains one of the form players at the tail-end of the season. With the scalps of both Nadal and Djokovic under his belt on the hard courts of Shanghai, he will relish the prospect of similar conditions in London.

He had a decent run in Valencia, eventually taken out by Mikhail Youzhny in a competitive three-setter. He might have preferred to confirm his seventh slot for London with a win over Soderling in Paris, but the Swede needed a good performance of his own, and got it with some big serving and power-play.

Prospects for London: The Russian seems confident and energetic, and is developing some useful all-court tactics and net-play. He made the finals last year and would be a good tip to make at least the semis this time.

8. Roger Federer (357 points)

(Last Power Ranking: 4, ATP Ranking: 1)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [R32], Basel [Final], US Open [Final], Cincinnati [Winner]

Federer had a decent showing at his home-town Basel, though he still lost ranking points by failing to hold the title. The final against Djokovic showed lack of match-play practice, with some problems on timing and over-striking.

Though he played better in Paris, he came up against a man possessed in Julien Benneteau. Few would have beaten the Frenchman hitting such a purple patch, but Federer would almost certainly have liked a few more matches to improve his timing.

Prospects for London: no injuries, but little match-play. Like Nadal, he is looking a little thinner—perhaps family life taking its toll. But London has the year-end No. 1 at stake, which should be incentive enough to drive him into the final stages.

9. Mikhail Youzhny (269 points)

(Last Power Ranking: 9, ATP Ranking: 19)

Last Four Tournaments: Valencia [Final], St. Petersburg [R16], Moscow [Winner], Tokyo [Final]

The Russian’s season ended in Valencia with another excellent showing that has taken him to his highest position in the A.T.P. rankings since the summer of 2008. Perhaps his recent hard-court successes will give him the incentive to perform well on the outdoor equivalents in the new year.

10. Robin Soderling (269 points)

(Last Power Ranking: NR, ATP Ranking: 9)

Last Four Tournaments: Paris Masters [QF], Stockholm [SF], Shanghai Masters [QF], Beijing [SF]

Soderling had to pull out of his semifinal clash with Marcos Baghdatis in Stockholm with injury. However, he came back with a strong performance in Paris to reach the quarterfinals, losing in a three-setter to Djokovic. (Surprisingly, Soderling has never done better in a Masters event.)

With his solid results in the Asian swing, the Swede won the first reserve* place for London, his first time at the event.

Prospects for London: He may get a chance to play should just one of the top eight drop out, and will enjoy the indoor hard courts. But it would require an exceptional performance to get beyond the RR stages.

* With the confirmed withdrawal of Roddick on Tuesday, Soderling is now in the final eight.

The Outsiders

Paris marked the last A.T.P. tournament of the year, so the ranking points for the Tour End Finals are now set. However, three names on the firm or reserve lists for London failed to make the final Power Rankings.

Andy Roddick: He confirmed his place for London long ago, but has been out since the first round at Shanghai with a knee injury. There is no word, at the time of writing**, about his status, though his website shows he has a string of charity events lined up for December. Assuming he makes it to London, he will have no recent match play, so he could end the season as he did last year, retiring early at the RR stage.

Fernando Verdasco: The Spaniard gained the eighth spot at the very last minute. He looked tense in losing to Murray in Valencia and to Cilic in Paris. Qualification clearly meant a lot. But now that he’s in the mix, he has the power to cause problems to any opponents who are less than 100 percent, as long as he has enough self-belief.

Jo-Wilfied Tsonga: As second reserve** Tsonga may not be required to play, but there is certainly an outside chance that two of the top eight, Del Potro and Roddick, may succumb to injury early on. If that happens, Tsonga is on his favorite surface, and talented enough to cause an upset. Whether he can maintain consistency against the best players across several matches is another question.

** Roddick has since confirmed his withdrawal. Tsonga thus becomes first reserve.

The Other Year-End Prize

Federer’s early exit in Paris has left the door ajar for Nadal to steal the year-end No. 1 ranking.

If Nadal had won Paris, his task would have been easier. As it is, Nadal will either need to reach the finals in London and see Federer lose all his RR matches, or win the tournament and see Federer lose at least one RR match. The last permutation is that Federer wins two of his three RRs, in which case Nadal needs to win the tournament undefeated.

In short, the year-end No. 1 looks like it's Federer's to lose.

The Beautiful Game: Tennis Turns Sport Into Art

Marianne Bevis — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:40:53 -0500

This article was originally to have been one of a pair, written in collaboration with Long John Silver. Instead, it is published alone. Long has bid farewell to B/R, and I therefore dedicate this article to him, with thanks for his support and friendship.

A thing of beauty is a joy for ever, and tennis has, appropriately, been giving pleasure to the world for centuries.

But what makes something as abstract as tennis such a thing of beauty? What are the splendid strands of colour that, when intertwined, produce the rich and complex embroidery which is, after all, just a sport?

The strongest and brightest threads, the essential fabric of the tapestry, are, of course, the glorious athletes who ply their trade in the tennis limelight: the players themselves.

Ever since the cultural flowering of classical Greece, the beauty of the human form in action has been celebrated. Statues chiseled to muscular perfection more than two millennia ago mirror today’s flesh and blood bodies, honed to the same perfection in the pursuit of peak fitness.

For admirers of the human form, tennis holds one particular advantage. The complexity of the skills and attributes required to perform at this sport’s highest level allows players of many shapes, builds, and styles to flourish. Which means that, for the fans, there is something for everyone.

For every woman who lusts after the muscular biceps of Rafael Nadal, there is another who favors the angled shoulders of Roger Federer, or the lean legs of Novak Djokovic.

For every man who is drawn to the statuesque, blond figure of Maria Sharapova, another is attracted to the softer brunette looks of Ana Ivanovic, or the legginess of Elena Dementieva.

Some prefer an in-your-face personality: Serena Williams, Robin Soderling, or Fernando Gonzalez. Others like their players serene and respectful: Bjorn Borg, Venus Williams, or James Blake.

But the appeal of tennis is far more than skin deep. It combines many finer strands from many art forms that, woven together, make it a uniquely strong, complex, and beautiful sport.

At the heart of great drama is individual conflict or quest, and the most compelling drama uses plot and character to advance an emotional or physical journey.

Imagine, then, the tennis court as the setting for a play or a film, and watch the players take to their stage for an opening performance.

Tennis is uniquely gladiatorial, one opponent against another, each entirely dependent on their own strengths. The story’s pace, too, is in the hands of the protagonists. Because of tennis’ special scoring system, there is no time limit, no draw, no “point of no return.”

The “dramatis personae” have to maintain concentration, focus, energy, and tactics in the face of constant challenge. They have to win the last point, regardless of the number of games, or sets, or hours that have passed. Then they have to repeat their all-out effort in every match, at every tournament. It’s like the labors of Hercules.

The results can be cruel and can be glorious.

Compare the downcast face of Andy Roddick after 77 games on the stage of Wimbledon with the roaring triumph of Federer at Roland Garros.

Watch the anguish on Dinara Safina’s face as she retires in pain from the biggest tournament of the year.

Look at the swaggering, aggressive strut of Nadal, and imagine the glower of Russell Crowe’s Maximus Decimus Meridius: both ready to take on the world at whatever cost.

Each is a mini drama unfolding before an audience of thousands.

From drama to another performing art: dance.

How many other sports require the constant movement, footwork, and balance of ballet? Which of them requires stillness one moment, explosive reaction, then precise poise the next?

One shot may demand a soaring reach, the next may force a deep bend. A sweeping off forehand pivots the body on a sixpence, a cross-court double-fister can twist the body like a spiral. A Sampras-type smash dunk is the equivalent of a Nureyev changement.

Quite simply, watch the counterbalancing arm of Federer or Amelie Mauresmo during a single-handed slice, and it could belong to Fred or Ginger.

The beauty of tennis’ three-dimensional athletes also translates with ease into the two-dimensional images of the world’s great artworks.

The flexing and pointing limbs of Pat Rafter and Evonne Goolagong recall the swirling, curving lines of Matisse’s many dance paintings.

The rich colours of skin and fabric embodied by Venus Williams or Fernando Verdasco out-shine the jewel-like oils of Gauguin’s Tahiti.

The bodies of Steffi Graf and Feliciano Lopez fit da Vinci’s representation of perfect proportion—the Vitruvian Man captured in his cage of circle and square—and echo the musculature outlined by that great painter’s pen.

Geometry describes an entirely different kind of beauty beyond the confines of the players themselves.

This most visual of the mathematical sciences is intrinsic to match play. Tennis demands a quite remarkable interpretation of angles, speed, and spin, achieved with extraordinary control of a racket head.

The brain has to analyse a ball’s trajectory, visualize where that trajectory will take the 100 m.p.h. missile, and then time the player’s reaction to a micro-second.

The spin on the ball might make it swerve towards the body, or away from it, and may describe a parabola, or a flat arc as it bounces. And the flight itself will be influenced by the very environment: its temperature, humidity, the playing surface.

All these calculations require the analytical power and precision of snooker, the hand-eye coordination of a juggler, and the ability to act and react to the constantly varying assault of an opponent.

This mathematical beauty decorates the tennis tapestry like a fine silver thread. It also illustrates another essential element in any love affair, the ultimate erogenous zone: the brain.

The very best players are top-notch athletes, have the touch of a painter, the bravado of a performer, and the nimbleness of a dancer.

But they also require split-second decision-making, lightening-fast anticipation, endless resilience and self-belief, and the tactical brain of a chess master.

This endlessly compelling sport intertwines the cerebral, the physical, and the dramatic into an infinitely varied, and complex embroidery.

The most beautiful game of all.

Near Misses: Novak Djokovic Almost Ends Rafael Nadal's Reign in Spain

Marianne Bevis — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:47:15 -0500

When the Madrid Masters got under way in mid-May, it stirred up all sorts of publicity.

The Magic Box—the dramatic new venue for this tournament—seemed to be waving a controversial wand over the Tour with its blue clay practice courts, the deep and distracting shadows of its show courts, and unusually hard playing surfaces that delivered more than their fair share of poor bounces.

The weather, too, seemed to be gripped by an evil spell. The wind entered the high, enclosed environs of the Santana and Sanchez Vicario courts and, quite literally, kicked up a storm.

The uneven, thin surface grit ended up in the players’ eyes rather than as a thick lubricant beneath their feet. What little grit remained earthbound was loose and dry, and made it difficult for the players to change direction. It was a punishing and atypical clay event.

Rafael Nadal, the top seed, was vociferous in his opinion of his “home” tournament venue. He felt the courts was unnaturally hard and fast. He felt the balls were light and flying (though whether the altitude of Madrid’s plateau really made a difference to the balls’ characteristics was never settled). Conditions were certainly not to his liking, and they were distinctly different from those he had enjoyed just a fortnight earlier.

Nadal came to Madrid fresh from his triumph over Novak Djokovic on Rome’s more traditional clay. As luck would have it, Nadal now had to face the same man in the Madrid semifinal. This time, though, the match was on a clay surface that had a more than passing resemblance to the hard courts of North America.

The conditions in Madrid, therefore, started to take on some significance. For although Nadal held a 13-to-four head-to-head record against Djokovic, all four of the Serbian's wins had been on American hard courts.

Nadal knew just how well Djokovic was playing on clay, too. Not only had the two met in the Rome final, but Djokovic had also taken Nadal to three sets in the Monte Carlo final. On the faster, harder courts of Madrid, this could be the Serb’s moment.

There were a couple of other matters that added a touch of spice to this particular match. For Nadal, a win kept alive his chances of a clean sweep of the Masters clay-court titles in one season. For Djokovic, a win gave him the chance to regain the world No. 3 ranking that he had lost to Andy Murray only the week before. Indeed, so recent had been Djokovic’s drop to No. 4, that he was still seeded No. 3 in Madrid.

So on the appointed day, a 12,500 capacity crowd sat back to enjoy one of the keenest fought contests of the summer.

Nadal was dressed for the part in hot acid yellow and white, while Djokovic played it cool in arctic blue and white: a contest between sun-tinged Mediterranean and moon-tinted middle Europe.

The ebullient crowd did not sit back for long. The fans were soon sitting on the edge of their seats as they quickly adjusted to an unexpected turn of events. While Nadal seemed preoccupied by the court and his footing, Djokovic burst out of the blocks, firing huge drives all around the court with such weight and depth that Nadal was soon down 0-3.

As the first set developed, the ground strokes from both rackets settled into longer rallies. However, Djokovic’s penetrating shots wide to both wings, the occasional killer volley, and some first-rate serving continued to punish Nadal, who had made an uncharacteristic 11 forehand errors by the time Djokovic closed out the first set at 6-3.

In the second set, the tension cranked up almost immediately. Djokovic gained a break point in Nadal’s second service game, which Nadal saved, along with the game. But the physical toll started to show on Nadal, who called the trainer to work on his right knee and thigh.

It raised, at least for a while, the fear that the hard, unstable surface would affect the outcome of this match. But with heavy strapping in place, he returned to the fray on a newly-watered court.

The set continued with serve until, at 4-4, Djokovic won two break points. So good had the Djokovic serve been in the match that these were as good as match points.

But if Djokovic expected any weakness from Nadal, he was sorely disabused as Nadal found big serves and an overhead smash to save the game. Again Nadal sought treatment, but the set then pounded its way to a tie-break. Nadal took control, and he converted his third set point chance, seven points to five.

With two-and-a-half hours on the clock, the standard of play climbed to a yet higher level, and even greater drama.

Djokovic broke Nadal for a 3-1 lead, only to be broken back straight away. He, too, then sought treatment to his knee and thigh.

The final set stretched, via outstanding tennis, to a tie-break that not even the most confident clairvoyant could have called. It deserves recording in point-by-point detail.

First serve, and first blood, went to Djokovic. Nadal then won his two service points, and appeared to have the wind in his sails. Djokovic reciprocated with excellent serving.

Nadal began to look ragged, with hair slipping from beneath his bandanna. His obsessive rituals became slower and more precise than ever at each change of ends.

At last, a long, long rally delivered a point against serve to Djokovic. The favor was returned and the tie-break continued with serve.

Nadal then conceded a service point that handed Djokovic a match point on his serve.

What followed was the most intense rally of the match (until half a dozen more followed). No player gave a quarter, and both hit harder then ever, to greater depth and width than seemed possible. But with a roar, Nadal won the point to level at 6-6.

[YouTube alert: 10 minutes of high volume tennis, and awry Nadal hair!]

There followed another epic rally, this time won by Djokovic. Yet another brought Nadal back to 7-7. Panting with effort, he served and was rewarded with his first match point.

The crowd chanted support, only to see Djokovic save it audaciously with a stunning drop shot followed by a devastating passing shot. With a big serve, he earned another match point of his own. He hit his drive a fraction long, and they changed ends again, all square a 9-9.

Nadal won his first service point with a perfect drive down the line. And after more than four hours—the longest three-set Master’s match on record—he finally out-drove Djokovic to take the win. He collapsed onto the court, and the crowd erupted.

But make no mistake. This was as close to winning as a loser can get. And what Djokovic did win was a great many new fans.

His shot-making was rangy, flexible, and nimble. He showed endurance and commitment. He tried out new tactics, and he very nearly got the beating of Nadal on clay.

Even after the huge disappointment of that 6-3, 6(5)-7, 6(9)-7 loss, a spark of humor surfaced: “Next time I'll probably take two rackets into the match point and try to hit with both of them...The positives are that I was one point away from the victory."

Indeed he was one point from handing Nadal only his fifth loss on clay in 154 matches.

Djokovic, in the event, left the coup de grace to Roger Federer in the final and that, it transpired, became a turning point in Nadal’s year. Nadal said of Djokovic after the match: “It seems to me he's getting better with every game." It was a prescient comment.

Their next meeting was at Cincinnati, on Djokovic’s preferred surface, and it turned the tables. Djokovic was an easy and comfortable winner. The extraordinary performance he produced in Madrid proved to be one more step in the development of a truly formidable tennis player.

This is the second in the "Near Miss" series. For the first, a double-header on Martina Hingis, see antiMatter's Part One and Long John's Part Two.

Tennis Year-End Finals: Will It Be History Repeating for Novak Djokovic?

Marianne Bevis — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:25:50 -0500

For the last handful of the tennis tour’s top men, a place in the World Tour Finals in London is so close they can almost taste it. The narrowing window of November is slowly eliminating names from the list of possibles, but the race to the Final is set to go right to the wire.

The first six berths for London were decided well before the late indoor tournaments began their final filtering. Five of them were in the same position last year, with tickets already booked for Shanghai: Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray, and Andy Roddick.

The sixth certainty for this year, Juan Martin Del Potro, secured his place for London several weeks ago but was, in 2008, still waiting on the sidelines to confirm his place. The sixth certainty last year, Nikolay Davydenko, finds himself in the same position this year. He could have sealed his spot with a win in Valencia but, like several other contenders, he now has to wait for Paris.

Who’s Already Out?

A string of players that was still in contention as October turned to November has already been discarded.

Tommy Robredo lost in Valencia to Fernando Verdasco and, at a stroke, also boosted his compatriot’s claim to London.

David Ferrer, whose chances were dependent on winning in Valencia, instead retired with a leg injury, and Gael Monfils was dropped after his second-round exit.

With 12th hopeful Radek Stepanek’s defeat by Djokovic in the Basel semis, he now has to win in Paris and see Verdasco fail to win any more matches.

The fate of Marin Cilic, 13 in the race, is almost identical: His fate would have been sealed had Verdasco beaten Murray in the Valencia semifinal, and it remains thin to zero.

Who Are The Remaining Contenders For London?

It’s just possible that the final Masters event of 2009 repeats the same trick as last year, and wins a place for its home favourite Jo-Wilfried Tsonga . Indeed, there’s a certain Groundhog Day feeling about Paris; a sense of history repeating (though there will be no last minute reprieve for Gilles Simon, since his bid for London has also come to an end in Valencia).

Prior to Paris 2008, Tsonga was down at 14 in the rankings, and David Nalbandian held the crucial No. 8 spot. Both fought their way to an all-or-nothing final and, in winning it, Tsonga stole both the No. 8 ranking and Nalbandian’s place in Shanghai.

Tsonga is in a similar position this year, sitting at No. 11 in the year-end race. This time around, however, he has major concerns following a first-round exit from Valencia with a wrist injury.

There is no question, however, that the main favourite, along with Davydenko, must be Verdasco. These two happen to hold the 7th and 8th London slots, and both reached the semifinals in Valencia.

Davydenko , who is currently over 300 points clear of the rest, was in line to confirm his O2 trip by winning in Spain, but went out to fellow Russian, Mikhail Youzhny. Davydenko has been in excellent form since the summer, taking titles in Hamburg, Umag, Kuala Lumpur, Shanghai. He is still top choice to fill one of the remaining London places.

Verdasco’s end-of-season has not been as strong as Davydenko’s, his most recent title coming in New Haven. He also lost to the Russian in Kuala Lumpur. However, he is playing very good tennis this week, and the indoor surface suits his powerful game.

He has postponed surgery on his foot in order to make the Tour Finals, and there’s a good chance he’ll seal the deal in Paris.

Robin Soderling , sat at nine in the race, has to reach the final in Paris to keep his hopes alive, but his worry will be the elbow injury that took him out of his home tournament in Stockholm. His fate will be dependent both on that injury and on just how well his opponents play but, like Verdasco, he has the big game to do well both in Paris and in London.

Neither Verdasco nor Soderling has made the year-end finale before. One rank outsider, Fernando Gonzalez , has, and he is ranked 10 in the race. He substantially reduced his chances with a first-found exit in Basel, but may still have an eye to the main chance: perhaps a reserve berth for London.

For what these last few players must not forget is that there is always the possibility that one of the “certainties” may drop out.

Will Injury Play A Part?

Last year, Nadal was injured in Paris and had to withdraw from Shanghai. Roddick injured himself in the round robin phase at the Masters Cup, and Stepanek flew in to take his place after the tournament was under way.

And one only has to look at the injury fall-out from the women’s end-of-year event in Doha to see that reserves can play unexpected part.

So those last remaining men may therefore want to bear a few things in mind.

Del Potro pulled out of Shanghai just a month ago with a wrist injury.

Verdasco did not play a Davis Cup tie in September due to injury, and he requires foot surgery when the season is over.

Davydenko had a catalogue of foot problems early in the year.

Roddick is still nursing a knee injury, and pulled of Paris prior to the draw on Friday.

Nadal is only just back from a long lay-off with abdomen and knee problems, and Murray had to take out six weeks to repair his wrist. Even in Valencia, he turned up at his press conference with an ice-pack.

Federer, too, is just back from a six-week lay-off. There are no signs of injury so far, but last year he carried an injury to Shanghai that he’d sustained in Paris, and went out in the round robin stage.

There are no guarantees and no certainties. So Djokovic, one of the players least troubled by injury this year, and with an excellent run in Basel this week, must really fancy his chances of retaining that year-end title.

He plays Federer in the Basel final. After losses in their two most recent meetings, Djokovic will be keen to reassert his credentials and give himself a boost ahead of his campaign to repeat last year's Shanghai triumph.

In the Zone with Roger Federer: Part One

Marianne Bevis — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:42:48 -0500

2009 Australian Open Quarterfinal: Federer vs. Juan Martin Del Potro

When Roger Federer and Juan Martin Del Potro took to the court in Melbourne in the opening month of 2009, the weight of certainty to uncertainty over the outcome was finely balanced.

There were many things that were certain about Del Potro. He came into the Australian Open with a win just the week before, in Auckland. His victims there included Sam Querrey and Robin Soderling; no slouches on hard courts.

Between Wimbledon and the U.S. Open in 2008, Del Potro had won four straight tournaments: Stuttgart, Kitzbuhel, Los Angeles, and Washington.

In the 12 months leading up to the Australian Open, his ranking had rocketed from 53 to six. And commensurate with his new-found ranking, he had made steady progress towards this quarterfinal showdown. Del Potro was young, he was big, and he was improving all the time.

Weighted against him, however, was a 3-0 head-to-head in his opponent’s favor.

Then there was the Federer balance sheet.

A fortnight before, he had lost to Andy Murray in the Doha semifinals. It was an inauspicious return to the Tour after an illness-tainted 2008. The man who had only been beaten 18 times in the previous three years put together lost 15 matches in a single year. The last two of those losses were at the round-robin stage of the year-end Masters Cup, beaten by Murray, Gilles Simon, and a crippling back.

More immediately, and of most concern, was Federer’s near loss in the previous round at Melbourne, to Tomas Berdych.

There were, this being the man who had racked up 237 consecutive weeks as world No. 1, a few ingots of gold to add to his side of the scales.

This was Federer's 23rd Grand Slam quarterfinal and his 19th in a row. The last time Federer had lost before the semifinals in any Slam was at Roland Garros in 2004. And of course, there was that 3-0 record over his opponent.

Their head-to-head may have meant little to Federer, but the record of his opponent weighed on Del Petro’s mind: “I will play the best player ever. I will just have to do my best to beat him.”

The match began normally enough, with holds of serve and the odd error off the ground. The fourth game, though, was a tussle. They played several deuces, but Federer hustled and sparkled, already showing off a fluid backhand, vicious forehand, and an eagerness to attack the net. He broke serve for the first time, which was enough to seal a fast-paced 6-3 set.

Federer was dominating the Del Potro’s power play with consummate ease. His movement was fast and assured, his footwork crisp, and his aggressive serve-and-volley tactics perfectly executed. But Del Potro had seen nothing yet.

In set two, Federer appeared to switch from everyday champion to once-in-a-lifetime champion. His racket was discarded in favor of a poison-tipped rapier, the shoes sprouted wings, and the tactical brain was swapped for a super-computer.

He broke the very first game, and to love, with a sequence of shots that encapsulated the rapid direction this match was to take.

Federer broke a second time, albeit with slightly less ease. Everything is relative, and although Del Potro scored a couple of aces and took the game to deuce, Federer stayed in command.

His tactics were clear. Federer aimed to move the bigger man back and forward, make him play low balls, and take time away from him by rushing the net.

The tactics worked a treat, and the execution was deadly. Backhands were sliced wide and acutely angled. Drop shots were stroked over the net from the back and the front of the court. Volleys were taken early and hit into open space. It was easy to see what Federer has been practising over the winter break.

In the blink of an eye, the second set was gone to love, and Del Potro looked stunned. Where had the fragile, vulnerable Federer of a dozen newspaper reports gone? Who had slipped on the dazzling blue invincibility cloak between that fourth-round match and this moonlit assault?

By the third set, Federer had taken on the characteristics of a killer whale, one of those glorious but remorseless creatures that catches its prey in the shallows and tosses it from wave to wave in preparation for the final kill.

Del Potro swam for his life, hitting harder and harder shots, but was broken immediately to love. In one desperate attempt to retrieve a skimming angled slice, Del Potro’s shot was called “not up” and Federer—relaxed to the point of needing a feather pillow—faked a smash before nodding it over with his head. A spine-tingling message.

By the fourth game, Del Potro had won just three points. The more he pushed, the worse he did.

Federer's 11th and 12th aces took him to 40-0, 5-0. One match point was saved, the next was not. The three sets had taken just 80 minutes, and Federer, appropriately, showed a certain reticence in celebrating his progress to a 19th consecutive Grand Slam semifinal.

The bald statistics of the match were eloquent enough: an average first serve rate of 70 percent; 12 aces; nine unforced errors, just three in the last two sets together; and 38 winners (that’s almost two outright winners every game).

But it was the style in which those statistics stacked up that confirmed most eloquently that Federer was “in the zone.” He appeared so completely centred, so oblivious to his surroundings, so quiet and calm, that a bomb might have gone off and he would have continued his near-faultless tennis. Few fist-pumps, not a sound, complete focus. The brilliance just poured from his racket.

The most jaded of critics would have been content with the stream of individual winners: the off backhand into the far corner to win the first game; or the cross-court angled backhand whip in the fifth game; or the serve followed by a soft stop volley in the 11th game; or, two games later, Federer cross-stepping into position to strike his signature forehand in mid air.

However, it was the numerous sequences of perfect shots that showed how completely “zoned” Federer was.

In the first point of the eighth game, Federer played four successive backhands: the first a blocked return to Del Potro’s feet; the second a subtle slice angled just across the net; the third a long cross-court slice to the far corner; the last a searing top spin drive deep down the line.

Then there was a sequence of four points that broke Del Potro to love in the first game of the second set, the last a soft caress of a forehand volley from his feet for an outright winner, nonchalant as a falling leaf.

This unrelenting pressure is what pierced Del Potro’s armoury like arrows through a pumpkin.

Federer’s words after the match confirmed this state of mind. “Things went much better than I expected…I kind of felt good from the start. The longer the match went, the more he struggled and the better I got.”

Now return briefly to those scales, and the checks and balances that can shift uncertainty to certainty. There was one additional ingot in Federer’s dish that evening.

What no-one else knew until many weeks later was that Federer’s wife-to-be was pregnant. The couple, it transpired, received the news that they were to have twins just before he played that quarterfinal. Only later did Federer reveal his apprehension at how this news might affect his game that day. He soon knew. “It was like, O.K., seems like it’s not affecting me. That was a good start.”

The end, though—losing a highly-charged final to Nadal—was not quite so good.

Federer would go on, in Madrid, to beat Del Potro in straight sets again, and then to win his first major title of the year. The French Open brought them together again, and Del Potro continued to grow in confidence and stature. That contest went to five gruelling sets and, although Federer won it, the gauntlet had been thrown down.

By the U.S. Open final, the scales had tilted Del Potro’s way, and Federer retreated to the bosom of his new family, carrying his first loss to the big man. The balance had shifted, for the time being at least. Those twins had had their effect after all!

But Del Potro must beware. It is only a matter of time until Federer finds his familiar “zone.” If it lasts an entire match, as it did on that Melbourne night, say your prayers, because good tennis won’t be enough!

Check out the previous article in this series on Pete Sampras by Rob York.

And if you have five minutes to spare, watch and enjoy some highlights of Federer’s performance here .

Bali Beckons: Wickmayer, Stosur, Bartoli Lead Tennis Champions' Finale

Marianne Bevis — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 19:52:34 -0400

The best men in the tennis world will be rewarded for their year’s efforts with a place at the A.T.P.’s Tour-end jamboree in London.

The British capital has a lot of things going for it, but the November weather isn’t one of them. The autumn leaves will have fallen, the air will be cool and, most likely, damp. And since dusk arrives at around four in the afternoon in late November, the players will get precious little daylight, let along sunshine!

Meanwhile, their female counterparts are enjoying sweltering daytime sunshine and sticky starlit nights at the glimmering Khalifa International Tennis Complex in Doha on the Persian Gulf.

But if the top eight women in the world have got a better deal than the men, the next rank of women have done even better.

For next week, they are bound for Bali.

Bathed in sunshine, and surrounded by coral reefs, this Indonesian paradise is a favored destination for tourists from around the world. Those tourists will shortly include 12 of the best women tennis players that the W.T.A. has to offer, for the Commonwealth Bank Tournament of Champions is set to debut at the Bali International Convention Centre on 4th November.

Although there has been an annual tennis tournament on the island since 2001, this is the first time it has featured as a round-robin style grandstand finale to the year’s Tour.

This is a chance for the 10 highest-ranked women who did not make the cut for Doha, along with two wild cards, to share $600,000 in prize money. More significantly, it is an opportunity for them to stamp their 2010 intentions on their W.T.A. rivals.

To be eligible, each woman must have taken at least one International tournament title from the 30 on offer in 2009. Any player who wins three International tournaments and the Tournament of Champions will also win a $1-million bonus. As if that wasn’t enough incentive, they get to stay in Bali for a week!

So who will make a season-closing splash?

The prime candidates are the three participants who are currently in the top 20.

Marion Bartoli, No.12, won her fourth and fifth Tour titles in 2009 at Monterrey in March and at Stanford in July (where she defeated Venus Williams in the final). Way back in January she also reached the final in Brisbane. However, she pulled out of Osaka in mid-October with a right shoulder injury.

Just below Bartoli is Samantha Stosur, who is at a career-high ranking of 13, and won the Osaka title in October. She was also the runner-up in Los Angeles in August.

Although Stosur is one of the form players of the moment, she will arrive in Bali straight from her participation, with partner Rennae Stubbs, in the doubles in Doha. Her success in Bali may well depend on how much energy she brings with her.

However, Yanina Wickmayer, ranked at 19, must be one of the favorites for this event. She’s had a breakthrough season, winning her first Tour title at Estoril in April and reaching the semi-finals of the U.S. Open.

Since October, she’s had yet more success, winning in Linz and reaching the semis in Luxembourg. As a result, she took second place in the last Bleacher Report Power Rankings.

Sabine Lisicki, ranked 25, has gained a wild card entry to Bali. With a Premier event already under her belt from Charleston in April, she also reached last week’s finals in Luxembourg.

Just below Lisicki, at No.27, is Anabel Medina Garrigues, who has had one of the best seasons of her 13-year career, including a ninth title at Fès in April and the final of Seoul in September.

At No.31 is Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez, who won her first ever title in Bogota in February, and then her second in Bastad in July.

A good tip for a break-through in Bali, though, is world No.32, Shahar Peer. She won her first two titles in consecutive weeks in September, without losing a set, at Guangzhou and Tashkent. She then reached the semis in Luxembourg last week. She’s on a good streak, and she seems to be fit. One to watch.

Others in the mix, but without much form since the summer, are Agnes Szavay, Aravane Rezai, and Magdalena Rybarikova.

Although Melinda Czink won her first title in Quebec in September, she had to pull out of the quarter-finals in Osaka with a foot injury.

For the sentimental vote, however, don’t look any further than the 39-year-old wildcard, Kimiko Date Krumm.

She returned to the Tour in 2008 after 11 years in retirement, and won the Seoul title this September. It was her first title since 1996!

A long shot, certainly, but what a story!

And what a great way to end a long, hard season: soaking up the sun in Bali.

Tip for the title: Yanina Wickmayer

One to watch: Shahar Peer

Roger Federer in Four Seasons: A Watercolour of Memories

Marianne Bevis — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 04:09:56 -0400

Time drags its feet through the fading days of October.

The wait is long, and the gaping hole he leaves seems bottomless.

The absence of Roger Federer from tennis brings a thirst that will only be quenched when, at last, he takes to the courts of his homeland. But the oasis of Basel seems still a distant mirage.

So the anticipation for autumn-tinged November has never been as great.

Until then, though, the only respite—like drops of rain in a parched desert—is found in recordings, recollections, and writing.

Thus watered, the desert bursts into a Technicolor meadow of flowers, each blossom a single moment from a year of contrasts.

As days shorten towards the Tour Finals, the first memories to surface recall oil-dark events, a year ago, under the magnolia roof of Shanghai.

God gave us our memories so that we might have roses in December (J. M. Barrie)

Last October, Federer turned a painful back on Paris. By November, his appearance had darkened to midnight blue for the pale violet courts of Shanghai.

The Chinese city’s exuberant fairground atmosphere threw his navy form into sharp relief.

Against Andy Murray, he played fearsome and fearless tennis, but was reduced to a shadow by an inspired opponent. First bent double like a stem without water, then prostrate at court-side as though blighted by winter frost, Federer was a broken reed. The rhapsody in blue turned to grey.

Winter advanced through December towards January. New shoots of growth appeared at a warm-up showcase in Abu Dhabi and a first tournament in Doha.

But the Persian Gulf shivered in chill winds. As though in sympathy, Federer remained swathed in the colour of the night sky—and continued to lose to Murray.

Jewels of rich and exquisite form (William Shakespeare)

As Federer has matured, his color palette has narrowed and refined into a winter spectrum. The occasional greens and yellows of his youth have been replaced by every imaginable blue tempered, according to the season, by strong jewel-like hues—ruby red, coral, azure.

In the Australian final, on the first day of February, a vivid lapis lazuli shirt trimmed in pure white recalled cornflowers swaying in the breeze.

The moon-tinted blue of the Melbourne court provided a perfect counterpoint to the glowing topaz of his limbs. Cropped dark curls were bound in sweat-darkened inky blue. Sapphire-hued shoulders swooped wide in his dramatic and elegant single-handed whip.

These cool colors belied the heat of the weather and the tennis. Federer’s longed-for rematch against Rafael Nadal produced the expected drama, scintillating tennis, and swinging fortunes.

The prize went to Nadal. The tear-stained face of Federer went into recuperative hibernation for five weeks.

If winter comes, can spring be far behind? (Percy Bysshe Shelley)

Federer’s winter solstice eventually passed, and a gentle sun rose into his spring sky. He was to become a father

Indian Wells chimed perfectly with his optimistic mood. It’s a place drenched in blue, completely in tune with its watery origins. Its serene mountainous backdrop, cloudless skies, and dry heat come as close to a garden of paradise as a desert can offer.

Federer stripped his look back to the simplest blue-black, shoulder-to-knee in navy. The collar was replaced with a simple neckline dipped slightly at the throat. What might be sombre was lifted by white headband and feet, signed off with a pristine swoosh on the breast.

His tennis was anything but sombre. He overcame some of the best hard-court players—Ivo Karlovic, Fernando Gonzalez, and Fernando Verdasco—yet he fell once more to Murray.

Late March brought one of the brightest and breeziest tournaments of the year. Miami’s searing sunshine alternated with breezy outbursts that kept both players and officials on their toes.

And at last, Federer’s winter hue lightened to white and mink leavened with turquoise highlights. But while spring blossomed across his shoulders, fingers of frost touched his tennis, and storm clouds broke out over another loss. This time it was to Novak Djokovic.

Blue days, all of them gone, nothing but blue skies from now on (Irving Berlin)

April, and a secret marriage, ushered in a new season and a new look for the welcome clay of Monte Carlo.

Now clad in silky blue-grey, streamlined and tinged with sky blue, a new steely glint entered Federer’s eyes. His visit to Monaco was brief, but it sowed the seeds of an emerging new game. A drop shot—especially an off-forehand caressed across the net—reminded everyone of his exquisite touch.

May brought Rome. The terracotta courts ranged from a deep shade of rust, through the vivid orange of a new flower pot, to the mellow red-earth shade of Rome’s weathered palazzos.

Federer’s tennis glowed hot on the hot clay, until thunder and lightning drenched the surface to near black, and Federer’s lead drifted in the fresh breeze to a final set loss and a repeat of Miami.

Yet the spadework had been done, the soil tilled and seeded, and the sun at last promised to yield a title.

In the silver blue of Madrid’s Magic Box, Federer’s shimmering form cut down the challenges of Robin Soderling, James Blake, Andy Roddick, Juan Marin del Potro and, finally, Nadal, like a scythe made flesh. And he reaped his first trophy of 2009.

June, Roland Garros, the French Open, and its perfectly manicured clay rectangle. Everything was just so. Federer fitted Paris like a native. Here, he married cool, understated smoky blue with a highlight of coral at his neck.

His effort, fitness, and concentration had to be as crisp and complete as his look. This was the most valued prize and proved to be the most hard won. Sets fell by the wayside, and two matches almost fell on stony ground. Tommy Haas saw the prize ripped from his grasp by a Federer suddenly possessed.

Del Potro almost stole the show two matches later. Federer, though had seen saw his name on the trophy: Soderling was dispatched in straight sets as gentle rain christened his efforts.

Fields of gold (Eva Cassidy)

The Federer trajectory since spring had swung upwards as temperatures rose into high summer.

Injuries were behind him, records were broken, and his personal life burgeoned. The sun-kissed assassin had started to take the tour by the throat, his outer contentment masking a steely resolve.

July, and an emerald Wimbledon offered the chance to etch his name in gold for a sixth time.

Glimmering in white, his look was stripped down to crisp simplicity: immaculate fit, diamond bright, with just a hint of gold on breast, thigh and shoe. Understated, practical and classy.

In action, the sweep of his arms and shoulders were swan-like, wings angled back like a bird taking flight.

He has always held the Wimbledon crowds in his palm. This year’s performance on London’s lawns was like a kiss on their cheek.

His tennis came together with a fluidity, lightness and ingenuity not seen in many a season. If it had not, if his piercing serve, his energised backhand, and his deft drop shot had not born such fruit, he may have lost one of the greatest battles of his career. But gentle sunlight shone on a victory over a gallant but shattered Andy Roddick.

The rest of high summer saw Federer retreat to the embrace of family and restful mountains, to the headiness of sleepless nights with newborn babies, and to reflections, alongside the tranquil waters of Lake Zurich, on what had been and what lay ahead.

This happy month, away from the whirligig of the tour, mirrored that less happy break in the cool weeks between winter and spring. That season was tinted with cobalt blue, stormy sea blue. His smiling return to tennis in August was cloaked in turquoise blue, Aegean blue.

Surrounded by parents, wife and daughters, he exuded joi de vivre. As the U.S. swing’s strap-line ran, “It Must Be Love.”

At the eponymous Roger’s Cup in Montreal, the Federer limbs worked themselves back into shape, though succumbed to a lotus-eater heaviness by the final stages of his quarter-final.

Another week, and the well-oiled machinery began to purr. Flashing feet skittered across the Cincinnati courts, blue over blue. Black made its first assertive statement, trimming neck and forehead, and presaging autumn’s black-and-bright theme.

Revenge over rivals from the spring came with satisfactory ease: Murray in the semis, Djokovic in the final.

Federer took his fourth title from five majors. New York lay ahead.

A study In scarlet (Arthur Conan Doyle)

White-bright summer afternoons turned to burnished days and velvet-warm nights at Flushing Meadows. Cheeks, appropriately, became flushed from a hot, humid sun. Colours exploded around the most vibrant venue in the world: Jackson Pollock made flesh.

The defending champion hoped for a record-breaking sixth title and dressed the part.

At high noon, Federer burned in vivid scarlet. At night, the crimson darkened to ink, with flames licking forehead and throat. Man turned volcano: body dark as granite, opening through red collar like molten lava.

So poppy-red days, like a Mediterranean garden, alternated with silky black evenings floodlit into operatic Technicolor.

He lost one set under the blazing sun to Lleyton Hewitt. He lost another under a cloud-heavy sky to Soderling. Federer, hard as jet, intense as fire, dug deep in pursuit of the prize.

With Djokovic dismissed, the black knight emerged for the final showdown. It proved to be a step too far. Black and scarlet trumped by Del Potro’s black and gold.

Within a week, restored to vermilion in Italy, Federer led the charge for Davis Cup victory on Italy’s clay. Season of mellow fruitfulness. Reds turning to copper, high heat turned down to simmer, flat-out effort giving way to down-time.

Now the four seasons have come full circle. Autumn has, once more, given way to winter and the pursuit of the year-end title.

Grasping hold of Federer’s shirt-tail through these four seasons, taking every chance to savor the blue and the orange, the white and the gold, the crimson and the black, has been a woman.

She began, almost one year ago, with a nervous journey to Shanghai.

She began, almost one year ago, to share her experiences with tentative words.

She began, 99 articles ago, by writing on Bleacher Report.

This 100th—a personal watercolour of her journey—is dedicated to the man who set her on her way.

Women's Tennis Power Rankings: Schiavone Shines While Jankovic Journeys to Doha

Marianne Bevis — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:31:43 -0400

What a difference a day makes. Yesterday, Serena Williams topped the women’s rankings. Today, with last year’s points from Doha subtracted, she slips behind Dinara Safina once more. The Russian will therefore be the top seed at the Sony Ericsson Championships.

It was with a margin of just four days that Jelena Jankovic won her place in Doha. By reaching the quarter-finals in Moscow, she scraped just enough points to fill the eighth and final place in the season’s finale.

Jankovic, for obvious reasons, has been one of very few top 10 players in action during the last fortnight. Two others racing for the Doha wire—and filling the pair of "reserve" seats—were Agnieszka Radwanska and Vera Zvonareva.

But how did they fair against the following pack, many of whom have the incentive of one of 10 spots in the Commonwealth Bank Tour of Champions in Bali during the first week in November?

The Top 10

1. Francesca Schiavone (597 points) Current WTA Ranking:17. Last Power Ranking:NR

Last four tournaments: Moscow [Winner], Osaka [Finalist], Beijing [R32], Tokyo [R64]

What a fortnight for the intense Italian. She reached the finals in Osaka and played a storm in Moscow to take only the second title of her career, despite this being her 12th final.

Looking at how she played, it’s a surprising record. She’s a wiry powerhouse of talent, able to play with slice as easily as topspin, volleys as happily as ground strokes. Her drop shot and her single-handed backhand are a delight.

How, at the age of 29, she has still never broken into the top 10 (her highest was 11 almost four years ago), is hard to understand.

This week, she has jumped seven places. With precious few points to defend in the early part of 2010, maybe she can make one last push.

2. Yanina Wickmayer (400 points) Current WTA Ranking:19. Last Power Ranking:NR

Last four tournaments: Luxembourg [SF], Linz [Winner], Beijing [R64], U.S.Open [SF]

The young six-footer from Belgium is on a roll. First she took the Linz title and then, to celebrate her birthday, reached the semis in Luxembourg. With her all-round power play, her first two titles in the bag, and acceleration up the rankings, watch out for her in 2010. With the return of Clijsters and Henin, the Belgians are most definitely on the march.

3. Svetlana Kuznetsova (387 points) Current WTA Ranking:3. Last Power Ranking:1

Last four tournaments: Beijing [Winner], Tokyo [R32], U.S.Open [R16], New Haven [QF]

The Russian has not played since her win in Beijing. With her place sealed for Doha, she may be playing a sensible game by resting. She appears to be injury-free, has come into form at the right time, and has the quick muscular game to get through the tough round-robin format. She has to be a good proposition for the year-end title.

4. Agnieszka Radwanska (387 points) Current WTA Ranking:10. Last Power Ranking:2

Last four tournaments: Moscow [R32], Linz [SF], Beijing [Finalist], Tokyo [SF]

The Pole continued her good autumn run with another 130 points from Linz, but an early loss in Moscow ended her hopes of a guaranteed spot for Doha. She has, though, made second "reserve."

With a few injuries breaking out amongst the top eight, she may still get to play—as long as her own heavily taped left leg stays sound.

5. Kim Clijsters (345 points) Current WTA Ranking:18. Last Power Ranking:6

Last four tournaments: Luxembourg [R16], U.S.Open [Winner], Toronto [R16], Cincinnati [QF]

Clijsters’ first return to the courts in Luxembourg since her U.S. Open triumph was brief, going out in the second round, in three stiff sets, to Patty Schnyder.

It looks as though the Belgian is building up her schedule. She will play Venus Williams at an exhibition event, The Thomas Cook Diamond Games, on the home turf of Antwerp in December, and her web site outlines a solid 2010 calendar starting in Australia in January.

6. Maria Sharapova (325 points) Current WTA Ranking:14. Last Power Ranking:3

Last four tournaments: Beijing [R16], Tokyo [Winner], U.S.Open [R32], Toronto [Finalist]

The Sharapova season finished with Beijing, and she is planning to use a long offseason to work on her fitness for Australia.

In an interview this week, she also mentioned a couple of exhibitions prior to the Oz season, so fans should keep their eyes open for those dates!

7. Jelena Jankovic (273 points) Current WTA Ranking:8. Last Power Ranking:OLI

Last four tournaments: Moscow [QF], Beijing [R32], Tokyo [Finalist], U.S.Open [R64]

Her quarter-final exit from Moscow was hardly a convincing performance. Since retiring in the final in Tokyo, she has struggled to impose her game on the competition, and looks jaded.

It’s hard to see her improving on last year’s semi-final finish in the Tour finals.

8. Marion Bartoli (249 points) Current WTA Ranking:12. Last Power Ranking:4

Last four tournaments: Osaka [QF], Beijing [SF], Tokyo [QF], U.S.Open [R64]

The French woman notched up another 70 points in Osaka before pulling out of her quarter-final match with a right shoulder injury. So her target of a top 10 place will have to wait until 2010.

More interesting, though, is that she, and the late-surging Italian, Flavia Pennetta just above her at 11, are next in line for those “reserve” seats to Doha. But Pennetta withdrew from Moscow with a knee injury. Let’s hope not too many of the selected 10 fall by the wayside before the Championships get under way!

9. Nadia Petrova (237 points) Current WTA Ranking:16. Last Power Ranking:5

Last four tournaments: Moscow [R16], Beijing [SF], Tokyo [R32], Quebec City [QF]

With some past solid performances, the energetic Russian is currently holding her own in the mid-rankings and added a modest 60 points at her recent Moscow outing. But without more consistency, she may have trouble maintaining a top-20 place for much longer.

10. Serena Williams (220 points) Current WTA Ranking:2. Last Power Ranking:9

Last four tournaments: Beijing [R16], U.S.Open [SF], Toronto [SF], Cincinnati [R16]

If she is motivated for the Doha title, she will still be the one to beat. She’s played little, but that may help her in the heat of the Persian Gulf.

Many of the women are starting to feel the effects of the hard court season just when they need their greatest resources. Williams is not.

Outside Looking In

Na Li (211 points) Current WTA Ranking:15. Last Power Ranking:7

After a strong showing in Tokyo and Beijing, Li has not played. She may have failed to win a title this year, but she is enjoying an all-time high in the rankings. Impressive at 27, and her success in the Asian swing may spur her on in 2010.

Vera Zvonareva (184 points) Current WTA Ranking: 9. Last Power Ranking:OLI

Things don’t seem to improve for the Russian. She made it to the second round in Moscow, where she got a thrashing from qualifier Tsvetana Pironkova, 6-0, 6-2. With both knees already taped, Zvonareva resorted to extra strapping during the match, and looked like a tired player.

She’s on the plane to Doha as a reserve. She may be hoping that she is not called upon to play.

Elena Dementieva (178 points) Current WTA Ranking:5. Last Power Ranking:8

Another Doha-bound woman who did not play this fortnight will be hoping that the rest sees her through the tough week ahead.

It will be Dementieva’s ninth appearance at the Tour Championships, the most among active players. Many will hope that this popular, but temperamental, woman has major success this time around. She turned 28 last week, so needs to make her mark soon.

Honorable mentions

The young Swiss, Timea Bacsinszky, won her first tour final in Luxembourg, and jumped 15 ranking places.

Australian Samantha Stosur also won a first tour title in Osaka, and finishes just shy of the top dozen at 13.

Author's Thoughts On Doha

Though the 2009 WTA tour has now reached its conclusion, a couple of show-stoppers still lie ahead for the top-ranked players. The singles Championship finale in Doha features:

Dinara Safina; Serena Williams; Svetlana Kuznetsova; Caroline Wozniacki; Elena Dementieva; Victoria Azarenka; Venus Williams; and Jelena Jankovic

Reserves:Vera Zvonareva and Agnieszka Radwanska

Venus Williams beat Zvonareva in last year’s final. The only other woman currently in Doha to have won before is Williams’ sister, Serena. She did so without playing a point, as her opponent, Lindsay Davenport, could not play the final. How much sweeter would be the year-end victory if she could play it out, on court, to the last point? But who could stop Serena?

Well, Jankovic has a niggling wrist problem. Wozniacki retired in her first-round match last week with a thigh pull. Azarenka has had few significant wins since the summer. Against this scenario, Safina will be counting her blessings that she is drawn against these three for the round-robin stage.

In her pool, Serena Williams faces her sister, who has also had injury problems. She has the form player of the moment, a fit and rested Kuznetsova. Also in this tough section is Dementieva who, despite an up-and-down year, undoubtedly has the ability to beat any of them. She too is rested, and would be a popular winner.

Pick for semis: Kuznetsova and Serena Williams, Safina and Azarenka.

Pick for title: Kuznetsova

A final word on the other tournament taking place in Doha this week: the doubles.

Cara Black and Liezel Huber are top seeds, with the Williams as No. 2.

The sisters have never been in the year-end competition before and have only played five tournaments this year. But those five resulted in three Grand Slam wins. They beat Black and Huber in two of them.

It will take a brave person to bet against the Williams winning in Doha as well.

Queens of the Court: Helen Wills Moody, the Garbo of Tennis

Marianne Bevis — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 03:04:51 -0400

The relatively unknown Molla Mallory holds the record for the most U.S. Open singles titles—eight. But it was the remarkable Helen Wills Moody who, at the age of just 17, relieved Mallory of her U.S. crown in 1923, and went on to hold the record of 19 singles Grand Slam titles for a third of a century.

This is the second in a short series celebrating some of the most inspiring and influential women to have played tennis.

Look out for more articles from Clarabella, Claudia, and Joan in the coming weeks.

All the signs were that Helen Wills would make a success of her life.

She graduated from one of California’s top schools and won an academic scholarship to study fine arts at the University of California. She went on to be honored as a Phi Beta Kappa, one of the most prestigious liberal arts and sciences awards in the United States.

She was a highly accomplished painter, a successful writer, and an excellent horsewoman.

She rubbed shoulders with kings and prime ministers, was painted by Diego Rivera, and was admired by Charlie Chaplin.

But the early signs did not suggest a career as one of the 20th century’s most successful sportswomen, for she was a small and relatively fragile girl. She was, though, blessed in her parents.

Her father, Clarence Wills, was a doctor, and he got his daughter interested in outdoor activities, particularly swimming and riding. When she was eight, he bought her a tennis racket and played with her every day.

Her physical health improved rapidly, and at just turned 14 she was invited to join Berkeley Tennis Club. Soon, her trademark concentration, power, and speed came to the fore, and she began competing on the national circuits.

In 1921, at just 16 years old and still only 5'0", she went to the east coast for more competition, and saw the most famous tennis player of the day, Suzanne Lenglen, for the first time.

The sick Lenglen was jeered off court by the American crowd, having defaulted against home favorite Mallory. The very next year, Wills was herself up against Mallory in the U.S. Open final, and recorded her last ever loss to her illustrious countrywoman.

Wills made that journey east with her mother, who provided the emotional support that her daughter needed. The teenager was a quiet and reserved girl who admitted in later years that she found relief from an innate melancholy in her painting and her tennis. The presence of her mother provided Wills with both mental strength and friendship.

By the end of 1922, Wills was ranked third among American women. More importantly, she had grown a full seven inches and had gained 25 pounds. She was ready to embark on one of the finest decades of tennis success ever achieved by a man or a woman.

Between 1923 and 1933, Wills won 17 of her 19 singles Slam titles and was runner up in two more. (And this was at a time when players did not take in the Australian championships because of the time and distances involved in reaching them.)

Wills also won gold in both the singles and doubles at the Paris Olympics. She held the No. 1 world ranking throughout, except for 1926, and—most remarkable of all—she achieved a 180-match winning streak between 1927 and 1933, without losing a set.

That gap in 1926 was significant in more ways than one. It marked an absence from her C.V. of all three majors because she needed an emergency appendectomy during the French championships. Wills was forced to withdraw from Wimbledon and, after attempting a come-back prior to the U.S. Open, was advised by her doctor to withdraw from there, too.

The Wills appendix, it transpired, was to deprive tennis of one of the most fascinating head-to-heads of the century.

Wills and Lenglen dominated the inter-war years, between them winning 30 grand slam titles between 1919 and 1938. Yet they played each other only once, and it was not in one of those majors. Billed as “the match of the century”, it took place in Cannes in February 1926.

Wills made her way to France that year to pursue her painting and her education. She was also ready to take up the Lenglen challenge. The media went into overdrive at the prospect of Lenglen, the best female player in the world, asserting her superiority over the 20-year-old who had already won three US titles.

The encounter was given added spice by the contrasting characters and styles of play of the two women. Lenglen, then 26 and the reigning French and Wimbledon champion, was renowned for her glamour, grace, flamboyance and tactical brilliance. Wills was more statuesque, physically stronger, but quiet and serious.

Lenglen was the favorite to win, and she did. But it was a closely fought battle that flagged up to the tennis world that Wills was ripe to take over Lenglen’s crown. But before the rivalry could get under way, Wills was incapacitated by her appendix, Lenglen turned professional, and the two never met again.

Wills, though, did meet another significant person again after Cannes. A young businessman in the crowd, Frederick Moody, introduced himself after the match, and Wills became Wills Moody in 1929.

By her return to tennis in 1927, Wills was unbeatable. Not only did she win all three slams between Wimbledon that year and Wimbledon in 1930, she did so without conceding a set.

The Wills game had become truly formidable. She routinely practised her tennis against men, which helped to develop the powerful, athletic and unflagging play that dominated all-comers. Indeed as late as 1933, she played, and beat in straight sets, the eighth ranked American male player Phil Neer in an exhibition match.

On both the forehand and backhand, she was able to drive the ball with speed, pace, and depth, and had a serve that could pull her opponent wide of the tramlines. Though she didn’t attack the net with any frequency, she was also a capable volleyer.

Time magazine, which featured Wills Moody on its cover twice, said: “There was nothing frivolous about Little Miss Poker Face [as she was known]. She stood her ground like a tank, drilling out bullet serves and powerful baseline drives."

The lack of emotion on court at which this extract hints was interpreted by many as an aloof coolness, and neither endeared her to the media nor won great warmth from spectators.

However, it did reflect Wills Moody’s naturally introspective personality, as well as her ability to channel herself with remarkable concentration into her tennis. In her autobiography, she said, "I had one thought and that was to put the ball across the net. I was simply myself, too deeply concentrated on the game for any extraneous thought."

Hazel Hotchkiss Wightman, a former American champion and the woman behind the Wightman Cup, had reason to understand Wills Moody better than most. She, too, had taken up tennis to improve her health, and also went to the University of California: "Helen was really an unconfident and awkward girl...I thought of Helen as an honestly shy person who was bewildered by how difficult it was to please most people."

Even some of Wills Moody’s fellow American players were less than enamored by her. Helen Jacobs—and indeed the American crowd—resented her retirement with back pain from the 1933 U.S. Open final. Wills Moody needed a year out of tennis to recuperate from the injury, and she refused ever to play in the U.S. Open again.

She did, however, win Wimbledon in 1935 and, after another three years away from tennis with back problems, in 1938. Both wins were against Jacobs. They were also her valediction to tennis.

Alice Marble filled, with Jacobs, the U.S. Open vacuum left by Wills Moody, and it is Marble who is credited with dubbing Wills Moody the “Garbo of tennis.” No doubt she intended it as a slight.

But it provides an excuse to look at Wills Moody from a different perspective. There are many photos of the reclusive champion, and even a little blurry film footage. Both media reveal a beautiful, elegant, glowing woman. Her features, like her figure, were classically proportioned.

In style, too, she had class. Not for her the bohemian bandanna and flowing coat sported by Lenglen. Wills Moody wore a pleated knee-length skirt, white open neck blouse, and a white visor—a trend-setter of her day.

She had an effortless and unhurried walk, a wonderful bearing, and yes, looked remote.

The beginning of this piece referred to Charlie Chaplin’s admiration, and the context for that reference is appropriate here. He is quoted as saying that the movement of Helen Wills playing tennis was the most beautiful sight he had ever seen.

In retirement, Wills Moody set up her own art studio, wrote extensively, and played tennis into her 80s. She continued to follow the game in her later years and admired the tennis of Martina Navratilova. As well she might. It had taken more than half a century for a woman to win more Wimbledon singles titles than the multi-layered Wills Moody. Navratilova was that woman.

What more might burnish the Wills Moody reputation? That she reached the final of every Grand Slam singles event she played during her career? That she played in the Whiteman Cup 10 times and lost only two matches? That she won 12 Grand Slam doubles titles? That she wrote and illustrated her own coaching manual?

Or that, when she died at 92, she left her $10 million fortune to the University of California, where she is now remembered by the Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute?

In truth, there are few either before or since who have left such a complete legacy. One of them may be her famous contemporary, the charismatic, Suzanne Lenglen.

Her life, and the story of her one and only brief encounter with Wills Moody, are the subject of the next article by Claudia Celestial Girl.

Nikolay Davydenko: The Brilliant Under-the-Radar Man Aims for London

Marianne Bevis — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 09:32:28 -0400

He’s not a man who seeks the limelight.

Not for him are the front rows of fashion shows, the Cosmo fashion shoots, or boxes replete with celebrities.

He shuns the attractions of Monaco, Miami, and Dubai for his home town of Volgograd, where he has lived since the age of 11.

Yet Nikolay Davydenko is capable of playing headline-grabbing tennis, and that is precisely what is doing right now.

In Kuala Lumpur at the beginning of the month, he took out Gael Monfils, Robin Soderling, and Fernando Verdasco on his way to that title.

He has the scalps of David Ferrer on clay in Hamburg and of Fernando Gonzalez on the hard courts of Montreal. And he wiped the floor with Juan Carlos Ferrero to win the Croatian Open.

But he has saved his best for last.

In winning of the Shanghai Masters this week, he ripped apart the games of the two best players in the tournament: Novak Djokovic in the semis, and Rafael Nadal in the final.

So low is Davydenko’s profile that it is easy to forget just what scintillating tennis he can produce. The manner in which he beat Nadal and Djokovic was a timely reminder.

He is able to put together extravagant, extended rallies that bring elements of chess to the tennis court. He uses hard, penetrating, technically-efficient ground strokes to open up the court with surgical precision, and then injects killer shots down the line or cross-court. Both sides are equally deadly.

Many have compared his ability to take the ball early with that of Andre Agassi, and there is also something of Agassi in the power that the Russian can generate from the extreme margins of the court. But not only can he play blistering flat drives from all parts of the court, he can deliver the ball to every inch of the width of his opponent’s court.

The body language of Davydenko, however, could not be more different from Agassi’s. His on-court persona verges on inscrutable—very much in tune with his off-court persona. He is a small, slight, angular man, who moves between points with a measured, slightly pigeon-toed amble. He goes about his business without fuss, with little time-wasting, and the minimum of verbal communication.

However, it’s easy to see when he’s feeling good. His eyes open wide to near circles, and his mouth sets into a straight, taut line. If his opponent sees that look, he needs to be very, very afraid, for that is when Davydenko’s tactical brain is at its sharpest and his confidence is unwavering.

It is then that his ability to pierce shot after shot at remarkable trajectories, acute angles, and penetrating pace sets his tennis alight.

It is also why he has maintained such an enviable record in the men’s rankings. Davydenko has been in the top 20 for little short of five years. For much of that time, he was in the top five. He has won at least one A.T.P. World Tour title each year since 2003.

Now, with the Shanghai win, 2009 has become his most successful title year since 2006.

Davydenko has been criticised in the past for a lack, on occasion, of mental toughness. Shanghai has turned that on its head. He won a final set tie-breaker against Djokovic. He then went on to win a first set tie-breaker against arguably the toughest attitude in tennis: Nadal.

What’s more, Davydenko was carrying three hours of tennis in his legs from his arduous semi-final match, while Nadal could not have been fresher—his previous two opponents retired injured.

There is one more area in which Davydenko has shown frailty in the past: the consistency of his serve. But his stats for the year show a 69 percent first serve average. In his final against Nadal, he served at 70 percent.

Make no mistake. Davydenko has set his eyes and his heart on a place in the London finale. No matter how low a profile he tries to maintain, his tennis this autumn is going to attract headlines. His aggressive, clever and fast game is on the radar, and there is no place for Davydenko to hide for the remainder of 2009.

Nadal and Roddick Take Up Rackets Against A Sea Of Tennis Troubles

Marianne Bevis — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:54:56 -0400

It's one of the hot tennis topics of the moment. But then it always tends to be one of the hot tennis topics around this time each year.

Is the ATP tour too demanding for the players?

This year, though, things were meant to be different.

The 2007 U.S. Open saw the official launch by the A.T.P. of a new approach to the men’s tour that was designed to create a healthier schedule for players and a more attractive package for sponsors and broadcast partners.

According to the then executive chairman of the A.T.P., Etienne de Villiers, “We need to have the best players, playing in the best stadia, in the best markets at the right time. Our players, fans, tournaments, and sponsors deserve a world class tour and that is what we will be giving them in 2009.”

What he presented was a re-branding of the elite tournaments into an easy-to-identify schedule that described the tour in terms of ranking points. It also aimed to ensure that the best performers entered the top tournaments.

In theory, the benefits for the players would be a more evenly spread through the season, and bigger prizes for those who fulfilled their commitments. The down side was that those who skipped mandatory events could face suspension.

The 2009 Package

So from 2009, the world’s top 30 players have been expected to compete in 18 tournaments each year, to include the four Grand Slams, eight of the nine Masters 1000s, and four 500s.

Monte Carlo became an optional ninth Masters or a substitute 500. Shanghai replaced Hamburg, and Madrid changed from an autumn indoor event to a late spring clay event.

Add in some non-mandatory events—the Davis Cup up to four times a year and the November finale for the top eight players—and the year has filled up nicely for the sponsors, the fans, and the media.

But this is proving to be a workload that many players view as unsustainable. Rafael Nadal has gone so far as to say that it could force players into early retirement.

Nadal has had more reason than most to be worried. He heads a list of casualties that have peppered the season.

In early spring, Roger Federer struggled with a back injury sustained during the autumn of 2008. By May, Nadal’s knees were causing him increasing difficulty, followed by similar problems for Gilles Simon and Fernando Verdasco.

Wimbledon was without Nadal and Gael Monfils. July and August saw problems for Andy Roddick, Andy Murray, and Federer. That latter pair did not even attempt the trip to the autumn Asian swing, where yet more players succumbed to muscle pulls and tendinitis: Juan Martin Del Potro, Stanislas Wawrinka, and Tommy Haas.

Little wonder, then, that the chorus of dissatisfaction has begun again.

Nadal: “It's impossible to be here playing like I did the last five years, playing a lot of matches and being all the time 100 percent without problems.''

Roddick: “We're finished in November and have to be pretty much Grand Slam-ready by fourth January year after year after year after year. And the people who are playing the most, they get added two weeks [for the Masters Final].”

The soon-to-retire Marat Safin: “Everybody is falling apart, getting injured, and complaining the season is long. Should it really take five years to realise that something is wrong?"

Even former champion Andre Agassi has piled into the debate: “I’d like to see people come to the table and work out a schedule that suits everyone. I always thought it’s best to give the players a schedule that enables them to be at their best.”

It’s hardly a coincidence that, at around this point in the season, the press and the bloggers also begin to have a field day.

The elite players ply their trade for give or take 30 weeks of the year. They earn big bucks both in prize money and sponsorship. They are doing something they love. They are pampered by their hosts and adored by their fans. There are worse ways to earn a crust.

It’s not long after the initial media grumblings that another line of argument begins. What about the days when….? What about, for example, the days of perhaps the greatest player of the Open era, Rod Laver?

That Was Then, But This is Now

Laver's 11 singles and eight doubles Grand Slam titles, together with two calendar Grand Slams, is all the more remarkable because he was unable to play the Slams between 1963 and the start of the Open era in 1968.

It was an era when there were no chairs at the change of ends, when there were no tie breaks, when there were three grass Slams and one clay Slam. Laver never won a Grand Slam on a hard court.

In assessing his success, he himself now says: “Probably one of the most fortunate things for me was that I was healthy all year. It helped, of course, that all of the Slams were played on softer surfaces.”

There were also fewer players on the circuit, with opponents in the early rounds who would not get near the draw these days. There were even fewer reporters, so that the great Laver could turn up at matches almost unnoticed.

And the game revolved around the serve and volley. The grass of Wimbledon, Australia (which rotated between different cities), and New York had a less pristine surface, less predictable bounce, but a slicker finish than today’s grass.

There was therefore a greater incentive to play the ball before it bounced. Even the French clay was not dominated by baseline play as it is now.

Laver’s assessment of the then and now, though, is striking. “Today’s game is much more physical than when we played. The ball is hit so much harder, the players generate so much speed and spin. I’d have to play differently if I was out there today.”

So that’s the answer from “the days when.”

Now, with more money and prestige, there is a far larger pool of talent, all supported by the expertise of sports scientists, nutritionists, and teams of fitness experts.

The demise of grass in favor of hard courts, advances in racket technology, and new training regimes have all allowed the baseline game to evolve and dominate.

The spin and power that can be generated by today’s finely-tuned athletes, using the best technology that money can throw at a racket, would leave Laver’s contemporaries open-mouthed.

Laver is a man of few and carefully-considered words, not given to hyperbole. In the latest I.T.F. magazine, he further compared the days of then and now.

“It’s getting more and more difficult [to win a calendar slam] because of the quality of play that’s out there with the new technologies. You look at the amount of great players. That has to create tremendous competition. You can’t have a bad day...The tennis racket is the biggest change that’s happened in tennis. It’s changed the game totally from what we knew...it’s tough out there today.”

That tough game is the gladiatorial, physically exhausting sport which today’s enthusiastic crowds pay to see. And if today’s players are to bring this spectacle to the tour for anything approaching the years of Rod Laver’s career, something has to give.

A Better Balance of Court Surfaces

Six of the eight mandatory Masters tournaments are on hard courts and just two are on clay. The balance is similarly biased towards hard courts in the Slams. As for grass, the season now lasts barely four weeks and has no Masters event at all.

Sadly that is unlikely to change. What could change, however, is how one of those surfaces plays. Return the grass window to its original style: fast, slick, and low bouncing. The grass seed may be the same as it once was, but the underlying surface is harder, the balls are slower and the bounce higher.

The unique qualities of the grass court game that favor touch, slice, and net skills have been almost swallowed up the baseline game of every other tournament. By bringing back the speed, there would be some incentive to develop different tactics, and to shorten points.

To swing the balance away from the punishing hard courts, it may be possible to remove some of the post-Australian tournaments to make way for an earlier Davis Cup.

At the 500 level, why not switch a couple of the hard court events to clay? This would go some way to redressing the balance away from the unforgiving impact of synthetic surfaces towards the kinder clay.

A More Flexible Schedule

There needs to be a balance between what will attract sponsorship and audiences, and what is reasonable for the players. Why impose so many designated tournaments, irrespective of fitness, personal circumstances, or wishes?

The top players are more than capable of selecting enough tournaments to maintain their ranking without having those tournaments specified for them. If they play too few, their points and their rankings will drop, and they will start to meet tougher opponents in the early rounds.

So they won’t play too few, but they will be able to select on the basis of their fitness, personal circumstances (the birth of children, for example) or, most important of all, the state of their health. With adequate spacing between destinations, they also have time for regular training and conditioning to keep themselves in peak condition.

Lleyton Hewitt added his weight to this particular debate: “The players know their bodies better than anyone, especially the top guys. And the tour needs the top guys. You shouldn’t go out and try and make them play every week.”

And if they want to slot in an exhibition match or two, why shouldn’t they? In return, they can put in an appearance at any pre-tournament brouhaha that the A.T.P. feels will benefit the appeal of the sport—like the festivities being proposed to launch the 2010 season.

The calendar would still retain its high spots at regular intervals without shortening the overall season.

Outside the Box

There are few players who do not want to represent their countries in the Davis Cup. Yet it is squeezed into the schedule in the week before two 1000 events in March, and then on the back of Wimbledon, the US Open and the Tour Finals.

For the top players in particular, who are most likely to reach the latter stages of the Majors, it is a big ask for them to then play the best-of-five-set format Davis Cup ties.

What about allowing the players to substitute the Davis Cup for one or two 500 events, awarding similar ranking points? And what about treating the Olympics in the same way, trading off perhaps a 1000 event against participation in one of the jewels of a sporting career?

Both would achieve a broad appeal beyond the core tennis fan base, and take major tournaments to new venues.

Player Power

The Players Council has Federer in the Chair, with Nadal as Vice-Chair. Novak Djokovic is also an elected member. These have the intelligence, the pulling power, and the responsibility to negotiate changes from a unique position of strength.

The new Executive Chairman, Adam Helfant also has the intellect and the sporting track record to thrash out a reasonable compromise. He is, after all, a Harvard graduate and former Nike executive.

He met with the players in Monaco and again in New York. The schedule will be the main issue on the table when they meet in London during the Tour Final.

Djokovic, in one of the U.K.’s prestige newspapers, summed up, in his usual incisive way, the task ahead.

“The players now are more united than ever. We can't expect just to shorten the season because that would hurt certain tournaments. We have to make a compromise. The A.T.P. is an association of tournaments and players together. The bottom line is that you don't want to have injured players. The schedule, in my opinion, is too long, but we have to go step by step and try to solve it."

With this kind of common sense, pragmatism, and intelligence on both sides of the table, a change for the better must be on the way.

Tennis in Shanghai: From Bladerunner to Blossoming Magnolia

Marianne Bevis — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:24:29 -0400

It’s a first lone flight. It’s a first venture to the Far East, to an impenetrable language, to a vivid new culture. It’s a guilt-laden journey taken entirely to indulge a passion for tennis. It’s both terrifying and thrilling: Shanghai. This relives the impressions of a first trip to a tennis Major, in one of the tour's most charismatic cities.

Begin Slideshow

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Gilles Simon Lead French Attack on Tennis Finale

Marianne Bevis — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 03:29:48 -0400

It seems like history repeating. The 2009 men’s tour is approaching its final stages, and the jostling for position at the top of the rankings is working up a real head of steam.

The prize is one of eight places in the World Tour Finals in London.

And right up there, pushing for a last-minute spot—in a scenario almost identical to the one in 2008—are France’s best: Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Gilles Simon.

Just three places remain for the London finale, and one of those has Andy Roddick’s name all but engraved on it.

Which means that the remaining handful of ATP tournaments—offering their last-minute opportunity for valuable ranking points—is taking on ever greater significance for the hopeful handful hovering between Nos. 7 and 12. And each of those players is applying the thumbscrews to their opponents.

First, world No. 8 Nikolay Davydenko beat No. 9 Fernando Verdasco for the Kuala Lumpur title last week. Robin Soderling and Fernando Gonzalez, just below them at Nos. 11 and 12, also stole some valuable points by reaching the semis.

Soderling this week took another step nearer the Finals with his semi place in Beijing, while Verdasco and Davydenko picked up 90 points from quarter-final places.

But back to those two Frenchmen.

Simon—currently at No. 10—last week took the Bangkok trophy, his first ATP title of the season, having been the only top 10 player without a title this season.

The win will do him no harm at all in his race to reach the Tour Final. And he finds himself in a situation with which he is very familiar.

At exactly this point last year, Simon was also No. 10 in the world, and was also making a strong late run.

Indeed, in Madrid—the indoor Masters that Shanghai replaces this week—he made it all the way to the final. He followed that, the very next week, with a semi run in Lyon.

By the beginning of November, he was world No. 9. And by the skin of his teeth, he made the trip to Shanghai when Rafael Nadal had to pull out with injury.

It seemed, at that time, that Simon’s skills and speed—as well as a gift for coming back from the dead to win matches that seemed lost—would carry him further.

There is something of Davydenko about him: slight, wiry, and determined. He has great court coverage, endless energy, and good all-round skills without one particular stand-out shot.

Against the current crop of players, that is not enough to help him climb further. But he’s a grafter and a fighter who cashes in rapidly on an opponent's off-day.

He also, it would seem, gets a second wind on the late-season hard courts, especially indoors.

Whether that autumn surge will pick up enough points to help him squeeze one of those last places remains to be seen.

Tsonga, though, appears to be a far more comfortable proposition in the race to the Tour Finals.

The current world No. 7 won this week’s Japanese Open in classy style, with sparkling wins over Gael Monfils in the semis and Mikhail Youzhny in the final.

Tsonga looks and sounds confident going into Shanghai. But things were less rosy at the latter stages of 2008. As he prepared for the final Masters event of the year in Paris, Tsonga was still down at 14 in the rankings, and David Nalbandian held the crucial No. 8.

The script for that tournament could not have been better, as these two players fought their way to an all-or-nothing final. Tsonga won and stole the No. 8 ranking. Nalbandian dropped out of contention at 11.

It seems appropriate, this year, that Tsonga should hold the superior position over Simon.

When he burst onto the scene at the 2008 Australian Open, the tennis world let out a cheer, because he brings charisma, creativity, and flair to the tennis court like few others in the top 20.

Tsonga has faced two particular challenges, though.

First, he has had to overcome a number of niggling injuries that took him off the boil at various stages during the last 18 months.

Second, he has had to develop more focus in order to channel his multiple talents into winning several matches on the trot.

With three titles to his name this year, he seems to be well on his way to mastering both challenges.

Tsonga, by his own admission, likes the Asian swing, and plays at his best on hard courts. All his titles this year have come on indoor or outdoor hard surfaces that show off his big serve, athletic volleying, and variety of spin to their greatest advantage.

Tsonga himself looks trimmer and more agile, his demeanour quieter and more focused.

The backhand can still be a little wayward, which encourages him to run around to his forehand more than he should. The rewards from his nimble footwork and piercing drives, however, usually counter any disadvantage.

He has great touch that allows him pick up balls from his feet, often on his way to attack the net. And when he’s at the front of the court, his shot-making can verge on genius.

Tsonga’s comment after winning in Tokyo, reinforces what was clear from his performance: “I have so much confidence going into Shanghai and the indoor events. It’s a great time of the year for me.”

It’s a good time of year for French tennis in general. Tsonga is lined up for one of the spare London slots. Simon is not far behind, and he is hot on the tail of another aspirant finalist, Verdasco.

The next few weeks will determine whether France, rather than Spain, is once again, the only country boasting two men in the Tour Final.

That would be some achievement over their all-conquering European neighbours.

Creature Vs. Creature: A Subtle Shift from Rafael Nadal to Roger Federer

Marianne Bevis — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 07:11:29 -0400

This article weighs up the fine balance between the closest of adversaries in men’s tennis as the tour reaches its climax. Who will carry the momentum into 2010: Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal?

Introduction

Theirs is a rivalry that is already poised to move beyond the realms of the record books and into legend.

Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal have stood shoulder to shoulder atop of the ATP rankings since July 2005: four and a quarter continuous years (aside from the three-week interlude this August while Nadal recovered from injury).

And, barring further injury, the two are set to maintain their duopoly of the men’s tour at least until the end of 2009, though both have played fewer tournaments than anyone else in the top 10. That is the measure of the vice-like grip these giants have on tennis.

Little wonder, then, that they and their stories have become inextricably interlinked.

In style, they are as contrasting as sun and rain, as distant as the Arctic from its polar opposite, as different as Mozart and Gershwin. One moves like mercury, the other like a ravenous tiger. One has a rapier attack, the other has all guns blazing. One is slender, angular, fluid, and silent. The other is expansive in muscle from shoulder through to calf, daring and plunging, volume set to high.

These very contrasts have produced some of the most compelling, competitive, intense, challenging tennis of their generation. Yet while Federer has dominated the tennis landscape since the beginning of 2004, Nadal has dominated Federer like no other player. Until 2009.

This article continues to follow the shift in domination towards Federer. Meanwhile, Rob York assesses the rivalry from the Nadal standpoint.

The story so far

Though Federer has held the top spot for all but a year of their combined reign, Nadal has won almost twice as many of their contests: 13 to seven. Federer dominated on the green and blue, but Nadal never let him near the red stuff. Nine of Nadal’s wins were on clay.

No matter: Federer ruled at Wimbledon—until Nadal beat him in 2008 in the most tightly-contested, high-quality final in living memory.

Never mind: Federer dominated on hard courts—until Nadal snatched victory in another nail-biting five-setter in the Australian Open this year.

As Nadal took control of Federer’s domain and seized the No.1 ranking, people talked openly about the long-awaited shift in the power-balance. They pointed at Federer’s refusal to take on a coach, at his emotional collapse in Melbourne, at his losses to other players. He was hit by back injury, and then diverted by the revelation of impending fatherhood.

That allowed the chorus of doubters to develop a new tune. Was Federer finding it hard to maintain his hunger? Were marriage and children the last nail in his professional coffin?

With the advantage of hindsight—or the application of some common sense—such debate was at best ill-informed, at worst foolhardy. No-one achieves the records posted by Federer, nor is held in such high esteem by his fellow players, without exceptional drive, commitment and heart.

And sure enough, in the blink of an eye, a period of rehab brought a sharper, stronger and leaner Federer back to the 2009 tour as it switched to its clay swing.

By May and Madrid, the tables had turned as Federer took his first Master’s title since Cincinnati in 2007. It was on clay and it was against Nadal.

The hard work of March continued to pay off at Roland Garros. The draw opened up perfectly to give Federer the opportunity to equal the Grand Slam record and to seal the one title that had eluded his C.V.

The reversal of fortune was completed at Wimbledon: Federer regained his favorite crown, his No.1 ranking, and the all-time Grand Slam record, while Nadal could only look on, nursing damaged knees as his titles and ranking were handed back.

Within the space of 12 months, then, their entire rivalry had been played out in miniature, with fortunes swinging back and forth, punctuated by unexpected losses, dramatic victories and debilitating injuries. It allowed the slate to be wiped clean, ready for a new chapter.

Under the microscope

The Australian Open was clearly a watershed.

Federer recognised that only extensive rehabilitation would remedy what was becoming a chronic back problem that had cost him the Masters Cup in Shanghai, and then returned with a vengeance after Melbourne.

Although his return to fitness and match-play brought frustrating losses for the remainder of the hard-court season, the real reward from the lay-off began to show on the clay. Quite simply, Federer seemed to be a man reborn.

He signed up, as a wild card, to Monte Carlo to get his eye in. This revealed some new shots, most notably a long-shunned drop shot.

By Rome, a revitalised backhand was reaping rewards, and his movement was back to its free flow. He lost in the semis after a rain-storm broke his concentration and gave Novak Djokovic a second wind, but the signs were good.

Then in Madrid, the reason for all those little shot adjustments became clear. This was the game plan for beating Nadal on clay. Added to the Federer weaponry was a wider, swinging serve deep to the Nadal backhand. This was a play that Nadal had learned to use ruthlessly against Federer. Now it was tit-for-tat. Intelligent tactics, flawless execution, and glittering variety gained Federer only his second ever win against Nadal on clay.

In the event, Federer did not have the opportunity to apply the thumbscrews to Nadal at Roland Garros, though his new range of shots and tactical nous got him through tough matches against Tommy Haas and Juan Martin Del Potro. And what these same two matches also showed was a Federer who was up for the fight, both physically and mentally. He appeared to have a regained the self-belief that he could win from any situation.

This confidence, and a passion to win at all costs, were the outward expression that Federer had changed. What had also changed was the imminent arrival of his first children, and this also appeared to sharpen his resolve. Suddenly he was faced with the prospect of a complete change to his life. And he had things to achieve before that happened. At Wimbledon, he duly claimed Pete Sampras’ record and reclaimed the No.1 spot. Job done.

The Momentum Shift

So does this dramatic turnaround in the fortunes of Federer and Nadal prefigure a permanent change in the rivalry? The momentum since the spring has certainly moved Federer’s way, and has continued into the hard-court swing.

He claimed his 16th Masters title in Cincinnati, so is closing in on a new record: Andre Agassi’s score of 17. And Federer came mighty close to winning his sixth U.S. Open, while Nadal wrestled to the semis with more injury.

Most important of all, Federer has shed the huge weight of expectation—that growing pressure to take the Sampras record, all the Slams, and the scalp of his nemesis on clay.

He is relaxed, content and revelling in fatherhood.

He had no qualms about pulling out of the Asian swing to rest up, relax with his family, take in some fashion shows, and head to Dubai for his missed summer break.

Since Madrid in May, he has lost only two matches—the final at Flushing Meadows and in the Montreal quarters—and has chalked up wins against all the five players below him: Nadal, Andy Murray, Djokovic (twice), Del Potro (twice before Flushing), and Andy Roddick. No wonder he is upbeat and laid back at the same time.

He has no coach, but no need of a coach.

He has been in great shape, and has added some new ammunition to his game. He has nothing more to prove, and nothing he hasn’t won. He is simply enjoying the tennis.

The rumor mill suggests that Federer has back problems. He himself has only mentioned general soreness in legs, arms and back. Were he really injured, he is unlikely to have played two rubbers in the September Davis Cup tie, let alone won them in straight sets.

Nor will it have escaped Federer’s notice that Nadal might be back to match-play, but his recovery from two separate injuries will be sorely tested on the end-of-season hard courts.

Show-downs to look out for

Federer and Nadal may have battled it out 20 times, but they have never met in the Davis Cup. That could all change next March. And should Federer and Nadal decide to play the tie, it could be the high spot of their sporting rivalry. The problem for Federer is that the hugely anticipated tie will be in Spain, on clay, over five sets: a scenario that has always ended in victory for Nadal.

Before that, though, there is revenge to seek in Melbourne. It is a surface that favors Federer, and he is a multiple winner there. He was distraught to lose it in 2009 and will expect to take it back.

On to Roland Garros. What wouldn’t Federer give to beat Nadal on the French clay? He may now have the title, but there continue to be naysayers who undermine Federer’s win because it was not over Nadal.

The desire will be great on Federer’s side to prove his superiority once and for all. It will be equally great on Nadal’s side to reclaim his most precious of crowns. On the day, it may all come down to fitness. But even at the very height of his achievements, Federer failed to beat Nadal at Roland Garros. It is unlikely that the momentum has shifted enough for him to do so next time.

Wimbledon will be another matter. With the serving, the speed, the fitness, the volleying, and the grit that Federer showed in winning the title in 2009, and an undimmed love of the venue, he must be favorite to take his seventh title.

It would be a joy to see him lock horns with Nadal on the grass for the fourth time. It would be a joy to see another match like their 2008 record-breaker. It would be a joy to see Federer exact revenge for one of his hardest defeats.

Before all that, there is the little matter of the Tour Final, in a new venue, on a new court, this November. There are very few games between now and then to see how Federer is playing. So consider the history.

Only one other player has ever recaptured the year-end No.1 ranking after losing it: Ivan Lendl. Federer could become the second.

Federer and Nadal met each other in the semis in 2006 and 2007. The former won both times.

These statistics are all incentives for Federer. Yet there is still another carrot to tempt Federer over the winning line. By the time he and Nadal arrive in London, Federer will have held one of the top two rankings spots for an unbroken six consecutive years.

He won't want that one to pass unnoticed.

To see an assessment of one of the new potential rivalries for 2010, see Nadal pitched against Juan Martin Del Potro by antiMatter and Rajat.

Molla Mallory: Mould Breaker and Mould Maker of Women's Tennis

Marianne Bevis — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:52:11 -0400

When Anna Margarethe Bjurstedt was born in Oslo in March 1884, few could anticipate the mark she would make both on tennis and on women’s participation in sport.

This was the latter stages of the 19th century, when the modern rules of lawn tennis were still just 10 years old.

It was a world where Otto von Bismarck was Chancellor of Germany and Victoria was Queen of the British Empire.

There was no such thing as Greenwich Mean Time (that was set in October), and New York harbor was yet to receive the Statue of Liberty from France (on the 4th July that same year).

Van Gogh had not painted his “Sunflowers”, and Tchaikovsky had yet to write his “Sleeping Beauty.”

But this daughter of a Norwegian army officer was soon to introduce a new attitude and new approach to tennis.

In doing so, she won a record eight U.S. women’s singles titles and became the only woman—along with Chris Evert—to hold four of them consecutively. And her win in 1926, at the age of 42, established her as the oldest singles Grand Slam champion in history.

When Bjurstedt—Mallory, as she was to become in 1919—first arrived in the United States in 1915, she had already won an Olympic bronze medal, but she was still a complete unknown. That was until she beat three-time defending champion Marie Wagner in straight sets to take the first of five singles titles at the national indoor championships.

That same year, she won the first of her eight Grand Slam titles.

What made Mallory stand out from the rest—and she beat a different woman in each of her eight Slam finals—was her attitude and her style of play.

It’s no surprise that she was regarded as a fierce competitor. Even at 42, in that 1926 match against Elizabeth Ryan, Mallory fought back from a 0-4 final set deficit to win the U.S. title 4-6, 6-4, 9-7.

But she was also described as “running with limitless endurance,” and as using a powerful baseline game and strong forehand to run her opponents into the ground.

Bob Kelleher, a former president of the USTA, was a ball boy during Mallory’s era: “She looked and acted tough when she was on the court hitting tennis balls. She walked around in a manner that said you’d better look out or she’d deck you. She was an indomitable scrambler and runner. She was a fighter.”

It’s worth putting this into the context of her day. Mallory, along with her most renowned contemporary on the other side of the Atlantic, Suzanne Lenglen, entered a world of female competition where long skirts, long sleeves, and even boned corsets, were the order of the day.

But to play the kind of tennis that these new heroines of the game brought to the court needed change. Lenglen is credited with shocking European audiences—notably Wimbledon—with her calf-length, loose fitting attire, but Mallory was wearing exactly the same in the States.

This enabled her to play as she wanted rather than as women were expected.

One of her few recorded quotes shows the difference between the Mallory view and the more general style of the day:

“I find that the girls generally do not hit the ball as hard as they should. I believe in always hitting the ball with all my might, but there seems to be a disposition to ‘just get it over’ in many girls whom I have played. I do not call this tennis.”

It’s not difficult to extrapolate that same spirit to some of the most successful and inspirational women to play the game in our own era: Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, and the Williams sisters.

Though other modern-day champions such as Steffi Graf and Chris Evert may claim a greater inheritance from the elegant and balletic style of Mallory’s antithesis, Lenglen, they can also trace contemporary attitudes to fitness, speed and attack back to the Norwegian.

Mallory’s tennis career ended at 45, as a semi-finalist at her beloved Forest Hills. By that time, she had played in every U.S. Open between 1915 and 1929. Not content with winning eight of them, she was a finalist in two more, a semi-finalist in three and—her worst result—a quarter-finalist in 1927.

Mallory was also a fixture in the mixed doubles between 1915 and 1924, winning three times (twice with Bill Tilden), and being runner-up five times (again twice with Tilden). Add another pair of titles in the women’s doubles and Mallory boasts 13 American titles.

At this point, some historical context is again revealing.

The U.S. tournament was the only Grand Slam to continue through the First World War, and so Mallory did not make an assault on the European events until 1920.

By then, at 34 years of age, she could reasonably be considered to be past her physical peak, and so her success against a new generation of more liberated players was limited. She nevertheless reached one final, two semis, and two quarters at Wimbledon, and reached the final of the French at her first attempt, never having played on clay before.

It seems surprising, then, in the light of this woman’s extraordinary contribution to women’s tennis, that her name and achievements have not stood alongside those of her glamorous French counterpart.

Almost every reference to Lenglen ascribes to her a turning point in women’s tennis. She was undoubtedly one of the most gifted players of her era, and a beautiful and agile exponent of the game. She was also flamboyant, given to emotional tears, and had the glamour to draw French and British crowds in never-before-seen numbers.

However, she made just one visit to the U.S. Open, and exited in the second round. Her career ended in 1926.

In a reversal of their early fame, though, Mallory was inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1958, one year before she died, aged 75, but a full 20 years before her more famous contemporary. Lenglen was not inducted until 1978, a full 40 years after her premature death.

And Mallory’s recognition has more recently had another boost. Just last year, her name took its place, along with that of Pete Sampras, in the Court of Champions at the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center.

At last, Mallory stands shoulder to shoulder with her equals: not only King, Navratilova, Evert, and Graf, but also Don Budge, Maureen Connolly, Margaret Court, Althea Gibson, Jack Kramer, Rod Laver, and Helen Wills.

And one more Champion who undoubtedly appreciated Mallory right from the first, from his own personal experience, is also there: former Grand Slam doubles partner, Bill Tilden.

Justice has been done.

Mario Ancic And David Nalbandian: Hard Road Back To Tennis From Injury

Marianne Bevis — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:41:08 -0400

Fluctuating form, and assorted injuries have played havoc with the top few positions in the men’s rankings in recent months.

Roger Federer, knocked from his No. 1 residency by Rafael Nadal a year ago, and battling with back problems, began to drift precariously towards No. 3.

Then Nadal, hit by wayward knees, slipped back to No. 2 and dropped still further behind a surging Andy Murray.

Novak Djokovic, for all the world looking to take No. 2 in the spring, was instead overtaken on the blind side by Murray. He, in turn, now nursing a sore wrist, watched Nadal snatch back the No. 2 slot.

Normal service, for the time being at least, has now been resumed. The old faces have returned to their old positions, the same bums are on their old seats. Yet, three of them have been out of the tour with injury since Flushing Meadows, and two of those have postponed their returns for even longer.

The pattern is repeated in the next tier. Andy Roddick and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Fernando Verdasco and Gilles Simon, and Nikolay Davydenko and Juan Martin Del Potro, have boxed and coxed into roughly the same order that they held three, four, and five months ago.

And half of those six have also contended with injury.

Take Fernando Verdasco, who has postponed surgery in his attempt to qualify for the Masters Cup. Unwilling to lose the month required to recover from a persistent foot problem, he has headed to the Asian hard courts.

Davydenko himself pulled from a couple of tournaments this year with a persistent heel injury, though he has just won the Malaysian Open.

Meanwhile, Simon has clinched his first title of the 2009 after months of being plagued by a knee injury.

Further down again, in the ranking 20s, Tommy Haas will not return to the tour until Shanghai, and Sam Querrey will miss the rest of the year with an arm injury sustained in an accident.

Amidst all these fluctuating fortunes and frenetic on-court activity, two players have been absent since May, and will play little part for the rest of the year.

David Nalbandian has been out of the tour for hip surgery since May, though his No. 14 ranking has been protected. Also missing since May is Mario Ancic. Still fighting the after-effects of glandular fever, and without the benefit of a protected ranking, Ancic has yo-yoed between the Top 20 and No. 136 in the space of 18 months, and temporarily hovers at 77.

Both face huge obstacles to reassert themselves on the A.T.P.’s extraordinarily competitive ladder of ambition.

Can Nalbandian At Last Translate Talent Into Triumph?

Nalbandian had surgery in May due to a torn labrum in the hip, a cartilage that cushions the movement of the femur. It’s the same injury that both Gustavo Kuerten and Lleyton Hewitt suffered, and Nalbandian will take much solace from the comeback made by the latter since he underwent surgery.

Nalbandian reported on his website that he would need four months to recover from his operation before on-court training could resume, and did not anticipate playing the circuit again before the end of the year.

But, the latest news is that, subject to a satisfactory check-up in Barcelona, he may be able to play an exhibition match in mid-December. Another exhibition is planned for Buenos Aires a week later, which he hopes to use to build up his competitive form before rejoining the ATP circuit in January 2010.

He certainly seems to be remarkably upbeat about that return, “I still have plenty of time to play, and I keep my aim of retiring with a Grand Slam or a Davis Cup.”

Nalbandian’s creative and intelligent tennis is a great asset to the sport, but he has been criticised with increasing frequency for his inability to use his flair to make the transition from early rounds to the end of major tournaments.

He says, though, that pain has been a factor in his game for a year and a half. And prior to that, he was indeed beating the likes of Federer and Murray on hard courts.

Perhaps surgery will not only relieve him of pain, but also give him the renewed belief and enthusiasm to realise his potential more fully. If it does, Nalbandian has the knowledge, and experience of beating all of the current top four. Meanwhile the likes of Hewitt and Haas show that injury, and maturity are far from being barriers to renewed tennis success.

Maybe Nalbandian’s aim of a major trophy is not entirely in the realms of fantasy. And such a win would be a treat indeed for the many, many admirers of his charismatic tennis.

Tennis Or Academe: Ancic Is At A Decisive Crossroad

The last tournament in which Ancic played was the Austrian Open in May, where he suffered the ignominy of having to qualify for the 250 event. He then lost in the first round.

In his previous outing in Indian Wells, he had to retire at the first hurdle. This is the pattern of glandular fever.

In 2008, Ancic reached the quarter-finals at Wimbledon, but was prevented from going to the Beijing Olympics by a relapse during which he lost over a stone in weight. He then had a handful of decent matches at the beginning of 2009, but after taking his singles rubber in the Davis Cup in March, he was spent.

When Ancic was first struck down by the virus for six months in 2007, he channelled his mental energy into completing the law degree he had started a few years before, and he graduated in 2008.

Initially, he put his future vocation on hold as he tried to reassert himself on the tennis rankings, but there are now signs that he is turning back to law.

Ancic has spent some time working as an intern in Zagreb, and made a high-profile appearance to lecture at Harvard Law School this spring.

Based on his thesis "A.T.P. Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow,” he spoke to sports lawyers about the legal foundation and organization of the A.T.P. tour. “I talked about the players' medical care, the pension fund that kicks off after the career, the structure, the membership, how it works. Being out of tennis, it has been a huge help to be focused on something else.”

A look through the remaining tournaments of the year does not reveal Ancic. The web throws up no information about him or his tennis—not even his fans’ site. He is only 25, but it looks as though Ancic’s presence on the tennis stage is slipping into the wings.

For Ancic himself, the prospect of a fulfilling career away from the rigors and disappointment of tennis must be a tempting, even an attractive one. For tennis fans, the prospect of losing such a charming, talented, and popular player is far less attractive. We can only wait and see.

President Obama Looks To Prime Minister Blair For Key To Chicago 2016

Marianne Bevis — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:36:56 -0400

When President Barack Obama announced he was to travel to Copenhagen, Denmark the day before the International Olympic Committee announces who will host the 2016 Olympics, he was taking an important leaf out of Tony Blair’s book.

Former Prime Minister Blair joined the British delegation in Singapore for two days during the vital final stages of its bid for 2012. Just days later, London, against all expectations, was awarded the Olympics over its age-old rival, and favorite for the prize, France.

The commitment of Blair was all the more impressive for the timing of his round-the-world trip. He was due back inside Gleneagles in Scotland to host a vital G8 summit before the final announcement was made.

Obama, similarly, is taking time out of a challenging period in his administration as he battles for health care reform. In doing so, he is the first U.S. president to lobby in person for an Olympics event.

However, the President can learn a few other important lessons from how Great Britain turned the tables on the hot favourites for the 2012 Games. After all, he too will have to overturn a strong challenge from new 2016 favorites, Rio de Janeiro.

Lesson 1: Cash In On Personal Kudos

Team GB used not only Tony Blair in their campaign video but Her Majesty the Queen. Rio is backed by a man who Obama himself has called “the world’s most popular leader:” Brazil’s president Luis Inacio da Silva. This man has an 80 percent approval rating with his own voters, and is leading a newly-oil-rich Brazil onto the U.N. Security Council.

But if there is one man who can outgun the Brazilian leader in popularity, it is Obama. By joining his wife in Copenhagen, he mounts an attack almost as formidable as Blair and Her Majesty. And nothing less will do.

Lesson 2: Prove Your Credentials

At the final show-down in Singapore, Team GB had football icon David Beckham: not just to for his sporting credentials but because he was born and bred where the 2012 Olympic Village will be located. He wept as the announcement was made.

The Obamas can do even better. He represented Illinois in the U.S. Senate after serving in the Illinois Legislature and considers Chicago to be his adopted home. She is a native of the city. Together, they form the perfect team to represent Chicago.

Lesson 3: Don’t Diss The Opposition

Just ask France’s Jacques Chirac. He all but threw away his country’s hope of success when he brazenly announced about the U.K.: “You can’t trust people who cook as badly as that. After Finland, it’s the country with the worst food.” Suffice to say, the President’s comments didn’t go down too well with the I.O.C.

Lesson 4: Press The Right Sporting Buttons

The Obamas certainly have pulling power. But when it comes to fellow supporters, the Chicago campaign might want a rethink. Michael Johnson: good. In fact great.

But Nadia Comaneci? Didn’t she compete for Romania before obtaining dual nationality? Oprah Winfrey may be Chicago’s most celebrated philanthropist, but we’re talking sport, not just celebrity.

Team GB’s campaign was spearheaded by multi-Olympic gold medal winners Sebastian Coe, Kelly Holmes, Steve Redgrave and another footballing icon, Bobby Charlton. Coe himself, who led an intelligent, articulate and determined campaign for well over a year before the final vote, was credited with much of the London bid success.

Lesson 5: Show Passion

London’s victory followed a passionate and inspirational plea by Coe. That passion was quoted directly by one of the Committee’s voters, Dutch member Anton Geesink: “Two different strategies—the French and the British. The British, they explained their love of the sport. It is a love affair for Sebastian Coe, that was the difference.”

Lesson 6: Leave A Legacy

The London bid was built on two main foundations: the massive urban renewal of a dilapidated area of East London; and to show a new generation that sport matters.

London took 30 youngsters from East End schools as part of its 100-person delegation, and Coe drew this to the attention of the members: "Why are so many here taking the place of politicians and businessmen? It’s because we are serious about inspiring young people. Thanks to London’s mix of 200 nations they also represent the world."

Part of London’s core programme has been to find, nurture and develop talented youngsters, not just as potential medal winners but also to pass on a legacy of health and optimism. It was, and remains, an irresistible argument.

Lesson 7: The New Kids on the Block Can Win

Paris was confident that its third attempt to win the Games would succeed, having failed to get the nod for the 1992 and 2008 events. Madrid didn’t make the cut for the 2012 bid and it’s unlikely to do so again: Europe cannot expect to host two successive Games.

Rio has the advantage of trying to win the Games for South America for the first time. So Chicago will be one of the two “new kids” in the final head to head.

And Some Rather More Cynical Lessons?

Any mention of Nelson Mandela is a winner. Blair, in a televised message, said he had been greatly inspired by his visit to the Athens Games, and by Mandela's endorsement of the London bid. Speaking in more than one language is even better. Blair dropped into French for an entire segment of this speech.

Another winner is generosity in adversity. Part of London’s pitch apparently included reference to the fact that it stepped in to help the Olympic movement by staging the Games while Europe was still recovering from World War 2. Now that is really upping the stakes!

But In The End….

The Chicago campaign can win or lose on the very last day. The London vs. Paris race went, by all accounts, all the way to the wire. The deciding factor, according to a number of the Committee, came down to Coe’s charisma and passion, and the appeal of his team’s final presentation.

Senior Australian I.O.C. member Kevan Gosper said “London won because of the way it sold its message in the final hours. Their presentation just had that little extra feel.”

And that is precisely where Barack and Michelle Obama have the upper hand, and where the bid may indeed be won or lost.

The Answer to a Tennis Fan’s Prayers: Oldies but Goldies Strut Their Stuff

Marianne Bevis — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 19:45:40 -0400

While the world’s media and 99 percent of the U.S. Open crowd had eyes only for the current stars of the tennis tour, a modest crowd gathered around the small perimeter of Court 4 at Flushing Meadows. What had drawn this assorted gaggle of people away from the main throng during the second week of drama? Only some of the most illustrious names from the record-books of Grand Slam tennis. For the first time, the U.S. Open hosted a Champions Invitational that pitted three co-ed teams against one another in the World Team Tennis (W.T.T.) pro-league format. The competition featured a line-up of Grand Slam champions and finalists under the leadership of three of the greats of the game: Pat Cash, Ivan Lendl and, the real star of the show, the eponymous Billie Jean King. Not only was the venue named after this tennis icon, but she is co-founder of the Team Tennis tour. The W.T.T. format is designed to be fan- and player-friendly, with short games, plenty of variety and, most of all, a lot of fun. So each match consists of one set each of men’s and women’s singles, men’s and women’s doubles, and mixed doubles. The rules are a little tricky to follow for the uninitiated: cumulative scoring, sets to five games, no ad after a deuce, playing let serves, and many more. But the atmosphere is competitively light-hearted, and rules a little flexible. The best approach is to just sit and soak it up.

Begin Slideshow

A Truly Scrumptious Davis Cup Prospect: Rafael Nadal vs. Roger Federer

Marianne Bevis — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 09:47:43 -0400

The Davis Cup, after years in the doldrums, seems suddenly to have ignited into something a little special.

Now with the incentive of a few ranking points at stake, the top players in the world have been more willing than ever to stand up and be counted at the business end of their countries’ endeavours.

As a result, the home crowds have responded vociferously, the ties have won airtime on world television as well as growing column-inches in newspapers, and the players have been revealing the sort of patriotic passion normally reserved for the Olympics.

The hottest property in Davis Cup is Team Spain. Champions in 2000, 2004 and 2008—and on their way to possibly their fourth title of the century this December—the men of Spain, swathed in red and gold, are the most glamorous squad in the world.

But as the tennis world awaits the thrilling climax to this year’s competition, new excitement has been kindled in the calm and dignified environs of Geneva. Home of the Davis Cup sponsor BNP Paribas, this is where the draw for next year’s world ties was made. And it is where the truly, truly scrumptious prospect of a head-to-head between the greatest rivals in sport today was announced.

The World Group’s first round pits Spain against Switzerland, and thus the possibility of Rafael Nadal against Roger Federer.

As a result, the spark of interest that this team-based competition used to generate once or twice a year now appears in danger of being fanned into a full-blown fire.

It’s a rivalry that has captured the imagination for almost five years. Nadal and Federer have, between them, held the top two spots in men’s tennis—barring an anomalous three weeks in August due to Nadal’s recent injury—for more than four of them.

They have met each other 20 times and all but four of those meetings were in finals. Seven of those finals were in Grand Slams.

It is one of the great pairings in sport. But these two players have never met in the Davis Cup.

If their head-to-heads have delivered some of the most thrilling matches in recent years, the added spice of playing for their countries and their team-mates is likely to inject yet more intensity into this rivalry.

Both wore their hearts on their sleeves in their recent winning ties. Who has escaped—via dozens of YouTube recordings— Federer’s adolescent, X-factor singing, post-triumph, in Italy? Who can forget Nadal’s exuberant smiles and team-hugs in Spain? These are both patriotic men who keep their main homes near their families and places of birth.

It is, of course, far too early to know whether they will take up the challenge for their countries when next March comes around. There may be injuries to overcome. There will be children to enjoy. There are Grand Slams to win. But these men are both competitive to their cores, and each must relish the prospect of taking on the other for their country.

If they do, Nadal will really fancy his chances of being the star of the show. Spain is to play at home and will, undoubtedly, choose clay for the tie.

Federer has beaten Nadal only twice on the red stuff and both occasions were in best-of-three formats. In every best-of-five-set match—and that means all four of their French Open encounters—Nadal has won.

He will have the home crowd at his back. It will be early in the season when his body is at its most fresh. Even the most devoted Federer fan must anticipate a Spanish victory.

But there is a lot at stake for the world No. 1.

The very fact that he has not beaten Nadal over five sets on clay will prick his pride. The very fact that his most joyous match of 2008 was his ‘team’ gold at the Olympics with fellow Swiss Stan Wawrinka will lift his resolve. The very fact that the Davis Cup is missing from his gilded C.V. will feed his desire. Indeed, that desire may have grown still greater with the arrival of two Swiss daughters to impress when his career is over.

Even if Federer overcomes his bete noir, he will, like Hercules, have the many-headed hydra of the Spanish team to contend with. There his prospects are better.

Against Fernando Verdasco, he has a 3-0 record. Against both David Ferrer and Tommy Robredo, it’s 9-0, Feliciano Lopez 7-0, and so on.

What, then, of Federer’s associate in his Davis Cup mission? Wawrinka, like many others, has a 100 percent losing record to Nadal. Against Verdasco, Ferrero and Lopez, the odds are fairly even, but he has a losing record against Ferrer and Robredo. Nevertheless, Wawrinka could manage one of the singles rubbers.

Which means it could all come down to the doubles: and there are lot of people who would pay very good money to see that Federer and Wawrinka Olympic performance re-enacted in Spain.

So the Davis Cup may deliver—even in its earliest round—a feast of treats. Nadal against Federer? “You two are truly scrumptious, scrumptious as the breeze across the bay.” Federer against Verdasco? “Scrumptious as a cherry peach parfait.” Wawrinka against Ferrer? “Cinnamon and lemon tart.”

And if this magical, show-stopping, mouth-watering tie doesn’t whet the appetite, there are surely other tasty morsels that will.

There’s the prospect of Serbia and Novak Djokovic against the U.S.A and Andy Roddick—the latter with three 2009 wins in their head-to-head: “So delicious, so beguiling.”

Or in Sweden, will Robin Soderling take up the challenge and join his squad against Argentina’s Juan Martin Del Potro? “ Lollies in a lollypop jar.”

So fingers are crossed for the Davis Cup fire that has was ignited this year to burst into flames in 2010. I can smell the toasting caramel already!

With acknowledgement to the sugary lyrics of “Toot Sweets” from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.

Any parallel between the Davis Cup competition and an old and battered vintage car that magically takes flight is purely coincidental…..

Murray Makes Headlines, But a Young Pole May Soon Take the Spotlight

Marianne Bevis — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:35:38 -0400

Andy Murray came to the Liverpool Echo Arena, saw his opponents, and conquered them. Sadly for the Great Britain team, that was not enough.

And the headline news now—certainly in the British press—is whether Murray should turn his back on the G.B. team until an over-indulgent system shows any sign that it can produce a world-class player to support the cause.

There was no doubting Murray’s commitment to his matches in the home team’s Davis Cup play-off, despite a sore wrist and a sore swipe at the media.

Having won his first rubber in straight sets, he was even more fired-up for his second match against the Polish No. 1. It was, and should have been, an easy match. Murray was, after all, playing the world No. 261. He duly won in straight sets.

But what the Liverpool crowd had the pleasure of seeing was a spirited and exciting new talent able to draw out the very best of Murray’s game. As a result, the teenager from Poland, Jerzy Janowicz, threw into even sharper relief just what G.B. tennis is lacking.

Janowicz, at just 18 years of age, was certainly not overawed by playing the world No. 3 on his home ground. What’s more, he had already taken a straight sets victory in his first rubber with an impressive power game that contained hints at all sorts of talent.

It was his physical presence that impressed first. Janowicz was variously described in the U.K. press as somewhere between 6'6" and 6'8". He is, in truth, mid-way between the two, making him a fraction taller than the latest star in the tennis firmament, Juan Martin Del Potro.

Yet while he is still two years junior to the Argentine, Janowicz’ physique already looks more evenly proportioned. He certainly had his deceptively large frame under impressive control around the court, and showed a willingness to power from behind the baseline and to advance to the net position.

He made a lot of volley errors against Murray with this tactic, but that seemed due more to over-enthusiasm than to poor movement. What he lacked in consistency he made up for in aggression and ambition.

In fact, rather than Del Potro, the player who first came to mind, while watching this tall young man around the court, was Marat Safin.

Facially, he has the same eastern European bone structure and gloom-laden expression. That, of course, is a comparison that might damn with feint praise. Where Safin allowed his temperament to dominate his talent, the Pole will need to channel his attributes more positively.

Back, then, to the Del Potro comparison. Janowicz’s style of play recalls much of the world No. 5’s powerful driving through the ball to generate huge pace and penetration. Unsurprisingly, he has a big serve too. Where he scores over Del Potro at the same age—two years ago—is in his mobility and forward speed.

So to another—and extremely flattering—comparison. Janowicz has an easy fluidity, including his service action, not entirely dissimilar to Roger Federer’s. This view comes not from the author of this piece but from a fellow observer, yet is not entirely fanciful.

A better comparison, however, might be with Novak Djokovic, though that too is a huge compliment to a player of such tender years and experience.

So enough of fanciful comparisons: what about some facts and figures? Well there’s precious little information to go on.

In the last Davis Cup round in March, Janowicz beat Belgium’s Kristof Vliegen (world No. 80), and he gave Andreas Seppi a run for his money in Marseille in February, losing 6-7, 6-3, 6-7.

He has a number of other top 100 to 150 players under his belt, including two in the qualifying rounds at the U.S. Open. Although he didn’t make the main draw there, he is heading in the right direction: just a year ago, he was ranked 600 in world.

Certainly a number of the current top players—Rafael Nadal and Del Potro spring to mind—broke into the top 20 by the time they were barely 20. But a quick look at some of the players with whom Janowicz arguably has more in common—Federer, Djokovic and even Murray—shows that, at Janowicz’s age, they too were hovering in the ranking hundreds.

These are still early days for this young talent, though Janowicz is already carrying the hopes of Poland on his young shoulders as they embark on their fight to keep their spot in Europe/Africa Group One.

Based in Poland, he must cast envious eyes at the kind of financial and developmental support that his British equivalents enjoy.

It’s probably fair to say that the British public, along with Murray, casts envious eyes towards the vast pool of talent in Europe.

Yet there must be any number of Janowicz’s in a population the size of the U.K’s. We need to learn from our neighbours how to find them, and then how to make them winners.

Is It Hot in Here or Is It Just Me And Spain's Davis Cup Team?

Marianne Bevis — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 20:44:52 -0400

The Spanish clay of Torre Pacheco Murcia burns orange. The distant hills of this parched region of Spain shimmer in the sun. The Spanish flags flutter like red and golden flames. The packed stadium throbs with passionate heat of the home crowd. And Spain’s tennis elite occupy their own small cauldron alongside the court, fired up from watching their compatriots power their way inexorably to victory. Spain’s Davis Cup team is hot property, and there is no sign of its fire being extinguished any time soon, because this squad is awash with men in the top 50 or so places of the ATP rankings. It’s all enough to get anyone with an eye for a shapely male calf a little hot under the collar. Because this apparently bottomless pool of talent is awash with men who bring just a little more to the sport than their outstanding tennis. This personal selection delves into the qualities of the six who make up the current 2009 squad: that they happen to be memorable for more than just their tennis is purely coincidental.

Begin Slideshow

Davis Cup: Croatia Takes on the Czech Republic

Marianne Bevis — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 03:59:59 -0400

This is one in a set of previews of each of the countries involved in the Davis Cup semi-final ties this weekend. Check out the others on Spain, Israel and the Czech Republic from fellow B/R creatures.

For Rajat Jain's take on the Czech Republic, click here.

For antiMatter on Spain, click here.

For Rob York's take on Israel, click here.

Marin Cilic and Ivo Karlovic will lead an optimistic Croatian team against the Czech Republic this weekend on the indoor clay of their homeland in the northern town of Porec.

It may be only the second time that Croatia has reached the semi-finals of the World Group, but last time it went on to win the Davis Cup, in 2005, against the Slovak Republic, the first unseeded nation to do so.

Located in an enviable location along a huge swath of the Adriatic Sea, and with a population of little more than half that of Greater London, Croatia has also won 11 of its last 12 home ties.

It won promotion from the Europe/Africa Group I last year with wins against Italy and Brazil, and has thus far defeated Chile and the United States in this year's World Group competition.

Team captain Goran Prpic has, not surprisingly, retained the same squad who beat the U.S.A. in July.

In the opening match of that tie, Ivo Karlovic came back from two sets down against James Blake for his first five-set victory in 12 career attempts. Then the hugely talented 20-year-old Marin Cilic gave Croatia a 2-0 advantage with another five-set thriller against Mardy Fish.

Despite an eminently predictable loss by Roko Karanusic and Lovro Zovko against the Bryan brothers in the doubles rubber, Cilic once again excelled in beating Blake in four sets to take the tie.

The win marked the third time since Croatia joined the competition in 1993 that they had beaten the 32-time champions of the U.S.A., making it the only team with a positive record against the Americans.

This imminent semi-final tie, though, is the first time Croatia has played against the Czech Republic, and the ATP rankings of the two pairs of teams suggest it will be a very closely fought encounter.

Cilic has just climbed two places to No.15 in the world, on the back of his good run to the quarter-finals of the U.S. Open. In so doing, he overtakes his forthcoming Czech opponents, Radek Stepanek, who dropped to 17, and Tomas Berdych at 18. However, fellow Croatian Karlovic slipped three places to 31,

So the rankings give very little help in predicting the outcome of the tie. What’s more, clay is probably not be the preferred surface of any of the men (though the Croats will enjoy the benefit of playing on the same surface that saw them beat the U.S.A. so recently).

Even the head-to-head records provide little help.

Both Cilic and Berdych have achieved better results on hard courts and indoor carpet than on clay but, to add a little spice to the encounter, they have not played one another on any surface before.

Cilic and Stepanek are one win apiece, both on clay.

Stepanek leads Karlovic 2-0, but they haven’t played each other for four years. Meanwhile, Karlovic has a beaten Berdych in the last two of their three matches.

The stats, the preferences, and the rankings therefore give little away. But on the basis of Cilic’s outstanding performance against Andy Murray in New York just last week, he must warrant the nod in both his singles matches.

The Croatians’ Achilles heel is their doubles pairing of Roko Karanusic and Lovro Zovko. It surprised few that they went down in straight sets to the Bryan brothers in their tie against the USA.

They will now face another daunting opponent in Lukas Dlouhy, who won the doubles title at the U.S. Open and at Roland Garros (both with Leander Paes). He will partner Jan Hernych, ranked world No. 63 in singles, and although it is an unknown combination, the Croats will be hard pressed to win this particular rubber.

So it may all come down to how well Karlovic rises to the occasion. Despite an early exit at Flushing Meadows, he will doubtless draw a lot of confidence from his big win against Blake, on the same surface, in the quarter-final tie. If Cilic lives up to expectations, Karlovic needs only to repeat that one performance.

With the crowd behind them and the home-court advantage, the Croatian men might just pull it off.

Prediction: Croatia 3, Czech Republic 2

Roger Federer's Contentment Shines Through Tired Defeat in New York

Marianne Bevis — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:26:16 -0400

Roger Federer has been the picture of contentment throughout the U.S. swing. With a first French Open title, the reclaimed Wimbledon championship, and twin daughters safely delivered in July, the burden of reasserting himself at the top of men’s tennis was lifted.

Life was handing him riches upon riches.

Little surprise, then, that he hadn’t stopped smiling since his return to the tour barely three weeks after his wife gave birth in Switzerland.

As anyone who has experienced the impact of a new baby can testify, the emotional fallout is enormous and enduring. Parenthood is a truly life-changing event.

Priorities change, perspectives alter, the relationship between couples shifts and adapts—and that’s over and above the hormonal roller coaster that a mother undergoes.

Even at the earliest stage, it was clear Federer wanted to be a hands-on father.

He revealed in an interview for the New York Times that, both before and after the twins were born, he spent several weeks at the hospital, sleeping in the same room as Mirka and, subsequently, with Mirka and the babies, fitting in training sessions during the daytime on nearby courts.

“I was sometimes very tired,” he said. “Don’t know if it was more from practice or from not getting the sleep you usually get.”

Remarkable, then, that the couple suddenly announced they were ready to hit the road and jetted off with two three-week-old babies, plus entourage, to Montreal. Stable and sustaining the marriage may be, and bottomless the financial resources, but this was impressive by any measure.

That Federer immediately made his mark by reaching a Masters quarterfinal was even more impressive—and better was to follow.

A week later, Federer captured his 16th Masters title in Cincinnati, defeating Novak Djokovic in straight sets. Not content with claiming Pete Sampras’ Grand Slam record at Wimbledon, Federer was now on the verge of taking Andre Agassi’s record of 17 Masters titles.

No wonder he looked so happy when he arrived in New York to begin his preparations for another record-breaking attempt.

As the media merry-go-round continued, Federer was constantly challenged about his involvement with the babies, and he constantly gave Mirka the credit for working so hard to make life easier for him.

By the time he played Lleyton Hewitt, the babies were still just six weeks old, and having an impact on day-to-day life—or rather, night-to-night life. In his press conference following his battle with Hewitt, Federer said, “Sure, I'm losing sleep, but that's part of it. I make sure on my off day maybe I do get a night where I can sleep in longer or take an afternoon nap. It's working out OK.”

Then he revealed, in a long feature for USA Today, that his practice regime had also changed in response to his night-time pattern.

"Last time I practised at 8 a.m. was, like, maybe three years ago. There's no need to get up early to go out and practise at 8, but why not if I'm already awake?"

Now mix into this new family life the arduous nature of a Grand Slam tournament. The more successful you are, the greater the physical demands, as the initial rounds advance to quarterfinals and semifinals against ever tougher opponents.

It is a credit to Federer’s fitness that he has reached these final stages at every Slam for five years. This summer, a win in Paris in June was immediately followed by a win in London in July: a physical as well as mental triumph.

Then he took paternity leave, a Masters title, and reached yet another Slam final by the second week in September. This takes supreme fitness—but also minutely controlled daily scheduling of practice, meals, and sleep.

By the time the final was played, Federer was showing subtle signs of tiredness. Rarely has his serve been so erratic, not to say poor: 50 percent first serve success, with 11 double faults against just 13 aces.

Rarely has he let so many break opportunities pass him by: just five out of 22.

Rarely has he found it so difficult to contain his frustration and maintain the usual focus.

Ignore his progressively more drawn features through the fifth set and look instead at the volume of wide ground strokes: 15 against four winners in just eight games.

It was probably at this stage that the rescheduling of the previous day’s semis began to play its modest part, too.

What argument determined the reversal of the Rafael Nadal/Juan Martin del Potro match to noon and the Federer/Djokovic match to 4:30 p.m. will probably never be explained. The latter pair, after all, had been twiddling their thumbs for four days, while the former’s match was spread across the previous two days. It made little sense.

While del Potro was off and home by three in the afternoon, Federer didn’t make it off court until 7:30 p.m. and was back on court at 4 p.m. Monday. In normal circumstances, this would make little difference to Federer. Against this summer’s backdrop, it may have weighed just a little heavy.

Del Potro was a worthy and delightful winner. He will go on to win more Masters and more Slams. He may even end up as a world No. 1. He may not, however, have deprived Federer of his record-breaking six in a row were it not for the arrival of Charlene and Myla.

But then Federer seems pretty happy with things just the way they are. What’s one more trophy alongside the summer he’s had and the happiness he has?

That equanimity spoke volumes.

View from the Bleachers: The U.S. Open’s Assault on the Senses

Marianne Bevis — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 12:27:00 -0400

This is the third in a short series of “Views from the Bleachers”, an attempt to record, in words and pictures, my impressions of one annual cycle of contrasting tennis tournaments. With clay and grass behind me, my first hard court tournament proved to be the most daunting so far because it happened to be the biggest and most extrovert tennis event of the year: the U.S. Open. It was daunting, too, because it brought together two long-standing ambitions. The first dream was to return to the city that knocked me for six several years before. I was star-struck by New York, and had looked for the chance of another shot in the arm. The second ambition? To get as much of the drug that is tennis into my system as I can. Wimbledon, rather than satisfying the need, demanded more experiences and so the target became the biggest and the best: the final Grand Slam of the year. The resulting assault on the senses is near-impossible to capture through mere words and photos. This personal selection, however, tries to scratch the surface of this unique event: different in so many ways from Europe’s clay and the English grass.

Begin Slideshow