Second Successive Scottish Slam?

Just over 4 months ago, Andy Murray was heading to New York believing that it was his time. He'd genuinely competed in a slam final for the first time at Wimbledon, and had then conquered the two best players in the world to take Olympic Gold. Back on hard courts, there was a real sense that if he could avoid any early slip-ups, this could be the one. 

He dispatched Bogomolov Jr and Dodig with minimal fuss before seeing off Lopez (who he's played in 3 of the last 5 GS) in the 3rd round. The potentially dangerous Raonic proved not to be so and a slow start against Cilic couldn't prevent him reaching a seemingly inevitable semi-final. The shock came in that he would be playing Berdych, who had dumped out a decidedly off-form Federer in the other quarter. The Czech provided limited opposition, crumbling away and so Murray had shot number 5 at a major title. Djokovic had fought past Wawrinka, Del Potro and Ferrer and entered as favourite. But the Scot was an entirely different man to any finals before. Even when the Serb champion battled back, Murray held his nerve to take the crown. 
 
So, heading into a new season, what odds on him holding aloft another new bit of silverware? Well, most bookies say 9/4 or thereabouts, but the point is that he most definitely in with a shout. Obviously Novak will be favourite again, but a loss to Tomic in the Hopman Cup suggests he's far from invincible. There's no knowing where Federer is at, and of course the likes of JMDP, Tsonga, Ferrer and Berdych will be around, but the stage is set for a second successive Scottish Slam. 

On a side note, Nadal's ongoing injury trouble highlights again the physical demands on top level tennis players. Robin Soderling is now "inactive" on the ATP website because he's been out of the game for so long with utterly incapacitating glandular fever and Mardy Fish's heart issues are similarly leaving him unable to compete for huge periods of times.

And now Rafa appears to be heading in the same direction. There was once a day when Nadal would have snorted in derision at a virus, but such is his level of strength and fitness these days, it caused him to withdraw with more than 2 weeks before the start of the tournament. More than just the sniffles going on there. We can only hope that the soon-to-be-world-number-5 (or lower) does still actually have a knee. There are some whispers that he may never return to the court and more than a few that he'll never again be the real ruthless Rafa.

Roll on Roland Garros

I simply cannot see the appeal of tennis. It is dull and predictable at the best of times but these Grand Slams of late, where you have four incredibly consistent, talented and physically awesome men battling it out each time, it's just beyond beyond tedious.

Last year the 16 Slam semi-final places were filled by our famous quartet a total of 14 times, only Ferrer and Tsonga breaking through once each (at the expense of Nadal at Aus and Fed at Wim respectively). Needless to say, the trend has continued this year already.


As for who wins the things, it's even more boring. 27 of the last 28 Slams have been won by just 3 men. Del Potro the only man to interfere with Federer, Nadal and Djokovic's dominance. Despite 9 Semi-final appearances, even Murray hasn't been able to mix it up a bit by getting to hold a trophy. He's been handed a very tough draw at Roland Garros this year so I wouldn't expect to see him do much to break that streak.


Then we get onto the matches themselves. So repetitive and long. Who wants to watch the two best players in the world hitting astonishingly powerful and accurate shots time and time again for 6 hours? And at the Australian Open this came after two semi finals of such intense action and length that all we asked for was a simple straight setter in the final. I just can't bring myself to watch it again.

So now that we approach the French Open, is there any chance of someone else getting involved? As always, the likes of Berdych, Ferrer, Tsonga and Del Potro will threaten but there is surely no chance of any significant disruption to the power four.

And of course, the surface, is not exactly conducive to quick and straightforward matches. Our only hope must be that Nadal is so much better than anyone else we don't have to endure more than the odd tight set as he continues on his relentless quest for clay-court and Roland Garros immortality.


But who wants to see records tumbling? I have no desire to be actively following tennis during what may go down as one of the most exciting, competitive and high quality periods in tennis history. So let's quickly get this next chapter over and done with, I'm not at all looking forward to it...

Murray to face Kazakh Kukushkin for the Quarters

Into the second week and Murray couldn't have asked for a much better last 16 opponent that Mikhail Kukushkin. The Kazakh world 92 had won an overwhelming total of 2 Grand Slam matches in his entire career prior to this tournament, but wins against Garcia-Lopez (66), Troicki (23) and Monfils (15) have rocketed him to a position he could never have imagined or hoped for a week ago. He now faces the biggest match of his career and a chance to seriously make a name for himself, and perhaps more significantly, claim enough points to climb 50 odd places in the rankings, and break the top 50 for the first time. 


Murray beat him fairly unconvincingly in 3 sets in Brisbane, in his first match of the season a couple of weeks ago so there's always the potential for a bit of trouble but realistically, in a match of this significance, Murray should crush him.


It's a bit like Chelsea (ranked 4th) playing Northampton Town in the FA Cup 5th round, after the Cobblers knocked out Rochdale (66), Cardiff (23) and West Brom (15) - you don't expect to see the League 2 relegation strugglers causing too much of a threat. It might be a different matter if Murray's defence consisted of the the tennis equivalent of David Luiz but fortunately he's more like the Chelsea of Mourinho than AVB.

Then again, Kukushkin plays his Davis Cup tennis in the World Group, the top tier, and will be up against Nadal et al. of champions Spain in February. Murray and Great Britain, in the European section of the 3rd tier, will be playing the Slovak Republic, including giants of the men's game such as Lacko and Klizan (yes I did have to look them up) - so maybe Mikhail should be going in as the overdog (not sure that'll catch on).

Should Murray overcome his unseeded opponent, it is highly likely to be JWT that awaits in the quarter final. The 2008 finalist and 6th seed will have the disadvantage of being French, something our Scottish hero seems to thrive on, as Llodra and Roger-Vasselin have found out to their misfortune. Nationality aside though, Tsonga will be a formidable opponent. I briefly touched on his strong end to 2011 last time out, and nothing so far this tournament suggests he is going to be anything less than extremely competitive. Although Murray holds a 5-1 head-to-head, JWT's win came at none other than the Australian Open, when the unseeded 23 year old from Le Mans powered his way past Murray (9), Gasquet (8), Youzhny (14) and Nadal (2), before losing to Djokovic in 4 sets. I shouldn't like to rule out Nishikori's chances on Monday but I can't help but feel the all important "second week" at this Slam is going to be a short one for the first ever Japanese player to get there.

Only minor shocks so far really (e.g. Raonic/Hewitt, Falla/Fish, Benneteau/Simon) and all the main men looking pretty comfortable. Sensible money seems to still be on Novak but cruising through early on doesn't really mean anything and this time next week the moment of truth will be on us. 

The Famous Four Down Under Again

Almost exactly a year on since my first blog post and I find myself returning after a festive hiatus from whence I began, namely tennis and the Australian Open.

Last year the (inaccurate) predictions centred around Nadal and Federer, and no big surprise they're in the running again. But who was to know that a wheat-free diet could lead to a defeat-free first few months of the season for Djokovic. The 2011 Aussie Open turned out to be the first leg in a somewhat memorable run and led the Serb to becoming the main man of the tennis world and most decidedly the man to beat. 
Back down under 12 months later, it's hard to see past the same old four again...


Novak Djokovic - The world number 1 (by a long way) goes in as firm favourite. He's not had a competitive warm-up tournament but did comfortably dispose of Monfils, Federer and Ferrer in the Abu Dhabi exhibition. His Grand Slam record of 25-1 in 2011 will take some matching but it's difficult to imagine that anyone could stop him before at least the quarters when he could meet someone like Tsonga or Del Potro.

However, Nole's fitness is always a factor to consider, and something often omitted from the story of last season. Taking nothing away from the greatness of the year, he did withdraw from 8 tournaments during the season (*Rotterdam, Monte Carlo, Queens, Cincinnati, Davis Cup SF, China Open, Shanghai, Paris) and pulled out here a couple of years ago with heat exhaustion. A different man these days maybe, but still liable to start feeling the pressure if anyone can get a set or two ahead. 


Rafael Nadal - The Spaniard has won a Grand Slam every year since 2005, but he goes into this season perhaps as off-form and fitness as we've seen him since the summer of '09. Although the venue for one of the greatest Federer-Nadal clashes, the Aussie Open hasn't been happy hunting for Rafa generally speaking. Only once other than that epic final has he even made the semis, and last year limped out sadly to countryman Ferrer. Reckless to ever write off the battling leftie but perhaps not surprising he's got the longest odds of all 4. 

Roger Federer - The Swiss comes into the tournament on the back of a pretty significant 21 match winning run, nearly half of what ND achieved last season. One could claim that he cynically protected it by withdrawing prior to a tricky tie against Tsonga but with only 2 mid-tournament withdrawals in his career, I don't think that really fits with his competitive nature. He's going to be a serious threat but everyone wobbles at some point in a GS and Roger seems to do it at somewhat crucial moments these days. He's gone nearly two years since winning a Slam and the next few weeks could be crucial to how the rest of his season, and career, will pan out. 

Andy Murray - The addition of Ivan Lendl to his backroom staff must surely be a big benefit. Read nothing into the win in Brisbane against no stiff opposition, it's on the Rod Laver arena that Murray's fate will be decided. Djokovic is younger than Murray and so the Scot can't hope to just outlast his rival - he needs to step up soon or risk his entire career being in the shadow of the Serb (and Nadal who's only a year older and had 9 GS by Murray's current age). Lendl lost 4 Grand Slam finals before his 1984 triumph at Roland Garros, and then went on to win 8 in total. If his new charge can do anything like that then it's safe to say it'll have been a good appointment by the British No. 1. Another chance for Murray to show he's got the mental and physical strength to last through the toughest test, in the first major of one of the most eagerly anticipated seasons in recent history.


Others to watch out for - Tsonga could be very dangerous indeed. A great second half to 2011 and a good win in Doha. He's going to make a very awkward QF opponent for one of the above. Raonic has just won in Chennai and could well cause a bit of an upset - he's likely to meet a top seed around R3 and if he can keep a lid on the UFE, is very dangerous. Tomic gave Nadal a bit of a scare last year, and although swept away by Murray in Brisbane, is inspired by an Aussie crowd and will certainly fancy his chances of making the latter rounds. And at some point, JMDP will be fully fit again, and the top 4 could become a top 5.

I can't wait...

Murray, we will see you again, but not yet, not yet

Congratulations to Novak Djokovic for a thoroughly convincing and deserved Australian Open victory.

He has been highly impressive throughout, dropping just a single set on the way (a tie-break to Ivan Dodig in the 2nd round) - overcoming some extremely good opponents along the way. Indeed it seems, as previously discussed, that a tougher route through is no disadvantage to an eventual finalist.

So what of Murray? There is no question that he is better than Henman ever was but is getting to 3 GS finals and never winning really preferable to getting to 6 GS semis and never further? Of course it's better but I doubt getting one round further but still falling short is exactly the improvement British tennis is looking for. Henman gets a lot of bad press but I believe he achieved appropriately for the level of ability he had - he maybe should have won a GS (particularly thinking of Wimbledon '01) but in 5 of his 6 semi-finals he lost to the eventual winner, and not a bad list of names (Wim '98 Sampras, Wim '99 Sampras, Wim '01 Ivanisevic, Wim '02 Hewitt, US '04 Federer).

Murray on the other hand, clearly has the ability, fitness and desire to win a major tournament. His record of 6-1 in Masters 1000 series finals says that he knows how to win a final. And the 3 GS finals he's lost have been against awesome opposition in Federer (x2) and Djokovic, not that that's an excuse - you can't hope to win a major tournament without beating the best.

That is what sets Grand Slams apart. The added pressure, expectation, tension - the tennis is only a part of what it takes to win. It'll only get worse for Murray the longer it goes on.

He committed 47 unforced errors (UFE), bringing his total for the tournament to 204. A massive 110 (53.9%) of these were in his last two matches - if this doesn't suggest someone tightening up and making mistakes as a result, I don't know what would.
Compare to Djokovic, 181 UFE for the tournament, 68 of which came against Federer and Murray, only 37.6%. In other words his UFE count was hardly up at all compared to his earlier matches (30% of the sets he played were in the last two matches, so 37.6% is only a marginal increase).

Djokovic of course has already won the big things - a Grand Slam (Aus '08), the Davis Cup ('10), the World Tour Finals ('08) - so that pressure is eased and there is a confidence, a knowledge that he can do it. All he had to focus on was his extremely high standard of tennis.

A lot of the BBC commentary following the match discussed Murray's need for a coach or someone in his team who could help him with this mental side of the game. They may have a point. He's certainly no choker but let's face it, he hasn't even been competitive in any of the 3 finals he's lost and that's not just a question of ability. He beats these guys regularly - perhaps he loses sight of that when it comes to the crunch.
I'm sure there'll be plenty more Slams for us to see what he's done about it...

A Final Showdown

Murray - Djokovic

A fascinating match-up and another extremely difficult one to call. Murray overcame a battling and resistant Ferrer in 4 sets (finally an accurate prediction) to book his place in the final while Djokovic held his nerve at the crucial moments to put Federer out in straight sets. They're both playing well, Novak perhaps slighty more so, but basically, there's very little between them.

Here are some stats to show how they've got on in this year's Aussie Open:

ACES: AM-59 ND-45

UFE: AM-157 ND-148       *AM had 63 UFE against Ferrer

Winners: AM-199 ND-188

Sets dropped: AM-2 ND-1

Double Faults: AM-15 ND-14

Murray has had a significantly easier route through - looking at the rankings of his 6 opponents thus far (101, 79, 32, 11, 46, 7) - they average 46th, whereas Djokovic's defeated opponents' average rank is 29 (42, 81, 29, 14, 6, 2). It all counts for very little...

Murray will need to up his level against NDjo - as many errors and weak service games as he put in against DF will be mercilessly punished. Federer didn't exactly play badly, Novak just looked solid, determined and astonishingly consistent with the power and accuracy of his groundstrokes. He'll attack Murray more than Ferrer but the biggest difference will be Djokovic's GS experience - Ferrer was Murray's match for most of the game and then collapsed in the two tie-breaks. It may well come down to who performs at the crunch moments - they both did in their semi-finals.

Extremely solid in defence, passionate and aggressive on court but lighthearted and relaxed off, they're seriously well matched. Murray is exactly 1 week older, their hard court head-to-head is tied at 3-3 and their career win percentages are within 2% of each other. (ND 75.5%, AM 73.9%) - who needs Federer/Nadal?

A few stats do separate them though and may prove crucial one way or another.

FOR MURRAY:

Djokovic hasn't even taken a set from Murray since April 2008 (3 meetings) and Murray leads the head-to-head in Finals 2-0 (Miami '10 and Cincinnati '09)

FOR DJOKOVIC:
He leads the overall head-to-head 4-3, has a better GS career win % (78.7% to 74.0%) and a significantly better Australian Open win % (78.3% to 70.6%). He also has the experience of winning a GS, and at Melbourne Park no less.


If a tennis match could end up in a draw, this one might well. I'm gonna stick my neck out, it's Murray's time. He'll win the Australian Open in 5 sets



* Unecessary but interesting stats:
If Djokovic wins, he'll lead Murray by 2120 ranking points, if Murray wins the gap will be just 520 - we've all heard of a 6 pointer, this is a 1600 pointer.
A Murray win will also take him back up to 4th in the rankings, whereas a defeat will mean that remarkably Soderling extends his lead over Murray to 195 points

Nadal asks no semi - Ferrer gives no semi

What an anticlimactic way for the Nadal dream to end. I appreciate the sentiment behind "give Ferrer his due" and "it's not easy to stay focussed in a situation like that" but in reality it was a bit like taking candy from a stubborn baby - not without minor difficulties but essentially inevitable and resulting in success but with a somewhat hollow ring to it. Ferr play to David for not showing any mercy but it's not like we expected him to forfeit a set out of a sense of friendship and humanitarianism.
In my prediction of straight sets (cop out excuse - I didn't state clearly who to ;-)), I commented that Nadal is Nadal - truth is during this match he wasn't. 

Or maybe he was, but not the Nadal we like to think of (sheer power, determination and incredible skill with a racquet). Part of Federer's consistency in Slams is not only always making it to the QF and beyond, but the fact that he participates in them all and never retires from a match. Nadal's style means that he is very susceptible to injury and so is unlikely to a) ever have a consistently injury-free year or b) have as lengthy a career as Federer. There's no doubt Nadal is a champion but his chances of winning as many GS as Federer are harmed greatly by his Darren Anderton-esque injury-proneness.
So we are left with the following Semi Finals:
Federer vs Djokovic
Murray vs Ferrer
Murray trails the head-to-head 3-2 but leads 2-0 on hard courts. Hard to evaluate Ferrer after the Nadal match but I would expect Murray to take him, although it may not prove as straightforward as their clash at the 02 in November. I slightly underestimated the difficulty Dolgo would cause but I genuinely don't see David taking more than a set from the Scot. Murray in 4
Remarkably, this will be Djokovic and Federer's 5th Grand Slam semi-final match up. Their head-to-head makes for interesting reading.
Overall: Fed leads 13-6 (68% RF wins)
In Semis: Fed leads 6-4 (60% RF wins)
In Slams: Fed leads 4-2 (67% RF wins)
On Hard: Fed leads 12-5 (71% RF wins)
In other words, there's an incredible consistency in the percentage of times Roger beats Novak. But to make it really specific, their four Grand Slam semi meetings are split 2-2 (RF: US '09, US '08 - ND: US '10, AUS '08). Perhaps this can give Djoko some hope.
It's a tough one to call, it will no doubt mean a lot to Federer to show that he is still capable of winning slams but Novak has to believe that he has a great chance, not only to beat Federer but to go on to claim his second Grand Slam title. Their career win percentages are unexpectedly close, at 81% (RF) and 79% (ND). I wouldn't be surprised to see it go to 5 sets but this time I think Federer will have the edge.


* selected other career win percentages (with total GS wins), for information's sake:

Borg 83% - 11

Nadal 82% - 9

McEnroe 82% - 7

Lendl 82% - 8

Laver 79% - 11 (5 in Open Era)

Sampras 77% - 14
Agassi 76% - 8

Edberg 75% - 6
Murray 74% - 0

Dolgo and the big boys

Nadal v Ferrer

Dolgopolov v Murray

Berdych v Djokovic

Wawrinka v Federer  


So, the 8 top seeds failed to all make it through. Wawrinka did indeed prove to be more than a minor spanner in the Roddick-works, but I think few expected to see Ukranian Dolgopolov put Soderling away and so comprehensively. 


So who is this upstart? I must admit, I watched the first set and thought it was a bit embarrassing him being so far into the tournament. He served 23% first serves and won only 20% of points on his second serve. He pulled those stats up to 50% and 44% respectively but was no doubt assisted in victory by Soderling's astonishing UFE count. The sets Dolgo won convincingly (3rd and 5th), Robin had a combined total of 32 unforced errors. That's gonna lose you the set. Put it this way, Murray has only committed 60 UFE all tournament. 


Dolgo has a bizarre and decidedly unorthodox technique, perhaps most obvious in his serve. His slingy forehands are quite dangerous and unpredictable but Murray will defend more than the naturally aggressive Soderling and it will leave Dolgo frustrated and we're likely to see an extremely error-strewn performance. In each of his matches so far, he's run away with a set or two (6-1, 6-2 against RS, 6-1, 6-1 against Tsonga, 6-0 against Becker, 6-2 against Kukushkin) which he's unlikely to be able to do against Murray.
Prediction: AD to have some dangerous moments, maybe the odd break and Murray is likely to concede more than 3 games in a set for the first time, but straight sets


As for the all Swiss match-up, Federer vs Wawrinka, although Stan seemed to be on great form and Rog struggling a touch, I can see the world number 2 coming through in 4 sets. Roddick and Monfils weren't able to offer anything different to their regular tactics and Stan punished them on the backhand time and again. No-one mixes it up and thinks on the court like Federer and that'll be enough to extend the 6-1 head-to-head


Not much of an adventurous prediction in the iberian clash either - Nadal hasn't lost to Ferrer since 2007 and takes an 11-3 head-to-head lead into the match. That said, David has won all 8 matches he's played this year (including the title at Auckland), dropping only 4 sets on the way - he's in exceptional form, but Nadal is Nadal. Straight sets


The quarter that intrigues me most is Djokovic-Berdych. Tomas is looking for a bit of consistency that might see him really challenge the top 5 - after his great Wimbledon performance, he fell off the wagon somewhat. Djoko put him away easily at the 02 and leads the head-to-head 4-1, but that 1 was the semi at Wimbledon. Don't think that Berdy will fold under the pressure. He's made serene progress, against some tough opponents and he has the potential to give Novak a good go. I'm gonna go for Nole though, I think the Aussie Open is special to him for some reason and he'll turn it up when he needs to. Another Federer Djokovic semi could be classic...

Top 8 = Last 8? And other stats

There is the real possibility that in two days' time a phenomenon may occur in Melbourne that has never occurred yet (as far as my research can tell me) - the top 8 seeds will make it through to the Quarter finals and therefore be the last 8 players in the tournament. Surely this is the whole purpose of the seeding process - getting the best players taking on each other in the closing stages? Yet never before has it happened. It nearly happened two years ago at the Australian Open '09, but Murray (4) let slip a 2-1 set lead to Verdasco (14) in the 4th round, leaving 7 of the 8 top seeds to fill the QF slots. 


Strangely enough it is Verdasco (9) who arguably has the biggest chance of spoiling the party this time round too, up against Berdych (6). That said, the Czech does lead the head-to-head 6-4 and 4-1 on Hard courts. 


Another one who could ruin it is Stan Wawrinka. He ruthlessly punished Monfils in R3 and certainly can threaten A-Rod. I'll still back our capped friend. 


Answers to this conundrum on a postcard: Stan has never even taken a set from Roddick yet he leads the head-to-head 2-1. *answer at the bottom*


Nadal again showed his class today - I warned you Tomic could be dangerous, but Rafa kept his nerve and demonstrated all of his fabled battling qualities from 4-0 in the second set. Tomic has an incredibly languid style (description from John Lloyd - patent pending), and seems almost lazy in thumping away winners. Unfortunately his UFE count meant that the only significant thumping was the one Rafa dealt him in the end. Lots of potential but needs to concentrate and not expect success to fall into his lap. Even Federer has to work hard. I fear Cilic may be reliant on divine intervention to have a chance of seeing the QFs this year, although he comes from the right town for it so who knows...


I was pleased that Baghdatis did the business over JMDP, as predicted, so it's a shame he had to pull out against Melzer. I fancy Murray over the Austrian (the Scot leads the head-to-head 4-0) but the Cypriot could have made it interesting.


So Rog and Raf are still there and still looking like giving us our first dream final since their clash here two years ago. Having tipped Rog because of his easier run to the final, I did some research (prompted by an off the cuff comment made on BBC Live text - see 11.52). Is it actually of benefit to avoid seeds on your route through? 


Not necessarily it would appear. Take a look at Federer's route through the Aussie Open since 2005 and you'll see that he's been in 4 finals (won 3) and only once in those years (4th round 2006 vs Haas, who was ranked 41 (having missed a lot of 2005 after stepping on a ball at Wimbledon and spraining his ankle) at the time, but made it to 11 by the end of 2006) has he played a non-seed after the 2nd round. 
The years in which Roger has been an abysmal failure, and only made the semi-finals ('05 and '08), he took on a non-seed in the 3rd round, and again in the 4th in 2005, before losing to the eventual winner each time.
Rafa is similar, last year he played non-seeds in the 3rd round and QF before losing his semi to Murray but his victory in '09 came off the back of wins against seeds in R4, QF and SF. 


Maybe the tougher route is the better one after all. 




Another bit of trivia, the two active players who have played the most consecutive Grand Slam tournaments are 1) Roger Federer (with 45) and 2) Tommy Robredo (with 41) - who play each other tonight.


* trivia question answer - both of Wawrinka's victories over A-Rod have come from the American's withdrawal due to injury, both in the first set (once SW was 4-0 up, once AR was 4-3 up). Congratulations if you got it, and a special mention to my wife who's not exactly a tennis enthusiast but figured it out pretty much straight away

No Major upsets

3 days in and a few hairy moments but, as with most Majors, no major upsets. Gilles Simon gave Federer a great game in one of the matches of the tournament so far - even more than my predicted "maybe take a set". Real signs that he can get his way back up to the top 10 before too long.


Plenty of competition for the match of the tournament though, Nalbo-Hewitt, Verdasco-Tipsarevic, Fish-Hanescu, Petzschner-Tsonga and Monfils-De Bakker all producing epic 5 setters but each time the higher rank coming through in the end. So why is that? 


A quick bit of maths reveals a telling stat regarding unforced errors (UFE). In the 6 matches mentioned (GS-RF, DN-LH, FV-JT, MF-VH, PP-JWT & GM-TDB), the average % of UFE made by the lower seed for the whole match was 48.5%. However the average % of UFE made by the lower seed in the 5th set only jumps up to 59.7%
Most pundits will tell you that UFE come down to two things, tiredness and concentration. There's no reason for any player to be less fit than his opponent (apart from if you're playing Monfils cos that man's a running machine) - but concentration is another matter. Not that I'm a world-class tennis pro to speak from experience but maintaining your concentration for 3+ hours is almost impossible. No wonder the ATP website attributes Federer's success to his experience. Players like Tipsy and Hanescu are always around in tournaments and can give a good show of themselves, but on the big stage they seem to lack the mental game to see it through. 
That's what sets Rafa, Roger and Novak apart, even from Robin/Andy/Tomas etc., they are insanely consistent in the Grand Slams. 


No doubt Rafa will crash out to Sweeting tonight. 


So my predictions from the previous post - mixed I think is a good summary. 


Simon certainly earned his label as "dangerous", only I underestimated quite how dangerous


Davydenko crashed out first round - hardly living up to my prediction of a QF slot


We'll have to see tonight about JMDP and Tomic, although I feel like the latter has done well by me getting past 44th ranked Jeremy Chardy.


As for the overall prediction, I'm sticking with Federer, it's good for him to have had a battle early on and the draw has opened up for him even more than before - the earliest he could meet another seed is the QF. Nadal certainly looked ominous but I'm not sure there was enough actual tennis to make a proper evaluation. We'll see how it looks after another round of matches...

Australian Open/Closed?

So the Australian Open starts this weekend and other than the usual Murray-mania, it's basically down to Federer Nadal. Again. If it was just Man U and Chelsea winning the Premiership every year, people would call it boring. Oh wait. Never mind.

Nadal is streaks ahead but Federer's been showing good signs - can he prove himself once again? I doubt he cares, but the number of times he's apparently finally settled the debate that he is the greatest of all time must be close to the number of aces in a Roddick-Karlovic 5 setter. Roland Garros '09 (career GS), Wimbledon '09 (most GS wins), regaining yr end No 1. ranking (end of '09), London O2 '10 (World Tour Finals).

But if you think of the great RN-RF clashes, it's Rafa that comes out on top. Wimbledon '07 was epic, but Rafa was only 21 and Roger was in his prime. When they've both been at the top of their games, Wimbledon '08 and Australia '09 it's been the Spaniard to prevail, not to mention the seemingly infinite number of RG finals he's beaten Federer in. Of course you cannot take away from Federer winning the French (09), then Wimbledon (09) and then the Aus but he didn't have to play Nadal at any of them (thanks to Soderling/injury, injury and Murray/injury respectively).

Federer's defending 2000 ranking points (from a total of 9245) whereas Nadal is only defending 360 (from a total of 12,390) so even if Fed does win, Rafa's likely to extend his lead in the rankings. Murray suffers a similar predicament in trying to win 4th back from Soderling, defending 1200 points to Soderling's 10. This won't be helped by the fact that Murray has hardly had any competitive tennis and Soderling's just won in Australia.

So any predictions? First of all, some dangerous players in the draw, undervalued in ranking for various reasons. Watch out for (in rough order of dangerousness):


Gilles Simon - Not sure Federer will be too happy to see Gilles as a potential R2 opponent, the Frenchman leads the head-to-head 2-0 and has been as high as 6 in the world, not to mention winning in Sydney this week. Prediction: he'll give Roger a good game, maybe take a set but not enough for the win - out in R2
Nikolay Davydenko - may seem silly to call the 23rd seed a threat but he's a lot better than 23 and can take anyone on his day (e.g. Nadal in Qatar last week) - could be a very interesting R4 vs Berdych. Prediction: out to Djokovic in QF
Juan Martin Del Potro - could take on Murray in 4th round, Grand Slam winner. Bit of a whack it hard as I can merchant but when he's in form, it works big time (US Open '09). Dangerous but lack of game time means he shouldn't pose Murray too much of a threat, if he gets that far. Prediction: out to Baghdatis in R2
Bernard Tomic - an 18 year old ranked at 209 currently (with a career high 208) may not strike fear in Nadal's heart but if Tomic can get past Chardy and Lopez, I think he could worry Rafa a touch. He gave Cilic a real scare last year and put out Starace (who was ranked 73) at only 16 years old. The crowd will be behind him and he may well make things uncomfortable for Rafa. If he gets to him. Prediction: (Disappointingly) Out to Lopez in R2


Who's actually going to win the thing? Ladbrokes have it dead even between Nadal and Federer, and I can't fault them - I'll go for Roger cos he's got a slightly easier route through. We'll see