Tennis World eng - issue 23

February - issue 23

TENNIS WORLD Write Grand Slam, Read Fab Four

Roger Federer Debunking Myths About Rafa Murray’s Legacy Champions Without A Degree A Slow Start American Crisis

Well done, Amelie Mauresmo

by Princy James

Sixteen years back, a 19-year-old Amelie Mauresmo came out as lesbian during the 1999 Australian Open press conference.

Sixteen years back, a 19-year-old Amelie Mauresmo came out as lesbian during the 1999 Australian Open press conference. With the world on the threshold of the 21st century, the bold teenager was like an exemplar of free spiritedness, but little was she prepared for a tempest that ensued.

Although times were different from that of Billie Jean King -- who lost all her endorsements within 24 hours after she was ‘outed’ by her disgruntled partner -- Mauresmo, to her disbelief, found it hard to cope with the repercussions of her action. In the case of Billie Jean King, she found herself more or less ostracised by the society. In Mauresmo’s case, that didn’t happen; people didn’t scorn her for being a lesbian, but suddenly, all focus was on her sexuality, not her game.

For a professional sportsperson, nothing worse could happen.

The subtle remarks from fellow players -- Lindsay Davenport, after being defeated by Mauresmo in the semi-finals of Australian Open, commented, “playing Mauresmo was like playing a guy”; the vociferous teen Martina Hingis went a bit too far by stating “she is half a man”.

It was a pity then that Mauresmo had to deal with all these when the people and the press should have been talking about her remarkable performance in the tournament instead.

Perhaps being an odd one out in the circuit might have accounted for her repeated failures in the Grand Slams.

She had to deal with a lot of pressure during those years. But Mauresmo was evolving, although gradually.

She couldn’t win one for long despite making it to the semi-finals many times. She once stated in an interview that her ‘coming out’ was a shock for her family.

She had to deal with a lot of pressure during those years. But Mauresmo was evolving, although gradually. She became the No: 1 in 2004.

Two years later, she silenced her critics by winning both the Australian Open and Wimbledon. Finally, she was a Grand Slam champion, not just a lesbian player on the tour.

Unfortunately, Mauresmo’s miseries didn’t exactly end there. Following her retirement in 2009, she tried her hand at coaching with players like Michael Llodra, Victoria Azarenka and Marion Bartoli.It was her stint with Bartoli -- during which the latter won her one and only Grand Slam at Wimbledon -- that put Mauresmo back in limelight once again.

When an estranged Andy Murray was searching for a replacement for Ivan Lendl, he couldn’t think of anyone better than Mauresmo.

Mauresmo being a woman was Murray’s least concern, but not everyone shared that opinion.

Following his formal announcement about their team-up, social media exploded, greeting them with criticisms -- many of the comments being laced with homophobic slurs. Not just that, once again, Mauresmo’s physical features became a subject of mockery. Homophobia is a reality, even sports isn’t immune to that, although we can say the situation is far better than how it used to be a few decades back.

Once again, only because of her difference, Mauresmo’s ability was questioned; yet once again, she has proven her mudslingers wrong by helping Andy Murray reach the final of Australian Open this year.

As a 19-year-old, she showed great courage and candour in proclaiming her sexuality to the world Although Murray faltered in the final moment, Australian Open 2015 witnessed his revival.

After his semi-final win against Stan Wawrinka, Murray said. "A lot of people criticized me for working with her, and I think so far this week, we've showed that women can be very good coaches as well. I'm very thankful to Amelie for doing it. I would say, it was a brave choice from her.”

Yes, it was indeed a brave choice. As a 19-year-old, she showed great courage and candour in proclaiming her sexuality to the world, hence, it isn’t of much surprise that she could take up a challenge like this. Although Murray couldn’t pay her back this time, that doesn’t make their relationship a failure.

In less than a year, she was able to propel Murray and his dwindling career back on track.

Perhaps if we could wait a little longer, the duo can make history.

Murray’s Legacy

by Marco Di Nardo

"Being a finalist here four times is very difficult” Murray said after his recent victory.

"Being a finalist here four times is very difficult,” Murray said after his recent victory in the Australian Open semi-finals, where he outlasted Tomas Berdych in four sets. “[But] to have it done in the era of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic makes me proud."

With that victory, the Scot reached his fourth final at the Australian Open, although, unfortunately for him, he went on to lose yet again to Novak Djokovic in the championship match. Murray has now reached eight Grand Slam finals but won only two.

For Murray, it must seem a bit unfair. In any other era he might have been the best player in the world, but in this one he is relegated to an almost perennial also-ran. Indeed, while the other three members of the so-called “Fab Four” have racked up almost 40 Slams between them, Murray can barely keep up.

In fact, he finds it hard to just get to and remain in the Top Four, and struggles to compete against the other elites in big tournaments.

His career so far is one of lost opportunities. Yes, he has won two Slams, but the six losses somewhat overshadow those achievements.

Most other players, of course, would be delighted with reaching eight Slam finals, and it can certainly be argued that he is a better player than many former world number ones.

Players like Thomas Muster, Marcelo Rios, Carlos Moya, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Patrick Rafter, Marat Safin, Gustavo Kuerten, Lleyton Hewitt, Juan Carlos Ferrero and Andy Roddick all became number one in the world without ever reaching so many Slam finals.

Coming into the Australian Open, the year had been going pretty well for Murray.

He won the Mubadala World Tennis Championship (which he had previously won in 2009) by beating Feliciano Lopez and dominating Rafa Nadal 6-2, 6-0 before taking advantage of a flat Djokovic in the final. He then went on to win three out of three matches at the Hopman Cup. The Australian Open itself was also a comparative cake walk until the final, with the Scot only losing two sets, both tie-breaks against very good players in Berdych and Grigor Dimitrov.

The final, however, was another story, as history repeated itself in horrific fashion for Murray yet again.

Yet Murray is not in the absolute sense a loser in the end, far from it.

His winning percentage in Grand Slams is an impressive 80.46%, with 140 wins and 34 losses.

This figure compares very favorably to Nadal (88.02%), Federer (85.93%) and Djokovic (85%).

His success outside of the Slams has been even more impressive.

From 2008 to 2011 Murray won eight of his first nine Masters 1000 finals, a truly astonishing figure considering the extremely high standard of these events.

Even with his two losses in 2012 his overall win rate of 75% – or 9 out of 12 Masters 1000 finals – remains one of his greatest achievements.

Murray’s biggest problem in Slam finals has been the quality of his opponents.

He has only ever met a member of the Fab Four in a Major championship match, with three losses to Federer and three to Djokovic. He did manage to beat the Serb twice of course, and has never faced Nadal in a Slam final. He has met the Spaniard in Slam semi-finals, however, and lost to him there many times.

Ultimately, Murray’s career is more a function of the era he’s lived in than it is a reflection of his true ability. Like Andy Roddick, his success would likely have been greatly amplified had he been born a little earlier or a little later. Though his two Slam victories and Olympic gold medal are truly accomplishments to be proud of, he will never be remembered as one of the best ever to play the sport. The biggest boost to his legacy might come with a rise to number one in the rankings, but that seems very unlikely given the company he is forced to keep.

Murray’s Meaningful Year

by Giovanni LaRosa

2015 could be a key year for the ATP World Tour.

2015 could be a key year for the ATP World Tour.

The era of the Fab Four seems to be heading for Sunset Boulevard, and soon that term will no longer have any meaning.

Yes, Djokovic and Federer were the two best players in the world in 2014, but Nadal was absent for half the season due to his injury issues. Younger players are also continually making bigger waves and reaching the latter stages of the more prestigious events. Perhaps the biggest problem for the term “Fab Four” is in fact Andy Murray. Indeed, his inclusion in the group has always been questionable, given that his resume is substantially less impressive than those of the other three. But his recent results have given even more pause to those looking to include him in that elite club. So the question is: will 2015 be the year where Murray regains his footing at the top of the men’s game, or will he remain firmly isolated from the true elites?

Just a short while ago it appeared as if Murray have experienced a turning point in his career. His hiring of Ivan Lendl not only spurred him to win two Grand Slams, but it started the trend of hiring former legends as coaches.

His gold medal in London and his US Open and Wimbledon titles seemed like just the beginning for the “New Murray.” But when he hurt his back and underwent surgery, while also splitting with Lendl, he suffered a setback which the Scot has yet to recover from. The sense of maturity and aggression that accompanied the Lendl years has all but disappeared, and he has been utterly unable to compete with the likes of Nadal, Federer and Djokovic.

When he hired Amelie Mauresmo last year, he believed he had found the person who would help him regain his lost form. The choice surprised many, for while Mauresmo was a very talented and accomplished player on the WTA Tour, she suffered from many of the same issues that Murray now faces, such as a lack of mental strength and inability to manage expectations. The decision to hire Mauresmo also does not seem to have gone down well within Murray’s camp, as he soon parted ways with assistant coach Dani Vallverdu and fitness trainer Jez Green. He had been working with both for many years, and their split was apparently due to irreconcilable differences of opinion. Murray’s decision to keep on Mauresmo while dumping other assistants has raised many an eyebrow. Certainly his results in the second half of the year were not exactly spectacular. Though he did win three titles, they were minor ones and he never had to beat a top

Indeed, when he did face tough competition from the Fab Four he lost rather meekly in each instance. His quarter-final loss at Flushing Meadows was bad enough, but his utter humiliation at the hands of Roger Federer at the ATP World Tour Finals was so bad it was hard to watch. Federer very nearly beat the Scot 6-0, 6-0, and Murray didn’t make it out of the round robin stages of the event, for which he qualified at the very last minute.

Of course, many would argue that the Scot’s problems are rooted in the back surgery he had, and that he has not fully recovered from the ordeal.

That might be true, but the fact is that his results are nowhere near where they need to be for him to be considered part of the Fab Four, and there has been a definite regression in terms of his tactics and technique.

He has returned the intensely defensive tactics that he preferred before Lend’s intervention, which have proven costly for him in big matches.

Murray’s problems are further compounded when looking at the extreme depth of the field at the moment. Veterans like Wawrinka and Cilic have broken the Slam stranglehold of the Fab Four, while youngsters such as Nishikori, Raonic, Dimitrov and others are constantly threatening to supplant their elders at the top. An even younger crop of players are also making noise, and soon Kyrgios, Thiem, Vesely, Coric and Zverev will also have to be dealt with.

The feeling is that 2015 will be a key year for the 27 year-old Scot. He is likely heading towards the end of his prime, and will have to take advantage of this period as much as possible. Yet there remains a lot of work to be done on his game, both from a tactical and psychological level. His tenacity and determination have long carried him over more talented players, but that alone is not enough to conquer the Tour.

His anger and hunger for success will have to be the foundation upon which Mauresmo builds another New Murray. She must further improve his athleticism, which is already one of his major strengths, and above all convince him to again abandon his stubborn defensive-minded play. He must be more aggressive if he is to return to the successes of 2012-2013. It will certainly be difficult, for he has proven hard to coach for everyone but Lendl, but she will have to persevere. Murray’s time to shine is running out, and if she cannot solve the riddle it might soon prove too late for anyone else to

Let The Season Begin!

by Alex Bisi

The first Slam of the year is upon us, and we cannot help but think back to a year ago

The first Slam of the year is upon us, and we cannot help but think back to a year ago when the Australian Open delivered one of the biggest upsets in tennis history. We are talking, of course, of Stanislas Wawrinka’s victory over Rafael Nadal in the final.

Historically, it has proven very difficult to repeat at any Slam, even more so in the current tennis era with the Fab Four ruling the roost. After his win Down Under last year, Stan had a very good season. He dipped a bit in the middle due to some physical issues, but came back strong at the ATP World Tour Finals and the Davis Cup final.

The more likely competitors for the title are Djokovic and Federer. The Serb has always been at ease at the Australian Open, with four titles won (three of them consecutively).

A yearlong collaboration with Boris Becker has certainly had a beneficial effect on Djokovic’s game, especially in the second half of last season.

Although the German was called in primarily to help Djokovic with the mental part of his game, he has encouraged his student to venture to the net more often, and his volleys have markedly improved as a result.

He will obviously never become a serve-and-volley player, but this new dimension to his game has aided his cause tremendously.

Federer, on the other hand, has also been playing well over the past year. When he hurt his back at the ATP World Tour Finals, many believed that his Davis Cup dream was in peril, but he gritted his teeth and played a wonderful tie with Stanislas Wawrinka to win the Cup for Switzerland.

After a disastrous 2013, Federer bounced back strongly last year with some new tactics and good physical health. The former was no doubt thanks largely to his collaboration with Stefan Edberg. He fell short of Wimbledon glory, but threatened to end the year as number one almost right up to the season’s final match.

Edberg did not bring substantial changes to Swiss’ game, but his insistence that Federer attack the net more often has been wonderfully effective.

Of all the contenders, Rafa Nadal is probably in the worst way.

He had a terrible second half of 2014, missing basically the entire latter part of the year due to injuries and illness.

The Spaniard must recover his health and his form, since he is currently missing the rhythm that gives his game such consistency.

He will likely only manage to recover this once he hits the clay in a few months.

Andy Murray is an unknown, recovered from his back surgery in 2013 but still not near his best.

Andy Murray is an unknown, recovered from his back surgery in 2013 but still not near his best. The collaboration with Mauresmo has not been an overwhelming success, and the Scot has definitely taken a step back over the past 18 months.

But enough of the Fab Four. Last season saw the rise to prominence of many youngsters who had been lurking for quite some time. Nishikori, Raonic and Dimitrov all made major strides and seem determined to rise to the top of the game in the near future.

Nishikori won three tournaments in 2014, reached the final of both a Slam and a Masters 1000 event, and qualified for the prestigious ATP World Tour Finals. He does not have a huge game, but his ability to take the ball early and track everything down makes him a very tough opponent indeed.

Raonic improved just about every aspect of his game last year, including his already monstrous serve. He is not afraid to come to the net and has become much more aggressive off the ground, making him all the more dangerous.

Fans of Dimitrov hope that 2015 will be the year that the Bulgarian will finally fully mature. He won three tournaments in 2014, but has yet to demonstrate that he can hang with the best players in the Slams. He is not as advanced as Raonic and Nishikori yet, but has a much higher ceiling than those two.

The winner of the US Open, Marin Cilic, will not play in Australia due to injury. And we will always have to keep an eye on loose cannons like Dolgopolov and Kyrgios, not to mention Coric and Goffin. We can’t wait for the new season to get started, so bring on the first Slam!

A Slow Start

by Giorgio Giannaccini Much fanfare has accompanied the early losses suffered by the darlings of the tennis world in January, namely Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic.

Much fanfare has accompanied the early losses suffered by the darlings of the tennis world in January, namely Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic.

Nadal lost to the unheralded Michael Berrer, ranked 127 in the world (though he has been as high as 42) 1-6, 6-3, 6-4, while Djokovic fell to Ivo Karlovic, who is 129 but has been playing very well of late.

There are several interesting things to note about these losses. The first is physical condition of Rafael Nadal, who missed most of last season due to injury.

Before the season started he took part in an exhibition event Abu Dhabi, where he was soundly defeated by Andy Murray. This was an early indication that he will require time to get back to his best, and the loss suffered to Berrer only confirms that suspicion. We did perhaps not expect him to go down to such a low-ranking opponent, but in retrospect is not the most surprising result in the world.

Berrer is a veteran on the circuit and was able to exploit the obvious physical shortcomings of his opponent.

Indeed, Berrer played a great match, hitting his forehand with tremendous power and accuracy and using his serve to great effect (he made 76% of his first serves).

Djokovic’s loss is a little different, because we are talking about a match lost in the third set and which featured two tie-breaks: 6-7(2), 7-6(6), 6-4. Djokovic basically lost the match by losing his concentration at the worst possible moments.

Such a mental lapse can usually be excused either at the end or the beginning of the long season, and luckily for him we are still in the latter. The early tournaments are there precisely so that players can work out the kinks in their games and get back into a rhythm for the year.

An issue that is worth considering here, especially for the Spaniard, is the lack of practice coming into the year. It is a fine balance getting ready for the season: you don’t want to do too much and injure yourself, and you don’t want to do too little and be underprepared. Nadal hasn’t played competitively in many months, and his game relies a lot on rhythm and practice. This no doubt affected him in a big way against Berrer.

Djokovic had a problem with timing in his match, which is more subtle than Nadal’s trouble but also less easily fixed.

However, we believe that he will right himself after getting a few matches behind him.

It is also worth noting that players always show up when playing the world number one, and he generally has to contend with the best version of each player he faces. This can occasionally lead to the odd upset.

Looking further afield, they weren’t the only players to struggle early in the season.

Roger Federer sweated through seven shirts to get past the Australian John Millman, ranked 153 in the world, with a score of 4-6, 6-4, 6-3.

He had to come back from a set and a break down as well.

He managed to turn that scare into a positive experience, eventually winning the title by beating Milos Raonic 6-4, 6-7(2), 6-4.

En route to his 83rd career title he also won his 1000th match, becoming only the third man to ever reach that milestone.

Stanislas Wawrinka had a similar experience, winning the tournament in Chennai by defeating the qualifier Bedene 6-4 6-3, but he also had some teething problems.

These did not come in the tournament itself, but at the preceding exhibition event in Abu Dhabi, where he was the top seed.

He lost there quite tamely to Rafael 7-6(1), 6-3 and seemed rather out of sorts. But his hard worked paid off and in Chennai he did not disappoint the crowds, successfully defending his title without dropping a set.

Flaws are often revealed in defeat, but those experiences can provide an opportunity to address those flaws before they become a bigger problem.

It is therefore best to get them out of the way as early as possible in the season so that players can save their best for when it really matters.

Write Grand Slam, Read Fab Four

by Alessandro Varassi

Since 2008, only three out of twenty-eight Slams have been won by a player outside of the Fab Four.

When entering a new tennis season, it is customary to look to the past and try, as much as one can, to predict what will happen in the future. The statistics, although they are mere cold numbers, can help us understand the tennis era we are currently in. Let us look at the four Grand Slams (Australian Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon and US Open) and focus on the winners from 2008 to today. Out of 28 major events, on only three occasions has a trophy been lifted by anyone other than the Fab Four (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray). Two of those three wins came in the 2014 season, with the triumphs of Wawrinka in Melbourne and Cilic in New York.

Rounding out the trio is the historic triumph of Juan Martin Del Potro at the US Open in 2009, which came in a five-set thriller against Roger Federer.

Until the successful US Open in 2012, the Argentine had been the only person to win a Slam in 19 tournaments other than Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. So perhaps rather than the Fab Four, we should probably refer to the group as the Fab Three.

Though Murray won again at Wimbledon in 2013, he still lags behind his peers in terms of Slams won over the past six years, with Nadal having won 11, Djokovic bagging seven, Federer adding five and the Scot triumphing at two.

People have for long been talking about the day the Fab Four stopped dominating the Tour.

Unlike all the previous years, however, we might very well be moving closer to this being a reality.

It will be interesting to see how the season unfolds.

It is likely to be a tumultuous one, but it remains to be seen whether that will result in more spectacular matches and champions.

The start of 2015 has been very unpredictable, with Djokovic and Nadal losing to Karlovic and Berrer respectively.

In 2014, the Fab Four were of course well below par at the Australian and US Opens.

In Melbourne, Stan Wawrinka beat both Djokovic and Nadal en route to the trophy, while at the US Open Marin Cilic ousted Roger Federer in the semifinals before crushing Kei Nishikori in the title match.

Of course, both Rafa Nadal and Andy Murray missed some time with physical problems, but their absence still meant the Fab Four were down to the Fab Two for quite some time.

But just because two men managed to break the monopoly last year does not guarantee that it is going to happen again this season.

Players like David Ferrer, Tomas Berdych and Jo Wilfried Tsonga can testify to the fact of how hard it is to get to the latter stages of a Grand Slam only to fall well short in the final.

It seems that you have to be both at the right place and the right time to be able to sneak in a Grand Slam win under the watchful gaze of the Fab Four.

It will be interesting to see how the season unfolds.

It is likely to be a tumultuous one, but it remains to be seen whether that will result in more spectacular matches and champions.

Roger Federer

by Chiara Gambuzza

Almost everything has been written about Roger Federer.

Almost everything has been written about Roger Federer. He has revealed just about everything about himself, even the parts he is not too proud of. As a child, for example, he was often nervous and subject to massive mood swings on the court. He has said overcoming those childish habits helped pave the way for becoming the player he is today. Even today, at 33, he continually amazes his fans with his exploits on the court and grace away from it. But we have found a few interesting lesser-known facts about the Swiss maestro that might just surprise you: 1. At 16 years of age, he threw his racket at the curtain of a federal training center, cutting it. As punishment he was forced to get up at dawn for a week, clean the bathrooms and prepare all the courts for the day.

2. In the summer of 2001, Federer played taxi driver for his friend Michael Lammer, who could not drive because of a torn ligament in his leg.

Every day Federer would pick him up and drive him to his physiotherapy treatments.

3. When Federer came to discover, in 2002, that his former coach Peter Carter was dead, he was in Toronto.

He lost in singles and doubles playing with black armbands.

He could hardly hold back his tears during changeovers.

He pulled out of Cincinnati and Washington to attend the funeral.

10. The highest number of unforced errors Federer ever committed in a match is 82, which came against Luis Horna at Roland Garros in 2003.

4. After winning Wimbledon for the first time, he spent his holidays in Italy. He arrived in Sardinia with Mirka and lying on the sand kept repeating "You're a Wimbledon champion."

5. With some of the first prize money he won in tennis, Federer dyed his hair platinum blonde. When his mom saw him for the first time, she screamed in surprise at what he had done.

6. During the final in Rome in 2006, Roger was angry with Toni Nadal and even turned to him in-between points, asking him "Everything OK, Toni?" He was sarcastically asking for coaching because of the constant sideline coaching Toni was giving Nadal during the match.

7. Until the age of 14, Federer was a vegetarian. He ate only cereals, pasta and pizza, and drank mostly milk.

8. He loves to play Playstation games, especially tennis ones.

While he sometimes chooses to play as himself, he often opts for Gael Monfils or Rafa Nadal.

9. At the age of six, during a lesson at school, Federer turned to his classmate to ask his opinion about a signature he had been practicing. His friend laughed, asking him why he is practicing a signature. “Maybe one day, when I become a tennis player, I will need it,� he replied.

Debunking Myths About Rafael

by Valerio Carriero

There are many stereotypes surrounding Rafael Nadal.

There are many stereotypes surrounding Rafael Nadal. These are often cited in the pointless discussions between fans of other players on the Tour, as well as those who simply don’t like Nadal’s style of play.

This article aims to disprove two basic arguments: "Nadal will have no longevity" and "Nadal is not versatile." To do so, I will consider his record at Grand Slams and also discuss his place in relation to the current holder of the most Grand Slam titles, Roger Federer.

Longevity This is something that has followed Nadal since his first days on the Tour.

The argument is that his style of play is simply too hard on his body. His game is so explosive that he simply will not be able to keep it up for very long.

This theory seems to be vindicated by the fact that Nadal has suffered from so many major injuries over the past few years. But its overall impact has perhaps been slightly overstated, especially when it comes to the Slams. After all, he is still very much a member of the Fab Four.

Any analysis must start with Roland Garros. Rafa has built his kingdom on clay, and his nine French Open titles are a testament to his complete and utter domination at the event. The only person who has managed to trouble him on his precious red soil in the French capital was been Robin Soderling in 2009. That was preceding a major injury layoff for Nadal, who was forced to miss Wimbledon due to knee issues.

So the fact is this: Nadal’s injury has hampered him at times during the Slams, but it has not crippled him. Even in his worst injury years he was still able to win Grand Slams, even on hard courts. Indeed, he can boast of the fact that he has won at least one Slam for 10 consecutive years (2005-2014). Taking Roger Federer as reference point, this achievement becomes even more impressive. The most consecutive years with a Slam the Swiss managed was seven, quite a few shy of Nadal’s 10. So not bad for Nadal, who is often belittled in terms of longevity.

Certainly nobody can question his staying power given his many years of winning at least one major tournament a year.

Versatility These days, court surfaces are not as different as they used to be. That being said, one cannot deny that Nadal has improved tremendously on surfaces other than clay as his career has progressed.

His continuing improvements on hard courts have allowed Nadal to become the only person in history to have reached at least reached two Slam finals in 8 different calendar years.

After his success at Roland Garros, it took quite a few years for the Spaniard to win his first Grand Slam title on another surface.

That came in 2008, when he beat Roger Federer in the final at Wimbledon.

Soon after that he won his first hard court title at the Australian Open.

His continuing improvements on hard courts have allowed Nadal to become the only person in history to have reached at least reached two Slam finals in 8 different calendar years.

These break down to two in 2006, 2007 and 2008 (Roland Garros and Wimbledon), three in 2010 and 2011 (Roland Garros, Wimbledon and US Open), two in 2012 (Australian Open and Roland Garros), 2013 (Roland Garros and US Open) and 2014 (Australian Open and Roland Garros).

This is again better than Federer, who achieved this feat “only� six years in a row (2004-2009).

So it is clear from the facts that two of the biggest clichĂŠs about Nadal are, at the very least, overstated.

Perhaps his career might not have the longevity that others have enjoyed, and he may not be the most versatile tennis player to ever walk the face of the Earth, but he certainly is no slouch in either department.

Is Soderling Done?

by Federico Mariani

Robin Soderling was once one of the most feared players on the ATP World Tour.

On 31 May, 2009, the impossible happened. Under a grey sky and in front of a frenzied crowd, Robin Soderling beat Rafa Nadal on Philippe Chatrier, something that most people had thought impossible.

After all, the Spaniard had seemed utterly unbeatable on the French clay for many years.

Before that day, Nadal had never lost in Paris, having won four straight titles and 31 consecutive matches.

After that loss, he would collect another five straight titles in the French capital.

This time, his winning streak has stretched for 35 matches.

To date, he has won 66 matches at Roland Garros against only the one loss.

The background to their match makes Soderling’s victory even more improbable.

The two had faced off just weeks prior in Rome, with Nadal conceding only one game to the Swede in a one-sided blowout loss.

So how did Soderling manage to then take four sets off Nadal at their next meeting?

The answer has yet to be found, and no logic seems to apply to the incredible situation, even after all these years.

Nadal played the match as he had played every match on clay in his entire life, relying on the huge topspin of his forehand to outmaneuver his opponent. But Soderling did not play the same old match…his shots had a power and violence to them that wowed the crowd from the first point. Most people thought that he would surely have to suffer some sort of dip in form, after all nobody can keep up that sort of hitting for three hours. Yet that is exactly what he did, handing the Spaniard a devastating loss that has become known as perhaps the biggest upset in tennis history.

He did not leave it there, of course, but built on that victory to become one of the world’s best players. His coach, Magnus Norman, helped him consolidate his newfound confidence, and he soon reached number four in the world rankings.

A year later he beat Roger Federer, the defending champion, in four sets, interrupting the Swiss’ streak of having reached 23 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals. It was the first time he had beaten Federer in 12 previous attempts.

In two years, the Swede accomplished something that goes beyond the extraordinary. He made history by playing the role of the antagonist, something which seemed to suit him well. Those two French Opens were significant for many reasons, and Soderling carved his name in the history books in a spectacular way.

Robin Soderling has not played an official match since 17 June, 2011.

But now, unfortunately, we are deprived of his brilliance.

Robin Soderling has not played an official match since 17 June, 2011, when he destroyed David Ferrer in the final in Bastad.

A terrible bout of mononucleosis sidelined him for months, and even after seemingly recovering from the illness, he was still struck with crippling postviral fatigue.

He was for long barely capable of maintaining a normal everyday life, let alone engaging in the sort of physical activity required of a professional tennis player.

In August he will turn 31, and though he has not officially retired, realistically he has very little chance of ever returning to the Tour and playing at a high level.

He might not have been the most popular man on Tour, but his power and explosiveness is sorely missed on the circuit today.

The game is dominated by defensive baseliners who are loathe to ever hit the ball harder than they need to. It would be a breath of fresh air indeed if the Swede, or someone like him, would liven up the Tour with a more aggressive style of play.

Fans did not appreciate him when he was there, but now that he has been gone for so long, it is becoming clear that we lost a true champion in him.

Here To Stay

by Giorgio Giannaccini Kei Nishikori’s incredible recent exploits, which culminated in him reaching the final of the US Open last year, has caught the tennis world by surprise.

Kei Nishikori’s incredible recent exploits, which culminated in him reaching the final of the US Open last year, has caught the tennis world by surprise.

The question on everyone’s mind now is: will he keep this up and become a future Grand Slam champion?

His run at the US Open would certainly seem to indicate that he will be at or near the top of the game for some time to come.

His dispatching of Novak Djokovic in the semi-finals was nothing short of masterful, and the 6-1, 1-6, 7-5, 6-3 victory was no fluke.

The final was a bitter pill to swallow for Nishikori, who was clearly exhausted against Marin Cilic.

He simply could not cope with his opponent’s incredible power and accuracy, and the 6-3, 6-3, 6-3 championship match was a disappointing one.

That being said, 2014 was a magnificent season for the youngster.

He won two titles, one in Memphis against Ivo Karlovic, the other in Barcelona against Santiago Giraldo, and reached the Top 10.

He even reached the Top 5 at the end of the year. In addition to all of this, he also qualified for the ATP World Tour Finals, losing to Djokovic in the semifinals. And even though Nishikori was not fully fit for their clash, the Serb still had to work very hard to get past his younger opponent.

Though many might be surprised by his sudden run of form, I cannot be counted among them.

I remember seeing Nishikori play against Simone Bolelli last year at Wimbledon, and I knew then there was something special about him.

Nishikori was down two sets to one, and his opponent was playing like a man possessed.

Bolelli seemed poised to win the match in the fourth set, but Nishikori squeaked out the tie break.

The fifth set was also tough, and for a long time it seemed as if the Italian would prevail.

Yet he would find, as so many others have, that Nishikori’s mental reserves are nearly infinite.

A few years earlier, in February of 2008, Kei was just eighteen years old when he became the protagonist of the tournament in Delray Beach Florida.

He started from qualifying and proceeded to carefully pick apart the main draw, even though he was not even ranked in the Top 200!

The high point came in the semi-finals, when he played the American bomber Sam Querrey.

The match was really incredible, exciting, and uncertain until the last point.

After saving four match points, Nishikori proceeded to the final, where he met none other than Top 10 player James Blake.

The final, contrary to expectations and the gap between the two players, was sumptuous.

Nishikori seemed to have wings instead of feet, and even at a height of just 1.78m was able to generate incredible power.

"His forehand hurts more than that of Chang," an amazed Federico Ferrero said during the commentary on Eurosport.

His mental strength shone through even then, and after losing the first set 6-3 he gathered himself to inflict a 6-1 humiliation on his opponent in the second. In the third set he showed the skills of a Top 10 player, hitting winners all over the court and constantly surprising the much more experienced Blake.

Perhaps the best point of the match was when Nishikori played a serve and volley on break point and second serve. He had not tried that all match, but it paid off.

Today, he is still flummoxing his peers with his incredible speed and shotmaking, and things only seem to be getting more ominous by the day for the rest of the field.

This might be the year that Nishikori truly becomes a player to be reckoned with.

Doubles Exclusive: Ivan Dodig and Marcelo Melo

by David Cox

They say that opposites often attract when it comes to partnerships and as a doubles pair

They say that opposites often attract when it comes to partnerships and as a doubles pair, in many ways Ivan Dodig and Marcelo Melo could not be more contrasting. On court, Dodig - no slouch at 6'0 (183cm) - appears almost dwarfed by the gigantic 6'8 (203cm) frame of Melo.

And it's not just physical appearance, their styles vary considerably too. While Melo moves languidly, relying on his excellent reflexes and feel at the net, Dodig is an explosive, all-action competitor, launching himself into returns and groundstrokes, often struck with both feet off the ground. Together they make a formidable combination, reaching the Wimbledon final back in 2013.

And last season they nearly clinched the biggest title of their career, powering through to the final of the end of season ATP World Tour Finals, with only the Bryan Brothers able to stop them.

"It was one of the greatest moments of my doubles career," Dodig reflects.

"Such a great, great experience for us.

In 2013 we made the semi-finals in London, now final last year, hopefully this year we can go all the way."

Playing on such grand stages is especially special for the 30 year old Dodig who spent many years slugging it out in the tennis wilderness before eventually breaking through onto the main tour in his mid-twenties.

"You know, this is some special guy" says countryman Goran Ivanisevic.

With little financial support, Dodig did what it took to make ends meet as he travelled the outposts of the futures and challenger circuits, regularly sleeping under bridges and in his car while at tournaments.

He recalls one tournament in Italy where he was unable to afford the price of the hotel and so climbed a wall and slept on the sunloungers next to the swimming pool of a local villa, waking and making a swift exit just before he was discovered by the residents.

"You know, this is some special guy," says countryman Goran Ivanisevic.

"The way he achieved everything by himself with nobody really helping him, is incredible. He never had any money and what he's accomplished is amazing. I think this is where is big heart on the court comes from, he never quit on anything and he tried to play his best tennis in every single match."

Dodig explains that he regularly subsisted off bread alone at tournaments in order to break even, a far cry from the luxurious buffets and generous budgets set aside for the players at events like the Grand Slams and the Tour Finals.

On one occasion, he went without any food at all for four days, and even managed to make the doubles final before nearly passing out on court through sheer hunger.

Melo looks on with a wry smile when listening to Dodig's tales. The son of wealthy parents in the cosmopolitan city of Belo Horizonte, he had a private sponsor from an early age and has never found himself in especially dire straits financially.

But Melo's calm has proved to be the perfect match for Dodig's fiery intensity and despite being waylaid through injuries, they proved to be a force at several of the big events in 2014.

"There are always ups and downs but for me, after everything I've been through in my career, these are great moments" Dodig says.

"We made two Masters series finals, one against the Bryans in Monte Carlo and another in Toronto," Melo says.

"We could have done better at the Slams but Ivan was out for three months so that was difficult for us.

But we did well to gather as many points as we could in the second half of the year.

We made the final in Tokyo as well.

So we had a number of of good tournaments but unfortunately we weren't able to get over the line and get a title."

"There are always ups and downs but for me, after everything I've been through in my career, these are great moments," Dodig says. "To play all these top guys and these big tournaments, sometimes I think through all the tough moments I had to get here and it's almost hard to believe."

Tennis still remains a popular sport in Brazil thanks to the legacy of Gustavo Kuerten but it is nothing on Croatia where it's popularity is at an all-time high after Marin Cilic's triumph at the US Open. At tournaments Dodig finds himself beseiged by journalists after his matches and he feels there are many more successes to come. "2014 really was an amazing year for my country, especially with Marin doing what he did. We played well and in Borna Coric we have the best guy who's come from juniors, he's in the top 100, he had amazing year, beating Rafael Nadal in Basel. There's a couple of girls on the WTA Tour who are consistently always playing great tennis and several new ones coming up who will do great things - Ana Konjuh, Donna Vekic and Ajla Tomljanovic. There are many good young players from Croatia on the up too. So plenty to look forward to."

Champions Without A Degree

by Lorenzo Pulcioni

The Grand Slam tournaments are the territory of the great champions.

Marcelo Rios Rios sported fantastic technique and an uncanny ability to hit incredible shots from ridiculous court positions. He won a total of 18 titles in his career, including Monte Carlo, Hamburg, Rome, Indian Wells and Miami. In 1998 he rose to world number one for a total of six weeks. In the final of the Australian Open in 1998 he was defeated by Petr Korda. He remains the only men’s number one who never lifted a Grand Slam trophy.

The Grand Slam tournaments are the territory of the great champions.

However, on rare occasions there are unheralded players who manage to reach the lofty heights of becoming Grand Slam winners.

Thomas Johansson, Brian Teacher, Mark Edmondson and Albert Costa are just a few examples.

Marin Cilic is the most recent player to win a Grand Slam while otherwise sporting only middling results for the most part.

On the flip side, there are a number of players who have had truly successful and decorated careers but for whatever reason never managed to win a Grand Slam. We have compiled a Top 10 list of these players, with two simple rules going into the construction of the list: we excluded players born before 1960 and those still playing.

There are also a few honorable mentions who did not make the list, like Mario Ancic, Thomas Enqvist, Guy Forget, Mark Philippoussis and Greg Rusedski.

David Nalbandian A fantastic player who was like a combination of Andre Agassi and Novak Djokovic. In his best year (2007) he won the ATP 1000 events in Madrid and Paris and for a long stretch seemed utterly invincible.

He regularly beat the likes of Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Berdych, Del Potro and Ferrer. He reached the semi-finals of Slam events four times while also making it to one final at Wimbledon in 2002, where he lost to Lleyton Hewitt.

Guillermo Coria Coria was a wonder to behold, and one of the most talented players of his generation. Unfortunately, his mental fragility would keep him from reaching the highest of highs in the tennis world, and he started a long decline in 2005 when he was only 23.

He won nine titles in total, mainly on clay, including Monte Carlo and Hamburg. Ranked number three in 2004, he suffered a gut-wrenching defeat in the final of the French Open, losing to Gaston Gaudio.

Alex Corretja Without any major weapons, apart from perhaps his forehand, Corretja had a great understating for the game and played way above his talent level. He won the Masters Cup in 1998 by defeating Carlos Moya in the final, which would be the most important of his 17 titles.

He also won Rome and Indian Wells and reached number two in the rankings.

He won the Davis Cup in 2000 and was twice a finalist at Roland Garros, losing to Moya and Kuerten.

Nikolay Davydenko A metronome from the baseline, Davydenko was one of the greatest counter-punchers of all time. His record of overall wins is quite low, less than 60%, but he won 21 titles, including the Masters Cup in 2009 and the Masters 1000 in Paris in 2006, Miami in 2008 and Shanghai in 2009. He reached as high as three in the rankings, but did not like the long format of the Slams and often lost in the early rounds. He reached the semis four times, twice at the US Open (both lost to Federer) and twice at Roland Garros (lost to Federer and Puerta).

Tim Henman Henman seemed like the natural successor to Fred Perry. An Englishman born in Oxford, his grandmother, grandfather and mother all played at Wimbledon. His style of play was serve and volley and grass was his favorite surface. Paradoxically his eleven titles, including the Masters event in Paris, all came on hard courts and carpet. He went as high as four in the rankings and reached the semis four times at Wimbledon, losing twice to Sampras and once each to Ivanisevic and Hewitt. He was also a semi-finalist at Roland Garros and the US Open, where he lost to Coria and Federer respectively.

Miloslav Mecir The Big Cat, as he was often called, was a player of tremendous touch and great agility despite his 1.9m height. He won 11 titles on all surfaces: clay, grass, hard, carpet, indoor and outdoor.

He also won the gold medal at the 1988 Olympics in Seoul, as well as other prestigious titles like Indian Wells and Key Biscayne.

He climbed up to number four in the ATP rankings and reached two finals at the US Open and Australia, but lost both to Ivan Lendl.

Miloslav Mecir The Big Cat, as he was often called, was a player of tremendous touch and great agility despite his 1.9m height.

He won 11 titles on all surfaces: clay, grass, hard, carpet, indoor and outdoor.

He also won the gold medal at the 1988 Olympics in Seoul, as well as other prestigious titles like Indian Wells and Key Biscayne.

He climbed up to number four in the ATP rankings and reached two finals at the US Open and Australia, but lost both to Ivan Lendl.

Undoubtedly he would make the list of the Top 10 most unfortunate tennis players, given his continuous health issues. His last tile came three years ago in Bastad, but he was then forced to go into semi-retirement because of mononucleosis, which struck him down when he was ranked five in the world. He won ten titles and twice finished runnerup at Roland Garros (2009 and 2010). He remains the only player to have defeated Nadal at the French Open.

Henri Leconte Leconte was hugely talented but plagues by injuries.

He also had too much flair for his own good, often losing matches because he was always looking to hit the most spectacular shot possible. He reached the Top Ten World in 1985.

Robin Soderling Though he has not yet officially retired, it seems unlikely that Soderling will ever play professional tennis again.

A finalist at Roland Garros in 1998, he won the Davis Cup in 1991, beating the United States with Guy Forget. One of his most memorable showings was at the French Open in 1992, when he reached the semifinals with a wild card after dropping out of the Top 100.

Todd Martin Though he was often as good as Sampras, Agassi and Courier, Martin had more than his fair share of bad luck. The worst of it came at the Wimbledon semifinals in 1996, when he lost to MaliVai Washington after being ahead 5-1 in the fifth set. He loved playing at the net and loathed the baseline. He reached the Australian Open final in 1994 and US Open final in 1999 but lost both times.

American Crisis

by Sergio Scalzi

Da McEnroe a Donal Young: storia del fallimento americano

On a hot night in September of 2003, Andy Roddick served for the match and the championship at the US Open. Juan Carlos Ferrero could do nothing to stop his opponent’s most powerful weapon, and a monstrous ace on match point sealed his fate. It was both the beginning of Andy Roddick’s long and successful career near the top of the sport, and also the beginning of the end for American tennis. That 63, 7-6, 6-3 victory was trumpeted by the USTA as the culmination of many years of careful training and nurturing to find the successor of the previous generation of top American talent. He would, they hoped, build on the huge number of records that American players had amassed over the previous decades.

Jimmy Connors held the records for most match wins in a career at 1253, while John McEnroe, threetime Wimbledon champion, boasted one of the greatest years in tennis history in 1984.

Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras inherited that legacy and took it even further with their various heroics.

There is little doubt that Roddick would have also made a much bigger mark on the sport if his rise hadn’t unfortunately coincided with that of another promising youngster: Roger Federer.

The American was thwarted and nearly every turn by the Swiss Maestro, especially at Wimbledon. The result was ultimately a very successful career for Roddick, but certainly not the legendary one many had been expected.

A decent tennis player can expect to make between $150 000 and $200 000 a year if he is competitive on the Tour.

And since his retirement, American tennis has gone through a glut that it has not experienced since the dawn of professional tennis.

The reasons for this failure are varied and complex.

Sport is a recreational activity, and generally promising athletes are drawn to the sports they most enjoy.

In America, however, this is not always the case, and decisions are largely made based on money.

A decent tennis player can expect to make between $150 000 and $200 000 a year if he is competitive on the Tour.

Comparatively, a baseball, football or basketball player can expect to make millions of dollars a year even if they are only comparatively mediocre, and tens of millions of dollars if they are very good.

This means that children are increasingly funneled into these sports and away from tennis.

Those that do make a go at a professional tennis career are often not the most talented athletes of their generation. The results are simple: no superstars. Where other countries send their best and brightest to the court, America cannot compete with their second-string talent. Nick Bollettieri has echoed this sentiment, and sees no end in sight: "Without hungry athletes it will be tough," he said recently. “I do not think there will be another golden age like there was in the 30 years starting in 1970.�

Richard Williams, the father of Venus and Serena, organized matches for his daughters against stronger players from a young age. There was often also animosity between these players and his daughters, meaning they learned to play under great pressure from the very start of their tennis days. This is certainly an interesting strategy, but hardly one that can be widely applied to save American tennis.

The USTA is now trying to focus on mental training more than anything else The current state of affairs is sad indeed. Donald Young, thought to be the heir to John McEnroe’s style of play, almost dropped out of the Top 200 in 2012, and even now is nowhere close to breaking into the Top 50. Adding to the list of broken promises are Ryan Harrison, Sam Querrey and Tim Smyczek.

Even relatively successful players like John Isner and Mardy Fish have faded from the limelight, the latter due to a debilitating heart condition.

The USTA is now trying to focus on mental training more than anything else, and hopes to organically grow champions by not putting too much pressure on them from a young age. When the time comes they hope their mental strength will carry them through to the top. Whether this works remains to be seen, but it seems pretty safe to say that it will take quite a while before Americans make an impact on the court again.

Caroline Wozniacki interview

by David Cox

The Comeback Queen Wozniacki prefers not to touch on specifics regarding the disintegration of her relationship with McIlroy but there was certainly a steeliness which returned to her tennis in the second half of 2014, the sort which dragged her over the line in so many close matches on her ascent to the summit in women's tennis.

However she refuses to put her revival entirely down to McIlroy.

"I mean, I also think I'm a more experienced player now," she says.

"'I've proven people wrong so many times," Caroline Wozniacki says, with a hint of weariness.

"I was told when I was younger, there was no chance I would make the top 100, top 50, top 30. Every time I've just proven them wrong. It's kind of nice."

Wozniacki is currently ranked No.8 in the world and climbing, still some way from the No.1 position she once held for 67 weeks but her resurgence over the past six months was one of the tour's most heartwarming stories of 2014.

Having largely been written off as a force in women's tennis, the heartache of being ditched by fiance Rory McIlroy inspired her best form in almost three years as she reached the US Open final for the second time in her career, claiming wins over Maria Sharapova and Sara Errani.

"I'm really proud of how I handled everything last year, how I fought back," Wozniacki continued.

"I proved to myself that I'm a really strong person and I can keep improving my game. I've learned so much from the past twelve months."

"I'd like to think I'm a better player than five years ago. You have to be. The game moves on. So many young ones coming up and people start getting to know you and your game so you always have to be prepared to adjust and move forward. Stronger serves, stronger returns. And I've definitely evolved.

I'm better in the big match situations and I know how I want to be playing."

For many years, Wozniacki struggled with her inability to find the right balance between her naturally defensive game, and the need to attack, especially against the game's big hitters in the latter stages of the majors. Wozniacki seemed caught in two minds, desperately wanting to throw off the shackles and unleash but unable to step outside her comfort zone when things got tense.

"It's crazy, makes me feel really, really old," she says wistfully.

During the hard-court season last summer, Wozniacki returned to what she does best - gritty counter-punching tennis but when she needed it, there was an impressive turn of pace especially on her forehand, one of the most improved shots in the women's game.

It's strange to think that Wozniacki has now been a fixture on the WTA Tour for over nine years, an impressive stat for a player still only 24. She still remembers her debut match in Cincinnati back in 2005.

"It's crazy, makes me feel really, really old," she says wistfully.

"But I remember it like it was yesterday. I was up against Patty Schnyder and she was 10 in the world, the No.1 seed and I got a beating - 6-3, 6-0. I didn't like her left-handed kick serve. I remember getting off that court and thinking, 'You know what?

Welcome to the WTA Tour, This is not going to be easy.' But here we are nine years later and it's been a fun journey." Understandably for a player who wins her matches through indulging in wars of attrition, Wozniacki credits her ability to remain at the top to her focus on fitness. "It's the biggest difference between someone who can play for a long time and people who quit earlier. It's the main part of playing. If you're fit you can play at a high level. Once you get the nagging injuries, that really holds you back." Wozniacki has learnt from watching her best friend Serena Williams, now on 18 Grand Slam titles and still comfortably on top of the world at the age of 33. 12 years on from the 'Serena Slam' when Williams held all four Grand Slam titles after clinching the 2003 Australian Open, Wozniacki admits that much of the tour still retain a nagging feeling that Williams' matches are largely on her racket.

"When Serena's on her game, there's not much we can do," Wozniacki laughs. "That's why she has as many titles as she does. You don't get 18 Grand Slams unless you're exceptional at what you do."

Having spent so much time practising with Williams over the past couple of years, Wozniacki has gained a rare insight into how the American has seemingly managed to reverse the march of time, simply getting better with the years, rather than fading.

"She has so much experience now which I think makes it even harder for us," Wozniacki says.

"Back in the day she might not have made the right choices all the time but now she can draw on so many past experiences.

And with Serena, it's not just talent. Talent can't beat everything.

She's a hard worker and she puts the yards in so when she needs it, she can pull out that big serve, use her power to push us back in the court and take the initiative."

Wozniacki knows Williams' strengths better than most at the moment after losing to the American four times in three months in 2014, most gallingly in the US Open final and the WTA Championships semifinals. Such was Wozniacki's form at Flushing Meadows that against anyone other than Williams, one felt she may have had a very real chance to end her Grand Slam duck. But unusually they remain close friends unlike Laura Robson and Eugenie Bouchard whose friendship disintegrated once Bouchard hit the big time. "We're very good at separating it", Wozniacki explains. "We're both competitors so we're going to do anything possible to win the match. Friendship is on the sideline when you're in there. It's like in a boxing ring you know, there's only one winner. But afterwards we're friends again. Tennis is just a game. Off the court we still care equally as much about each other."

Wozniacki's critics have accused her of many things in the past - being too nice, too bland, too stuck in her ways.

It's perhaps more than a little unfair on the Dane who's shown herself very willing to try new things over the past few months - running an impressive time of 3:26:33 in November's New York marathon and then competing in the ITPL for the UAE Royals team alongside Novak Djokovic and Goran Ivanisevic. The latter experience gave her a few ideas for how the WTA Tour could shake things up a bit.

"I think it might be fun if instead of having lets on the serve, we continued playing," she says.

"I think it might be fun if instead of having lets on the serve, we continued playing," she says.

"That could keep it fun and entertaining. You'd have to be ready for anything and it would help speed the game up. When you have a let,it takes a few seconds to get another ball and serve again. I've had matches where I've hit 3 or 4 lets in a row. That wouldn't happen. You'd have to be on your toes. I think it would be great for the crowd."

Wozniacki is looking upwards and another surge over the coming six months could push her towards the top four. Not that she really focuses on rankings.

"I actually don't really pay attention. I just play. At the end of the day, if I play well, the ranking will be there. I feel like my body's in the place where it wants to be and my head is where I want to be. And that's what matters."

Emmo’s streak

by Roberto Marchesani

The story of Roy Emerson at the Australian Championships is one of incredible success and domination.

Emerson’s domination of the Australian

The story of Roy Emerson at the Australian Championships is one of incredible success and domination. In terms of results, he is the most successful competitor the Australian Slam has ever seen. He reached the final seven years in a row (1961-1967) and won the singles title six of those times.

Of course, this was before the Open Era, in a time when the amateurs and professionals did not play together. Amateurs, including Emerson, represented a large part of the tennis world and competed on the traditional circuit, which includes the Grand Slams.

The professionals, on the other hand, took part in more restricted events, and toured around the world to play in front of large crowds of admirers.

This division lasted almost 50 years until 1968, when professionals and amateurs alike were allowed to compete in all events.

So one cannot exactly equate a Slam victory before the Open era with a win after it had begun.

That being said, one cannot deny the incredible success that some of the amateurs achieved at the Slams, and the high level of tennis they played at those events.

Championships, for example, was so complete for so long, and he played against such strong competition (Rod Laver, for example) that is must still be held as one of the sport’s greatest achievements.

Nobody has since come close to equaling Emerson’s run at the Australian Open. Ken Rosewall, Andre Agassi, Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic each won the title four times, though Rosewall could not even play in the tournament for 11 years (1957-1967) because he was a professional.

Had he been able to, he surely would have won a few more titles.

However, in reality the record still belongs to Emerson.

Novak Djokovic conceivably has a chance to overtake Emerson eventually, give how dominant he has been in Melbourne over the past few years.

But until he does so, we will celebrate Emerson’s achievements by having a look at his incredible success Down Under, which also included a record run of 27 consecutive match wins.

1961 Emerson’s first title came in 1961, and was won on the grass courts of Koyoong Stadium in Melbourne, the current seat of Kooyong Classic.

Emerson flew through the early rounds with ease: beating Alan Hicks (6-1, 6-1, 6-2), Bert Kearney (6-1, 6-2, 9-7) and John Pearce (6-1 6-2 6-3) in straight sets.

In the semi-finals he ousted eighth seed Fred Stolle 8-6, 6-2, 7-5 to book his place in the championship round.

The first set of the final saw some spectacular play from Laver, and already hinted at the two calendar Grand Slams he would achieve later in his career.

But despite losing his first set of the tournament 6-1, Emerson bounced back strongly.

Emerson won the next three sets with relative ease to pull off what was considered a major upset at the time. To be fair, however, Laver was suffering from the effects of a wrist injury he had picked up over the course of the tournament, and it increasingly weighed on him as the match progressed.

The final score was 1-6, 6-3, 7-5, 6-4. Laver would not blame his wrist for the loss and praised his opponent. He emphasized that he had rested well before the final and the wrist was not a problem, though Emerson was.

1963 After losing the final in 1962 in a rematch with Laver, in which Emerson lost one of the sets 6-0, 1963 would mark the start of Emerson’s five-year reign as Australian champion.

Laver did not play that year, or indeed any year for the better part of a decade, because he made the decision to go pro.

The result was one-sided and almost predetermined, as Emerson romped over all of the opponents the draw put in from of him.

The only worry came in the semi-finals against Bob Hewitt, who took him to four sets. In the final against Ken Fletcher, the former schoolmates contested a rather uninteresting final, with the 6-3, 6-3, 6-1 score reflecting the lack of competitiveness in the match.

1964 In 1964 Emerson was really hitting his stride, and he would go on to win his third Australian Championship without losing a single set. He defeated Dick Crealy, Bowman, Tony Roche, Martin Mulligan and Fred Stolle en route to the title. It would be the first of five Slam finals Stolle would contest against Emerson. He would lose all of them.

He remains the only man to have reached five straight Slam finals without winning a single one.

Many people had hoped that John Newcombe would make it through the draw and challenge Emerson in the semi-finals.

Even though he was just 20 years old, it was clear that Newcombe had the makeup of a future star.

Unfortunately he lost in the quarter-finals to Martin Mulligan, but it is interesting to wonder if he would have been able to give Emerson any trouble. If he had ousted Emerson, who knows what sort of knockon effect that would have had.

1965 After an utterly dominant 1964, a year in which he won three of the four Slams, Emerson was the undisputed best amateur in the world.

He was the favorite coming into the Australian Championships, and few had any doubts that he would emerge victorious once again. This time around the public got its wish, as John Newcombe made his way through the draw to eventually face the defending champion Emerson.

It would, however, not be nearly as exciting as everyone had assumed. Emerson walked all over his opponent, losing only ten games in the semi-final blowout, the final scoring being 7-5, 6-4, 6-1.

In the final, the poor Fred Stolle awaited. Unlike the previous year, the underdog got off to a fast start, taking the first two sets 9-7 and 6-2.

It seemed all but over for the defending champion, as Stolle just had to keep his cool and the trophy would be his. Unfortunately for him, however, it was Emerson who was the cooler of the two for the rest of the match.

The dramatic comeback was the match of the year, and the 7-9, 2-6, 6-4, 7-5, 6-1 victory was one of Emerson’s finest moments. In 2012 a similar scene played out at the US Open, with Andy Murray going up two sets two love over Novak Djokovic.

Murray had lost the previous four Slam finals he contested and seemed on the way to his first even Major title. However, he lost the next two sets and all seemed lost, but he managed to turn it around in the fifth to seal victory. It is something Stolle would never be able to do, at least not against Emerson. He would eventually shake off the loss and go on to win the French Open later that year.

1966 The 1966 Australian Championship is remember for two things: Emerson’s emerging rivalry with Arthur Ashe and his dramatic quarter-final with Bill Bowrey. It was an important year for the tournament, as it saw a dramatic increase in international attention.

The tournament took place at White City Stadium in Sydney that year, the same venue that would play host to so many victorious Davis Cup ties for the Australians.

Emerson has already won the tournament in Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide but never in Sydney, where he lost the final in 1962 to Laver.

Unlike previous years, 1966 proved a tough one for Emerson at the Australian Championships.

He was very nearly ousted in the quarter-finals by Bill Bowrey, and it was only an epic effort that allowed Emerson to come back from two sets to one to seal a memorable 9-7, 4-6, 4-6, 7-5, 9-7 victory.

The final saw a wonderful match against Ashe, though it ended in a rather bizarre fashion: Ashe double faulted on match point due to a foot fault.

The Australian spectators, who have always been famous for their manners, was silent for a while before sheepishly applauding the victory for their homegrown hero. The final score was 6-4, 6-8, 6-2, 6-3.

Emerson became the first man to win four consecutive titles at his home event. Some described it as the greatest success of his career, even more so than winning Wimbledon.

1967 It all had to end sometime, and 1967 was that year for Emerson.

That year would see the last of his Australian Championship titles, easily beating Ashe 6-4, 6-1, 6-4 in the final.

The real highlight of the tournament came in the semi-finals against Roche, where the two rivals played an incredibly long match.

The third and fourth sets each features 28 games, and each player won one.

Emerson eventually won the fifth 6-2 in a similar scene as the previous year’s epic against Bowrey.

1968 and onwards The last edition of the tournament before the Open era saw Emerson not playing, but he returned in 1969 to win one round, stretching his winning streak to 27 in a row.

He then lost to Rod Laver 6-2, 6-4, 3-6, 9-7 to finally bring his Australian Empire to an end.

8 Things We'd Like To See In 2015

by Alessandro Varassi Like our colleagues at L'Equipe, TennisWorld has put together a list of eight things we’d like to see in 2015.

A grass season to remember After Roland Garros comes the grass season, and this year will see some big changes to this most hallowed of periods.

An additional week has been added between The French Open and Wimbledon, meaning another week of preparation for the sport’s biggest event, as well as some more warm-up events.

We just hope that this means a more interesting grass season than in recent years, and that the specialists will again gain an advantage thanks to the extension of the period.

A more exciting tournament in Rome The prestigious setting of the Foro Italico is poised to become even more important than in previous years.

The event has had some problems in the recent past, but positive steps are being taken in terms of management and the tournament facilities. Soon it might very well be considered as a mini-Slam.

Roger Federer back at number one in the world It is needless to list all records of the Swiss Maestro.

He recently won his 1000th match, and a Slam win or two accompanied by a return to the top of the rankings would definitely be the icing on the cake of an already glorious career.

The confirmation of young stars Coric, Kyrgios, Kokkinakis, Goffin.

These names are new to the world of tennis, but they have already showed signs of possible greatness to come. 2015 will tell us whether they can truly be the heirs of the Fab Four.

A true successor to Serena Williams 2014 was not a super successful season for Serena, but her shadow still loomed large over the Tour.

In 2015 we would like to see someone emerge as the true successor to the American.

Some of the names that are already doing well include Sharapova, Halep, Radwanska and Azarenka, but we will have to see if they are ready to make that very big step The possibility of a new event in Italy See point 1. Rome is the most important event in the country, but there is always room for another.

A 250 or 500 tournament in Milan, Naples or Palermo would do a lot for tennis in the region.

More tennis on TV While tennis is becoming more and more of a common site on television channels, there is still a lot of work to be done in terms of coverage. Many tournaments are not covered at all in various countries, and even events like the Slams and Masters 1000 series are tread shabbily by certain broadcasters. We hope that in 2015 a big step forward is taken in terms of how much tennis is shared with the masses.

No more cases of match-fixing Controversy and investigations, some concluded, others in progress, others still in the pipeline.

Tougher penalties and more prize money in smaller tourns will help combat the scourge of match-fixing.

The ATP and ITF are moving in this direction, and we hope they continue to make big strides in the upcoming season.

Tennis Players And Relationships

by Giovanni LaRosa

Tennis is a complicated sport.

Tennis is a complicated sport. It is not enough to simply have good technique and athleticism, though these are hard enough to obtain, but you must also have great mental strength. This can be particularly important on the women’s circuit, where the physical and tactical differences between the players are miniscule. The mental side of things is often what makes the difference.

Mental strength off the court is also very important, as careers can take wild turns that require extreme patience and fortitude to manage.

This is specifically true when it comes to romantic relationships. One need not venture very far to see how romantic affairs or even births can play havoc with a player’s life.

An example? Let's start with what was perhaps the most striking case on the women's circuit: Nicole Vaidisova.

In 2007, at the age of just 18 years, the Czech had already reached two Slam semi-finals and two other quarter-finals. She had won six WTA titles and gone as high as seven in the rankings.

What happened then? She met Radek Stepanek, who was then a decent competitor on the ATP Tour.

The beginning of their relationship marked the beginning of the end for her career.

In 2008 she reached just one Slam quarter-final, and soon dropped out of the Top 40. 2009 would prove to be even worse, and she ended the year at 181 in the world.

In March of 2010, clearly no longer interested in the sport, she retired at the ridiculously young age of 20.

She married Stepanek, content to be a tennis wife, but it wouldn’t last: they split in March of 2013. A little over a year after their separation she returned to the courts. Coincidence? Unlikely.

Ana Ivanovic experienced a similar situation, though her damage was limited thanks to the short duration of the affair. In her best year, 2008, she started dating Fernando Verdasco. With her first Slam victory and Roland Garros and a final appearance at the Australian Open, she became the world number one. She was hitting her stride and still had plenty of improving to do. Their relationship lasted for about seven months, and it would not do wonders for her career.

While Verdasco would play the best tennis of his career, reaching the Australian Open semi-final in 2009 and breaking into the Top 10, Ivanovic experienced a crisis. She never went beyond the quarters in the Slams and dropped out of the Top 20.

This slide would continue until 2012, when she started making a comeback that is not yet fully realized.

There are also equally interesting cases where the player concerned was the least famous party in the relationship. The list is long, but Flavia Pennetta, Gisela Dulko and Lucie Safarova are perhaps the most enlightening.

Pennetta started dating Carlos Moya when he was still one of the best players in the world. During their relationship, Pennetta very much took the back seat, never truly excelling on the court. After their stormy breakup in 2007, however, she slowly became a force to be reckoned with. In 2008, she reached her first Slam quarter-final in New York (followed by three other appearances in the quarter and semi-finals in 2013), and in 2009 she entered the Top 10 (the first Italian player in history). At the same time she reached the number one ranking in doubles with her friend Gisela Dulko. Her separation from Moya represented the turning point of her career. It is inevitable to ask whether she would have still reached these heights had they stayed together.

Perhaps the question is answered in the fact that since she started dating Fabio Fognini last year she has not had any good results.

That is, until she reached the quarters in New York as well as the doubles final of the same event.

Gisela Dulko, Pennetta’s doubles partner, dated Fernando Gonzalez for a time. The Chilean was once number 5 in the world, and reached the Australian Open final among other good results.

The separation between the two came in 2008 and represents the beginning of an excellent career for Dulko. In 2009 Gisela started playing with Flavia, and together they won the 2011 Australian Open, the 2010 WTA Tour Championships and 10 other titles (plus another semi-final and quarter-final at Slam level).

To close this section of tennis players who lived in the shadow of their partner we turn to Lucie Safarova. Her relationship with Tomas Berdych started in high school and ended in 2011.

Safarova had been one of the most talented but fragile players on the WTA Tour until her separation from Berdych. After that point, her true potential started being realized as she put her game and herself back together. She broke into the Top 20 and posted several other good results, no longer being “Berdych’s girlfriend” but "Lucie Safarova." 2014 was a key year for her: she reached the semi-finals at Wimbledon, the second round in Paris and New York and matured at a tactical and mental level.

So far we have talked about relationships between tennis players, but there are other cases that deviate from the parameters we set earlier. Our last study will be of Caroline Wozniacki and Rory McIlroy, two of the biggest stars of different sports. Their relationship’s start in 2011 marked the beginning end for Wozniacki’s reign as world number one.

She disappeared for a while before popping back into the Top 10.

But her defensive style of play was no longer good enough to net her major results.

She had regressed from the tactical point of view and, in part, also from a physical one.

The couple became engaged, but McIlroy abruptly ended the relationship in May of last year.

It was clear that Wozniacki was shattered, and she admitted as much publicly.

Yet she soon started improving her game, becoming more aggressive and physical in her matches.

Her newfound confidence culminated in an appearance in the US Open final, five years since her last trip.

Of course there are many more relationships we can mention, and in fact you could probably write a book on the subject.

Managing a professional sporting career is hard enough, and adding a private life to that mix can have devastating consequences.

All of these stories seem linked together by a thread, by an equation that can almost mathematically explain the phenomenon.

Yet it is difficult to reach a clear conclusion, because there are individual episodes that contradict this principle (the performances of Sharapova and Azarenka, for example).

It seems quite clear that an inability to handle the pressure and expectations of public and private life is the key factor in the negative cases we have seen today.

Ultimately, mental strength is the factor that allows some players to maintain relationships on the Tour, while others are incapable of giving the best of themselves to their partners and their careers at the same time.

Tour In Trouble?

by Adriano S.

Sponsors who abandon major tournaments in order to try their luck in Asia.

Sponsors who abandon major tournaments in order to try their luck in Asia. Players who follow the money and shun the Slams in favor of exhibition events or minor Eastern tournaments. No, this is not the pitch for some thrilling movie, but rather a grim preview of what might one day play out in the real tennis world. Indeed, many argue that it is already happening.

Just think of the case of Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, who was lured by the promise of a huge payday in Southeast Asian. In tears only 7 days before, unable even to play doubles in the Davis Cup final, he reported for duty at the International Premier Tennis League (IPTL) ready to play. It did not seem to matter that he was putting his entire 2015 campaign at risk should he further aggravate his injury.

Perhaps predictably, shortly afterwards he had to pull out of the Australian Open, no doubt because he never allowed his body to heal properly over the offseason. The same is true of Marin Cilic, who will miss at least a month after also overextending himself in exhibition play.

As Alize Cornet claims she can earn more in two weeks of exhibitions tennis than whole months on the circuit, it is perhaps understandable that players are doing this in ever increasing numbers. Even Roger Federer went to India to play in an exhibition event with other top players, despite the fact that he had suffered a significant back injury only weeks before.

One can perhaps argue that it is good for tennis that these events are taking place.

The IPTL is already expanding, though they are firmly in the exhibition space at the moment.

They are hugely popular and provide a boost for the sport in places where it is not particularly well-liked, like Asia and India.

The team atmosphere at many of these events also gives the proceedings more of a communal flavor.

Even the rules have been adjusted to make the sport less “serious.�

Crowd noise is not policed as seriously as on the Tour, and everything from five-game shootouts to artificial noises in-between missed serves are heartily embraced by the crowd.

None of this, of course, will ever be adopted on the main Tour, although the ATP did briefly experiment with eliminating the let chord altogether in some Challenger tournaments.

But even a change like that was not met favorably by either players or fans.

At the moment, this all happens during the offseason or during quiet times after Slams.

But with fights about prize money, especially among the lower-ranked players, now being a yearly event, one wonders if a true parallel Tour might soon be a possibility.

The IPTL is already expanding, though they are firmly in the exhibition space at the moment.

The important thing is for the ATP and WTA to try and exploit the growth of the International Premier League without letting things get out of hand.

If the IPTL, and perhaps similar events, can increase the profile of tennis worldwide, while also encouraging the fair distribution of prize money on the main Tour, this could very well be a win-win situation for everyone concerned.

The Toleration Of Frustration

by Alberto Cei

Tennis is a sport in which the players must face a great deal of frustration in every match.

Tennis is a sport in which the players must face a great deal of frustration in every match. About every 30 seconds a point is awarded to one of the two players, meaning that one person will likely be frustrated at the end of that point. This is repeated a hundred times during every match, and sometimes even more. Apart from the physical number of shots and points there is also the time factor, as matches can sometimes span many hours, often in some very unforgiving weather conditions. In tennis you can still win while committing many errors. Some will be forced on you by your opponent, while others will simply be due to your own failure. In most cases, the person who manages his frustration the best is the most likely to win the match.

The frustration comes from not having put the ball in play during a point despite many hours of training.

Is there anything wrong with feeling this way?

Absolutely not.

We must not fight this feeling, but simply learn to deal with and tolerate it.

Obviously nobody likes to make mistakes, one must realize that tennis is not always a sport of precision‌ the winner is often the player who commits the fewest errors. The best advice is simply to take a deep breath and go play the next point, confident that your training and ability will carry you through.

We must not play each point as if it were the last, because in this way the competitive pressure increases along with the fear of making mistakes.

We must accept fear, tolerate our own mistakes and use our mental strength to put pressure on our opponent throughout the match.

We must accept fear, tolerate our own mistakes and use our mental strength to put pressure on our opponent throughout the match. Tennis is a fast sport that requires both physical and mental strength. The latter is particularly important and often ignored, since it is pivotal to not get down on oneself after just half an hour of play. A match cannot be lost in the first set, and every situation can be turned around. Only those who are able to combine these two aspects of the sport will have a successful career. You must be patient after making a mistake, and not hurry to regain whatever disadvantage you have suffered. Such an attitude will only make you even more afraid of making mistakes.

A successful tennis player must be able to pause their thoughts in-between points and think about how they will solve the problem presented by the next point, not dwell on how they made a mistake on the previous one.