What is a uchronia? Wikipedia defines it as follows: “A genre of fiction based on the premise that the history of the world followed an alternative path with respect to the real one.” In literature, there are many famous examples of uchronic fiction: “The Swastika on the Sun” by Philip K. Dick and “The plot against America” by Philip Roth are among the first that come to mind.

Journalism should aim to report the facts as they unfold, as faithfully as possible, and is therefore impervious to uchronian scenarios. Frequently, however, while reading the recaps of hard-fought tennis matches that went to the wire, we have a feeling that, if not perhaps a uchronian narrative, at least science fiction had always been there, between the lines. How many times do the authors of these articles make explicit reference to what could have happened – and did not – if at a given moment of the match, a particular point won by one player had been won by his or her opponent instead…

The comments of our readers are often, in turn, short uchronic stories in which – perhaps because of a soft spot for one of the on-court protagonists – an alternative reality is described.

Partly for fun, and partly in order not to succumb to the boredom of these long days plagued by social distancing, we have chosen some points that – had they sported a different outcome – could have resulted in a different end-result in the last three matches of the ATP Finals which were played at the O2 in London a month ago. We called them… “sliding points” – let us proceed chronologically. 

First semifinal: Thiem beats Djokovic 7-5 6-7 7-6

SCENARIO

We are in the second set and Thiem is serving at 5-6, 15-40; he is therefore facing two consecutive set points, the first of which is our…

…SLIDING POINT

Thiem serves at 196 km/h, and Djokovic returns with a moderately deep shot. Thiem, with the forehand, tests again Djokovic’s backhand. It is a good drive, but at first sight not good enough to thwart a man blessed with the best two-handed backhand on tour and perhaps of all time… and yet, at that very moment the spirits of Jack Sock and Steve Johnson (respectively the worst backhand in the West and in the East) possess Djokovic’s body and make him hit an abysmal backhand that lands wide. 

The unspoken message on the Serbian’s face, in a close-up, is very clear, as to say: “Today is not my day.”

CONCLUSION

Djokovic had a correct foreshadowing of the future, and history would confirm it shortly thereafter. But what if he won that point? Surely it would have removed a lot from the drama of the match, because what happened in the decisive game of the second set will remain in the memory of the fans for a long time, but we believe that Nole would have gladly given up all of that epic in order to avoid the physical and mental fatigue that came with those 20 minutes of the first tie-breaker in order to arrive with a little more gas left in the waning moments of the ensuing set.

Second semifinal: Medvedev beats Nadal 3-6 7-6 6-3.

SCENARIO

Second set tie-breaker: Medvedev is serving at 4-3 in his favour, when, all of a sudden…

…SLIDING POINT

The Russian misses his first serve; on the second, Nadal takes over the rally and puts himself in a position to hit a forehand from just behind the net; the violent trajectory of the ball struck by the Spaniard meets the frame of Medvedev’s racquet, and is followed by a winning lob from the Russian. 

Some comedians would probably have jokingly called it “the point of the week”. Nadal – whose features increasingly remind us of actor Wes Study in the film “Geronimo” – with admirable composure just returns to his seat, raising his eyes to the sky, perhaps to ask Manitou for help. And Manitou won’t help him.

CONCLUSION

We might state the obvious by saying that, during a tie-breaker, one thing is to be chasing at 3-5 and quite another is to be tied at 4-4. But we do it trusting in your understanding by adding that the psychological factor when a tennis player feels victimised by fate can be decisive, even if the player in question is as mentally tough as Nadal. It seems to us that he was the first to be aware of it when he said in the post-match press conference: “I wasted a great opportunity.”

Last but not least the final: Medvedev beats Thiem 4-6 7-6 6-3.

SCENARIO

Thiem won the first set by closing it with a net-favoured shot that left many observers – and perhaps even himself – with the feeling that the gods of tennis were with him. The second set is going by rather quickly, and the two players find themselves tied on the score of 3-3, 30-40, with Medvedev serving to save a break point that feels like a match point, and which is our last…

… SLIDING POINT

Medvedev’s first serve goes out; the second one is a sluggish and central serve that travels as fast as 133 km/h which the Russian rushes towards the net as an ideal bull’s eye for Thiem’s ​​forehand; the Austrian seizes the opportunity immediately, and hits a violent stroke that forces Medvedev to make a purely defensive diving volley which by pure chance spins slightly backwards once it has barely crossed the net with an insidious, unpredictable effect. Thiem, however, starts running towards the ball as soon as it makes contact with Medvedev’s racquet and reaches it with enough time to place an apparently simple shot even for the standards of someone who – like him – hasn’t been gifted with great touch; Medvdedev’s fate seems sealed but Thiem puts the ball wide and subsequently stays standing there, petrified, with his eyes turned to his coach, who was at the moment no less aghast than him. An error that reminded us the infamous one backhand miss by Nadal in the fifth set of the final of the 2012 Australian Open against Djokovic.

CONCLUSION

If Thiem had sealed that point, he would have potentially found himself two service games away from victory. We cannot know what would have happened next, but the doubt that he lost this game more than Medvedev won it will be with us for a long time.

We would like to end this article with the words written by late writer and poet Vittorio Sereni. This great Lombard loved sport, and he wrote many essays and articles that have recently been collected in an anthology titled “Il verde è sommesso in nerazzurri” (Green is subdued in blacks and in blues). 

In an article on soccer, he writes: “I don’t think there is another sporting spectacle like this one, offering validation to the truth of existence, mirroring it or rather representing it in its up and downs, in its unexpected events, in its setbacks; and even in its stasis and repetitions; and in its monotony too… ” Mutatis mutandis, we believe that these thoughts can be applied to tennis as well. Do you agree? 

Article by Roberto Ferri; translated by Michele Brusadelli; edited by Tommaso Villa