The Old and The New: A Glimpse to The Future in Grand Slam Tennis

What a year of grand slam tennis 2014 has proved to be. 

It all started with Stanislas Warwinka’s win at the Australian Open against Rafael Nadal.  Now, some will argue that Nadal was injured but the fact remains that Nadal was being totally outplayed for a set and a half before injury set in.  The situation was similar to the 2006 Australian Open final between Amelie Mauresmo and Justine Henin when Mauresmo was outplaying Henin.  The difference here is that whereas Henin retired early in the 2nd set, Nadal decided to play through the pain and finish the match; even though he knew defeat was inevitable as long as Warwinka held his nerve.

What so impressed me about Warwinka’s victory was the tactical deployment of big 2nd serves, deep into the corners around 110mph.  This definitely caught Nadal by surprise and threw him off his game.  It also proved that it is still possible to play an aggressive game against one of the world’s best counterpunchers and win. 

We can say order was restored at grand slam level when Nadal faced Novak Djokovic in the final at Roland Garros.  Nadal rewrote the history books again by winning his ninth French Open and equalling Pete Sampras’ record of 14 major titles.  I never thought I would see the day where a player wins a major tournament nine times.  When Sampras won his seventh Wimbledon title in 2000 that sounded like crazy numbers but incredibly Nadal has gone two better at a major tournament with the opportunity to win a tenth in 2015.

For a while though as in previous years, it looked like Djokovic would finally get the better of Nadal after taking the first set with some good tennis.  But as happened before, Nadal wore down Djokovic to the point of near exhaustion; Djokovic couldn’t take any more grinding.  I believe this has been the case since Djokovic beat Nadal in the 2012 Australian Open final in a match that lasted five hours and fifty seven minutes.  The human body and mind can only take so much and in the really long matches, Djokovic is often coming up short.

However, in Wimbledon, Djokovic was able to rectify that by taking his 2nd Wimbledon title beating Roger Federer in a five set thriller.  Roger Federer played his ninth Wimbledon final which is an absolutely incredible record over an eleven year period, especially as last year he lost in the 2nd round as defending champion.

It was a strange final, in footballing terms Federer almost sneaked the match at the end of extra time when he should have been out of the match in normal time.  He took the first set on a tiebreak when Djokovic seemed the better player.  Djokovic then took the next two sets by upping his level and consistency.  Djokovic was then in control when he served for the match in the fourth set but let it slip and Federer played some great tennis to win four games in a row to take it to a fifth set. Then, just as you thought Federer finally grabbed the momentum he lost it late in the fifth set.

What really surprised me about this final was that both players were regularly serving 1st serves between 110mph and 119mph throughout the match, surprisingly relatively slow for top players in 2014.

The highlight of the grasscourt season for me was Grigor Dimitrov who won Queens and reached the semifinal of Wimbledon, beating defending champion Andy Murray in the quarterfinal in straight sets.  In the semi-final, Dimitrov could have taken Djokovic to a fifth set decider but faltered in the fourth set tiebreak.  Dimitrov’s big first serve where he can get up to 135mph, cat like movement around the court, volleying ability and willingness to hit down the lines and attack the net really reminds me of Sampras and I have no doubt that Dimitrov is a Wimbledon champion in the making; as long as he believes and things fall into place. 

And onto the US Open.  Well, what a tournament!  Nadal missed the event as defending champion but in the end his absence was not really felt.  The tournament really came to life in the semifinals, with two huge upsets in one day.  The first time that has happened in a major tournament for years, since Federer and Nadal lost the semifinals of the Australian Open in 2008 to Djokovic and Tsonga, but that was on different nights.

Kei Nishikori had no business beating Djokovic in four sets in the first semifinal after five set battles against Raonic in Rd 16 and Warwinka in the quarterfinals.  Djokovioc should have been the fresher but Nishikori grabbed all of his opportunities and deserved to win.  I also often feel that Djokovic plays too passive in big matches and is not prepared to grab the initiative.  Djokovic is rapidly becoming the modern equivalent of Ivan Lendl; he has the number 1 slot locked down and appears in many finals but has lost a number of them so far.  Lendl’s problem was that he was always vulnerable to attacking players whilst Djokovic’s problems is a lack of aggression as he faces similar counterpunchers to himself.

However, the real eye catching performance was the second semifinal where Marin Cilic literally “thrashed” Roger Federer in straight sets.  Federer described Cilic’s performance as “old school tennis”.  Cilic rewrote all of the conventions which you are supposed not to be able to do anymore.  Having Goran Ivanisevic in his corner has proved to be a masterstroke.

The final was equally one sided.  On paper it looked like a 50:50 match up, the first “pick em” since Pat Rafter faced Greg Rusesdki in the 1997 final.  Unfortunately, Nishikori finally ran out of gas, and Cilic played the big game with the type of sustained brilliance we don’t see often anymore; it reminded me of Richard Krajicek’s Wimbledon run in 1996 when a player of 6ft 5 was hitting his groundstrokes and moving around the court like a much shorter man, Cilic was in that kind of zone.  It is very rare for a player that tall to serve, return and volley as well as Cilic did during this year’s US Open.

Those familiar with my articles over the years will know that I have been observing that many players can serve fast today but technically do not serve as well as the previous generation of the 1990s.  Ivanisevic persuaded Cilic to remodel his serving technique and it worked.  On the ad court Cilic now stands much closer to the centre line and instead of hitting fast deliveries more or less into the returner’s strike zone, Cilic was swinging the serve away from the returner with slice at pace which is much nastier to deal with.  That adjustment of technique also opened up so many more possibilities on the 2nd serves; he could be more in control of his destiny.  Ivanisevic was a master of serving and it is interesting to think how many other players can benefit from this sort of advice.  And it is certainly a technique I have been advocating top players use for the last ten years.

The other huge improvement was Cilic’s movement.  On almost every occasion where Cilic hit a big inside out forehand he attacked the net and finished the point with a good volley off a floating reply.  One source of frustration for me in mens tennis has been watching guys hit three or four inside out forehands, eliciting weak replies and eventually losing the point because they wouldn’t attack the net.   I always considered this not very tactical and downright diabolical, whilst many hid behind the excuse of slower courts and polyester strings.  It could be also a fact that many players today are not able to volley to a reasonably technical level.  Cilic proved this strategy still works on hardcourts if implemented properly.

Cilic’s win was a very satisfying end to a great grand slam year.  The question is, what does this all mean for the 2015 season?  Well I wrote an article back in the spring called Warwinka’s example where I argued that Warwinka winning the Australian Open and Monte Carlo showed that the top guys can be beaten in the big matches.  Cilic and Nishikori recognised this and took advantage.  Unfortunately in the US Open quarterfinal, Gael Monfils had his opportunity against Roger Federer but did what we have seen so often in the last ten years, not grab his opportunity because he played too passive when it mattered.  The lesson from 2014 is that both Wawrinka and Cilic won their majors because they took the game too their opponents and were prepared to go in bold on their 2nd serves. 

The other equation is the stage is now set for both Raonic and Dimitrov to show they are capable of winning major tournaments.  However, at the same time it is looking increasingly the case that Tsonga, Berdych, Monfils and Ferrer may have missed the boat.  But lets’ not count these guys out yet.  With Murray out of the top 4 and Nadal coming back from injury again, the opportunity is there in 2015 to win majors for those skilful enough to grab it.

Here’s hoping for a great grand slam year in 2015!