Kvitova v Azarenka - The Next Big Rivalry?




Well, the first major of the year has been decided. Victoria Azarenka emphatically beat Maria Sharapova 6:3 6:0 to claim her first Grand Slam title and the World Number 1 ranking at the same time, not bad for a day’s work. Two of the last three major tournaments have been claimed by Victoria Azarenka and Petra Kvitova. In 2011, the two also played each other in the final of Madrid, the semi-final of Wimbledon and the final of the year end WTA Championships in Istanbul.

Victoria Azarenka is now world number 1 and Petra Kvitova world number 2. It seems appropriate that we could see these two players swap places quite a bit over the next few years, much in the way Federer / Nadal, Agassi / Sampras, Graf / Seles did in recent history. They have all of the ingredients for a great rivalry – contrast in styles of play, contrasts in personality and both have a will to win and desire to improve their game.

It is almost ironic that both players beat Maria Sharapova to claim their maiden grand slam title. On each occasion Sharapova was made favourite by the pundits and bookmakers, although I thought Kvitova and Azarenka would come through in their respective finals, they were the players in form and ready to claim the big prize.

Looking at their personalities, Azarenka is a feisty character on court, someone who plays hard and throws her heart and soul into a match, which has led to many “meltdowns” as Azarenka herself puts it. I first saw Azarenka as a junior in the 2005 French Open and I remember her being almost hysterical in her match, on the court and during changeovers, virtually sobbing in her chair! I wasn’t impressed and questioned how far she could go at senior level acting like that on the court but Azarenka sure left an impression on me that day. It is great to see her come so far, banish her demons and realise her potential.

Azarenka is a player that makes fans take sides, there are not too many neutrals out there. Some will love her fighting spirit, others will dislike her grunting (or wailing) and the way she orders ball kids around. Although at the same time she is still young at 22 years and will probably mature further as time goes on.

Whilst Azarenka is the feisty player out on court giving everything until it hurts, Kvitova is often as cool as a cucumber. But like all great players, looks can be deceiving; Kvitova has a burning intensity to win her matches, that’s displayed often when she screams PODJ! after winning an important point. Kvitova also makes it look easy often, she has incredible natural power and timing, she doesn’t look like she’s making a huge effort, and yet the ball whistles off her racquet for winners.

Their differing personalities and styles of play are the perfect ingredients for a great rivalry. Kvitova is the player with the all court skills, great net play and natural power with a great serve. Azarenka is the solid player with a great groundstroke game but doesn’t have the best serve out there. Traditionally, the attacking player with more options has the better head to head in this type of rivalry. And so far that has proved to be the case, they’ve met 6 times so far and Kvitova has a 4:2 lead. Kvitova won most of the big matches in 2011, the finals in Madrid and Istanbul, plus the semi-final in Wimbledon. Kvitova also beat Azarenka in 2010 Wimbledon, coming from 5: 3 down in the first set to win 9 games in a row 7:5 6:0. Azarenka beat Kvitova in the 2009 Australian Open 1st round 6:2 6:1 and in Prague in 2008.

Kvitova has proved a bad match up for Azarenka so far, Kvitova usually has all the answers to Azarenka’s play. Azarenka likes to play solid and manoeuvre her opponent from side to side, but Kvitova nullifies that by going for lines and coming to net often, putting Azarenka in situations she doesn’t like. Kvitova plays high risk tennis which when it comes off, Azarenka hasn’t got an answer to as yet.

In a press conference during the Australian Open, Azarenka was quoted as saying "New rivalries are being set up like the one I can have with Kvitova. Maria and Serena came back to the top. Kim's still there. We are playing at a very high level." With Kvitova and Azarenka being the same age, that rivalry will be around for many years and they will play each other in many semi-finals and finals. Both Clijsters and Serena are in the autumn of their careers and Sharapova is currently going through a phase Boris Becker once experienced, where he was just 2 to 3 years older than many of his rivals like Agassi, Sampras, Courier and Ivanisevic, but it seemed a world away because he broke through to win Wimbledon at 17, just like Sharapova years later. Sharapova is now playing catch up against her younger opponents.

This is an exciting period for womens tennis after the problems that were caused by Justine Henin’s sudden retirement in 2008. Serena Williams didn’t play enough to stay number 1 consistently whilst we’ve had 3 number 1 players without major titles to their name. Now we have two players who could help take the game to the next level; Azarenka is looking to improve her movement and variety all the time, Kvitova is looking at ways of making her game solid whilst keeping that level of creating something out of nothing, her lefty game making her angles and improvisation even more spectacular, much in the way Marcelo Rios once did on the ATP tour.

Who Will Make the Next Breakthrough in Mens Tennis



2011 was an incredible year for mens tennis, primarily due to one player – Novak Djokovic. Djokovic won 3 major titles and went on a 43 match win streak between January and June claiming the Australian Open, Dubai, Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid and Rome, an incredible feat. Djokovic also went on to win Wimbledon and the US Open. But what Djokovic managed to do was break the cosy monopoly of Federer and Nadal at the top of mens tennis. Now that Djokovic has shown that it can be done, the question must be, who will be next to make the big breakthrough and can it happen in 2012.

Andy Murray is the player most pundits, fans and bookmakers are looking at to be the next player to win a major title. Murray has been to three major finals so far but has yet to win a set in any of those matches. A lot of people point to Ivan Lendl and Andre Agassi as players who suffered similar results in their first few finals but both those guys had 5 set final losses, at the French Open, Lendl in 1981 to Bjorn Borg and Agassi in 1991 to Jim Courier. Therefore, you have to come to the conclusion that Murray is actually overwhelmed in major finals; and is not able to play his game or impose himself on his opponent.

That’s partly the reason as Murray’s style of play is also a contributing factor to his lack of major success. Murray is a counterpuncher by nature but to win a title match you have to do more than hope for your opponent to miss. That is precisely the reason why Murray hasn’t been able to claim a set in any of his finals. Other players who can be counted as counter punchers have learned their lesson well. Both Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic have added aggressive strategies to their game to complement their defensive skills, making them formidable opponents on the generally slower surfaces in the professional game today.

Andy Murray has been content to surround himself with guys who do not want to rock the boat and say what was needed to be said, that is evidenced by Murray’s attitude to his camp during matches. Miles McClaghan is a good coach but in any of his interviews pre and post Murray, McClaghan gives the impression that Murray is more or less the finished article and just needs minor adjustments. I happen to think Murray needs major adjustments, adjustments in his mentality and his game plan.

And Murray has acknowledged that by hiring Ivan Lendl as coach. A brave decision in my view, some argue that they won’t get on and it won’t work as a partnership but I hope it does and I am sure it will. Murray will have instant respect for Lendl due to his standing in the game and Lendl’s achievements. Also, Lendl knows what it is like lose many major finals before claiming one and what needs to be done to get another opportunity. Lendl can show Murray discipline and how to impose his game on his opponent. Murray’s forehand has often appeared a liability and I also think Murray relies too much on his 1st serve; his form has declined badly if he doesn’t get his 1st serve in consistently. What Lendl will impress on Murray is to have a good game and strategy behind his 2nd serve. When Murray puts in a 2nd serve, what type of serve will it be and will it be designed to win points or just get it in and hope for the best.

This is really an indication of how mentality and skill is intertwined. You have to have the skill to construct winning points behind 2nd serves against top returners, but also the courage to play like that in pressure situations. If Lendl can instil the mentality to be more courageous in pressure moments, Murray could and should make a big breakthrough in 2012 with his 1st major championship, hopefully for him at the Australian Open where he already has an excellent record as twice losing finalist.

Joe Wilfred Tsonga could not be more different to Andy Murray in terms of attitude and temperament. Tsonga is a real showman on the court, and by all accounts quite shy off the court.

Tsonga is a great talent for sure, I first saw him play in 2007 at Wimbledon in the 3rd round where he comprehensively outplayed Feliciano Lopez to win in straight sets. I knew that day he was going to become a top player and that has proved to be the case. In 2008 Tsonga lost to Djokovic in the final of the Australian Open after taking the first set. Tsonga hasn’t quite hit the heights since then which is a bit of a surprise, mainly due to injuries and inconsistency.

Tsonga has shown he can live with the big boys by taking Federer out at the quarterfinal stage in 2011 Wimbledon. Tsonga also got to the final of the ATP World Tour finals, losing to Federer in a thrilling final. Tsonga has the game to blow his opponents away, especially when he gets inspired. However, Tsonga’s biggest challenge is playing at a consistent level throughout a five set match without having too many ups and downs. I like the way Tsonga goes for his shots when the pressure is on, what Tsonga has to ensure is that he makes those shots at key moments and not miss them, that’s the fine line Tsonga is walking. If Tsonga can get that consistency under pressure, he has the skill and power to defeat the best players in the world and claim a major title. What better place than Wimbledon? Tsonga has the perfect game for grass.

If we think of other players that can make a breakthrough, or at least re-establish themselves, then Juan Martin Del Potro would be a good candidate. Del Potro had a great 2009, getting to the semifinal of the French Open, where he held a two sets to one lead against Federer before losing. Del Porto returned the favour, coming from behind to beat Federer in the US Open final, his only major title to date. Del Potro also got to the final of the ATP World Tour finals, losing to Nikolay Davydenko.

Del Potro has suffered a nasty wrist injury and was out of the game for virtually 12 months, returning in early 2011. It’s fair to say that Del Potro is struggling to get back to top 5 status, which is understandable. Del Porto is a great shotmaker with an incredible forehand and good movement for a tall guy. And that’s where I feel Del Potro has a problem, almost all top players who are 6ft 4 inches plus ( 1 metre 96cm) have had serious injuries - Todd Martin, Richard Krajicek, Robin Soderling, Mario Ancic, Goran Ivanisevic all suffered long term injuries. In tennis, there seems to be a threshold that players over a certain height are more injury prone. Also, the way Del Porto hits the forehand, i.e. the technique he uses; he is vulnerable to a recurrence of his wrist injury.

If Del Porto can stay injury free and recover his self belief and movement, he’s a threat because he’s already proven he’s a champion and has the mentality to beat the best players in the biggest matches. Mentality and self belief is as important as talent at the highest level.

There are not too many other players who will be seen as potential major winners, other than two more tall guys, namely Milos Raonic and Tomas Berdych. Raonic is an exciting young player from Canada with an incredible serve. Raonic is 6ft 5 inches tall, and already has suffered a lot of injuries. 2012 may be too early for Raonic as he is a raw talent, but a player to watch for the future, especially on grass. Berdych has the talent to win a major and reached the 2010 Wimbledon final. Berdych probably requires a bit more self belief and a bit of luck at this stage, but he’s a threat at the majors and shouldn’t be discounted in 2012.

Previewing the 2012 WTA season



The 2011 WTA season turned out to be a very interesting one with four different nationalities winning the major titles. Serena Williams did not win a major title for the first time since 2006 whilst Petra Kvitova announced herself as the most exciting young talent to emerge for many years, perhaps since Justine Henin and Kim Clijsters 10 years previously. An exciting transition at the top is certainly taking place. With the season about to commence in Australasia, it’s a good time to assess the contenders for the major prizes in 2012.

Caroline Wozniacki

Currently the world number 1 for the past 18 months, Caroline Wozniacki has come in for quite a bit of criticism. There are a number of reasons for this, Wozniacki didn’t win any major titles or make any major finals. Traditionally, tennis fans or media do not like to see a number 1 player with no major titles. Wozniacki’s style of play is a contributing factor to her lack of major success; a counterpuncher by nature, winning majors is all about being brave on the day and taking the game to your opponent before they take it away from you.

As for 2012, Wozniacki is still only 21 years old and has time on her side to win a major title, that could happen in 2012 as she will be top seed for the Australian Open and still holds the edge on many of her opponents. Wozniacki had a good 2011 winning 6 titles including Dubai and Indian Wells. To go one better and win a first major title, Wozniacki would need to work on her serve and making her forehand a bigger weapon, plus improve her play in the forecourt, volleys in particular.

This sounds a tall order, and it’s surprising a number 1 player has so many technical deficiencies. Therefore we will see whether Wozniacki has improved or allowed the pressure to get to her. If Wozniacki has worked to improve during the off season, she has every chance of winning a major.

Petra Kvitova

This is the player which has made the new season such an exciting proposition; I would imagine this is the most anticipated new season for a number of years. Kvitova had a great breakout season, winning 7 titles including Wimbledon, Madrid, WTA championships and the Federation cup with Czech Republic defeating mighty Russia in the final. Kvitova won titles on all surfaces and finished the season 115 points off Caroline Wozniacki’s number 1 position. Kvitova also won a host of awards including WTA player of the year and breakout player of the year, and fans favourite player of the year.

The question for 2012 will be whether Kvitova can build on the momentum she’s established. There will probably be some downs along the way but Kvitova has the game not only to become number 1 but to dominate the game for the foreseeable future. That’s due to the fact that Kvitova has more shots, weapons and skill than probably all of her rivals and has recently shown she has mental fortitude under pressure, often coming from behind in the score to win.

Kivitova has yet to master outdoor hardcourts, I think she can make her serve more of a weapon on that surface and add more topspin to her forehand for control to account for varying conditions. It’s entirely possible Kvitova will defend her Wimbledon trophy and is capable of winning the French Open as well, 2012 should be another great year for Petra Kvitova.

Serena Williams

Serena Williams is certainly at a crossroads, she’s been the top player since 2008 with the demise of Justine Henin during that period, winning a hatful of major titles. However, a life threatening illness meant that Serena couldn’t start her season until June at Eastbourne, which didn’t give her time to get enough matches for a proper Wimbledon challenge.

Serena did go on to claim the Canadian Open title (Rogers Cup) and reach the US Open final before succumbing to an inspired Sam Stosur. That has turned out to be Serena Williams’ last match of 2011. The simple questions are, is Serena motivated to enter enough tournaments to keep her match sharp for the major tournaments. Also, will the rise of Petra Kvitova motivate Serena to get back to the top to challenge the younger players? Serena has the best serve and return of serve in the womens game, but Kvitova is looking to challenge that position. Serena has the edge on athleticism but has a litany of injuries to contend with.

If Serena can challenge for the major titles, it could be a vintage 2012 for the WTA.

Victoria Azarenka

Azarenka had a great purple patch in the spring winning Miami for a 2nd time and Marbella on clay. Azarenka also won Luxembourg in the autumn and made the final of Madrid, the semi final at Wimbledon and the final of the year end WTA championships, each time losing to Petra Kvitova. Azarenka has a great solid groundstroke game and has the ability to come to net from time to time to finish off points. That type of game usually means hard courts will be her best surface but the French Open is also a realistic possibility in 2012.

Azarenka should be able to continue her progression to a possible major title in 2012; she’s feeling confident and has improved her movement and fitness, her chances for a great 2012 look good. The only problem I see is Azarenka facing Kvitova in a major semi final or final. In that scenario she becomes the immediate counterpuncher because of Kvitova’s aggressive attitude. A lot of people predict it to be the great rivalry for years to come; I see it developing in the same way as Agassi v Sampras, with Azarenka playing the Agassi role.

Another analogy / comparison will certainly be Janica Kostelic and Anja Paerson who had that great rivalry in skiing, Azarenka being similar to Paerson and Kvitova similar to Kostelic. Contrast in styles and personalities make for great rivalries and Azarenka has the opportunity to help create something special in 2012.

Maria Sharapova


It’s strange to think that Sharapova won the Italian Open, Cincinnati and got to the final of Wimbledon and the semi final of the French Open. And yet Sharapova is kind of the forgotten player in the top 5 despite her being such a renowned figure in the world of sport.

And to me there’s a simple reason for that, despite having such a great comeback in 2011 playing great tennis and winning big events, you never know when she’s going to hit a double fault! And you certainly don’t know when she’s going to double fault during a crucial stage of a big match. Double faults are the reason why Sharapova hasn’t reclaimed a major title.

Assuming Sharapova recovers from her foot injury sustained in Japan in October and continues to be relatively injury free with her right shoulder, Sharapova could have a great 2012 and win a major title as long as she can somehow banish the demons (i.e. nerves) within her and cut out the double faults in big matches. John McEnroe reckons Sharapova should cut the 2nd serve out of the equation and work on getting a high first serve percentage. I don’t know if that is realistic but Sharapova has to rectify the situation to get back to the top of tennis.

Sam Stosur


Sam Stosur had a great 2011, winning the US Open title in emphatic style, comprehensively outplaying Serena Williams in the final. Stosur also got to the final of the Italian Open where she lost to Maria Sharapova, and the year end championships semi final, playing a great match against Petra Kvitova before losing in 3 sets.

Stosur will always be a threat at the French Open, clay being by far her best surface. Stosur also has the experience of playing a final there, so a good opportunity to win there in 2012. Stosur will also be a sentimental favourite with the Australian fans to win the Australian Open, there will be a lot of pressure and it will be interesting to see how she handles it.

My only concern for Stosur in 2012 will be that she just doesn’t win enough smaller events. In fact, besides being a great doubles specialist before her illness and reincarnation as a top singles player, Stosur has only won 3 singles titles so far in her career. Stosur has a game to become a dominant player at the top of the womens game, with an incredible forehand and topspin (kick) serve. However, Stosur needs to win some smaller events to give her the confidence to win the big events consistently.

Other players that can make a breakthrough in 2012 include:

Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova – I think Pavlyuchenkova has the game to become a top five player in the next few years; she’s a natural ball striker with a good serve. Pavlyuchenkova needs to work on her fitness and mental game but has great potential.

Kim Clijsters – You never write off a naturally talented player who has a lot of experience, Clijsters is defending Australian champion after all. With Clijsters it’s about fitness, motivation and making time for her daughter, if she can stay fit, she’s a threat at the majors.

Jelena Jankovic – I keep thinking Jankovic is too talented not to breakthrough to win a major title, but for some reason Jankovic just cannot get it together mentally. It’s not too late for her so let’s see what will happen in 2012.

Na Li – Pete Sampras recently joined Na for an exhibition in China and said some kind words about her. Along the lines that it will take time for her to adjust to being a grand slam champion in the way it did for Novak Djokovic and for Sampras 20 years ago. I think the difference is that both those guys were very young where Na is almost veteran status and probably not as hungry for success. Na certainly has the talent; if she can find the motivation she can surprise everyone again in 2012.

Vera Zvonareva
- Similar in game style and temperament to Jelena Jankovic, Zvonareva has the talent to be a major champion. However, like Jankovic, Zvonareva may lack the self belief to be a champion and beat all of the contenders in 7 matches. Zvonareva still has about 3 years to make something happen, let’s see if that can be in 2012.

Assessing Federer and Sampras


The last 20 years have been a very interesting period for men’s tennis with two of the most prolific champions of the 1990s and 2000s overlapping each other. Both players had significant rivals and set many records along the way. With Roger Federer breaking yet another record at the year end ATP World Tour finals a couple of weeks ago, it will be interesting to assess how both players have helped to define their eras.

Pete Sampras’ major achievements

Sampras won 64 titles including 14 major championships. Sampras finished year end number for 6 years from 1993 through 1998 which is a record. Sampras currently holds the record for most weeks at number 1 (286 weeks). Sampras won Wimbledon on 7 occasions which is an open era record; he’s also tied with Jimmy Connors and Roger Federer for 5 US Open titles. Sampras is the youngest ever US Open winner at 19 years and 28 days. Sampras won the Davis Cup in 1992 and 1995 and was a losing finalist in 1994 and 1997. Sampras won the Australian Open in 1994 and 1997 and was a losing finalist in 1995. Sampras won major titles every year from 1993 to 2000 and appeared in major finals from 1992 to 2002.

As far as other titles go, Sampras won the ATP championships 5 times and played in 6 finals. He won Miami, Cincinnati, Indianapolis three times each plus Indian Wells, Queens, Los Angeles, Paris Bercy twice. Sampras won 11 Masters Series including the Italian Open.

Roger Federer’s major achievements

Federer has won 70 titles including 16 major championships which is a record. Federer has participated in a record 23 major finals and played in over 30 consecutive major quarterfinals. Federer is tied with Sampras and Connors for 5 US Open wins. He’s tied with Andre Agassi with four Australian Open wins in the Open era; he’s won Wimbledon 6 times and the French Open on one occasion. Federer spent 237 straight weeks as number 1 between 2004 and 2008 which is a record, and 285 weeks in total so far. Federer won Olympics doubles gold in 2008 in Beijing with Stan Warinka. Incredibly, Federer has not missed a single Grand Slam tournament which is very unusual, no doubt accounting for his consistency of results as well.

In terms of other tournaments, Federer recently broke the record of winning the ATP World Tour finals on six occasions, going one better than Sampras and Ivan Lendl. Federer has won his local tournament Basel four times, Cincinnati, Canada, Dubai three times each. Federer has won 18 Masters Series titles so far including Hamburg on three occasions.




1990s – Sampras era

1990s was very much Sampras’ decade; he won 61 titles from 1990 to 1999. It was an interesting decade because there were more sanctioned surfaces on the ATP tour, and court speeds varied starkly depending on location and time of year. Most indoor tournaments in Europe and America were played on indoor carpet (Supreme in America, Taraflex in Europe) and the surfaces were fast and low bouncing, although kick serves were still effective, the surface suited attackers and baseliners as long as they played aggressive.

Grass was hard, fast and low bouncing and clay slow and high bouncing, fast balls were used on grass and heavy balls were used on clay. Hardcourts were also quite varied in pace, Australia used rebound ace which was often very slow and high bouncing, whilst hardcourts in America were relatively fast (except Miami which has always been slow).

The many different types of surfaces meant there were a variety of styles of play on the ATP tour, serve and volleyers, aggressive baseliners, counterpunchers, grass and claycourt specialists. This is reflected by the fact that, Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Courier, Sampras, Agassi, Muster, Moya, Rafter and Kafelnikov all held the number 1 position, a cross section of serve and volleyers (all court players) and baseliners.

2000s – Federer era

As often, eras overlap; Federer won his first major title at Wimbledon in 2003, 10 months after Sampras’ last in September 2002 at the US Open. From 2000 to 2009 Federer won 62 titles. As the decade progressed, there was a convergence of surfaces and surface speed, and with the gradual retirement of attacking players, there was a convergence in styles of play. Court surfaces also changed, indoor carpet was phased out to be replaced by indoor hardcourts, which were slower and higher bouncing. This change along with the change of composition of grass at Wimbledon ensured that net play would become an exception rather than the norm.

Clay was also speeded up as the decade progressed; lighter balls were introduced, which ironically would have suited the many attacking players of the 1990s. String technology also advanced and more top players used synthetic strings or a combination of synthetic and natural gut. To reflect the slowing down of surfaces, players on average were stringing their racquets much looser than top players of the 1990s.

The Australian Open changed surfaces from distinctive rebound ace to a more conventional plexicushion hardcourt which is medium slow and high bouncing, again favouring baseline play. Tennis shifted from players with natural ability, athleticism and improvisational skills to a more physical, functional style which favours stamina and percentage play.

Sampras style of play

Sampras is an interesting player because he seems to fit into many categories of peoples thoughts about his game. Sampras once said that the media didn’t understand him or his game, there might be some truth in that. Depending on who you speak to, you get a different view of what Sampras’ game was about. Some see Sampras as a serve and volley specialist, some view him as having a big serve where the returner didn’t get a look in. Some view him as an all court player with great movement, one guy I spoke to recently didn’t remember him for a big serve, whilst another guy remembers him been very cool under pressure.

Fred Perry made the famous quote in 1993 which said Sampras “moves like oil, you don’t hear him, you just hear the other guy, and the other guy’s losing.” In 1999 Agassi described Sampras’ forehand as “obnoxious” during a Wimbledon press conference.

Sampras talked about his versatility in his book, which is reflected by the many conceptions different people have of his game, he can be described as all of these things. Sampras was one of the most talented players of the open era who modelled his game after Australians Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall. Sampras was very much a product of the modern era, and I would describe his game as a hybrid between Ivan Lendl and Boris Becker, the movement and big forehand of Lendl and the big serve and athleticism of Becker.

Sampras had every shot and improvised shot in the book, as evidence by the many YouTube clips that document his game. Sampras also has what is considered the best and most beautiful rhtymic serve of the open era, which had twice as many rpms as his rivals, which made his 2nd serve delivery fantastic because it was delivered at pace with an incredible amount of slice and topspin. Sampras also played differently depending on the surface, on grass, Sampras served and volleyed on every serve, first and second, on hardcourts he often played a more baseline oriented game, especially in the early 1990s on slower hardcourts like Indian Wells, Miami and Australia.

Sampras’ game also went through a few phases, under Joe Brandi in the early 1990s, Sampras was a raw talent who blew hot and cold, under Tim Gullickson, Sampras became the number 1 player who could play on any surface. Under Paul Annacone, Sampras used his athleticism and big serve and volleys more later in his career. Sampras also started chipping and charging more, something he hardly did before. Sampras’ more aggressive game late on in his career sacrificed his game on clay which requires more patience from the baseline.

Sampras' return game also changed as he got older, in his early years he often ran around his backhand to smack forehands, later in his career he used the chip and charge and backhand drive down the line return more often.

One aspect of the game which really gave Sampras a different dimension was his ability to hit winning returns and passing shots, off both wings, down the line and crosscourt plus lobs, that separated him from other attacking players of that era and was the reason he won Wimbledon 7 times. In the 1995 Wimbledon final against Becker, Sampras hit over 25 passing shot winners and in the 2000 final against Rafter, Sampras hit over 20 passing shot winners, and 12 return winners, on each occasion he lost the first set in a tiebreak.

Federer style of play

In Federer’s case, there are no arguments or discussion; he’s universally admired as having a beautiful game. One of the reasons for this is that Federer likes to bring out his best regardless of who he’s playing, whether it be a journeyman or a top player. For instance, some of Sampras’ greatest performances are against his peers like Agassi in the 1999 Wimbledon final, Federer makes great performances against journeymen as well, something crowds appreciate.

As Sampras gradually got older, his game became less and less baseline oriented, whilst as Federer got older, his game became more and more baseline oriented. In the 2003 Wimbledon final, Federer served and volleyed on over 3 quarters of his first serves, in 2004 that ratio fell to under 20%. The reason for this is the slowing down of surfaces, however, this allowed Federer to play an expansive baseline game which is great to watch, especially on grass where the ball should move quicker and stay lower.

The speeding up of the clay surfaces also helped Federer as it allowed him to play his game and create lots more opportunities to hit winners with the faster balls and more modern strings. Federer’s trademark has been his forehand and serve, and exceptional movement which has allowed him to stay relatively injury free for long periods of time, or at least, not have the serious injuries many of his colleagues suffer.

Federer also has a mean backhand down the line and exceptional improvisational skills. Federer also has every shot in the book and seems to invent new ones as well, which is no mean feat. What would have been even more interesting is if Federer had used his volleying ability and athleticism at net even more, that would have given him an even extra dimension especially in the really big matches he plays at this stage of his career.

Recently Federer has been playing a more aggressive game under the guidance of Paul Annacone, who of course was Sampras’ long term coach after the death of Tim Gullickson. Federer has been running around his backhand more to hit forehand returns and is using the chip and charge as a tactic at opportune moments.




Sampras’ Rivals

Sampras was one of the few players to dominate virtually all of his top rivals. Sampras only had losing records against Sergei Brugera, Michael Stich and Richard Krajieck amongst his peers, whilst having close losing records to Marat Safin and Lleyton Hewitt, but there’s a ten year age gap (11 years in Hewitt’s case). This was due to Sampras’ ability to raise his game in the big matches, and match his opponents from the baseline, that again separated him other attacking players of that era.

v Andre Agassi 20-14
v Jim Courier 16-4
v Patrick Rafter 12-4
v Thomas Muster 9-2
v Michael Chang 12-8
v Goran Ivanesivic 12-6
v Boris Becker 12-7
v Greg Rusedski 9-1
v Cedric Pioline 9-0
v Albert Costa 5-0
v David Wheaton 8-0
v Todd Martin 18-4
v Jonas Bjorkman 9-2
v Yvegeny Kafelnikov 11-2
v Michael Stich 4-5
v Mark Phillipoussis 7-4
v Richard Krajieck 4-6
v Sergei Brugera 2-3
v Tim Henman 6-1
v Stefan Edberg 8-6
v Petra Korda 12-5

Federer’s Rivals

Federer also enjoys healthy leads on many of his rivals. However, he has a comprehensive losing record to Rafael Nadal, mainly because Nadal has been able to get to Federer’s backhand in a way no other player can. Federer also has a losing record to Murray, but Murray has never beaten Federer in a grand slam tournament. Other than that, Federer has excellent records against many top players.

V Rafael Nadal 9-17
V Novak Djokovic 14-10
V Andy Roddick 21-2
V Joe Wilfred Tsonga 8-3
V David Ferrer 12-0
V Marat Safin 10-2
V Juan Martin Del Potro 7-2
V Nicolay Davydenko 15-2
V Lleyton Hewitt 18-8
V Juan Carlos Ferrero 9-3
V David Nalbandian 11-8
V Andy Murray 6-8
V James Blake 10-1
V Tomas Berdych 10-4
V Gael Monfils 6-1
V Carlos Moya 7-0
v Gaston Gaudio 5-0
v Guillermo Canas 3-3

Roger Federer’s career is still on and it may be a while before he retires, but make no mistake, all achievements today are a bonus and his career has been defined by his exploits in the 2000s. It’s remarkable how he and Sampras have had such similar careers in some ways and different in other ways. Both men can identify as having a unique talent and the ability to use a small headed heavy Wilson midsize racquet that most other players will not touch. These guys are one offs.

Can ATP Tour Learn from WTA scheduling?


We’ve had a tremendous finish to the 2011 WTA season, probably the best finish for a number of years. Petra Kvitova won the BNP Paribas WTA Championships for the first time, and in emphatic style winning all of her matches. The championships took place in Istanbul for the first of a 3 year contract and the atmosphere was great with record breaking attendences, which really inspired the players to put on a good show for the crowds.

A week later we had the Federation cup shootout between Russia and the Czech Republic in Moscow. The Czechs edged out the Russians 3:2 to win the cup for the first time as an independent nation. One of the matches of the year took place in the 3rd rubber between Svetlana Kuznetsova and Petra Kvitova. The match kept everyone on the edge of their seats with 3 sets of high quality intense tennis with both players hitting an incredible number of winners under pressure. It was a great advert for womens Tennis.

With Ana Ivanovic winning the tour of champions in Bali for a second time, there is now a nice two month break until end December when the merry go round of the tour recommences in Australasia. The players have an opportunity to have 3 to 4 weeks off to relax and recharge their batteries before commencing pre season preparations. However, it’s not only an opportunity for the players to decompress; the fans can also recharge and really get excited about the upcoming 2012 season.

While the WTA tour has shut down for another year, the ATP continues to roll. During the week of the WTA championships, there were indoor tournaments in Stockholm and Vienna. Then last week there were tournaments in Valencia and Basel. The Paris Masters has just taken place and then from November 20th through 27th the ATP World Tour finals at the 02 arena in London. And if that wasn’t enough, the Davis cup final between Spain and Argentina takes place a week later in early December.

It’s been difficult to keep up with who’s winning what and where. Not only that, but a bit of mental fatigue has crept in, I kind of want the season to be over already.

I’ve been following the ATP tour closely since 1993 and for as long as I can remember the complaints have been the same, the season is too long. It seems less like a season and more like a circus, a never ending commitment to play tournaments all around the world for pretty much 12 months a year. Like cricket, mens tennis has suffered from a scenario of nonstop touring. That is set to change from 2012.

There have been many vague changes to the tour designed to reduce the workload of the players. One change included making all ATP finals best of 3 sets including the ATP World Tour final (a mistake in my view which reduces the prestige of the tournament). There have also been changes to the rankings system which gives out points almost like confetti for winning major championships. Players are encouraged via complicity to take breaks during the course of the season, somewhere between the end of the grass court season and the beginning of the hard court season. Also between the end of the US Open and the Asian swing in late summer.

However, what will really make the difference for players and fans is to have a proper off season, like the WTA tour has managed. This year there is a huge difference where the WTA has a break of 8 weeks and the ATP a break of just over 4 weeks. We’ve heard the complaints from the likes of Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray but we are still in the same scenario as previous years.

Finally, after years of lack of will and vested interests by tournament directors, it seems as though the ATP has listened and shortened the calendar for 2012, which will see the World Tour finals finishing on November 11th, with the Davis cup final presumably taking place a week later. This is a welcome change of thinking and overdue, the tennis tour is quite a grind of nonstop travelling and as a consequence top players retire fairly young compared to many other professional sports. Players of the calibre of Pete Sampras, Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, and Patrick Rafter among others have all retired before reaching their 32nd birthday. Tennis fans have been deprived of these great players playing into their mid 30s.

At the same time, the ATP needs to work harder to find a way of shortening the season still further for the top players. One way to do that would be to match the WTA and end the season at the end of October and not towards mid November. Shortening the season further will not only reduce the mental and physical fatigue of players, but also give players a longer off season to recharge their batteries and make proper preparations for the next season.

For once, the sometimes maligned WTA tour has taken the lead on improving the lot of their players. The ATP have now followed the lead for the 2012 season, let’s hope this is the start of a new trend of having at least an off season where players and fans can take stock and look forward to the next season with fresh minds and spirits.

Petra Kvitova - An In Depth Look at Her Game




Petra Kvitova has made a real impression on the WTA tour in 2011. Kvitova is very much a throwback to bygone eras in pro tennis. Her game and attitude is very much modelled on what can be described as the big game, and what makes Kvitova so interesting is that she plays the big game in the purest sense. We hear that players hit the ball harder than ever and yet most of the top players on the tour are grinders. Kvitova is the opposite, matches are determined on how she’s playing and feeling, it’s on her racquet.

The way Kvitova won Wimbledon is reflective of this, she only dropped two sets whilst hitting over 200 winners in 7 matches, on average 30 winners per match, that’s a lot of winners! Kvitova has won 5 tournaments so far this year including Brisbane, Paris Indoor, Madrid and Linz, she’s won tournaments on all surfaces. Kvitova has a very bright future, so its a good opportunity to take an in depth look at her game and potential.


Petra’s Serve


Kvitova has one of the best serves on the WTA tour. Her serve is up there with Serena Williams and Sam Stosur as the most technically proficient. It’s not the fastest (usually top speed of 115mph) but it’s very big with a lot of spin and variation. Kvitova has an added factor, time on her side to improve her serve and make it more of a weapon than it already is, which is a scary thought for her opponents.

With Kvitova being left handed, she has an immediate advantage on the ad court (the decision court) which she uses to great effect with the swing serve to the backhand. Kvitova uses an incredible variety of serves and takes more chances on her serve than any female player. On both courts, Kvitova uses the sliding serve into the body to jam her opponents and get a short reply. By using the serve into the body as a tactic, it sets up a wide serve either side of her opponent.

Kvitova is also a great proponent of the slice serve on the deuce court, she bends it beautifully away from her opponents backhand. Kvitova can hit all four targets of the service box and therefore has the ability to hit many aces. The Wimbledon final against Maria Sharapova is a perfect example of Kvitova’s tactical brain, throughout the match Kvitova served into Sharapova’s body or wide to her backhand, then on matchpoint, straight down the middle, ace with Sharapova guessing the wrong way, great thinking in a pressure moment.

What really makes Kvitova’s serve stand out is the 2nd serve, Kvitova really takes chances on it, often going for lines, or into the body and very deep in the box. The sort of courage we haven’t seen from servers since the likes of Sampras was at the top of tennis. That sort of courage and tactical play will ensure Kvitova wins a lot more matches than loses over the next few years.





Petra’s Return of Serve


This is another aspect of the game that really reminds me of past greats. Kvitova is reviving an art that has been lost for some time, which is hitting clean winners off return of serve. Again, players go after their opponents’ 2nd serve, but Kvitova can turn good serves into return winners,

Kvitova has great hand eye co-ordination and a long wing span. This allows her to really have a go at the return of serve. And so often with players who have big serves or expect to hold serve, they can really put pressure on their opponents serve, not giving them much time to breathe. On deuce and ad courts, Kvitova has the ability to really step in and punish any short serves for winners.

Kvitova can also get the ball deep with tremendous pace, putting the server under constant pressure. Kvitova also has an interesting mentality, which is she’s not afraid to miss, if she misses the return or makes a mistake, she’s still coming after you when the next opportunity arises. That’s a gift to have that sort of self belief and confidence in your own ability.


Petra’s Forehand


Kvitova’s forehand is very much a classic shot, a shot designed to deliver as much damage as possible in the rallies. Kvitova said in an interview during Wimbledon that she watched Agassi Sampras matches on television, her forehand is very much in the tradition of those two players. Her forehand doesn’t have a lot of topspin, but is driven with force to all targets of the court.

Kvitova can make a lot of errors with her forehand but when she’s in a groove it can be a fantastic shot, especially when she’s off balance or out of position and goes for the spectacular.

Commentator and ex champion, Tracy Austin said during Wimbledon that Kvitova’s forehand can be a little too flat at times, I would agree with that assessment. Agassi and Sampras added topspin to their forehand drives to make it a formidable shot and increase their margin for error, Kvitova has the ability to do the same and come up with similar results, which would make her forehand one of the best in the womens game alongside Sam Stosur.





Petra’s Backhand


Kvitova has a great two hand backhand, especially off return of serve. Again, like her forehand, she can really use it to drive through the ball and hit winners at will, from all angles of the court. Kvitova also has an added advantage, the ability to take one hand off and play great slice shots, especially on grass where the ball stays low.

With the slice backhand, Kvitova can use it to change the pace of the rallies, or take a short ball and use the slice to attack the net. It was a shot that certainly gave her an added dimension during Wimbledon.

In terms of the two hander, Kvitova has the advantage of being 6 ft tall (1 metre 83), this often allows her to really lean on the ball and take a lot of her shots on top of the bounce, taking time away from her opponent with fairly flat drives. Like her forehand, Kvitova is especially dangerous when out of position and goes for winners down the line or crosscourt.


Petra’s Movement


This is a part of her game where the critics love to have a field day. I can see the comparisons with Lindsay Davenport in terms of Kvitova’s height and playing first strike tennis. Kvitova’s movement is not the best on the tour, but it’s not bad, and it’s an area she is looking to improve all the time.

Her movement into the forecourt is very good, she’s not afraid to hit approach shots and attack the net and take the initiative, always the sign of a very good player. Kvitova’s movement from side to side across the baseline can be improved but I also think her movement is deceptive and she has a long wing span.

And that’s an area I feel she has an advantage over a past player like Lindsay Davenport. When Kvitova is drawn out of position, she can come up with amazing shots, so her movement has to be good enough to get her into positions to hit those shots.


Petra’s Volleys and Overheads


This is another facet of the game Kvitova can excel in, she showed this right through her Wimbledon run this year. Kvitova has excellent volley skills and court positioning at net and is able to hit all sorts of conventional and drive volleys. Kvitova is also capable of hitting great stop volleys and improvised volleys.

Kvitova is not as athletic as Amelie Mauresmo or Justine Henin but she does have a long wing span, and cuts off passing shots well. Kvitova hasn’t had to play too many overheads, as players don’t go for lobs as much but she’s a capable smasher. And with improved movement and fitness, her volleys and overheads will improve further in the coming years.





Looking at Petra Kvitova’s game in detail, her strengths far outweigh her weaknesses. As long as Kvitova keeps improving, and improves her fitness and mental game, she has the game to become a multiple slam winner and great player in years to come.

Speeding Up Courts Could Help Bring Variety to Tennis

The pace of courts in professional tennis has become the big topic over the last few years on various internet forums printed media. Players have made comments from time to time, especially concerning Wimbledon, but for the first time the issue has come up at the US Open. Roger Federer’s comments after his first round match forced the United States Tennis Association to put out a written statement. Poor weather conditions since the annual resurfacing of the courts meant the courts had been used and power washed less often


The USTA said "Both of these factors have resulted in the courts playing a little slower than usual. We expect the court surface to speed up as the courts get more play throughout the tournament as they traditionally have."


The fact that the USTA felt compelled to make a statement proves there is one thing that is universally agreed on in tennis, the courts have slowed down considerably over the last 10 years. The reasons why have been well documented; but what hasn’t been documented is the impact the slowing of courts has had on both the WTA and ATP tours.


The primary reason for the slowing of courts revolves around the Wimbledon Championships. During the 1990s complaints were that rallies were too short and the game had become too serve dominated. This was before the explosion of the internet and digital television, so most casual tennis fans would watch Wimbledon as it was one of the few tournaments that would be shown on terrestrial television around the world. Also, many clay court specialists would just not play Wimbledon.


The situation came to a head in 2001 when some of the Spanish players including French Open finalist Alex Corretja boycotted the tournament complaining that the Wimbledon Committee were basing seeds not on world ranking but on past pedigree on grass. Many clay court players had no pedigree so they were given a lower ranking. They argued that this was unjustified as they worked all year round to build up a ranking. The situation was further exacerbated by then World Number One and French Open champion Gustavo Kuerten skipping the tournament to take a holiday.


The Wimbledon Committee decided to change the seeding system from 16 to 32, a system the other three major tournaments adopted. However, that’s not the only major change Wimbledon made over the years. From 1995 through 2001 Wimbledon have also changed the composition of the seeds on the famous lawns to slow down the grass and the impact of big serving. Those changes really manifested itself in 2002 when Lleyton Hewitt went on to win Wimbledon. Hewitt’s win coincided with the demise of Pete Sampras as a force on grass, Pat Rafter’s time out from the game to contemplate his future, Roger Federer’s first round defeat and Goran Ivanisevic’s inability to defend to his title due to shoulder trouble. Richard Krajicek got to the quarterfinal but had a surprising 5 set loss to Xavier Malisse.


It became apparent in 2002 that attacking serve and volley tennis was no longer a viable proposition at the top level. This was mainly due to the fact that junior players coming through were no longer attacking the net, whilst future World Number One Roger Federer would change his game on grass from an attacking one to a baseline game to adapt to the changing times. Another significant change Wimbledon made was to go to a heavy duty ball to lessen the impact of big serving. Serving speeds were the same but the returner had a little more time to react as the ball slows relatively after bouncing.


It used to be that each major tournament had unique characteristics. The Australian Open was played on rebound ace between 1988 and 2007 (a rubberised hardcourt which was slow and high bouncing). In 2008 the Australian Open laid a more conventional hardcourt called plexicushion which is decidedly medium pace. The Australian also went from Slazenger balls to Wilson balls, Wilson balls are lighter and quicker but that hasn’t made any real impact on the pace of the courts. Rebound ace favoured both attacking players and aggressive baseliners as players like Sampras, Becker, Agassi, Lendl, Courier, Kafelnikov won the tournament with different styles of play.


Another significant change in the last 10 years has been the decline of indoor carpet courts on both the WTA and ATP tours. The indoor season was an important part of the calendar with tournaments in Europe and the United States culminating in the end of year Championships. For many years the womens final was played in Madison Square Garden in New York and Los Angeles. The mens tournament was played in Madison Square Garden, Frankfurt and then Hanover in Germany.


Indoor carpet as a surface favoured attacking players but baseliners could also excel on the surface. Players of the calibre of Ivan Lendl, Martina Hingis, Monica Seles had excellent records on the surface. Modern players like David Nalbandian have also done extremely well on indoor carpet. However, most of the indoor tournaments have replaced carpet with hard courts including Paris Bercy and Rotterdam. Tournaments such as Philadelphia and Stuttgart have been taken off the calendar in recent times. In 2005 Jim Courier was interviewed on BBC radio during Wimbledon and stated that the demise of attacking tennis was due to the decline of carpet tournaments and the ATP should address the issue.


The fact that hardcourt tennis is played all year round both indoors and outdoors doesn’t help with player injuries as hardcourts are so punishing on the body.


Medium pace courts allow players more time to set up their shots, there is less need to develop a large skills set to earn a good living from tennis. This is especially true in the womens game at present. There are currently a large proportion of players who play a similar game based on the Nick Bollietieri blueprint. That blueprint is to try to control the middle of the court with fierce groundstrokes and have a big return game. However, many players are not developing their serves as a reliable weapon, do not develop any volley or overhead skills and hardly ever apply slice on the backhand side to change the pace and tempo of rallies.


Caroline Wozniacki has been World Number One for twelve months and yet has a great amount of technical flaws in her game including a weak 2nd serve and poor volleys and a general passiveness in her game. We are unlikely to see players of the technique, variety and strategy of an Amelie Mauresmo or Justine Henin anytime in the near future. Wimbledon champion Petra Kvitova is one of the few players today who has the potential to add a lot of variety to her game, especially on grass.


The mens game is also suffering as the general public do not know who the players are outside of the top four. And with the new ranking system that gives points like confetti, David Ferrer who’s currently ranked 5 in the world is almost 10,000 points behind number 1 Novak Djokovic. The mens game also has a problem where 90 % of the players play a similar game where the slice backhand and net play are very much exceptions to the rule.


Medium paced courts are presently masking any flaws in technique players may have. With current racquet and string technology, players have much more time to set up their shots to keep the rallies extended, and it has become more difficult for shotmakers to hit through players or make telling volleys consistently. It has become much more difficult to rush opponents into errors plus the return of serve has probably become more vital than the serve.


Medium paced courts have discouraged players with natural attacking ability to adopt that strategy as it doesn’t pay in todays game. At Wimbledon it will become increasingly difficult for an attacking player to win the tournament. Joe Wilfred Tsonga got to the semifinal this year playing great tennis but ran into Novak Djokovic in the semifinal, who probably has the best defence in the world. Players like Tsonga would thrive on indoor carpet courts if they still existed.


An interesting phenomenon we’ve seen in the last 10 years are tall players who play as counterpunchers. That would have been inconceivable twenty years ago. Andy Murray and Gael Monfils are blessed with athletic ability and a big serve and could have played much more aggressive tennis. It can be argued that both players haven’t maximised their potential due to their style of play, again exacerbated by slow and medium paced courts on all surfaces.


It’s time that the powers of tennis look to find ways of bringing back variety to the game. The mens game will face a similar scenario to the womens game once Roger Federer hangs up his racquet. The womens game has really suffered since the departures of players like Martina Hingis, Amelie Mauresmo and Justine Henin because so many of their matches and rivals offered a great contrast in styles which the public always love to see. When Wimbledon rushed to slow down the grass courts, they overlooked the great matches played over the years between the attacker and the baseliner such as Rafter v Agassi or Navratilova v Graf.


The International Tennis Federation, The ATP and WTA would do well to listen to the fans and lay the groundwork of reintroducing variety into the game of Tennis, by speeding up many courts. This would encourage coaches around the world to teach more variety to their pupils and not the one dimensional baseline game we now see so often.

Featured post

Is Stefanos Tsitsipas in the Last Chance Saloon?

Stefanos Tsitsipas recently announced he will work with “supercoach” Goran Ivanisevic during the upcoming grass court season. Now, on the fa...