Laver Cup: As Federer and Nadal reconvene, speculations greet merriment

There was palpable soaring of excitement once the news broke out about Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal joining forces for Team Europe in the 2019 edition of the Laver Cup in Geneva. The memories came crashing back – when Federer and Nadal made the world pause as they formed a partnership in the inaugural edition of the event in 2017 – 2018, then, was relatively subdued, although Novak Djokovic joining in, put an end to the murmuring of contentiousness between the Swiss and Serbian at long last.

The goodwill generated by Federer and Djokovic’s – read, Fedole as some called it – team-up notwithstanding, the reunion of Fedal, however, has some emotional connotations. It talks of the glory days of their duopoly, when the fight for almost every title was played out between them; it references to them becoming unlikely rivals, at a time when Federer seemed unmatched in his highs; and it goes back to an era, when breaking down a single-handed backhand against a left-handed topspin-heavy forehand was the go-to tactical discussion. Most importantly, though, it pushes us back to a time when many envisioned what a two-man team featuring these players would look like, if it were to ever happen.

Photo Credit: Laver Cup

2017 was as much the fruition of this dream as it was about these players’ resurrection and revival after a tough year of uncertainty and disquiet about their career paths. 2017, then, was as much about Fedal winning their doubles match in the Laver Cup as much as it was about Federer and Nadal, divvying up all four Majors in the year between them, two apiece. So, if 2017 was all about making a return, what is 2019 poised to be like?

Perhaps, it is nothing pivotal in the scheme of the season – and is just another confirmation of a player in yet another tournament. Or, perhaps, it is a cryptic indication of the incoming conclusion of a retirement that is dreaded as it is expected – with a rivalrous camaraderie that was just as unexpected, initially.

Somewhere along, in their almost 14-years of rivalry, Federer and Nadal became statesmen, displaying not just professional courteousness whenever and wherever required, but also offering helpful shoulder when needing support to the other. In that, there has been a symbiotic maturity in their association with each other, which was displayed in their shaky-yet-coordinated doubles match at the Laver Cup in 2017.

2019, then, feels like a farewell of not just a career, but to also the Fedal rivalry that held us all in its thrall as it fluidly changed courses, as if completing a circle that was unimagined in the first place.

Wimbledon: A looming twist in the tale of expectations?

With three of the Big Four members reuniting again at a Major the men’s singles draw for 2018 Wimbledon has had a tokenism of nostalgia attached to it. Even beyond the expectancy of the match-ups. In the end, the draw didn’t disappoint by over-favouring – despite a certain concentration of easy-pickings in the second-half.

Since it’s the world no. 1 Rafael Nadal who heads the bottom-half of the draw as the second seed, there is a deeper connotation to it. For one, the two-time former champion who has lost in the initial rounds – and exited at the start of the second week in 2017, in the fourth round – looks like he could avert his bad run this year. It also augurs well for them that he will be starting off against Israeli veteran Dudi Sela, on Tuesday.

The Spaniard does have one other member of the Big Four tribe lined up in his half in Novak Djokovic, which makes his section of his draw subtly tricky. The 12th seeded Serbian could be a dangerous opponent to encounter for Nadal given his recent resurgence, more prominently visible across the two preparatory tournaments he played in Eastbourne and Queen’s,

Though Djokovic was unable to collect a trophy in either event, it was a big takeaway that he didn’t looked stymied as he had been looking in 2017 and even at the start of the 2018 season. If the clay season – to me, specifically beginning in his third-round match against Kyle Edmund at the Madrid Open – was his road to recovery, on grass he has been sprinting.

The three-time former champion has been placed in the top-quarter of the lower-half. He would be playing Tennys Sandgren in the first round and could meet the seventh seeded Dominic Thiem in the pre-quarter-finals. A potential tripping point for Djokovic could, then, be against Nick Kyrgios in the quarter-final.

That the Australian finds it easy to play against players of Djokovic’s ilk – most recently as seen against Roger Federer in the Stuttgart semi-final – adds to the intensity of his maverick nature. Non-conformism hasn’t, then, been the word-to-go-by for the fourth seed Alexander Zverev, who is the highest-ranked player in this quarter to come through as the drawn semi-finalist for Nadal.

The German who carried the hangover of the French Open by way of a hamstring injury played just one tournament before Wimbledon – Halle. His campaign in the German town, which ended in the first-round courtesy of Borna Coric raised – and still does, in a way – about what form he would be carrying into the Championships. There’s a lot riding at stake for Zverev at Wimbledon this time around. There’s the probable extension of the run of his quarter-final appearances at the Major (to two). As there is the unmistakeable symbolism of him doing so at the Major where he first made it past the first week.

Is Federer the absolute favourite?

Thus, referencing Nadal at the outset – along with these names dotting the fray – also broaches the aspect of the draw being open-ended despite Federer being the overwhelming recipient of the cue card termed ‘tournament favourite.’

At the outset, Federer’s section seems like it has easy pickings for him, with him opening against Dusan Lajovic, in a repeat of their second-round match from last year. However, while the foe may be familiar, Federer’s form remains the unknown factor after his seemingly ill-at-ease performance in Halle.

There could be a potential exacerbation of this discomfort early in the second week at Wimbledon, with Federer possibly facing Borna Coric in the fourth round. If the two do keep with the slated promise of the draw, they would be taking on each other for the third time this year following Indian Wells and Halle. Moreover, with Coric emphatically avenging his Indian Wells’ loss in the Halle finale, the pressure would be on Federer to come up with a befitting riposte. And that, would just be the start for Federer for the remainder of the Major.

A potential quarter-final against either Sam Querrey or Kevin Anderson, then, hangs in the balance for Federer with yet another known opponent in Marin Cilic waiting to pick up the rivalrous threads in the semi-final for what would be the third consecutive year since 2016.

Where the eight-time champion’s rivalry with Coric has peaked this season, his competitive association with Coric’s Croatian counterpart Cilic has been building over the years. At Wimbledon, things seem to have come to a head with Federer claiming contrasting wins in his previous matches in the preceding two years.

Cilic, the defending finalist will play Japan’s Yoshihito Nishioka in the first round. The Queen’s champion could face a couple of unpredictable opponents towards the business end of the tournament, beginning with a possible pre-quarter-final clash against Milos Raonic and a potential quarter-final against either John Isner or Grigor Dimitrov.

Regardless of the volatility greeting him in terms of his rivals, there shouldn’t be any doubts about the third seed’s steadfastness. At the start of 2018, Cilic had outlined his goals clearly and had spoken about keenly wanting to add to his 2014 US Open win. Reaching the Australian Open final soon after brought him closer towards achieving this objective. At Wimbledon, then, he seems to be the player to have pieced his game together entirely.

Image Source: Hello Magazine

From separate entities to insistent interdependence: Is there a need to remap the Fedal rivalry?

Rafael Nadal winning his 11^th French Open title on Sunday, 10^th June brought out a plethora of reactions. There was the usual token of disbelief, agony (for the Dominic Thiem fans) and elation. Parallelly, a narrative of comparison also swiftly emerged – juxtaposing Nadal’s latest achievement with those of Roger Federer’s, with the statistical representation fixated on their individual Slam counts and on the possibility of Nadal overtaking Federer.

Objectively, it’s understandable that such comparisons are inevitable. Federer and Nadal being able to extend their duopoly for so long and amid the ever-changing panorama of their rivals makes for a fascinating story that can be recounted several times over. This domination of theirs also makes for a closely-run race of numbers, with one rival superseding the other at regular intervals.

Their paths have continued to crisscross, but by no means are their individual careers and the resultant numbers inter-dependent. Not before when it was least expected that they would make innumerable comebacks to the top. And not now, with added urgency padding the renewed frenzy of expectations around them.

To make it as if equalling Federer and getting past him were the only highlights of Nadal’s momentous win in the French capital is, then, quite an unnecessary takeaway. Repeated mentioning of Federer also adds to this redundancy in that the Swiss was not even part of the French Open line-up or the entire clay swing for that matter. As such, the whole of the clay season could have been done without propping up the 36-year-old’s career as a yardstick for compulsive contrasting.

It also merits consideration whether either player is mentally tabulating his titles’ tally with those of his rival’s, beyond cursorily. Nadal’s words during one of his interactions with the media after his win reinforced as much. Though Nadal did admit that winning 20 Grand Slams – and more – would be a good achievement to speak of, he wasn’t really working with only that number in sight.

“Let me enjoy this title. I can’t be always thinking of more. You can’t be frustrated always if somebody has more money than you, if somebody (has) a bigger house than you, if somebody (has) more Grand Slams than you. You can’t live with that feeling, no?” he noted, infusing ambitiousness with pragmatism.

The latter will be a quality to employ heavily in the forthcoming few weeks as the tennis season unfurls onward to grass and, to Federer’s return to the Tour, beginning at the Mercedes Open in Stuttgart.

The Federer factor

With the onus of expectations now shifting towards the world no. 2, who has a significant portion of points to defend until Wimbledon, the repetitiveness of the unwanted comparisons tilts in the direction of Federer. Worry is, therefore, clamouring around how shaky his start was in Stuttgart against Mischa Zverev and what is at stake (for him) in the rest of the tournament.

These notwithstanding, rationality demands that one does remember that the results of Federer’s grass season don’t need to be assessed vis-à-vis the absoluteness of Nadal’s triumphs on clay.

Photo Credit: FFT and Zimbio

Greeting changes, comeback and continuity at the Davis Cup

Silence may have fallen on the intriguing affair that was the Miami Open, but tennisdom is anything but quiet in its aftermath. Especially on the men’s side of the sport, where there are a couple of concurrent developments taking shape, broadening into the entity known as the Davis Cup.

Although the tournament pops into the frame at regular intervals in a tennis season, this time around, there’s palpable urgency surrounding it. Aside from the World Group entering its business end – with the quarter-final ties scheduled for this weekend – even the zonal rungs of the event have an aura of headiness around them.

For, even as the teams prepare for the known aspects of the Davis Cup, at the end of it all, there is an unknown element lying in wait to take over. The changes to the event’s format that were proposed in February-end, with the tournament being enlarged to an 18-team extravaganza to be played across a single week, is at the forefront of everyone’s minds – most of all, on the players’, especially those who are sceptical to these elaborately-drafted plans.

As a result, there is also a subtle tug-of-war that looks to play out this weekend between these players and those who have welcomed the move as being long-due, as if to assert the dominance of one over the other. This factor has also accentuated the presence of the cluster of the top-ranked players – especially in the eight teams playing in the quarter-finals – for their respective teams, even with each outfit vying to advance further in the event’s stages.

The stakes are, however, different – and higher – for one man, though.

Rafael Nadal’s prominent inclusion in the Spanish squad for its quarter-final tie against Germany to be played at home in Valencia – on clay – is, then, the other side of the men’s tennis continuity this week.

This will be the 16-time Grand Slam champion’s first tournament in nearly three months, since he withdrew in his semi-final – in the fifth set – against Marin Cilic at the Australian Open, in January. After his initially planned return to the Tour – in Acapulco – ended in further pre-tournament withdrawals across what remained of the first quarter of the 2018 season, his return now has decidedly significant overtones than merely being a token of his rejoining the circuit. Or, helping his country reach its first Davis Cup semi-final in about five years, since 2013.

Roger Federer’s early exit at the Miami Open ensured that Nadal regained the ATP world no. 1 ranking plumb before the clay season. Moreover, with Federer opting to wait out the clay season, the scheduling of the Davis Cup has lent a fortuitous intervention to Nadal’s place atop the ranking. In that, the Mallorcan will be undisturbed as the world no. 1 for the next two weeks, i.e. until the start of the bigger events on the surface – beginning with the Monte Carlo Masters, on 15^th April.

Yet, having a slew of points on the line – with him defending titles in Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Madrid and the French Open – pressure is on Nadal, despite the initial leeway, to try and retain these titles to extend his reign as the top-ranked player. Playing in the Davis Cup, then, will be a viable morale booster for Nadal. It will also help him gauge his form better, without any surface transition or alteration to his preparation module.

Because, irrespective of the familiarity Nadal enjoys about clay, exploiting the surface to bring out his best – each time, seemingly better than before – the task seems humongous this year. Mostly, it’s because of his hip injury, which looked to have caught him as unawares as it did with the audience watching him play when it occurred. The equally unexpected turn-of-events that shortened his season have given his prospects – on clay – dubiety which wasn’t present even when he had less-than-mediocre – by his otherwise high standards – results on the surface. Be it 2009, or 2015.

But, it’s also about Nadal, the player too. Perhaps, for the first time in his career which has seen him endure several injuries and brave past them, the 31-year-old looks like he’s slowing down with his aching physique looking to catch up with – and overtake – his indefatigable psyche.

The home-crowd cheering for him – and the rest of the Spanish team – may as well be the decisive incentive to start his season over. And, perhaps, it may even hit back at him reflectively of what the tournament would be losing if it were to opt for its suggested overhauling.

For, in spite of his commitment to the Davis Cup in all these years, Nadal, too, has been in favour of the proposed concept of World Cup of Tennis as its viable alternative.

Photo Credit: Davis Cup

After win over Mackenzie McDonald, Grigor Dimitrov has a unique experience to share

“This time I landed on the winning side, comparing to the last year,” ­– world no. 3, Grigor Dimitrov, in his on-court interview after winning his Australian Open second-round match against American qualifier Mackenzie McDonald.

Dimitrov found himself at the receiving end of fusillade of shots from McDonald for the better part of their three-and-a-half-hour encounter. The 22-year-old played fearlessly, bolstered by the lack of pressure on his shoulders – making his first appearance in the second round of a Major, he had nothing to lose – even as the world no. 3 looked discomfited.

Eventually, despite seeming peaky, Dimitrov not only staved off his opponent, but also prevented an already-open top-half of the men’s singles draw from widening further. In a way, he also ended up proving that he has had matured as a player, as someone who can tough it out in demanding match-ups. Not only against better-seasoned rivals, but also against those who crop up unexpectedly as McDonald did.

“Just with fight. I mean, those are the days I want to win. It’s tough. It’s tough to say many things right now. I guess I fought through. I fought through the match. I had to find a way to win. It was simple as that,” Dimitrov said in his post-match press conference when asked his thoughts about his performance.

“Really the game wasn’t there today. I wasn’t feeling well on the court. My movement was a little bit out of sorts. Yeah, fourth set was a disgrace. That’s what’s right now.”

The Bulgarian’s harsh self-assessment wasn’t far off the mark. His being bagelled in the fourth set, after having painstakingly overturned the opening set deficit was worrying as it was perplexing. It was as though for the course of those few minutes Dimitrov had forgotten the basics of the game. His shots spewed wide on all parts of the court even as McDonald’s found their mark. More importantly, Dimitrov’s attitude went awry as if he himself couldn’t realise the reason for him floundering on the court.

It was to Dimitrov’s credit that he didn’t let this drain on his focus to seep into the fifth. His coach, Dani Vellverdu looked like he had his heart in his mouth every time Dimitrov geared to serve in the set. And, though he had to fight for every point in most of his service games in the 14-game set – as compared to his opponent, who had it easy right up to the 14^th game – Dimitrov held his ground firmly to notch a win over the 2016 NCAA champion.

His full-range of shot-making may have had been absent, but Dimitrov came up with aggression and craftiness to keep McDonald at bay as the set progressed. Although McDonald’s grasp over the momentum of his service games remained visibly steady in the set, Dimitrov’s onslaught, however, forced him to take a slight back-step in his last two service games in the fifth set which, in turn, was leveraged further by Dimitrov and which demarcated the two opponents, despite the world no. 186 finishing with a handful of points more than his rival – 150 to Dimitrov’s 148.

Was this experience, then? It truly was. But, as Dimitrov shared in his post-match presser, it wasn’t about showing the experience he has had received by being on the circuit for so long, but about displaying the lessons learnt from similar such matches in the past. Or, rather, from one match in particular – his five-set defeat to Rafael Nadal in the 2017 Australian Open semi-final.

“That was the biggest key for me today, like my experience overall, being in those matches. I’ve been there playing at 7 p.m., prime time, Rod Laver, against a higher seed, nothing to lose. You come out there, you just play your game basically. You don’t think about anything else,” shared Dimitrov.

His first words in his on-court interview were also, then, a valid and timely reiteration of his evolution as a player.

Of the new and the not-so-new: Will 2018 see the appearance of Novak Djokovic, version 2.0?

Although anticipation levels soar before the start of each tennis season, in a lot of ways, the ushering in of the 2018 season seems quite reminiscent of the way 2017 was set to begin.

Where, before the start of 2017, the focus was centred upon the comebacks of Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer – specifically on the latter, given that it was the first time in his near 20-year career he had had to sit out for six months – this time around, it’s all about Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic. And, of the two, it’s Djokovic whose every move and decision has held attention rapt among tennis’ widespread audience.

The reason is obvious, too.

The unexpected crash-and-burn

Back in 2016, after the 12-time champion’s performances started to slump following a stupendous win at Roland Garros, his struggles elicited not only doubts, but also criticism as well. It was claimed that he was suffering from a loss of motivation, with one such proffering emerging from none other than his ex-coach Boris Becker himself, who hadn’t been an ex for that long in the first place. Such observations, in turn, fanned the rumours of his disinterest towards tennis further – effectively extending them into the 2017 season.

Djokovic’s freefalling form in the first four months of the 2017 season – which was followed by his sudden announcement to part ways with his entire coaching team – kept the debate running as to how and why he had lost his mojo. His hiring of Andre Agassi before the French Open did mute the naysaying briefly, but it wasn’t until he decided to end his season post his quarter-final retirement at Wimbledon that the actual reason came to light.

The 30-year-old shared his health troubles with obvious reluctance, stating, “It’s the elbow that already keeps bothering for over a year-and-a-half, actually.” His next set of words, however, not only indicated a lack of disinclination towards continuing in the sport, but also made his purposefulness clear.

“A prolonged break from the sport is inevitable. [But], I’ll do whatever it takes to recover. Five months may seem long from this point, but I’m sure they will pass quickly because there is so much I want to do,” he went on to underscore.

A team forged anew

A couple of developments, along the way, elaborated on this invigorated resolve of his. One was the announcement that his and Agassi’s association would extend into the 2018 season. Then, there was also the roping in of Radek Stepanek into his coaching team almost immediately after the latter’s retirement in November.

Djokovic, however, seemed to have saved his most suggestive action – about his future in the professional tennis tour – for last. That of hiring Craig O’Shannessy, a strategist whose expertise is renowned in the tennis world. The American is no stranger to such technical strategizing, having already helped quite a few players in the past – most notable of these being Dustin Brown in his upset-causing endeavour at 2015 Wimbledon – with sufficient success.

But, this aspect of the scribe-turned-analyst lending a helping hand – or to put it more precisely, mind – gets further nuanced when a multiple-time Grand Slam champion’s credentials get factored in.

O’Shannessy’s addition to Djokovic’s team, then, has several connotations to his imminent return. Primarily that the Serbian isn’t thinking of his return in mere cursory terms, with token changes. Rather, he is attempting to breakdown his nearest rivals’ – read Federer and Nadal – games while trying to refine and modulate his own tactics. And, by doing so, he is seeking to give himself ample head-start to stretch his run of dominance over them despite not having played against them in 2016.

In mentioning Federer and Nadal’s resurgence on the Tour in 2017, it has been retold many times and in many ways as to how the two turned around the visibly-weaker links of their respective games into impenetrable arsenal. Especially vis-à-vis the Swiss, there have had been repeated references to his reinvented backhand and his results, particularly those against Nadal, have had indeed reflected this improvement of his.

The biggest takeaway pertaining to Federer this year has had, thus, been his ability to catch his rivals unawares. Seeming to take a leaf out of the 18-time Grand Slam titlist’s book, Djokovic is also taking a stab at putting his own slant to a well-received storyline. And, it wouldn’t be the first time that he would have done so, either.

After all, he’s the Djoker – the anti-hero who has long defied the conventionality of the Federer-Nadal duopoly, making his successes dissimilar despite the veneer of superficial similarities shrouding them.