Previewing the 2020 WTA season

We have reached the end of 2019 and entered a brand new decade. A good opportunity to take our annual look at the WTA players who will be key protagonists in 2020.

Unlike in the men’s game, the transition to the new generation has already taken place. In 2019 three of the four major championships were won by players under the age of twenty four,  Naomi Osaka already has two major titles to her credit, whilst Ashleigh Barty finished the year as world number 1, French Open and WTA champion. Therefore, it is fair to say the WTA tour is in good hands going into the 2020s.

Ashleigh Barty

There is no better place to start our preview than with the current world number 1. Ashleigh (or Ash as she prefers to be called) had a superb 2019, initially reaching the final of Sydney international and the quarterfinal of the Australian Open in January. Ash followed that up with a big win at the Miami Open, then her major title at the French Open defeating Markéta Vondroušová in the final. Ash then went on to win the Birmingham Classic on grass before losing in the fourth round of Wimbledon to Alison Riske. Ash also reached the fourth round of the US Open but came back strong in October to win the WTA finals in Shenzen, defeating Elina Svitolina in straight sets.  For good measure, Ash also won the Italian Open doubles partnering with Victoria Azarenka and finished as runner up in the Federation Cup final, just falling short against France.  Ash also finished runner up with Victoria at the US Open doubles final losing to Aryna Sabalemka and Elise Mertens.

Ash is relatively short player, standing at 1 m 66 (5 ft. 6 inches). To get to number 1 at that height is a great achievement, and underlines the folly of predictions. At the turn of the millennium twenty years ago, pundits were predicting only female players over the height of 1 metre 80 plus would win major titles. That prediction was bucked pretty quickly by Justine Henin in the mid 2000s and now Ash Barty. Not only that, Ash also took time out of tennis to play big bash cricket in Australia in 2016!  Ash re-found her love for tennis and returned to the sport, which is clearly tennis’ gain. Ash has great variety, probably the most variety of the top players today, using the slice backhand more than any other player since Roberta Vinci and has very good volleying skills and a good overhead. That variety of game was a great bonus during her French Open run although everyone expects her to do well at Wimbledon eventually.

As for 2020, it is hard to predict what will happen as with the other top players; Ash is very young so we do not know how she will react to starting the year as number 1 and considered favourite to win the Australian Open in front of her home crowd.  Ash has the game to be a contender for the next five to ten years and win many tournaments and possibly a few majors.  I am not sure she has the game to dominate the tour as her backhand needs to improve; she has a similar game and backhand to Sam Stosur, albeit with more variety and more natural talent. Having said that, I get the impression Ash is the sort of player who would be content with winning titles and not necessarily be too concerned about being number 1 every week of the year.

Naomi Osaka

What an interesting 2019 for Naomi Osaka. Naomi began 2019 like a house on fire winning the Australian Open final with a great victory over Petra Kvitova, to back up her win at the US Open just three months prior.  After her Australian win, her game virtually fell off a metaphorical cliff and she was a non-factor for more or less the next nine months, however Naomi managed to salvage something by winning the China Open in September defeating Ashleigh Barty in three sets and finishing the year in the top three. 

The first signs that things were not going to plan came when Naomi unceremoniously “sacked” her coach Sasha Bajin without ever going into the reasons why in any depth, leading to lots of speculation. I then watched Naomi lose her first match in Dubai after Australia, going down relatively easily to Kristina Mladenovic. That would prove to be the pattern for the rest of the season on all surfaces, whether clay, grass or hardcourts.  So, the simple question is, what happened?  How could it go so wrong so quickly after such a dramatic rise to superstardom?

I think there are a number of factors. The first being that her US Open win in 2018 over Serena Williams was welcome if unexpected. Naomi played a great semi-final against Madison Keys and an even better final against Serena Williams.  After defeating Petra Kvitova to win two majors in a row, great things were predicted. However, the reality is that Naomi was not ready to deal with the status of being a major champion and world number 1.  Naomi was not ready from an emotional standpoint, dealing with the media, sponsorship, fan expectations and players trying harder against her. This was exacerbated further by the fact that Naomi’s game is also not ready to be sustained at the very top.  Naomi plays a very straight up and down game with not much margin for error, and when Naomi makes errors; her game unravels very quickly indeed, especially when she is feeling uncomfortable on the court. The only way to fix this is sheer hard work, work on her mental approach to the game and add more elements to her game. In my opinion this would include working on her percentages, assessing when to pull the trigger and go for winners off short balls, as opposed to any position at the back of the court, Naomi also needs to develop a transition a game, where she can create or take any advantage of short balls to finish points at the net.

It is impressive that Naomi has achieved so much already with what on the face of it looks like a still underdeveloped game. If Naomi can improve all aspects, we could be a looking at a real great player. 2020 may be too soon to become a much more rounded player although she has hired Wim Fissette as her new coach.  Naomi’s best chance of major success will again be on the hardcourts which has the even bounce all big hitters crave.

Bianca Andreescu

This has been one hell of a rise for Bianca in 2019, in many ways mirroring Naomi Osaka’s rise in 2018. 

Bianca started the year outside of the top 100 playing challengers, then finishing the year ranked number six in the world.  Bianca also became the first teenager to win a major tournament since Svetlana Kuznetsova won the US Open in 2004 and the first player born in this millennium to win a major title. Bianca gave notice that she will be a force to be reckoned with when she reached the final of Auckland despite having to play three qualifying rounds just to get into the main draw.  Bianca lost out to Julia Georges but then surprised everyone by winning Indian Wells in March, defeating Angelique Kerber in the final in three sets. Later in the summer Bianca would win the Canadian Open defeating Serena Williams who had to retire in the final, and then defeating Serena a month later in the US Open final; you would have to say relatively easily as well.  The interesting thing here is that despite her success Bianca played a relatively shortened season due to injuries so it will be nice to see how Bianca will perform in 2020 if she can stay injury free. 

It will also be interesting to see how Bianca will perform on surfaces away from hardcourts where she has had all of her successful results so far. Like so many players from North America, Bianca’s best results have come on hardcourts as that is the surface she grew up on; right now her game is very hardcourt centric. Therefore, for me it is difficult to gauge what kind of game Bianca has for clay and grass. As far as I can see, Bianca likes to hit the cross court and down the line patterns, however to win on clay and grass you need a little bit more tactical variation. Bianca is still very young so 2020 will be an interesting year for her. 

Karolina Pliskova

Karolina finished 2019 ranked number 2 in the world.  However, I don’t recall anything exceptional about Karolina’s 2019 season. 

In fact, I would venture to say it was underwhelming.  Karolina did make the semi-final of the Australian Open losing to Naomi Osaka and then the Miami final losing to Ashleigh Barty. Karolina won a huge tournament at the Italian Open in May, with a straightforward win over Johanna Konta, and then beat Angelique Kerber in the Eastbourne final.  However, despite these good results, Karolina appeared to be a non-factor for much of the year, often being unsure with who should be her coach, which perhaps was not helping the situation as different coaches during the season means different ideas for her to take in and try to implement on the court.

Karolina did have good results towards the end of the season, winning the Zhenzou Open in China and reaching the semi-finals of the WTA finals losing to Barty in three sets, Karolina appeared to play her best in China.  For the 2020 season, Karolina has hired Daniel Vallverdu so hopefully that will help to be the key to finally delivering a major title.  A few years ago I identified Karolina as a potential major winner but unfortunately I do not see much changes or improvement to her game to help make the transition to major champion.  Karolina has the best serve on the tour no question; however there is still an issue with her movement which is unfortunate as she is 1m 85 (6 ft. 1) thus her movement will be compromised. 

To cover the lack of movement Karolina has to think of some tactical plays; which could be attacking the net more or being more solid off the ground. I mentioned this before but when I saw her play in Eastbourne in 2017, I was struck by how low she consistently hit the ball over the net in the baseline exchanges. I think that is a big problem because that is unsustainable, there is simply not enough margin for error and that needs to be addressed, there needs to be higher net clearance which will help with her confidence, that would require an increase in the ratio of spin on the ball.

Karolina has a lot of talent but is not making the most of it, there is a fear Karolina will miss out so hopefully in 2020 she can get it together. Like most players today, her best chance of success will come on the hardcourts.  Her movement on grass at Wimbledon needs improvement to be a contender there.

Simona Halep

2019 proved to be an interesting year for Simona. Statistically it was not her most productive by any means, winning one tournament and losing two finals in Madrid and Qatar. However, the only tournament she won was the biggest to win! Wimbledon, and in memorable fashion, totally outplaying Serena Williams in just over an hour, making Serena look distinctly pedestrian in the process.

This allowed Simona to achieve a childhood dream of winning Wimbledon, the first Romanian player to win the tournament.  Simona has joined a very select group of players who have won the French Open and Wimbledon, which is not easy to do. 

Besides her Wimbledon triumph, Simona didn’t really pull up too many trees on the WTA tour or at the other major championships. In Australia Simona lost to Serena in the fourth round in three sets, at the French she went down at the quarterfinal stage as defending champion, losing to upcoming American Amanda Anisimova and at the US Open lost to American Taylor Townsend who came to net over 100 times in a three set match!!  Simona also made the semi-final of the Miami Open losing out to Karolina Plisokva.

Therefore, not a stellar year but Simona should go into 2020 believing she is a contender at all of the big tournaments.  The criticism with Simona has been that she was often not pro-active enough on the court. I would go along with this, Simona cites Justine Henin as her inspiration, however at the same height (1 m 68) Justine was one of the most proactive players on the WTA tour trying everything from chipping and charging to serve volleying and going for winners when it didn’t look on.  Simona still needs to play more proactively in my opinion if she wants to get back to number 1 in the world and win more major titles.  As of now, Simona’s best chances will come on the natural surfaces where craft comes into play; it will be difficult on hardcourts where she can get brushed aside by bigger hitters.

Simona has announced she will not be playing Fed Cup in 2020 to concentrate on the Olympics in Tokyo. Let’s see how that goes.

Other Players to Watch

Elina Svtolina

Elina had a reasonable 2019, finishing the year ranked six and reaching the semi-finals at Wimbledon and US Open, whilst almost defending her title at the WTA finals losing out to Ash Barty in the title match. However, Elina won no titles throughout the year and she will want to change that in 2020. Elina is a player who does everything well, but nothing exceptionally, similar to Tim Henman when he was on the ATP tour.  To win a major title you need more than doing everything well, Elina has to work on becoming either more aggressive, coming to net or taking many more risks and initiative. That will be mentally tough for a player who likes to be a “steady eddy”.

Belinda Bencic

Belinda has had a terrible amount of injuries in the last two to three years after bursting onto the scene as a teenager in 2016.  Belinda is mentored by Martina Hingis and it is clear to see, Belinda has a game almost identical to Hingis and is an intelligent player and good to watch. Belinda finished the year ranked seven after winning Dubai, Mallorca and the Kremlin cup in October, plus reaching the semi-finals of Indian Wells, US Open and WTA finals where she had to retire in the third set against Barty.  Like Svitolina, Belinda does everything well, however, if things fall into place she may well be a slightly bigger contender at the major tournaments going forward.

Serena Williams

Like Roger Federer, Serena Williams shows absolutely no signs of packing it in and retiring. However, the manner of defeats in the Wimbledon and US finals will give her pause for thought. At the same time, she won six matches each time to make the finals so she is still doing considerably better than many of her opponents. If Serena pulls off a major win, she would have won in the 1990s, 2000s, 2010s and potentially 2020s so this will be interesting to watch.

Johanna Konta

Perhaps my British bias here for including Konta.  There was a lot of promise in 2019 for Johanna but it didn’t happen. In fact, in the Italian Open final. French Open semi-final and Wimbledon quarterfinal she displayed a bizarre lack of composure in the big moments, often rushing up to mid court short balls (which all good tennis players crave) and then literally hit the shots into the back fence, which made for very painful viewing, especially as she did it over and over again.  Johanna did not win a tournament in 2019 but if she can overcome her nerves, she will give herself more opportunities to win a big title in 2020.

Sloane Stephens

As before, Sloane’s form and rankings has continued to “yo-yo” from US Open winner in 2017 and French Open finalist in 2018 to ranked outside of the top 20 once again. Sloane is too dangerous a competitor not to make another comeback into the top ten at some point.

Madison Keys

A player who has a similar game to Naomi Osaka, Madison’s game has not developed since she burst onto the scene in 2014.  This happens so often to players who have big shots but for whatever reason seem unable to "rein it in" and play with more spin and percentages and strategy. As of this moment in time, Madison is a definite underachiever and has changed coaches fairly regularly; let’s see if she can get it together in 2020.

Flashback to 2006 Wimbledon final

This week we continue our Flashback series on grass and take a look at the 2006 Wimbledon final between Amelie Mauresmo and Justine Henin.

2006 saw an interesting championship which culminated with a popular winner in Amelie Mauresmo; a player who had been through a lot in her young life at that point, overcoming a number of adversities to triumph on the big stage. Strangely enough, her opponent Justine Henin also experienced many adversities as well whilst ascending to the top. This is a reminder of what it takes for many of the world stars to get to the top of their profession.

In Amelie’s case, there was a lot of talk about her after coming out as gay as a 19 year old in January 1999. Amelie was not on speaking terms with her father but it was reported she was able to come to peace with him shortly before his death in 2004. Not to make things any easier, the press often gave Amelie a difficult time over a number of years for her physical appearance and perceived lack of fight in the big moments of important matches.

As for Justine, she lost her mother at a very young age and was not on speaking terms with her father for many years until they patched things up in 2007. She married Per Yves Hardenne in 2004 and would separate months after the 2006 Wimbledon final. Henin also had a rough time with the press; which mainly centred on allegations of cheating on and off the court. Therefore, as you can see, both players went through a lot in their young lives.

In regards to the tennis, Amelie was a sentimental favourite due to the fact she was semifinalist in 2004 and 2005, losing to Serena Williams and Lindsay Davenport respectively. In both semifinals, Amelie went down the same way, after being up a set and a break, in 2005 Amelie cut a very forlorn figure against Davenport, it was quite a sad sight. In 2006, Mauresmo reached the semifinal after seeing off Anastasia Myskina in the quarterfinal and would face another Russian Maria Sharapova.  You could argue Amelie didn’t have it easy, taking on very difficult opponents in the semifinals, all previous Wimbledon champions. And true to script, Amelie played great, going up a set and a break, looking good until it all started to go wrong again…Amelie lost the second set but this time was able to regroup and take the third set 6-2 to reach her first final.  In the other semifinal, Justine saw off Kim Clijsters in straight sets but Kim did break the Henin serve in each set.  In fact, it was never easy between Henin and Clijsters, the ultimate Belgian rivalry which was soured by comments by Kim’s late father Leo Clijsters regarding Henin.

Talking about souring of relations, at this stage Amelie and Justine were not quite on the best of terms either :-0  Amelie won her first major title at the Australian Open in January of 2006, and in the final it looked as Justine was about to receive quite a beating, losing the first set 6-1. However, shortly after, Justine retired and handed the match to Amelie complaining of stomach issues. It was a very strange ceremony and in the aftermath it was almost as if Amelie was to blame for winning the tournament based on retirements in both the semifinal and final. Needless to say Amelie wanted to prove a point against the same opponent on a different surface. I wonder whether the fact that the WTA tour was so strong during this period of history left all of the players on edge towards each other; they all wanted the same thing, to be the best. The final would have long term implications and historical importance for a number of reasons:

• This will be the last final in a major where a player (Mauresmo) deliberately chooses to serve and volley as a tactic throughout the entire match
• This is the last final to date between two players with a single handed backhand
•  Henin was bidding to hold all four major titles, joining a very elite list of players
•  Mauresmo was bidding to become the first French woman to win Wimbledon since Suzanne Lenglen in 1925.

The match started off with Mauresmo getting broken in the very first game, as Henin applied the pressure early. As I mentioned before, Mauresmo served and volleyed on most of her first serves with speeds between 168 and 186 kph (105 to 116mph), therefore Henin also decided to get to the net as often as possible, tactics no doubt discussed beforehand with her coach Carlos Rodriguez; throwing in the occasional serve volley herself whilst hitting the backhand return and charging the net. As old school a tennis match you could possibly get in 2006 played by two women. Henin broke serve with a brilliant net exchange, the sort of exchange you get in a doubles match and then held serve comfortably to take early charge. As the first set developed, Mauresmo seemed to clear the nerves and got into the match but lost her serve again to go 5-2 down, allowing Henin to serve out the set to love with an ace and looked in good shape to join the greats of the game.

Mauresmo knew she needed to respond and started the second set on a good footing with a love service game, letting out a scream in the process, trying to rid herself of tension. Perhaps it worked because Henin herself seemed to be full of tension and was instantly broken as Mauresmo picked up on this and started rushing Henin at the net with great chip and charge returns and volleys into the open space.  There were some tremendous rallies in the second set with incredible net play by both, Mauresmo in particular. However, this good feeling didn’t last long with Mauresmo losing her lead at 4-2 to allow Henin back into the set. You would have expected Henin to put the pressure on but Mauresmo responded immediately with a great running forehand passing shot down the line, off a very good Henin serve and volley play. Mauresmo soon got to 15-40 and despite Henin saving the first break point with a strong serve, Henin was broken on the second break point, leaving Mauresmo to serve out the second set.

Now of course, no one said it was going to be easy. Mauresmo had to save three break points before finally getting to set point, which she scored with an ace to take the second set 6-3. Each player won their set with ace to the backhand on the ad court. The ace summed up the second set nicely, a set with great tennis, crazy errors and a lot of tension but ended in the right manner. There was a caveat, it seemed quite windy and as we know in stadiums, the wind can swirl around the bowl so that was also a factor in the errors count.

Henin was now serving first in the final set, which usually is a big advantage and she started off well, but by now Mauresmo was looking stronger and stronger and broke Henin early in the third game of the final set. That can often spell danger in a big final to break so early but on this occasion Mauresmo was really focused on holding with great serve and volley play, which was a joy to watch. In response, Henin was now also serving and volleying on almost every point on her games, even on some second serves. It was quite a sight to see two players serve volleying in a big final in the new millennium.  Henin did her side of the bargain; holding on to get to 5-4, inviting Mauresmo to serve it out. We all wondered how Mauresmo would come out to serve for the match, we needn’t have been concerned. Mauresmo hit two aces in the deuce court wide to Henin’s forehand, and then at 30 all played a great volley into the corner to set up match point. Mauresmo missed the first serve but the second serve went in barely and Henin obliged her by missing her forehand into the net after a short sharp rally. Mauresmo sank to her knees, realising that she was finally Wimbledon champion at the age of 27 after so many near moments in the previous years.  Mauresmo’s victory speech with Sue Barker became famous for her tongue in cheek remark “I don’t want anyone to talk about my nerves anymore!”.

How did Mauresmo turn the match in her favour?  According to analyst Jason Goodall, he charted that in the first set Mauresmo served at 65% first serves in but served too many to Henin’s backhand, which Henin used to drive the return and attack the net, putting the pressure on Mauresmo’s second serve. However, in the second set Mauresmo’s first serve percentage was under 50%, but she switched the attack to Henin’s forehand more and found great success, Henin making many more errors on that side which allowed Mauresmo to serve more aces in the deuce court as well. It is interesting that Mauresmo was able to switch strategy in the middle of the match and raise her confidence level as a result, with Henin’s going downwards at the same time.  In the third set with her confidence rising, Mauresmo’s first serve percentage reached as high as 84% therefore she was definitely on top for the decider.  As an aside, it also worth noting Mauresmo is one of the few players to win junior Wimbledon (1996) and then the main draw event in 2006.

2006 was a great year for both players.  Mauresmo won two major titles whilst Henin played in all major finals in the same year, the first player since Martina Hingis in 1997.  Also, both players battled it out for the year end number 1 ranking, with Henin securing number 1 at the WTA championships in Madrid. In the final, Henin defeated Mauresmo in two tight sets to bookend their rivalry in 2006 by playing each other in the first and last big finals of that year.   

Looking back at the Wimbledon final, it is a little unfortunate there are no longer any all court players with a one hand backhand getting to the top of women’s tennis; two players who were constantly changing strategies throughout the match, trying to find different ways to win.

Flashback to 1999 Wimbledon semifinal

We are in the middle of Wimbledon 2019 so as always a good time to focus on our flashback series, looking at grass court tennis. Today we take a look at a match that is largely forgotten, the 1999 Wimbledon semifinal between Pete Sampras and Tim Henman.

I say forgotten as the final between Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi is widely seen as Sampras’ greatest performance and there are a large number of videos on YouTube of that particular final. However, the semifinal against Henman was quite a struggle mentally and emotionally for both participants, and perhaps as it turned out, a hard training session for Sampras, honing his skills for the final.

The 1999 championships had been wrecked by rain in the second week; this caused a backlog of matches, which during this period of history was quite normal. Back in 1999 and as recently as three years ago, the championships took place in the last week of June and the first week of July. I always found this a bit strange, as once Wimbledon finished it usually dried up!  In London It often rains heavily in June and very early July. 1999 was no different.  This meant there was such a backlog of matches both the men’s and women’s semifinals were played on Saturday and both finals played on the Sunday. With a very early start Steffi Graf and Mirjana Lucic battled it on court 1 followed by Pat Rafter and Andre Agassi. On Centre Court Lindsay Davenport dispatched Alexandra Stevenson quite easily, followed by Sampras against Henman.

This was the second year in a row the two men would meet in the semifinal. In 1998 Henman went into the match hopeful of causing an upset; he gave Sampras a good match, losing in four sets but breaking Sampras twice in the second set and running him extremely close in the third set before Sampras’ greater experience came through. However, a year later in 1999, Henman was viewed as more than hopeful of causing an upset. By this stage Henman was a top ten player on the ATP tour and almost beat Sampras in the Queens final a few weeks earlier, taking the deciding set to a tiebreak before losing out. The consensus was that Henman was the grass court successor to Sampras once Sampras started to go downhill so to speak. As for the semifinals, it was an extremely strong line-up and whoever would win the tournament would certainly have been seen as a worthy winner. To get to the semifinal, Sampras had a little bit of luck, he lost the first set to Mark Philippoussis in the quarterfinal and looked to have a lot of work to do but Philippoussis hurt his knee and had to retire. I recall Sampras raising those eyebrows in sharp relief as he didn’t have to win it in four or five sets.  Henman meanwhile defeated Cedric Pioline in four sets, another quality grass court player who made the final in 1997.

Whenever Henman played on centre court the crowd was always very vociferous. Rather interestingly, due to what was at stake both men started extremely nervously. Henman began proceedings and held serve relatively easily but the fun started on Sampras’ opening service game. For some reason Sampras decided he was determined to hit every serve to Henman’s forehand on both courts. The only problem was, he kept missing :-0  On the first and third points, he hit the tape twice leading to double faults, he then retrieved the situation by hitting two serves down the T on the ad court to the forehand and put away excellent volleys, which lead to a thirty all score line. However, Sampras wasn’t done, he again hit another double fault on the deuce court trying to go to Henman’s forehand, so three double faults all serving to the same place!  With a break point to Henman, Sampras finally realised he had to do something different and served a first serve to Henman’s backhand, who was clearly waiting and drilled the return down at his feet.

Henman went 2-0 to the delight of the home crowd but Henman inadvertently decided to get into the double fault show, starting with one and finding himself love 40 down in double quick time. Henman hit a great serve to Sampras’ forehand, who was expecting a backhand serve but adjusted so quickly to hit a clean forehand winner down the line, incredible skill.  Although, this ultimately didn’t mean much because Sampras soon got broken again to find himself 3-1 down. Amazingly there were three breaks in a row at the start of the match. After a fairly long deuce game where Sampras threatened with a few good returns, Henman held on and came again, Sampras finding himself love 30 after a lovely flicked backhand from Henman almost round the next post into the corner; the British crowd were in dreamland by this stage with lots of union jacks being held aloft.  Sampras managed to get himself out of going a double break down but Henman was not to be denied and eventually took the first set 6-3, serving it out to 30.

Sampras knew he needed to reassert himself in the second set with an immediate hold of serve to love which no doubt boosted the confidence.  Henman’s one problem was that he was missing too many first serves and had to hit a lot of second serves. Sampras didn’t seem to mind missing first serve returns but once the second went in, he hardly missed and immediately came up with a break point, ironically off a first serve return. Henman fended it off well but Sampras slipped at the back of court, not allowing him an attempt at a passing shot. One strategy Henman did employ was to stay back on some of his serves, first and second. In their 1998 semifinal, commentator and ex-champion Pat Cash observed that Henman was having some success, surprising Sampras and consequently winning a lot of rallies from the back court.  Therefore Henman figured he could do this again.  However, I get the distinct feeling that Sampras and coach Paul Annacone discussed this beforehand because Sampras was winning a lot of those rallies, either getting to net off a short of a length shot by Henman or stretching Henman with his crosscourt forehand.

As the second set developed both guys were holding serve more easily but things picked up dramatically at 5-4.  In the proceeding game, Sampras missed relatively easy passing shots which seemed to frustrate him but in this game Sampras dramatically raised his level. As so often happens, Henman went 30 love and seemed in control  Sampras hit a strong backhand return to make it 30:15 and then two shots later, it was 30:40 and set point to Sampras thanks to two more backhand returns and two brilliant backhand passing shots out of the top drawer.  Henman saved the first set point by hitting a great forehand himself which Sampras couldn’t control at the net. After two more deuce points, Sampras set up a third set point with another backhand passing shot crosscourt. Henman was feeling the pressure and coach David Felgate’s demeanour in the box said it all, he looked dishevelled! Henman served the first serve well long, and then did the same again, so a double fault and second set to Sampras 6-4. The atmosphere was like a punctured balloon and Sampras did a jig of delight, which makes me laugh every time I see it.

Sampras was now a different player, breaking Henman again to love, this time with a marvellous forehand cross court passing shot and had break points chances to go 4-0 in the third set but Henman saved it. To get to break point, Henman stayed back and after a twelve shot rally, Sampras hit a cross court forehand to open up the court and put it away. This rally emphasised the difference in class. The difference being that if Sampras was mentally ready to play, Henman could not match Sampras from the baseline, whether he thought it was a good strategy or not. Henman almost went 1-5 down but saved another breakpoint and kept it to one break but Sampras did what he did best, which was to serve out the set for 6-3 and go two sets to one up.  Henman was just not getting enough first serves into play and Sampras was starting to serve more and more aces. Henman hit some nice passing shots but was not able to really create break point opportunities consistently by this stage.

Henman was down, but certainly not out. The fourth set proved to be an intense struggle lasting forty five minutes.  Henman again was immediately under pressure on his serve surviving a very long deuce game and having to save another break point. Sampras’ eye was in, hitting a clean forehand winner off one serve timed at 213kph (131mph). At this juncture Sampras hit twelve return winners to Henman’s six.  However, Sampras was still clearly as tense as Henman, escaping long deuce games and break points in the sixth and eighth game; on one break point Henman totally skyed a second serve return. However, escape he did and proceeded to break Henman in the ninth game to serve out the match, Sampras hit a backhand passing shot which Henman found too hot to handle.

The fans were certainly not finished, chanting Henman’s name in the changeover hoping it will inspire him to break back. And Henman almost obliged by winning the first point with a lovely forehand return winner down the line. However, that would be the last point Henman would win as Sampras closed out the match with great serving, finishing off with a wide serve to Henman’s forehand at 187kph (116mph) to win 4-6 6-4 6-3 6-4, the dream was over for Henman and much of Britain.

There is no doubt that Henman had his chances to at least take it to five sets but at the critical moments either did not have the belief or his decision making was not quite there.  Sampras knew when to raise his level to break serve, once he got over his initial nerves in the first set. However, the nerves never really went away for the whole match, a lot was at stake but Sampras was simply better at playing through the nerves than Henman.  Importantly, Sampras’ serve also made the difference, hitting more aces and unreturnables.  Henman’s first serve percentage was not good enough and gave Sampras far too many looks at second serves, Sampras was too good for Henman to keep offering up second serve opportunities in key moments.

The statistics bear this out. Henman made 22 winners and 30 unforced errors while Sampras made 57 winners and 37 unforced errors. Sampras made only seven more unforced errors but almost three times more winners including 24 forehands and 21 backhands.  It was a great battle fitting of a Wimbledon semifinal and it would be nice if BBC or Wimbledon made some highlights available of this match.