Andy Murray and 2011

Andy Murray does not have a slaying shot. He has an excellent first serve, but his percentage of first serve generally remains around 50-55%. His second serve is very defensive, which is often exploited by the opponents. He has good confidence in volleying and he used it as the offensive strategy against Rafael Nadal in the Australian Open, 2010. He is able to hit winners from the backhand and that sometimes is the more reliable flank in a rally. He is excellent in the return of serve and it is difficult to hit aces against him. He sometimes goes in for drop shot when he should not. His choice of shots in crunch situations is sometimes open to criticism. In anticipation and movement, Murray is as good as Roger Federer. In defence, he is as good as Rafael Nadal. He aced himself out of trouble many a time against Nalbandian at ATP Masters, Paris, as Roger often does. He served and volleyed in the second set to go on the offensive. His change of pace has a surprise element and sometimes the opponent is left stranded. He does not fear either Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal. Although he does not have an overpowering weapon by itself, he is now a days utilising his repertoire of shots in an intelligent manner. He must have become immune to the media expectations, having acknowledged the pressure as early as Australian Open this year. But then why he has not won a Grand Slam.

Andy Murray has been in two Grand Slam Finals. But he faced the same player in those two finals - Roger Federer. Both times he lost in straight sets. The first defeat should have given him the required experience what it feels to be in a Grand Slam Final and playing with the higher ranked player. The second defeat reduced him to tears. It took away from him something. It might not have devastated him, but he was deeply hurt.

His match against Rafael Nadal at the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals, London has been acknowledged as one of the best matches played in 2010. His duels with Rafael Nadal are becoming more and more intense. Both have similar playing style. Their movement on court are equally swift. What Nadal gains with more speed, Andy Murray makes up with greater anticipation. Andy Murray becomes more and more innovative as the rally progresses. It appears that he knows well how to create openings against Nadal and place the ball in gaps. He is more confident when facing Nadal. But it is against Federer that he can not find gaps that often. He is able to force errors, but that has happened more in non - Grand Slam events.

Andy Murray appears to have a better game than Andy Roddick when the latter won his only Grand Slam. His game also perhaps is better than Lleyton Hewitt when he won his Grand Slams. But these wins came before Roger Federer took centre stage and before Roger Federer - Rafael Nadal hegemony engulfed the tennis world. Andy Murray has to gain pace on his shots or at least on the killer shot, whether from backhand or forehand. He will have to take more risk against his nature at present and go for more controlled aggression. He has to think point wise and not game wise so as not to let despondency take over him when down. He is not a choker, but he does not play his two best matches consecutively. He was majestic against Rafael Nadal in Australian Open 2010 but could not do much against Roger Federer in the very next game. He would have learnt his lessons for sure. Australian Open is one tournament where he has done well. He has performed better on hard courts. He is one of the contenders for the Australian Open. It is just one success that will open the gates for him. It looks as if 2011 is going to be the year of reckoning for Murray.

Rafael Nadal needs Roger Federer

Winning in tennis requires tennis shots, physical prowess, athleticism, stamina, court craft, anticipation, mental strength and many things. One person can not have everything in him and what he lacks in one compartment, he makes up by abundance in another. Those with weak backhand tend to convert to forehand. Those with less anticipation, meet the ball late to gain some time. Those with weaker serve, go in for higher percentage of the first serve. Those who lack killer shots make up by retrieving every ball. Those who lack stamina tend to play short points. The end result is winning. If one has all the tennis shots but is weak physically, he will not win and can not be called a tennis great. Similarly if one makes for lack of tennis skills by great athleticism and returns every ball, but does not win, can not be called a tennis great. It is the record of wins at big stage that qualifies a player for tennis greatness. Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer both fall in that group. Roger Federer appears to be the main rival for Rafael Nadal in the GOAT debate at the moment. As regards Roger Federer, his main rival in the GOAT debate is Rod Laver. There are few comparisons of Rafael Nadal with Laver, Sampras and the like. Rafael Nadal is still improving according to the needs, the latest improvement being his serve. Roger Federer can aspire to play at 100% and beat the very best, but he can no longer change his grip or single backhand to double fisted backhand at this stage of his career. Their meetings do not always produce the greatest matches. At U.S Open, Djokovic-Federer was a better match than finals. At London Finals, Rafael Nadal-Andy Murray match was the best, and perhaps the best tennis match played by Andy Murray in 2010.

It is not always that the best two playing each other is the greatest spectacle. There was a time when the Williams sisters were the best two and they did clash in the finals of the Grand Slams. Their style was similar. Their looks were similar. Their grunting was similar. Their shots were breathtaking. Yet the spectators wanted something different. It was becoming a boring spectacle.

When Roger Federer took over from Sampras, the initial years were exciting. Slowly, but surely, Roger Federer put aside the challenge of Lleyton Hewitt, Andy Roddick  and the like and a few seasons later, there was none to challenge him. The Grand Slams bore the same spectacle where the loser was predictable and the entire excitement would reduce to how much fight he gave to Roger Federer. One got bored to hearing the same post match speeches. It is as if people wanted to see democracy than the kingdom. And then came Rafael Nadal. His looks were totally different. He was something like a new Borg. His demeanor was totally different. And his tennis was different. Over the years, Rafael Nadal - Roger Federer rivalry has brought more viewers to tennis and they have produced classic matches with spectators longing for “Once More”. 

When Rafael Nadal won the French Open, the winners were often called One-Slam wonders. Winning Wimbledon was synonymous with winning over Roger Federer. Winning Australian Open or U.S.Open was synonymous with winning over Roger Federer. Roger Federer was the bench mark for Rafael Nadal. Rafael Nadal turned the tables and emerged as Roger Federer’s nemesis. Whereas all other players would be petrified finding Roger Federer across the net, Roger Federer started feeling less and less confident finding Rafael Nadal across the net. Those who hated Roger Federer come, see and conqueror everything he purveyed, found a life line. Things came to such a pass that when Roger Federer won the French Open, it was attributed to the absence of Rafael Nadal in the finals.

Rafael Nadal-Roger Federer playing generates excitement, since these two are already tennis greats and have huge fan following. The decline of McEnroe could be due to rise of Lendl and the power play, but might also have something to do with the retirement of Borg. If Roger Federer were to retire today, Rafael Nadal will find a vacuum and it is likely to affect his motivation. For Rafael Nadal to blossom further, Roger Federer should be there playing at his full potential. Rafael Nadal needs Roger Federer more than vice versa.  

2011 - NEW RIVALRIES

One has become so used to the Federer Nadal rivalry that it appears as if there are no other rivalries in tennis. 2010 is over and 2011 is on the anvil. One can see that during the last two-three years, Murray has figured in a number of tussles with the two superstars and has annihilated either / both of them. He is one player apart from Nadal who has winning record against Federer, though in non - Grand Slam events. He is also the one having big successes against Nadal in Grand Slams. In his matches against the big two, the outcome is not easy to predict. He has discovered their weaknesses like no other player has done. It is only on the biggest stage that he is unable to find the ways and means to master both of them in the same Grand Slam. That credit has gone the way of Del Potro. Andy Murray is likely to provide the biggest rivalry to Rafael Nadal in future, as and when the Nadal - Federer rivalry wears thin.

Del Potro has tasted success. It is to be seen how his wrist holds up on his come back. He does not fear either Nadal or Federer, but it might take about a year for him to reestablish himself on the tour.

Djokovic and Andy Murray have not played so many matches against each other so as to ignite fans’ imagination. This was partly due to the fact that almost all the Grand Slams have had the presence of either Nadal or Federer. But their rivalry is in the nascent stage. They would become top notch players in a year or two and one would see them battling out at the bigger stages in 2012 or so.

Another player coming out of the shadows of self destruction is Gael Monfils. 2011 promises to see him maturing unlike Tsonga. He has the credentials, but not the patience. The next year might see the showman out of him and he coming out with more maturity in important matches. His style of play is similar to Nadal and Murray and on his day, he will pose bigger problems for the superstars.

Soderling appears on his way down. He has done sufficient in 2009 and 2010, and failure to win the French Open has sapped his determination. Berdych also does not have in him, since he does not possess a big weapon that fires consistently.

However, Rafa - Roger show will go on in 2011 keeping fans hooked to their glorious rivalry.

BARCLAYS ATP WORLD TOUR FINALS 2010 - ROUND ROBIN

GROUP A

Tomas  Berdych will be a man on revenge against Rafael Nadal. One could see the agony on his face at the prize distribution ceremony at Wimbledon. He did not cry like Roger Federer did at Australian Open 2009, but that could point out to deeply nurtured desire for revenge. If Tomas Berdych craves to take revenge, he will play his best against Rafael Nadal.

Novak Djokovic is the other player out for revenge against Rafael Nadal, but his desire for revenge may only be normal. He is too seasoned to indulge in extremes. He does not need a burning desire to overcome any of the players.

Andy Roddick appears content with the limited success he gets on the tour. Being talked in the same breath as the other top players satiates his appetite. He no longer thinks himself capable of achieving success like the one at 2003 U.S Open, and might look satisfied with what he did at 2009 Wimbledon.

Rafael Nadal has targeted this event and has skipped Paris. He appears motivated and that can take him beyond round robin.

Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic appear on course for the Semi-Finals.

GROUP B

David Ferrer has had great success this season. He may not believe that he yet belongs to the elite group. He might fancy chances against Robin Soderling, since his defence can test patience of any body. Federer has enough weapons to pierce through his defence and Andy Murray has better defence than him.

Robin Soderling has lifted his first ATP 1000 title at Paris. His scalps there did not include any of the players in his group. It does not appear that he carries any momentum into the London WTF. Andy Murray will be a difficult candidate for him playing before home crowd.

Roger Federer has motivation problems. He has achieved so much that it is difficult to predict where he will play well. His number two seeding does not appear to be in danger. He can defeat most of the players even while playing below par. His new nemesis in ATP events could be Andy Murray.

Andy Murray has to satisfy his countrymen and he could do this half way at London WTF. He is a good in both defence and offence but does not pack any overpowering weapon. He does not need it while playing against the other three in his group. He knows the formula of success against Roger and can apply it in non-Grand Slam events. He can switch between defence and attack against the other two depending on how they are playing.

Andy Murray and Roger Federer appear on course for the Semi-Finals.

BNP PARIBAS MASTERS, PARIS

Roger Federer, Andy Murray and Rafael Nadal have one thing in common. None of them have won Paris Masters. Nadal is already out of the tournament, having withdrawn citing shoulder tendinitis. Will it be the year Roger Federer or Andy Murray scales the summit at Paris? Or will the year belong to one of the hopefuls for the remaining three slots in Barclays ATP World Tour Finals at London? The summit can be reached if they atleast clear their quarter of draw.

Andy Murray is too strong in his half. Gael Monfils could upset any body else with home support, but not Andy Murray. They play similar games, but Andy Murray plays a proactive game against Monfils. He dominates the play and is unlikely to make too many errors to be exploited by Monfils.

Federer’s march to Semi-Final will not be stopped by Gasquet or Stepanek or Ferrer. Ferrer is yet to qualify for the London finals, but even that motivation will not be sufficient to overcome Federer. Stepanek plays mind games with his opponents, but even a sub-par Federer is too strong for Stepanek. Richard Gasquet can give a tough fight in his service games, but can not break Federer.

Djokovic has tough opponents in Berdych and Davydenko. Berdych has capability to upset Djokovic, but he has to get past Davydenko which is not an easy proposition. John Isner and Sam Querrey are good on paper, but it is street fight for them even to reach the position to challenge Djokovic.

In Soderling’s quarter, Roddick has more motivation since he is yet to qualify for the London Finals. But Ljubicic is a difficult customer. Soderling, Youzhny, Gulbis are manageable. It looks likely that Andy Roddick will overcome snake bites in his path to Semi-Finals.

2010 SEASON - STILL ALIVE AND 2011 - BECKONING

Has the 2010 season ended? No, not yet. There are fierce battles still ahead. The race is more for the immediate future as well as for the long term future. It is a circular track where the four mile stones are the Grand Slams placed at equidistant points on the track. ATP masters events do confer glory, but Grand Slams separate greats from the greatests. ATP World Tour finals is the next thing after Grand Slams and players do seem motivated to get their names on it.

ATP World Tour Finals Championship is one thing missing in Rafa’s kitty. Can he win London WT Finals? Yes, he can, he is the most successful player of 2010. What is his motivation? He has not won it, just as he had not won U.S Open earlier. Roger has won it four times. Will Rafa win it? Not definite, law of averages exists, not only for him, but for everybody. One predictable thing IMO is that Roger would do every thing at his disposal to avoid a show down with Rafa in Australian Open before finals. This could be his motivation to do well in the remaining tournaments, to avoid being relegated to number three position. Andy might like to be in Rafa’s half at Australian Open, but there is little in his hands. Its going to be the fight between Roger and Djokovic, which Andy can, but watch from the sidelines.

It is also a fight between the top two and the next two for 2011. Rafa-Roger duopoly has already destroyed careers of many. Quite a few talents have perished without blossoming into greatness. Roger is more to blame ( or credit ) for this than Rafa. Quite a few talents have peaked without multiple Grand Slam titles to their names.  This had not happened in the era of Connors, Borg and McEnroe. Martina - Evert duopoly has a closer resemblance. But it appears that 2011 will turn out to be a path breaker. The next two might break out from the stranglehold of the top two.

RAFAEL NADAL - LEFT HAND ADVANTAGE!

It is often heard that Rafael Nadal’s uncle, mentor and coach encouraged him to play left handed though he was a natural right handed person. It is difficult to assess whether what Rafael Nadal has achieved is directly attributable to such a decision. What advantages does a left hander derive over a right hander in terms of play? The strokes that a left hander plays can be played by a right hander too. Federer’s Forehand is as good as that of Rafael Nadal. In certain situations, Nadal forehand may look more deadly, say when the forehand kicks up on a single fisted backhander. In some other situation, a Federer forehand is more deadly when it rips through on a flatter trajectory.

Forehand from left hand with excessive top spin was said to be a master stroke that catapulted Rafael Nadal into a champion player. Is such a statement a fact or a myth. Should the coaches start advising left handers to play right handed and right handers to play left handed. A player should play to his strengths and to the weaknesses of his opponent. If a player is strong on right hand, will it be better to play with right hand or with left hand.

As far as backhand is concerned, most of the players play double fisted backhand strokes. There could be a bit of advantage in ambidexterity for the backhand stroke, since both hands are used to generate power and get control. But what advantage is derived in reversing the roles of the left hand and the right hand. Since there are more right handers than left handers, there is less familiarity with a left hander opponent. One becomes accustomed to playing the shots of a right hander mostly. When one faces a left handed player, there is some element of surprise in the shot making of the opponent. While playing to the weaknesses of the opponent, it takes time and thought to plan your shots. It is not that instinctive. The rhythm has to be established anew. The flair is not there during some shot making. 

If there is an advantage in any particular direction by a left hander, it will get neutralized on the other side of the court by a right hander. Left handed forehand advantage appears to be only a myth and should not spur parents to start advising their wards to start playing with the wrong hand in order to become a Rafael Nadal.