Novak Djokovic already regrets, of course, that he wasn’t able to be in Sunday’s Wimbledon final, and to have a chance to gain another step in his pursuit of Roger Federer’s record number of 17 Grand Slam titles.
But the blip against Sam Querrey in the third round may haunt Djokovic for a long time. Almost surely, Djokovic will bounce back, maybe even as early as September in New York.
Maybe not, though.
MURRAY TOOK TOTAL CONTROL AFTER NOVAK’S DEPARTURE
Andy Murray will be there at the U.S. Open, possibly blocking Djokovic’s path to another Grand Slam title. It could happen, judging from the way Murray took total control of this Wimbledon in the aftermath of Djokovic’s departure.
Murray’s masterful performance in controlling Milos Raonic’s huge game in Sunday’s Wimbledon final could very easily impact the future of Djokovic’s tennis career. Now with three Grand Slam titles of his own and the possibility of even becoming the world’s No. 1 player before the year ends, Murray likely will be even more of a force to be reckoned with in the future.
MEN’S TENNIS’ IMMEDIATE FUTURE MAY RESIDE WITH TWO 29-YEAR-OLDS
With Federer searching for answers to the rest of his career at age 35 (Aug. 8) after a hugely disappointing result against Raonic’s power in the semifinals, and Rafa Nadal’s future very much in question, the immediate future of the men’s game appears to reside in the rivalry between Murray and Djokovic, a pair of 29-year-olds who were born seven days apart in May 1987.
Sunday’s score of 6-4, 7-6 (3), 7-6 (2) doesn’t really tell the story of this Wimbledon final, and the way Murray almost toyed with the 6-5 Raonic at times, and the ease at which the Scot sailed cross-court backhands past the somewhat immobile appearing Canadian.
MURRAY WAS ALMOST IMMUNE TO RAONIC’S POWER
Murray was just too good, too solid, too mobile, but yet too strong. And yet, Raonic had looked so impressive just a couple of days earlier, and even mobile.
Of course, matchups mean everything in tennis. With his determination, intensity and power, Raonic made Federer, at times, appear almost weak, slower and less motivated.
Against Murray’s arsenal of controlled firepower, consistency and mobility, Raonic went flat at times. Other than the big first serve, Raonic couldn’t hurt Murray.
Murray’s low passing shots forced Raonic to volley up too often. The first point of the second-set tiebreaker pretty much told the story of the match.
RAONIC WAS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PLAYER
Raonic looked like an amateur on that point as he allowed what should have been an easy put-away at the net get away from him. He attempted a slice backhand volley, but awkwardly netted the ball. Such a simple point became such a struggle.
This was a top professional, a powerful Wimbledon finalist simply failing to execute an easy put-away at the net. Of course, Murray quickly moved into a 6-1 lead in the tiebreaker.
There were other times as well that Raonic did little with volleys that should have ended points. Raonic was a completely different player than he had been against Federer.
IMPACT OF THE PLAYER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE NET
There appeared to be no urgency in Raonic’s game. Of course, the fact this was his first Grand Slam final probably had something to do with that.
But near perfection on the other side of the net as Murray demonstrated throughout the match can have a major impact on the way another player performs.
Murray appears to be totally well from his 2013 back surgery. He’s feeling good again, and playing great.
—
James Beck is the long-time tennis columnist for the Charleston (S.C.) Post and Courier newspaper. He can be reached at Jamesbecktennis@gmail.com. See his Post and Courier columns at
http://www.postandcourier.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=search&text=james+beck&facet.filter=&facet.filter=&sortbydate=1