Grigor Dimitrov Gave Nadal All He Could Handle - UBITENNIS
Connect with us

Editorial

Grigor Dimitrov Gave Nadal All He Could Handle

Published

on

Grigor Dimitrov celebrates winning the fourth set in his semifinal match against Rafael Nadal on day 12 of the 2017 Australian Open (source: Jack Thomas/zimbio.com)

Rafa Nadal is back for at least awhile.
Grigor Dimitrov almost surprisingly gave Nadal all he could handle in the Australian Open semifinals. Dimitrov played well enough to have won this match, even if vintage Nadal did show up to save Rafa late in the fifth set.
Dimitrov may be the next Novak Djokovic. He has firepower coming from every direction to go along with his Novak-like movement. He may even be quicker and stronger than Novak.

DIMITROV DROVE NADAL OFF COURT WITH HIS POWER
Dimitrov practically drove Nadal off the court with his thundering forehands, backhands and serves, not to mention his athletic ability. At times, the Bulgarian seemed to almost bully Nadal around the court with his power and athletic ability.

Dimitrov always appeared to have a weapon in reserve, whether a powerful or a twisting serve that took Rafa off the court, or powerful forehands and backhands to all corners.
Nadal did what he does best. He never quit, even at times when his plight appeared to be almost hopeless. But that’s Rafa.

His forehand might not be as deadly or as accurate as it once was, but Nadal was able to come up with enough big points to earn his way into his 21 major final with his 6-3, 5-7, 7-6 (5), 6-7 (4), 6-4 conquest of the 25-year-old Dimitrov.

The problem with the forehand might be solved if Nadal can defeat Federer. The forehand is there. It’s just a matter of confidence.

HELP MAY HAVE SAVED NADAL DOWN UNDER
Nadal probably is lucky that someone else took care of Andy Murray, Stan Wawrinka and Djokovic, leaving only his old pal Roger Federer between him and a 15th Grand Slam title that would make Nadal the only double career Grand Slam holder in the open era of tennis.

I don’t know if Nadal could handle any of the younger trio of Murray, Djokovic and Wawrinka — at least, maybe not this early in his return from a wrist injury.

But Federer? If the past holds up, Nadal will be just fine physically and otherwise in Sunday night’s final, even after his five-hour struggle with Dimitrov.

FEDERER’S ONLY WINS OVER NADAL IN MAJOR FINALS CAME AT WIMBLEDON
Nadal has practically owned Federer from the very beginning and has defeated Federer in their last four meetings in Grand Slam finals. Federer’s only two victories over Nadal in their eight previous head-to-head major finals came on the grass of Wimbledon where Federer felt so at home.

Although Nadal is 30 years old now, he may still have a few Grand Slam titles left in him, that is, if he can get the kind of outside help he had Down Under the last two weeks. True, he’s not quite as quick and relentless as he was before a string of injuries limited his time on the tour, but Nadal may actually be serving better these days, at least, late in the fifth set and the entire first set as well as some other key moments.

And, of course, Rafa is still humble and a refreshing entity in a Grand Slam final.

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

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Comments

Australian Open Break Points: 10 Topics Worth Further Discussion

From Djokovic’s French Open chances to the campaign against on-court coaching – there is still a lot to be discussed.

Published

on

The first grand slam of 2019 has come to an end. Naomi Osaka followed up on her US Open triumph to claim the woman’s title. An achievement that has elevated her to becoming the first Asian player to reach No.1 in the world. Meanwhile, Novak Djokovic produced a masterful display against Rafael Nadal to empathize his dominance on the men’s tour.

Now that the tournament has reached its conclusion, here are 10 topics that require further discussion.

1) Novak Djokovic will win Roland Garros, completing his second “Nole Slam.”

Embed from Getty Images
Predicting the winner of an event over four months away is a risky business, especially when that event is played on clay and you’re not picking Rafael Nadal. And hot takes such as this are popular to make after one dominating performance. But the way in which Djokovic destroyed Nadal in Sunday’s final is the kind of victory that has a lingering effect. It’s reminiscent of Nadal’s crushing win over Roger Federer at 2008’s Roland Garros, after which Rafa finally dethroned the king of grass a few weeks later. Novak’s victory over Nadal last year at Wimbledon is what propelled him back to the top of the sport, and reestablished Djokovic’s mental edge over Nadal. Beating Nadal on clay in best-of-five remains the sport’s biggest challenge. But I see Novak winning a few clay titles in the best-of-three format heading into the French Open, which will instill the necessary confidence come Paris. As we saw on Sunday, the patterns in this matchup play to Djokovic’s favor. His deep returns, superior backhand, and aggressive positioning on the baseline all take time away from Nadal. The terra baute will neutralize some of that, but not enough to derail Novak’s quest to again hold all four Majors.

2) The resolve of Petra Kvitova was only trumped by that of Naomi Osaka

Embed from Getty Images
What the men’s final lacked in drama, the women’s certainly made up for. Kvitova’s fight back to save three championship points and level the match at one set all was awesome. Yet the way the 21-year-old Osaka still found a way to compose herself and close out the match was even more impressive. She seemingly matured as a competitor within the match itself. And it was poetic justice for Osaka to get to enjoy her triumph, after she was robbed of doing so in New York. Kudos to both of these great champions, and future Hall of Famers, for their perseverance.

3) Do the right thing and re-name Margeret Court Arena

Embed from Getty Images
Having the Australian Open’s No.2 court named after a proud homophobe continues to be incredibly troubling. While delivering the keynote address in last week’s Australian Open Inspirational Series, Anna Wintour used the platform to address this topic. “It is inconsistent for the sport for Margaret Court’s name to be on a stadium that does so much to bring all people together across their differences,” said Wintour. I wish players would publicly refuse to be scheduled on Margaret Court Arena, but sadly that hasn’t materialized. Instead, a leader from the fashion world was the best advocate for change at this tennis event. The excuse Tennis Australia has provided, that this decision isn’t fully under their authority, is just that: an excuse. We need more officials, more players, and more members of the media to demand this change.

4) The new heat stress scale is an upgrade, but the standard for closing the roof is still way too high

This year the Australian Open replaced the ever-confusing “wet bulb” standard with the AO Heat Stress Scale. It measures a variety of weather-related factors, and requires the roof be closed if the scale reaches a 5.0. This is much easier to understand than the old rule, but 5.0 is too high of a standard. During the women’s semifinals, it was obviously extremely uncomfortable for everyone on Rod Laver Arena due to the heat. The ball kids weren’t even able to rest their hands on the court, but the roof remained open for most of the first set since the scale was still below 5.0. What is it going to take for officials to wake up and realize they’re endangering the health of players, officials, and fans? It’s time for common sense to prevail here before someone suffers from some serious medical issues.

5) The electronic net machine doesn’t work. If better technology is not available, bring back the judge that sits at the net

Embed from Getty Images
There were many instances during this fortnight of lets being called when the serve clearly didn’t touch the net, but the worst example was during the women’s semifinals. As Danielle Collins served to Petra Kvitova, the electronic net machine beeped before she even struck her serve. She subsequently missed the serve and was not awarded a first serve, as Chair Umpire Carlos Ramos incorrectly asserted the beep came after her serve. For years now, players have complained about “phantom lets,” where the ball clearly doesn’t hit the net, but the machine beeps anyway. We should not only eliminate that machine, but we should allow players to challenge let calls. The technology to do so exists, so why not utilize it? Better to wait a few extra moments to get the call right.

6) Let’s introduce the first-to-10 final set tiebreak at all events

Embed from Getty Images
This is one of many innovations where Tennis Australia is ahead of the other Grand Slam governing bodies. The first-to-10 tiebreak was utilized at 6-6 in the final sets at this tournament, and created some great drama. It also served as a reasonable ending to prolonged matches. This is an enhancement over the US Open’s first-to-seven final set tiebreak, which has been used for a long time now. Wimbledon has announced they’ll begin using a best-to-seven tiebreak as 12-12 in the final set, but that’s still allowing for a full extra set of play, when a more prompt conclusion would be best. And as usual, Roland Garros lags behind the other three Majors, as they continue to let final sets play out without a tiebreak. The scoring system in tennis is hard enough for a casual fan to follow. Having four different ways to decide matches at four different Majors is unnecessary. Let’s make the scoring system uniform at all events, including non-Majors, and use a first-to-10 final set tiebreak everywhere.

7) If this was Andy Murray’s last singles match at a Major, what a fitting way to conclude his career

Embed from Getty Images
His over four-hour match with Roberto Bautista Agut, where he somehow summoned the will to comeback from two sets down despite the tremendous pain he was suffering from, was a remarkable feat despite the loss. Murray was never the most naturally-gifted athlete on tour, but worked extremely hard and got everything he could out of his talent and his body. Hopefully Murray finds a way to relieve the pain in his hip, even if it doesn’t yield a return to professional tennis. More important is his quality of life outside of tennis.

8) Good on the fans for booing Maria Sharapova’s ridiculous seven-minute bathroom break

Embed from Getty Images
During her fourth round match against Ashleigh Barty, Sharapova played a terrible second set, losing it 6-1. Then in a lack of sportsmanship, she spent a full seven minutes off-court, in a clear attempt to disrupt her opponent’s momentum. The Aussie crowd reigned boos down upon Sharapova as she walked back onto court, as the sporting crowd is not fond of such dirty tactics. A rule limiting the amount of time a player is allowed to leave the court is long overdue.

9) Starting matches after midnight is unfair to players, tournament employees, and fans alike

Embed from Getty Images
Garbine Muguruza’s near three-hour battle with Johanna Konta in the second round was one of the tournament’s best matches. Unfortunately, almost no fans witnessed it live, and it deserved a much better atmosphere. The MCA schedule ran extremely late, as two men’s matches went five sets (I’ll save the “men’s matches are too damn long” argument for another time). So these two former top 10 players didn’t start their match until after midnight, and didn’t finish until after 3:00am. It’s completely unfair for the winning player to be on court until such an ungodly hour, having to face an opponent in the next round that completed their match at a reasonable time. If we’re not going to speed up play in the men’s tournament (sorry, can’t help myself), at least move this match to a different court at an earlier time, or hold the match over until the next day.

10) One last plea to keep sacred what makes the sport so special. Please don’t allow mid-match coaching

Embed from Getty Images
There’s talk that Tennis Australia is considering allowing coaching from the stands during matches at next year’s Australian Open. Please, Tennis Australia, think better of this. One of the things I love most about this sport is how players are forced to problem solve on the court, and on their own. It’s revealing of character, just as it also builds character. Limit the mid-match coaching to team events where it belongs.

Continue Reading

Comments

COMMENT: Novak Djokovic’s Perfection Stole Nadal’s Magic

Tennis columnist James Beck reflects on Djokovic’s latest win and what the future lies for him on the European clay.

Published

on

Novak Djokovic wasn’t ruthless. He was perfect.

There were few grind-it-out points.

When Rafa Nadal called on his magic, it wasn’t there.

Djokovic stole it.

As John McEnroe said, “He is having a bad day so far.” And nothing changed for Nadal.

It wasn’t Rafa’s day on Sunday in the Australian Open final. Djokovic gave the Spanish left-hander one of his worst beatings, a simple 6-3, 6-2, 6-3 victory for a record seventh Australian Open title.

A SIMPLE, BUT PERFECT DAY FOR NOVAK

It was simple for Djokovic. He played nearly perfect tennis and Rafa was hardly a shadow of the player who had been so superb in this tournament without dropping a set in his first six matches.

Yes, this one came easy for Djokovic. He didn’t drop a point on his serve until he served for the first set.

Novak simply didn’t give Nadal a chance to get into the match, partly because Nadal couldn’t find the court on big points.

Nadal started without his usual passion and tenacity. He apparently was just trying to get into the match slowly, rather than all at once. He obviously thought he would be able to make a run at some point in the match. He didn’t. Djokovic wouldn’t let him.

A PRICE TO PAY FOR LACK OF EARLY PASSION

Rafa paid a price for not pushing himself to a fast start.

Djokovic came out on fire and never let up, never giving Nadal a chance to become the Rafa that the crowd had seen for two weeks.

Twenty-one straight Grand Slam tournament wins and three consecutive Grand Slam titles put  Djokovic in a class all of his own right now. He wasn’t spectacular against Nadal. But he did almost nothing wrong. He dominated the rallies with his quickness and consistency, and his serve was almost perfect.

It was a clinic that Nadal had no answer for. He probably will stay awake at night, asking himself, “Why didn’t I come out ready to play?”

NO ANSWER FOR DJOKOVIC’S STYLE OF PLAY

Rafa went to Melbourne ready to play, ready to claim a victory that would make him only the third player to complete a double career Grand Slam.

Perhaps it was that sense of immortality that got to Nadal, as well as the fact Djokovic was on the other side of the court.

Novak may be the only player in the game who has Rafa’s number.

All of that was enough to take Rafa’s usual passion away.

WHAT HAPPENS IN PARIS?

Nadal simply has no answer for Novak’s court coverage and ability to turn Rafa’s best shots into winners of his own. But is that just on hard courts? Maybe.

What will happen in Paris in a few months? Surely, it will be more of a grind, and Djokovic isn’t likely to be as perfect as he was Down Under.

Nevertheless, there has to be worry in the Nadal camp, just as there is concern in Roger Federer’s camp after a surprising quarterfinal exit. Just remember, Federer is 37 years old, five years older than Nadal.

The big question is what happened to Nadal’s tenacity and movement, and inability to put the ball into play on big points.

But there’s a long way between January and September. And Nadal doesn’t seem to feel the pressure in other majors that he feels in Australia. Maybe because he already has his two titles in every other major.

The world could look completely different by the time the U.S. Open ends.

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/search/?l=25&sd=desc&s=start_time&f=html&t=article%2Cvideo%2Cyoutube%2Ccollection&app=editorial&q=james+beck&nsa=eedition

Continue Reading

Comments

COMMENT: It Won’t Be Easy To Take The Top Ranking Away From Naomi Osaka

Charleston Post and Courier columnist James Beck reflects on Naomi Osaka’s Historic win at the Australian Open!

Published

on

Naomi Osaka! What a surprise this last year!

Two straight Grand Slam titles and the world’s No. 1 ranking.

Even Serena Williams might have a difficult time regaining the top ranking from Osaka. If the powerful 21-year-old Japanese stays healthy and keeps her head, she is likely to be No. 1 as long as she wants.

A year from now, Osaka may own four or five Grand Slam titles.

A SMALLER VERSION OF SERENA

Osaka is just a smaller model of Serena. Maybe she’s not quite as strong as Williams, but Osaka appears to be better than Serena in several areas.

I believe Osaka may actually be faster than Serena, and for sure quicker and more mobile.

Osaka’s serve may not be quite as strong as Serena’s. Osaka’s serve is in the same league, not the single smooth brute strength motion as Serena’s, but Osaka’s power comes from the added acceleration on the downswing.

Even if it’s not Serena’s serve, Osaka’s serve is outstanding. It should carry her to a bunch of Grand Slam titles.

OSAKA PROVES HOW GOOD SHE IS

Obviously, there doesn’t appear to be anyone out there at the moment capable of surpassing Osaka’s ability. Osaka is a terrific athlete.

Osaka’s upset of Serena in last year’s U.S. Open final obviously wasn’t an accident.

Neither was Osaka’s win over Petra Kvitova in Saturday’s Australian Open final.

Kvitova played excellent tennis most of the match with her incredibly low ground strokes from both sides and almost unreturnable out-wide serves on the ad side. Of course, Kvitova is a left-hander, and such serves are her bread-and-butter shots.

WAIT UNTIL WIMBLEDON?

Who could forget that Kvitova is a two-time Wimbledon champion? And she has overcome career-threatening injuries to reach her current level of tennis. She is not someone that Osaka or anyone can overlook in the future, especially in a few months at Wimbledon.

There was no denying that Osaka was the better player in this one match, other than when she had triple match point in the second set. One of those “I don’t want to be here” emotions must have overcome Osaka for a brief time.

I can’t forget what I saw happen last April at the Volvo Car Open, way out on the club court with a crowd of a less than 2,000 watching. There was Osaka walking to her bench in the midday heat during a round of 16 match against Julia Goerges. Osaka was sending a verbal message to her coach that she didn’t want to be there.

And sure enough, Osaka soon was walking off the court in defeat.

A CAUTION FLAG

Osaka’s revelation at the Volvo Car Open brought out a caution flag about a player who only a few weeks earlier had earned a huge  payday at Indian Wells.

What was she thinking? To be playing in a big tournament on the WTA Tour would have been almost any tennis player’s dream. But not Osaka’s.

She has won a couple of much larger paychecks since then. But you almost have to wonder what might happen when she wins a few more of these big paychecks the size of her two Grand Slam paydays and everything isn’t going her way. Will she really toss in the towel?

Or will she have the never-say-quit drive of a Serena Williams?

Few players have Serena’s level of mental toughness.

But right now, Naomi Osaka is the face of women’s tennis.

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/search/?l=25&sd=desc&s=start_time&f=html&t=article%2Cvideo%2Cyoutube%2Ccollection&app=editorial&q=james+beck&nsa=eedition

Continue Reading

Trending