9.09.2010

Roger Federer: Tilting Windmills

Federer On A Very Windy Evening on Ashe
Thierry Henry was in the house last evening.

Last night's quarterfinal between Soderling and Federer, highlighted among many things - the sheer versatility of the Swiss.

Within the first ten minutes of the match, here is something perhaps a not so surprising tale.

An extremely close call was referred to hawk-eye (after the linesman called it out), Federer's ball was literally millimeters within the line, and Soderling had a play on it but he hit out out. Hawk-eye ruled the ball in, and instead of replaying the point, Pascal Maria automatically awarded the point to Federer. In Pascal's opinion the call did not affect Soderling's shot. Disgruntled Robin, walked to the chair umpire and on his walk back, he turned to Federer for a fleeting moment, and quipped, "Do you want it?' (as in, do you want the point this way). Federer was impasse.

How many players of today you think would do that ?  Not because of some outer world respect or anything for Federer, but simply because "why would one do that?'. Soderling does do that - just to get a bit personal .... get the competitive juices going.

Windy conditions exacerbate the situation, more so inside the cauldron of Ashe when compared to other courts (I dont know why this is actually, ?)

The trade wind bowl of Ashe was anything but conducive to playing tennis last night. It completely prevented both of them from playing with freedom, Soderling was affected more because he is more one dimensional out of the two.

If you can sense the nuances - you can see why Federer is quite simply, a stud. He quite simply accepted the fact that he is going to shank and make mistakes, and did not get ruffled. He continued on, sometimes its hard to not get frustrated even when you know that the ambient conditions prevent you from playing at the level you know you can. His body language seemed extraordinarily relaxed.

The crucial thing under such gusts is to not allow your racket head speed to decrease, and Federer was very conscious of the same throughout the three sets - even when he shanked regulation forehands. Federer hit more shots towards the vertical T, than in any other match - gave himself more margin for error than on regular days. Soderling for his part, also gave himself more margin for error.

At around 3-3 in the third, Federer had an opportunity to drill one through straight into Soderling at the net (Lendl - to J'Mac remember), but it was classy that he took the down the line curver (which he missed eventually) instead.

Make no mistake, Robin did not lose this match, Federer won it fair and square simply because of his impeccable adaptation to ambient conditions.

Most interestingly ... look at the mechanics of his shots last night.

On regular days when you see Federer hit a forehand, the most striking thing is the "snap" at the point of connection after which the ball comes off his racket with laser like precision and with maximum velocity.

Yesterday, time and again - it looks like that very "point of contact" - the "S-N-A-P" was slowed down by times hundred. He did not hit it as much he he guided it last night, giving himself more time and more margin, the ball still came off his strings beautifully, but with less velocity and more directional consistency.

The match was never under control, but Federer managed a quite intractable situation, until he went down 3-5 in the third.

Soderling should have held to take the third set, but the conditions played havoc again. Federer would eventually survive 4, 4 and 5.

We thought (and quite correctly) that Soderling's serve holds the key for him to push Federer. Yeah, one of the biggest servers in the world clocked two aces, to Federer's 16 - thats also a true testament to how effective Federer was in getting back those almost impossible flat hard curvers (and) Robin simply served poor.

And Federer had 5/6 converion rate on break points. Make no mistake, this was Quentin Tarantino's - Pulp Fiction. In other words, A Masterpiece.

Federer won today, simply because of his sense of adaptation to anything that a tennis match and opponent can throw at him, from both inside and outside the court. Today, he literally tilted windmills successfully.

Cant wait for his Second Saturday date with the Jokester.

--- Keep Rockin, Long John Silver













9.08.2010

Kim Clijsters: More Peaks than Troughs

Kim Clijsters in Ashe
As the wind wreaked havoc last evening on Ashe, Clijsters and Stosur went to battle to earn the right to play Venus Williams in the semis.

Stosur started brilliantly, by breaking Clijsters and taking an early lead. That forehand is something which I cannot get over with (Andy Murray can watch a bit of Sam's forehand). It strikes a perfect delicate balance among power, pace and control. The racket head speed is phenomenal and the placement - pin point. Its not quite the liquid whip of Federer, but its in the vicinity. Its fearless as well.

Consistent with the entire tournament, Kim has her ups and downs, and peaks are followed by troughs. She came back to win the first set 6-4, and then a lull engulfed her game at the beginning of the second set. She would once again even the second set at 5-5, only to see Stosur win the second 7-5.

Unlike Robredo and Youzhny yesterday afternoon, Clijsters and Stosur play at an incredible pace - both during the points and between them. They hardly go for the towel and this was clean ball striking between two players who are like a well oiled engine in an Aston Martin.

I did think Sam used the kicker a bit too much, may be showing way more respect to Clijsters than one normally does. The kicker provided Clijsters that additional fraction of time to lock up and load ... on the return. A flatter one down the T could have been used more to take time away from Clijsters.

The wind wreaked havoc - leading to 15 breaks of serve in three sets. The breaks were more due to the wind rather than due to mediocre serves of MA-SHA, Ivanovic or Dementieva. Even Venus Williams struggled significantly on her serve last evening against Schiavone.

With 3-3 dead heat in the third set, Clijsters switched the button 'ON' again. Her shifting gears just at the right time in combination with wind and Sam's inconsistency for a very short period of time - resulted in she winning the final set 6-3.

Sam was down 3-5 in the final set against Dementieva as well, and jail-broke there, but Clijsters closed the door firmly shut. Stosur's camp looked incredibly happy at her run to the quarters in NYC, and she was pretty pleased with she being able to back up her run in Paris as well.

That win against Dementieva under the lights two night before would have given her tremendous confidence. Today was a bit of a crap shoot- and she ran into a player who was just too hot. Her elder brother was in her box, but her younger out of the two brothers chose to actually stay in the crowd with the Aussie boys ... with a few pints in hand - and cheer for his sister. He seemed to have a great time, and the cameras did not miss that. For the nth time these two weeks, Mr 30's ROCK Alec Baldwin was in the house.

With the work ethic and the meat and potatoes serve - FH combination, along with her mental strength, slam days are not far away for Sam Stosur, may be even as early as 2011. What better time to do it than in Laver in front of her adoring home crowd, but realistically her best chance in on the faster hards of New York ... or on the Parisian Clay perhaps.

Coming back to Clijsters, she faces Venus Williams next - and Venus herself struggled on her serve a lot against Schiavone. Makes you think almost - is good bio-mechanics a necessity for a reliable and a strong serve ?

Think about it, almost all of them: Venus Williams, MA-SHA, Ivanovic - all of them use way more of their arm power rather than an ensemble of perfect biomechanics of their body to exert power - on their serves and groundies.

Think about someone like Federer, Sampras or Isner - in addition to their arm, they use perfect mechanics on strokes to facilitate such a strong serve. That comes down to how one is taught to serve early, and thats pretty much set when you are out of your teens. Tinkering with one's serve action (even if its sub-optimal) is almost suicidal (Nole and MA-SHA now withstanding). Dementieva has perfect mechanics on her groundies (she is one of the few women who utilizes mechanics rather than sheer arm power to exert power on to her ground strokes), has one of the most uncomfortable, ungainly and consequently, an ineffective service motion.

Makes you wonder if mechanics and service motion are correleted ?

Clijster meets Venus: Can Venus rally take advantage of the troughs that Clisters inevitably goes through in a match .... one needs incredible coinsistency to take advantage of that. I dont think Venus does have that consistency as of now, I am going to pencil in Kim's name for a second consecutive - second Saturday appearence.

Another late night for Jada I guess, she needs to get used to it if her mum plays at this level though ...

--- Keep Rockin, Long John Silver






9.07.2010

Roger Federer: Hitting his Strides

Roger Federer on Ashe Stadium
Cameron Diaz and Alex ROD were in Ashe last evening, to catch a glimpse of Federer.

Melzer threw the kitchen sink at Federer, and then some. On Sunday evening, as Dementieva absolutely unloaded on a forehand cross court, Stosur stood back on her feet and half volleyed a clean forehand down the line winner reflexively (almost like a cover drive). Melzer hit a very similar shot last evening, and he did well by taking time out of Federer's hands.

However, he realistically did not have anything in his game that can hurt Federer, if you check the box and compare both their games I am struggling to think which category is the one in which Melzer would be one up.

To Federer's credit he was on auto-pilot for a good part of the first set, and when needed raised his game at crucial stages of the match. Seond set was key, and Federer did have two net chords go his way in the second set breaker.

From an isolated standpoint, guaging Rodge's game:

Serve - check. Movement - check. Backhand (aggression and timing) - check. The forehand still goes awry at times, but those were minor lapses.

However I am most interested in Federer's net-play. He did not nearly come in as much as he did in previous matches. May be its a sign of his respect to Melzer's ground game, may be he felt more comfortable going back to his bread and butter game, may be a bit of both.

This is where stats can be a bit misleading, Federer was at the net 25 odd times, but he only realistically served and volleyed less than five times. 

But if Paul was tryin to get him to come to the net a bit more, it wasnt seen last night. That was surprising. Like I said, it could very well be because Federer did not feel like he needed to come in to win this match. Something to think about, because if his objective was to practice on that front by coming in against less dangerous players - then it did not happen last night. He certainly is not going to come in more against Soderling or Nole in the immediate future.

Federer is a pleasure to watch in full flight - you can sit back and watch the game to see how it should be, and can be played - in its consummate E-L-E-G-A-N-C-E. His serve is vintage clutch, and time and again he rode on it to get out of precarious situations.The difference was just a band - it was  just that Federer was a shade better. Federer had a winners to unforced errors differential of +9. to Melzer's -7.

Given the way how his next opponent has been timing the ball, and how clean his crystal ball striking has been so far - the quarters is assured to be a barn burner. Will Federer's still limited net play be a factor ? ... Thats a question for the jury in two days time.

But Federer, is hitting his strides quite elegantly, Le'Sod looms next ...

--- Keep Rockin, Long John Silver







9.06.2010

Samantha Stosur: Intrepid

Samantha Stosur on Arthur Ashe Stadium
After the mediocre quality of Murray Wawrinka for three odd hours, one needs a lift - and it was probably followed by one of the best matches of the year so far in the women's tour.

It had the ingredients of a classic, and quite undoubtedly a classic it was. Crystal clean ball striking, psychological fortitude, fluctuating fortunes, two different but equally effective sets of strengths and two women who wanted to do nothing more than win a tennis match. It had that quality which I can sense in a tennis match - a veneer of visceral craving to win.

I've always liked Elena Dementieva - other than the fact that she is probably the best player never to have clocked a slam yet, I love watching her play. She is one of the (very) few on the women's tour who does not use only her arm strength to generate power and pop on her groundies. Its the ensemble of the entire mechanics that generates such power. From a physical mechanics standpoint: her groundies are a treat to watch. Federer and Nole would be proud of those groundies.

With four matchpoints for the taking, Dementieva could not quite seal the deal, she left the door unshut - and Stosur came through .... with a greeting in a heavy accent of "Sorry Maaaate". She is a gold coast girl, a vintage Queenslander - my lab mate's a Queenslander and he is always interested in how Sam's doing. I am his update radio each morning (let's call him EC). Stosur is old fashioned, her meat and potatoes are the vintage serve and forehand combination, and her kick serve would do Edberg and Rafter proud (he also is a Queenslander apparently).

This was a match which was won by sheer nerves and ice flowing through your veins, more than forehands and backhands. Sam kept it simple: she knew her strengths and she stuck to them. She quite simply refused to go away each time she was match point down. As the quality of the match reached its culmination point in the latter stages of the third set: the high octane visceral rallies off the ground were a treat to watch. You could hear the sounds of silence in Ashe - could hear a pin drop between points, the crowd were on their feet.

Dementieva served for it at 3-6 6-2 5-3 ... she blinked.

Stosur played what you call as 'intrepid' tennis, she knew what she had to do, and she went about doing it ruthlessly. Time and again that forehand was let rip with lethal reckless abandon, and she never looked like she was going to miss. I think thats why I like her despite her conventional 1-2 punch game, her attitude of being 'Intrepid' and ruthless. As the match found itself at the cusp of the third set breaker (at least no Mahut Isner tale yeah?), Sam continued on and Dementieva's forehand went AWOL. Four errors off that wing, and one more, leading to a well deserved victory for Stosur.

With a second Sunday run on the Parisian clay, the current World No. 6  has definitely shown she has the courage and intrepid essence to take on players such as Henin and S.Williams, and come out winning. That separates her from most of her peers, she has the game and the nerve to hold her own on the biggest of stages. That's a unique quality: W's, Henin, MA-SHA and Clijsters have that, not many more. 

Clijsters awaits next ... but who's to say EC will not happy again in two days?

--- Keep Rockin, Long John Silver






Andy Murray: Stuck in Neutral By Choice


Andy Murray Leaving Armstrong Stadium
Ahhhh, one of those days. Since the little thing called US Open starts at an awful time of 1 in the AM for me, I actually catch my fix of the open in the evening. I just completed a manuscript that I have been working on quite literally non-stop, the past 50 days. I am also submitting it to one of the top journals in the discipline, hence at best I have fighting chance (I need some luck, kiss me …). I finally completed it last evening. And hence this is my hibernation week.

Hence was out of the lab at 17.15 and home in time to catch Murray.

There is a lot at the periphery, and Murray himself plays rope-a-dope a lot, given the fact that he loves boxing. The leaded heaviness in the legs is as much a function of the kind of day he had at the office, more than the legs themselves.
 
The “who the hell stole my lunch” look did not help – as Wally Masur and Roger Rasheed went on and on about his body language and attitude. But that’s the way he deals with adversity, he likes to deflect and (at the time on court) attribute it to something physical, so that he can play without any pressure. The NY crowd did not like his attitude, but that's the least of his problems.
 
That’s his defense mechanism, there is nothing wrong with that – we all have our own.

But the problem of why he lost was not because he looked downright ghastly on court. It was two: and two that we already know. First and foremost – that forehand, and secondly the “defensive” counterpunching.
 
Wawrinka in his quest to conquer Murray went all the way in embracing ‘net hugging’. He came in more times than probably during this entire year. Time and again, he waited for that cross court forehand pass from Murray to volley into the open court. Nine times out of ten he was waiting at the right place, Murray does not pass down the line on his forehand wing, or at least he does not like to as much as he should have.

And secondly, the elephant in the room which we have discussed time and again: the ever-annoying defensive counterpunching. Watch the rallies, you can notice M’Andy tirelessly hitting those ¾ paced trackers and those high loopy balls. It’s ineffective to the point of throwing a huge glass bowl at the television screen. You almost want to slap him and send him home.

And it’s not like he does not know how to, or cannot pull the trigger. He can, and he did – and when? At 2-4 0-30 in the fourth set. He pulled out two return missiles from his backhand wing that left Wawrinka motionless on the baseline. Flat, fast and lethal.

For his part Stan kept it simple: he was solid and attacked at every opportunity, and when he got a chance took the offense to Murray from the ground. Murray did not even push him to up the risks, if anything Wawrinka played within the risk margin.

Murray eventually got caught between needing to transition to offense by needing to go against his innate instinct. More than once he would be in control of the point from the ground, only to throw in a drop shot (which hardly worked the entire evening) rather than pull the trigger off the ground. Leaves you wondering if he can change something that’s very innate?
 
Murray keeps leaving the door open to too many first strike players, whom he has no business losing to. Join the list: Verdasco, Gonzo, R’Andy, Cilic, Berdych and now … Wawrinka. The forehand was acceptable at best and ineffective at worst. The defensive counter attack was a neutral strategy at best, and is akin to waiting for a dynamite to explode. How often do dynamites not explode?
 
If it does not, you win, that’s great. But how often do dynamites not explode?
 
Seven times, out of seven?   

Come ON, Andy … What's that ol' Metallica tune: "You pretend it doesn't bother you, but you just wanna explode'

--- Keep Rockin, Long John Silver




9.05.2010

Demo Tape

Bootleg: Central Park S&G
Hello - 

Ive never been good at blogging because - for some reason its ingrained in me that's its an inefficient waste of time. Besides I also think "why would anyone care what I think?", I certainly don't really care much on what many other people write online ...

Ive also been a member of sport writing sites before, I have learned a lot through interactions with my fellow mates in there, and learned a lot about writing and other things in there. Ive also realised any "supposedly" friendship through an online medium is an illusion at best, deceiving in the middle, and downright cheap at worst. I value them for what its worth, but with much skepticism. 

Few are genuine and you can count those with your fingers. The online world consists of people from all sorts of life: for some its an escape to be what they cannot be in real life, for others its a medium to develop friendship without actually taking on the responsibility of being a real life friend, for some others its a place to argue mindlessly over the most trivial of issues, and for a few its a place to share their writing and creativity. Its a melting pot.

And Ive also gotten a bit jaded about how so called editors and experts who apparently judge your work and its worth, clearly dont know much about the game nor the quality of writing. Not that am an expert either, but I've realised I know more than them through this process. Its really flexible on what am going to write, I dont know yet. But it will probably be about environment, energy, tennis and politics and at rare times, may be something personal. But am not a huge fan of writing personal things online.

I owe a sincere thanks to Zander for all that I have learned about being a sport writer. I also love this background, I am very specific in how everything looks and this is the first background I saw, and instantly fell in love with it. Its elegant, simple and dark.

Some of my favorite characters are Chandler Bing, Gregory House, Conan O'Brien and Hank Moody.

I craved for a sense of originality and spontaneity, hence I named my write space - 'Unplugged'. Remember when Nirvana played in the 'Hammerstein Ballroom' in New York, it was Kurdt's last show and they essentially created a bootleg. In the sense, no mistakes and errors or bad notes they played were fixed ... pure original unplugged. In here, whatever it is I write, once am done writing that post, I will not go back and change, edit or revise it, it makes it not premeditated and very ... 'Unplugged'. The only exception to that rule are spelling mistakes.  

Other than that  - Lets get this started shall we ? Mrs Robinson - Jesus loves you more than you will know ...

--- Keep Rockin, Long John Silver