2001 Wimbledon - Best Championship of the Open Era

2001 Wimbledon has gone down as one of the greatest championships in the Open era and Grand Slam history. 

There was great drama throughout, and great weather up until semifinals day, when the tension reached unbearable levels, climaxing with the incredible and unprecedented “people’s final” which took place on the 3rd Monday.  The final between Goran Ivanisevic and Pat Rafter will live long in the memory of those who witnessed it, watched it on television or listened to it on the radio.

What set up this particular Wimbledon to be one of the greatest tournaments was the dramatic defeat of Pete Sampras by Roger Federer in the 4th round on the 2nd Monday.  Sampras went into the event without a tournament win for a year, but was still defending champion and number 1 seed.  It was an almighty close battle which Federer edged 7:5 in the fifth set.

The defeat was hugely significant because it gave the remaining players a lift that they had a chance to win Wimbledon.  It also gave the tennis community a lift because Wimbledon would get a new winner as Sampras had dominated the field so severely.

Tim Henman battled past Todd Martin over five sets and two days to make the quarterfinal.  Henman’s reward was to play Roger Federer, a huge relief for Henman not to play Sampras, a man he never beat at Wimbledon in three tries including semifinals in 1998 and 1999.  Henman beat Federer in four sets, dropping the 3rd set.  Andre Agassi beat talented French shotmaker Nicholas Escude and Ivanisevic went past Marat Safin in four sets.

We were left with a great semifinal line up for the 4th year in a row; the big difference this time being no Sampras involved.  Rafter would play Agassi and Henman would play Ivanisevic, four players Sampras beat in semifinals and finals the previous three years.  As Pat Cash put so well in the BBC commentary, these guys were absolutely desperate to win Wimbledon, and we were about to get three amazing five set matches in a row.

The first semi between Rafter and Agassi was a repeat of their 2000 encounter and their third in a row as they also met in the 1999 semifinal.  This time the weather was red hot and the drama was incredible, the tennis was not quite of the standard of the previous year but there was definitely more tension with the prize at stake (not having to play Sampras in the final!).

Agassi came out stronger taking the first set 6:2, with stunning returns and passing shots; and stunning tactics, continually lobbing Rafter to get him off the net, then passing him when Rafter was weary of closing too tight to the net.  The type of tennis we don’t see today as no player is brave or foolhardy enough to charge the net.  

However, Rafter’s character, will to win and smart tactics of his own saw him claim the 2nd set.  Agassi won the 3rd and looked like the final was his for the taking but then made some uncharacteristic errors as Rafter took the 4th set using the classic tactic of slice and topspin to disrupt Agassi’s rthythm in some lovely baseline exchanges.  Agassi went up a break in the 5th set and even served for the match, but Rafter broke back with the chip and charge ploy, unsettling Agassi. Rafter then took the match 8:6 when Agassi got broken with a topspin backhand passing shot.

Pat Cash was right, both men were desperate to win, and we knew the match between Ivanisevic and Henman would be just as tight.  Ivanisevic took the 1st set but Henman came roaring back taking the 2nd and 3rd sets, the 3rd being an incredible 6:0 rout with Ivanisevic visibly mentally shaken. But then the heavens opened, hours after it was predicted to, it was 7:30pm and Henman would have had more than enough time to finish the job in 4 sets.

 

On Saturday, the womens final should have been played between Venus Williams and Justine Henin.  But Henman and Ivanisevic played just one and a half sets throughout the course of the whole day and had to come back on the Sunday to finish the match.  Henman would get to play on the Sunday, but not the final.  The match reconvened at midday and serving at 4:4 in the 5th set, Henman got broken leaving to Ivanisevic serve out the match, a remarkable match played over three days of unbearable tension for the British public.  

The deal was to play the womens final on the Sunday and the mens final would be played on the Monday.  The womens final turned out to be excellent value with Venus defeating a very talented but green Henin in three sets.  But the real fun was to take place the next day, the Wimbledon Committee announced that tickets were to be sold on a first come first served basis, consequently we were to see a tennis crowd we will probably never see again at Wimbledon especially in a final.  The crowd was a mixture of Australian fans with flags, painted faces and plastic kangaroos, whilst the rest of the crowd comprised young Croats and young Brits who were supporting Ivanisevic.

The crowd were absolutely amazing, loud, chanting, good natured, it was the like the best Davis cup atmosphere between nations, maybe even better considering it was  Wimbledon.  The match couldn’t help but live up to expectations, both players were keyed up from the very first point and it was inevitable it would be a five set thriller.  The points were short but the skill, bravery, endurance, power and touch were there from both guys, even acrobatics by Rafter as in combat!  Ivanisevic broke early to take the first set, Rafter stormed back to take the 2nd, Ivanisevic, the 3rd, Rafter broke twice to take the 4th; Ivanisevic lost his head exactly where Agassi did in the semifinal.

So here we were again with another 5th set and the crowd going crazy.  After a glut of break points for both throughout the set, Ivanisevic was finally able to break at 7:7 with some great backhand returns which Rafter couldn’t deal with, a combination of Rafter’s kick serve not being as effective and Ivanisevic’s great two hand return, the slightly taller man taking the ball early before it kicked too high, banging it back past Rafter when it really mattered.  After squandering three match points, Ivanisevic finally took the fourth on a 2nd serve which Rafter put into the net with a forehand. 

In the presentation, Ivanisevic thanked the All England Club for giving him a wild card, while Rafter and his coach Tony Roche were choked with emotion but still gave a very dignified interview to Sue Barker on the court.

Looking back, it seems strange to think that Andre Agassi, Pat Rafter and Tim Henman would never get another opportunity to win Wimbledon.  In fact, it’s incredible someone of Rafter’s talent on grass never won Wimbledon, being shut out in two finals by Sampras and then Ivanisevic.  Maybe these guys knew something we didn’t at that time, they gave so much to win Wimbledon that year, they seemed to have nothing left for the rest of their Wimbledon careers.  Ivanisevic was fulfilled and due to shoulder trouble didn’t play until 2004 for one last hurrah, whilst Rafter took a sabbatical for a year after losing at the US Open to Sampras (who else) and then announced his retirement a year later at the age of only 29.  Henman would make the semifinal in 2002 but lost comprehensively to Lleyton Hewitt.

It would be nice if the All England Club can give us a middle Sunday in future with tickets sold exclusively on a first come, first served basis.

 

 

Questions and Answers with Jo Wilfried Tsonga

Jo Wilfried Tsonga is one of the more talented players in the ATP top 10.  He plays a brand of tennis fans love to watch, particularly on the grass at Queens and Wimbledon.

Recently Tsonga employed a full time coach for the first time in over a year.   His choice of coach was Australian Roger Rasheed, a man who has worked with Lleyton Hewitt and Gael Monfils and is considered to be a tough coach, one who works his pupils hard.  So it is an interesting choice for Tsonga at this stage of his career.

That’s because Tsonga has suddenly reached middle age in tennis terms, teetering on veteran status.  At the age of 28, there are not that many years left to be had in the top 10, and now would be as good a time as any to try to win a maiden grand slam title. 

Tsonga’s final appearance in the 2008 Australian Open showed what he is capable of as an attacking force.  Injuries and inconsistency have slowed Tsonga down slightly, and he had to make the choice of switching from a classic all court Wilson racquet to a more modern Babolat Aero ProDrive, which is easier on the limbs.  The racquet switch has allowed Tsonga to remain relatively injury free over the last two years.

With that in mind, I think it is a very positive move to hire Roger Rasheed as coach.  Like Murray’s appointment of Lendl, Tsonga has shown that he is prepared to put in the hard work to attempt to take his game to the next level.  Rasheed’s task is to help Tsonga develop a reliable game plan and strategies on court, and to stick to them, allowing for flashy shots only when it is warranted.  But also to get to a level of fitness that will allow him to stay with the likes of Murray and Djokovic on the slower surfaces we have today.  Maintaining a high level of fitness and sticking to a game plan will hopefully allow Tsonga a better chance to use his big weapons to winning effect.

But we also have to remember that Tsonga is part of a tradition of stylish French players of past and present.  A lot of people would have loved to see how Tsonga’s game matched up in the previous era of attacking players.  But what would be even better is seeing Tsonga win a major tournament playing a hybrid brand of attacking tennis; last year at Wimbledon Tsonga and Mardy Fish played one of the most enjoyable matches I’ve seen live for some time, with both players regularly serve and volleying on 1st serve and staying back on 2nd serve.  As I mentioned in a previous article in July 2011, that could help inspire a whole new generation of players who want to challenge the current counterpunching style of tennis.

I managed to correspond with Tsonga during the last week while he was playing in Madrid.  I was able to ask some questions about his game and his opinion on where the game is today; fans are always interested to know what top players think about their own game and where the game of tennis heading:

1. You have recently started working with new coach Roger Rasheed; you have been playing without a full time coach for a couple of years.  What persuaded you to hire a new coach and Roger Rasheed in particular?

I liked my freedom but realized that I needed some outside help to work on some aspects of my game.  In order to improve I had to hire a new coach that I could trust and develop new parts of my game.

2.    Roger Rasheed has a reputation for being a tough working coach.  How do you think those qualities can help in your game?

He is a tough worker but I am practicing with a lot of intensity which is what is needed now to practice well and not waste any time.  Roger helps on and off the court and am already reaping the benefits of our work.

  

3.    Which areas of your game do you think are working well right now, and what do you think can be improved?

I can improve lots of part of my game but my backhand is probably a good area to work on in order to improve.  I am also trying to be more patient on the court and wait for the good opportunity when I am playing.

4.    There is a lot of discussion that surfaces are too slow right now, especially with the prevalence of hardcourts and the disappearance of indoor carpet from the tour. As a top 10 player, do you think surface speeds are ok or would you like to see some faster surfaces on the tour more often to help attacking tennis?

The question is more complex than just speed, you could add balls, playing conditions, scheduling to the list.  As far as speed goes we see changes throughout the year but it has been noticed that in recent years we've come back to slightly slower conditions.

5.    You are a big fan favourite at Wimbledon; fans love to watch your style of play, improvisation and Boris Becker diving! I think you are capable of winning Wimbledon before your career is over, how do you see your chances at Wimbledon this year?

As always I enjoy playing at Wimbledon for everything the tournament represents.  Once again I will play my hardest to go one step further and try to reach the final.  I have had great memories there but I am looking to built up on my previous experiences.

  

6.    From the previous generations, which players inspired you the most? Which players would you have liked to play?

There were a few players that I looked up to.  I first got into following tennis with the Davis Cup final between Sweden and France when Arnaud Boetsch save match point to win the decisive tie.  I have been a fan of Pat Rafter as well.

  

7.    The French have produced an incredible amount of players who play well on grass, the athleticism required and improvisation suit the French style.  Players like Tauziat, Mauresmo, Forget, Pioline, Gasquet, Grosjean, Mahut and yourself.  I do not know of many grass courts in France so why do French players play so well on grass in your opinion?

This is a good question, worth inquiring with the technical directors at the French Tennis Federation.  I have always liked grass because I have the weapon to allow me to move forward and with my size I know it takes a great passing shot to put me down! 

  

8.    Do you think attacking tennis can make a comeback in future?  Not in terms of hitting the ball hard but transition play, coming to net, serving and volleying on 1st serves on a regular basis, is there a future for attacking tennis?

I hope so as I like to see some inspired play from up and coming players.  Attacking the ball and coming to the net has always been fascinating to me.  The era of the Becker, Sampras and a few others was truly fun to watch.  I am not saying it is now boring but the game shifted to a stance of baseline power hitter, which I would include myself in.  I do like to come to the net, serve and volley and would recommend it!

Where are the Next Generation?

It is spring 2013 and we are finally escaping the heart of a prolonged winter.  Traditionally at this juncture of a decade, a new generation has fully emerged and taken over the top of the world rankings.

This has certainly happened over the last 3 decades.  In spring 1983, John McEnroe was the clear number 1 and Ivan Lendl was close behind challenging for major titles.  In spring 1993, Pete Sampras had just taken over the number 1 position from Jim Courier.  And in spring 2003, Lleyton Hewiit was clear number 1.  Hewitt would lose that position later that year to Andy Roddick who then ceded to Roger Federer.

However, in spring 2013, the rankings have a familiar feel to them, a different man is at the top but it feels like a shuffling of musical chairs.  That’s because the same guys have been top 5 since 2008. 

Now you can argue that Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic are the new generation who are set who are set to dominate the game and challenge for the major titles.  But I see them as the mid generation.  Murray and Djokovic will turn 26 next month during May; in fact, Murray won the junior US Open in 2004 almost 9 years ago.  Djokovic played his first US Open final in 2007.  These two players are the same generation of Nadal, Tsonga, Berdych, Gasquet and Giles Simon.

Looking back to history in 1993, Boris Becker was 25 and Stefan Edberg was 26 and yet as both had achieved so much at a young age, were seen almost as veterans but were only 3 to 5 years older than the new generation of Sampras, Courier, Chang, Muster, Brugera, Krajicek and Ivanisevic; In fact, Becker was only two years older than Agassi.  The new generation removed the mid generation relatively quickly from the very top of the rankings.

In the 1980s, Mats Wilander, Pat Cash, Yannick Noah, Edberg and Becker came through to challenge McEnroe and Lendl.

However, for the first time in living memory, there appears to be no challengers to the top 4 on the horizon or indeed any impression that players like Tsonga, Berdych or Gasquet will break through to win a major title. And injuries have set Juan Martin Del Potro back two years. 

So the question is, who are the new generation and when will they challenge for Masters 1000 and major titles?  Players should be no older than 22 years of age to be classified as the new generation.  The up and coming players who would fall under that tag are Milos Raonic, Grigor Dimitrov, Bernard Tomic and Ryan Harrison. Other than these guys, I cannot think of any other players who would be considered as “promising”. 

In fact, none of the players here have won a tournament above ATP 250 level so far in their careers. That’s not to say they won’t because at some point in the future, someone will have to win the bigger titles.  But by now you would have thought collectively they would have made a bigger impression at Masters and Grand Slam level.  Rewinding to spring 2003, players like Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Federer, Nalbandian and Juan Carlos Ferrero were already winning important tournaments at masters level, Hewitt and Safin were major champions, later that year Ferrero, Federer and Roddick would win the three remaining major titles on offer. 

So why have these players not made a bigger impression so far?  It could be that they are just not ready, or maybe they haven’t got what it takes to take their game to the next level.  The interesting player for me is Bernard Tomic, who plays an “interesting” game of forehand slices and not really making things happen’ it often appears like a junior game played by a senior, I don’t think that will cut it at the top level. 

Milos Raonic certainly has the biggest serve in the game today, in the tradition of Richard Krajicek, Goran Ivanisevic and Michael Stich.  He is talented and plays an aggressive game but at 1metre 96cm tall has to work hard on his movement and return of serve to get to the next level.  This makes Eurosport’s headline of calling Raonic the next Pete Sampras extremely wide of the mark because of his serve, especially as Sampras’ game was all about movement and skill.

Dimitrov is a player a lot of fans are pinning their hopes on to succeed Roger Federer, as he has modelled his game on Federer with the one hand backhand and Wilson racquet.  Federer won junior Wimbledon in 1998 and Dmitrov won junior Wimbledon in 2008. However, at this stage Dmitrov is in danger of having a career in the fashion of a Richard Gasquet. 

In my previous article re slow courts changing womens tennis, Eurosport commentator Simon Reed answered some questions on that subject but he also made an interesting comment to me about Grigor Dmitrov “I’d love to see Grigor Dimitrov break into the top 10 but I’ve waited too long ..this has to be the year. It would be great for tennis to see someone like Dimitrov with real skill in the latter stages of tournaments. That’s especially important if and when Federer calls it a day.”

It’s also said that the physical nature of the game is making it harder for younger players to make an impression on the tour and climb up the rankings relatively quickly.  For sure, it has become harder than ever to penetrate the top 5, which has become a closed shop in recent times.  That along with the constant altering of the points system where players get more points than ever for winning the top prizes.  To illustrate how things have moved on, in 1994 the winner of Miami (Sampras) got 350 points, in 2013 Murray received 1000 points.  Only the experienced players are now in a position to do that on a consistent basis.

At some point during the decade of the 2010s, a new generation will emerge to challenge and take over the established order.  Unlike the last 3 decades, tennis fans will have to wait longer to see a new batch of faces contending for and winning the biggest titles.