N°21 - November
Tennis World Reinventing Roger Federer
The Missing Ingredients
Reasons To Believe In Rafa’s Renaissance
Interview: Marin Cilic
Reinventing Roger by Giorgio Giannaccini
This season has been an extremely successful one for Roger Federer
This season has been an extremely successful one for Roger Federer, and there is little doubt that it is largely thanks to his new offensive mindset. Indeed, 2014 has been perhaps the most aggressive we have ever seen the Swiss play. It is easy to argue that had he not adopted this change of tactics, he would not have been able to return to the kind of form that has seen him routinely beat Top 10 players and win tournaments. It is a bit of genius, really. Federer is 33 years old and no longer able to compete athletically with the likes of Djokovic and Nadal from the baseline, at least when the rallies get stretched out to defensive contests of 30+ shots. These days, the tactical emphasis is on extreme defense, and more often than not the player who
can rally the longest without making an error comes out on top. Winners are becoming a rare thing indeed. One reason Federer struggles to play this sort of tennis – apart from his age and natural inclination for aggressive tennis – is his one-handed backhand. The one-hander is an endangered species in the modern game, even though the likes of Thiem and Dimitrov are still carrying the torch among the youngsters. The reason for the gravitation towards two-handed backhands is simple: today’s strings and rackets make it very easy to hit with extreme topspin, which means the ball is bouncing higher than ever. With a one-handed backhand, it is very difficult to handle high balls effectively. If you are pushed out of
His salvation this year has proven to be his aggressive play, particularly his willingness to come to the net. position, your only real option is to play a deep defensive lob. This tactic may have worked well on clay courts in the early 1990s, but these days a lob like that will be easily dispatched with by the opponent, meaning that one-handers are generally at a massive tactical disadvantage. This development has been coming for some time, of course, and for the better part of two decades players have been embracing the twohanded backhand as a means of coping with these changes. For Federer this has always been a particularly big problem, since he has spent most of his career competing for major titles against Rafael Nadal, whose extreme topspin forehand creates all sorts of problems for the Swiss. Age has certainly not helped his cause, and he is now more vulnerable than ever to a topspin barrage on his backhand.
His salvation this year has proven to be his aggressive play, particularly his willingness to come to the net. This tactic has not doubt been greatly influenced by his coach Stefan Edberg, who was one of the greatest serve-and-volley players of his day. It is ironic that Federer would turn to such an ageold tactic to revive his fortunes, especially since coming to the net is so reviled in the modern game. But it is appropriate as well, given that Edberg used that tactic for much the same reason that Federer is using it now – as a counter-strategy to his opponents’ strengths. Edberg had to regularly face off against players like Pete Sampras and Boris Becker, whose could overpower him with their huge games. Rushing the net was his way of neutralizing that power, and it proved very effective. Edberg helped Federer see that it was better to get to the net and face the humiliation of being passed
Particularly effective has been Federer’s chip-andcharge tactic, which he uses not only during rallies but often straight off the return. on a semi-regular basis than to battle pointlessly – albeit with great dignity – from the baseline. Djokovic and Nadal are simply too young and too strong, especially on clay, and his only chance is to lean on the net in order to neutralize their quickness and court coverage. The results speak for themselves. Particularly effective has been Federer’s chip-and-charge tactic, which he uses not only during rallies but often straight off the return. He also often uses a topspin approach, mixing it up nicely with the slice approach. This tactic is so foreign to opponents that they often do not deal with it effectively, making the scheme doubly effective. It also protects Federer’s “weaker” shot, his backhand, and allows him to use several different variations of the stroke that can be deadly when combined with a net game. Even if the approaches are not brilliant, they can still be
extremely effective. A short slice approach to the middle of the court might appear to be suicide, but it is actually very difficult to deal with, since it is hard to get good pace on the ball while also lifting it over the net during the pass attempt. Edberg has done nothing more than rearranging the pieces of a beautiful puzzle, which was already gorgeous, but is now even more of a masterpiece. By using old tactics, Federer has found newfound passion and excitement for game.
The Missing Ingredients by Marco Di Nardo We have just come to the end of one of the more unremarkable editions of the ATP World Tour Finals in recent memory
We have just come to the end of one of the more unremarkable editions of the ATP World Tour Finals in recent memory. Though it featured the Top 8 players of the past year, it certainly didn’t feel that way. In the first four days of the competition there wasn’t a competitive match to be found, with all of the contests being decided in lopsided two-set blowouts. Throughout the round robin stages there was a distinct gulf between the two players on court, and it gave the whole affair an air of pointlessness. Both groups featured one undefeated player, with the runner up losing one match. The semi-finals finally provided some uncertainty, even though the final was eventually set up between the two players everyone expected – Roger Federer and Novak
Djokovic. Federer had to work particularly hard to reach the championship round, saving several match points in his semi against Stanislas Wawrinka. Indeed, that match proved too much for the Swiss’ body, as he was forced to withdraw from the final due to a back injury suffered at the end of the match. What was the cause of Federer’s injury? Many have speculated that the courts could have contributed. Federer himself has said in the past that this surface favors defensive baseliners and punishes big hitters. While an interesting theory, the truth is likely more boring: Federer is 33, and a long season combined with a tough match against Wawrinka proved too much for his body.
It is perhaps not a coincidence that it took Ferrer stepping in to bring an end to four days of boring straight-sets matches. In fact, the defensive baseliners that have defined the competition for the past years were absent from this season’s contest. Rafael Nadal withdrew completely due to an appendix operation, and David Ferer was relegated to the role of alternate after failing to qualify on his own merits. Nadal had withdrawn from the Paris Masters 1000 with the same complaint, while Ferrer only played one match in London after Milos Raonic withdrew due to a hamstring injury. It is perhaps not a coincidence that it took Ferrer stepping in to bring an end to four days of boring straight-sets matches. The one and only match he contested was the first competitive affair of the whole tournament, when he went up against US Open runner-up Kei Nishikori. Ferrer suffered early setbacks in the first set, but managed to come back and eventually take it 6-4. Nishikori proved too
much in the next two sets, however, and the Spaniard – who had perhaps had too much of a rest coming into the match – could not keep up. As for Nadal, his absence was felt for several months. The Spaniard has basically not competed at all since Wimbledon, missing significant time due to a wrist injury and Appendicitis. In both groups his presence would certainly have changed things. Particularly interesting would have been if Nadal was drawn into the same group as Federer. Given the Spaniard’s tenacious competitive streak, it is hard to imagine that any of his matches would have been boring. Indeed, the US Open would also have been much more interesting had the Spaniard been able to compete. The final, which was a one-sided affair featuring Marin Cilic and Kei Nishikori, could certainly have done with a little Spanish magic.
Reasons To Believe In Rafa’s Renaissance by Adriano S.
Nadal is no stranger to enormous obstacles to his ambitions. 3) Starting in 2015, there will be one extra week inbetween Wimbledon and Roland Garros. Nadal has shown that once he has adapted himself to the surface at SW19, he can be almost unbeatable on grass. 4) Nadal has very few points to defend next year. He did not defend his titles in Monte Carlo, Rome and Barcelona in 2014, and after July he is defending almost no points at all. It is very possible that he might end the year as world number one and who knows, maybe it will be his turn to lift the ATP World Tour Finals trophy… Nadal is no stranger to enormous obstacles to his ambitions. This year proved to be one of the more trying of the Spaniard’s career, and his fans have suffered right alongside him. That being said, there is reason to believe that Nadal might bounce back stronger than ever in the upcoming season, as he has so often in the past. Here are five reasons why 2015 might be Nadal’s year once again: 1) Rafa has always benefited from extended rest. Every time he has been forced to take long periods off has been followed by massive success. Given the fact that this latest stoppage was not caused by his knees or wrist, but rather by his appendix, the rest might prove to be even more beneficial than ever before. 2) The Mallorcan paid the price for his exploits in South America last year. It obviously affected his preparation for the new season in a negative way. This year, though he might make less money by staying home, he will be able to fully prepare for the 2015 season in the proper way.
5) 2016 might be the last year of professionalism for Roger Federer. The following season will be crucial if Nadal wants to finally supplant his longtime rival as the best to ever play the sport.
The Masters by Brent Kruger
Today, the ATP World Tour Finals is played at the O2 Arena in London, but in 1970....
Today, the ATP World Tour Finals is played at the O2 Arena in London, but in 1970, the year-end Masters was held at the Metropolitan Gymnasium in Tokyo. The fledgling tournament was looking for its own identity outside of the Grand Slams, and over the following decades it would do just that. The first Masters tournament purported to be the perfect end to the season, with the six best players of the year pitted against each other for the most prestigious trophy outside of the Majors. The first edition was held in Japan, and saw six contenders who would eventually turn into true tennis legends compete for the Cup: there were two Australians (Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall), two Europeans (Zeljko Franulovic and Jan Kodes) and two Americans (Arthur Ashe and Stan Smith). The competition consisted solely of a round robin format, with the most successful player being
awarded the trophy. That first year, even though Stan Smith and Rod Laver ended up being tied in the standings, Smith won because he had beaten Laver in the round robin phase. The next year saw one extra person added to the round robin stage, but that would not last for long. From 1972 onwards a total of eight players would qualify for the event, and they would be split into two different groups. These groups would then vie for a place in the semi-finals, from which point a knockout format would be followed. This is the format that is still used today, and was only briefly abandoned between 1982 and 1985, when the event followed a standard knockout format. The year-end Masters (which between 1977 and 1985 actually took place at the beginning of the next season) bounced around from place to place until it eventually found a permanent home in the in the picturesque setting of Madison Square Garden. The 1970s were ruled by Ilie Nastase, who reached five consecutive finals and won four titles, while the 80s were the domain of Ivan Lendl. The Czech appeared in the final nine times in a row, taking home five trophies. Though they didn’t dominate like Nastase and Lendl, John McEnroe and Boris
Becker also enjoyed a bit of success at the Masters in their heyday. The American was victorious on debut in 1978, and again won the trophy in 1983 and 1984, while the German beat Lendl in 1988, having lost his previous two finals in 1985 and 1986. From 1990 and until the beginning of the new millennium, the event was renamed as the ATP World Tour Championships and, following the name change, changed its venue to Frankfurt for six years and Hanover for four. Becker and Stich gave the locals plenty to cheer about, winning three times in this span, but Pete Sampras soon took over proceedings. But even though Sampras dominated in the 1990s, the Germans still made things difficult for him. Michael Stich was the only person who beat Sampras in a final (1993), while Becker pushed Sampras to the very brink in 1996, narrowly losing 3-6, 7-6, 7-6, 6-7, 6-4. Sampras won the event five times in the end, and his reign ended shortly before the tournament would again move location and change its name. After a stop in Lisbon, the Masters Cup (as it was called in those days), temporarily left Europe for
Australia and then Shanghai, with a brief interlude in Houston. The two-year Texan term (2003/2004) saw the baptism of the person who would become the most successful winner of the year-end event in history: Roger Federer. After winning in Houston, the Swiss prevailed twice in Shanghai (2006/07) before losing the 2005 final to Nalbandian. Djokovic won his first title in 2008 in time to see the event changed to the ATP World Tour Finals and move to London. In the five years in London, after the surprise of Davydenko (2009), Federer and Djokovic divided the spoils in the following years, with the Serb winning in 2012 and again in 2013. In its 44 years of existence, the Masters has seen 122 players qualify for participation. The holder of the most trophies
is Roger Federer (6) followed by Sampras and Lendl (5) and Ilie Nastase (4). Boris Becker, John McEnroe and Novak Djokovic follow with three each. The Masters is the only tennis tournament on the calendar where you can win the event even though you have lost a match. Indeed, in theory you can even lose two matches and still prevail in the end, though this has not happened yet. More than half of the time (23 versus 21), the eventual winner lost a match during the round robin phase of the competition. Curiously, Sampras lost a match in each of his five victorious campaigns, three times against Becker and once each to Moya and Agassi. In contrast, Lendl never lost a match in the years
when he won the tournament. The same is true of McEnroe. With the format as it is, it is not uncommon for two players to face each other twice in the same event. They often play each other in the final after having squared off in the round robin stages. On 8 of the 14 occasions in which this occurred, the loser of the first match got their revenge in the final. 1976 Fibak-Orantes 75 76; Orantes-Fibak 57 62 06 76 61 1978 McEnroe-Ashe 63 61; McEnroe-Ashe 67 63 75 1989 Becker-Edberg 61 64; Edberg-Becker 46 76 63 61 1990 Edberg-Agassi 76 46 76; Agassi-Edberg 67-76 75v62
1994 Becker-Sampras 75 75; Sampras-Becker 46 63 75 64 1996 Becker-Sampras 76 76; Sampras-Becker 36 76 76 67 64 1999 Agassi-Sampras 62 62; Sampras-Agassi 61 75 64 2000 Agassi-Kuerten 46 64 63; Kuerten-Agassi 64 64 64 2001 Grosjean Hewitt 36 62 63; Hewitt-Grosjean 63 63 64 2003 Federer-Agassi 67 63 76; Federer-Agassi 63 60 64 2004 Federer-Hewitt 63 64; Federer-Hewitt 63 62 2005 Federer-Nalbandian 63 26 64; Nalbandian - Federer 67 67 62 61 76 2008 Djokovic Davydenko 76 06 75; Djokovic-Davydenko 61 75 The Romanian Ilie Nastase has the highest win percentage at the Masters: 88%, translating to 22-3. Behind him are Federer, Laver and Okker. Federer has won 44 matches in total to 11 defeats, while he holds the record for most matches played at 55. Becker, Lendl and Sampras all follow at 49. The women’s Masters.........
The female equivalent of the male Masters started on clay in Boca Raton in 1972. The Virginia Slims Championships, which got its name from the WTA Tour’s sponsor, left Florida after only two editions (both won by Chris Evert), and moved to California on the opposite coast for a three-year period. Evert played three finals and won twice, losing only to the Australian Evonne Goolagong. Early on the tournament changed its formula several times and was played mainly between February and April. It was only in 1986 that the WTA decided to move it permanently to the end of the season. It was the period in which the dominance of Martina Navratilova (ten consecutive finals including eight wins) seemed unassailable. She still holds the record for finals played (14) and wins (8).
From 1979 to 2000 the Top 16 players qualified for the year-end event. Between 1984 and 1998 three finals went to five sets (this was the only event on the WTA Tour which allowed best of five sets): in 1990, Monica Seles beat Gabriela Sabatini 6-4, 5-7, 3-6, 64, 6-2, while in 1995/1996 Steffi Graf beat Huber and Hingis respectively for two of her five total trophies. In 2001, the event left the WTA headquarters in New York to relocate temporarily to Germany. That was the only year the final was not played, as Lindsay Davenport was unable to take the court due to an injury. Serena Williams won by default. It was the first of four titles for Williams, the last of which she won in 2013, twelve years after her first one (a record). The event was then moved to the immense Staples Centre, home of the Los Angeles Lakers, but the low turnout of the public forced the WTA to consider new locations: Madrid (2006/07), Doha (2008/10) and Istanbul (2011-2013). From its inception, the tournament has hosted 147 players and there have been 19 different winners. It is only since 2003 that the WTA has adopted continuity with the round robin format, and consequently there are only a few instances of a player who lifted the trophy despite having lost a match. The first to do this was Sylvia Hanika. The German, in 1982, lost her first match rather sharply to the Yugoslav Mima Jausovec, but qualified for the semi-finals and there beat Wendy Turnbull before ousting Martina Navratilova in the final.
The other four players to win after losing, as it were, are Maria Sharapova (2004), Amelie Mauresmo (2005), Justine Henin (2006) and Kim Clijsters (2010). Of these, only Henin managed to get revenge in the final. She lost to 4-6, 7-6, 6-2 in the round robin, but won 6-4, 6-3 in final. Navratilova (8) has won the most titles, in front of Graf (5) and Evert/Serena Williams (4). Serena has the best win ratio (83.33% with a record of 25-5) in front Navratilova (82.19% with 60 wins and 13 losses) and Graf (80.49% and a record of 338).
Williams sisters and the issue of sexism in tennis by Princy Jones
Shamil Tarpischev derogatory remarks about the Williams sisters are anything but funny.
Shamil Tarpischev derogatory remarks about the Williams sisters are anything but funny. It is pity that he thought he was cracking a ‘joke’ when he referred to Venus and Serena WIlliams as the ‘Williams brothers’ during a live television show. Tarpischev didn’t stop there, instead he went on saying that “it’s scary when you really look at them”. Perhaps he should throw some light on the ‘joke’ part and enlighten us here. The Russian Tennis Federation president had to bear the brunt of his callous remark when he got suspended for a year with a fine of $ 25,000 by the WTA for his insensitive slur. The association did a right thing by taking an instant disciplinary action, but what it cannot contain is the sick attitude which isn’t limited to Tarpischev alone; it’s only that he has said it loud what many others harbour in their minds.
You have every right to dislike a particular player and criticise their style of play for whatever subjective reasons, be it the Williams sisters, Sharapova, Nadal or Federer. Not everyone is a fan of the powerful aggressive game Williams sisters are known for. But undeniably, the duo have dominated the game like no other for the last 15 years, especially Serena, who stands second in all-time list with 18 Grand Slam singles titles. Even without the Afro-American tag, they boast of an incredible feat. Williams’ father and coach Richard Williams has explained many a times how difficult it was for him to plan and eventually make real a seemingly impossible dream for his daughters, considering his race and background. Right from the start, it was a swim against the current -- the vicarious experience he had as their coach, the massive amount of criticisms he was subjected to from the media, the biased umpires, and moreover, hostile crowd. But the Williams family had the last laugh when the sisters combinedly won 41 Grand Slam titles (25 singles and 16 doubles); 8 Olympic gold medals (one each in singles and three in doubles) -- a record that would stay for a long time, perhaps forever. Still, it is indeed sad that they aren’t getting the recognition they deserve, but are subjected to cruel criticisms based on their looks.
Years back, Martina Hingis accused Williams sisters of playing the race card. She said that being black helps them to get sponsors and that they enjoy a lot of advantages being so since they can always play the victim card. We can cut Hingis some slack for she was just an impulsive 20-year old then, even though she was downright stupid in actually thinking so. If Williams sisters’ skin colour was lighter, not just them, but even their style of play wouldn’t have come under such harsh criticisms. But it is unpardonable when veteran players, commentators etc., blame them of ruining the game. Beauty is the last prerequisite for an athlete. Unfortunately, the press, usually is happy to have a tall slender blonde on the front page. It is never wrong to hail someone for their appeal, but it gets
wrong when they determine the standards of beauty, and tend to underrate the players who don’t fit into those standards. This is what BBC presenter John Inverdale had exactly done when he made denigratory remarks about Wimbledon champion Marion Bartoli last year. His imagination went a bit too far when he expressed a doubt whether Bartoli’s dad might had told her that she is never going to be a looker like Maria Sharapova, when she was young. Bartoli, who possesses an I.Q of 175, replied in an impressive fashion, saying “I am not blonde, yes. That is a fact. Have I dreamt about having a model contract? No. I'm sorry. But have I dreamed about winning Wimbledon? Absolutely, yes.’’ Sharapova is stunning like a Victoria Secret model, and she is one of the most sexy person on the planet. It is understandable that she is being hailed for her drop dead gorgeous looks. But when we are talking tennis, we should be talking about her marvellous game rather than her sexy legs. Inverdale, inadvertently, was belittling Sharapova also with that remark of his. The Williams sisters are often mocked at for their athletic figure, especially Serena. There are disgusting videos on youtube which analyses her physique, often crossing the limits. The media alone isn’t the culprit here, for it caters to the fancy of people. They are not alone in defining the beauty standards of female athletes. Tarpischev branded Serena as less feminine because of her muscular figure;
The good thing is that WTA wasted no time in handing over the punitive measure Enti nem quo ipsa saperum con niminis ut expeles strangely, Venus, who is of a slender figure, also was regarded ‘manly’. Hence Tarpischev was just being sexist and racist. Tarpischev reminds Williams sisters that their battle against adversities is never ending, and that they will forever remain subjects of mockery of sick people like him despite all what they have attained. His audacity to make such a remark on live television reiterates the fact that racism and sexism still prevails in sports, however evolved we say we are. It’s not just subtle, but it is loud and obvious. The good thing is that WTA wasted no time in handing over the punitive measure, the sad thing is that, it will take even longer to change the mindset of some people.
An Old Tradition In A New Location by Alessandro Varassi First held in Opened in 1971, the WTA Finals features the Top 8 players of the year in a prestigious season-ending tournament.
On 26 October, Serena Williams beat Simona Halep in the final of the WTA’s year-ending championship. It was the fifth time that the American won the title, and the third time in a row. The tournament is mentioned in the same breath as the ATP World Tour Finals, where the best players of the year also face off for the unofficial title of “Master of Masters.” For the WTA Tour, the 2014 edition of its Finals event inaugurated a new venue, which will host the event until at least 2018 – the Singapore Indoor Stadium. Stacey Allaster, the CEO of the WTA, was enthusiastic about the public response to the tournament (4 of the 14 sessions sold out) and called it the "the best year in the history of the WTA Finals."
The Finals first took place in 1971 and wandered around from location to location, mostly in the United States. In fact, only one of the first 36 editions of the tournament took place outside of the US. The tournament was mostly hosted in Houston, Boca Raton, Madison Square Garden in New York (on 23 occasions), Los Angeles and Oakland. In 2006, a shift system was adopted, which saw Madrid, Qatar and Turkey host the event for three years each. The emphasis of locations in the East shows how serious the WTA is about gaining a better foothold in the region. As she did in so many other tournaments, Martina Navratilova dominated the Finals for many years, winning the tournament eight times.
Even though she was ecstatic about the event’s success, Allaster emphasized that there was more to be done to make the event perfect, specifically regarding the venue’s roof and lights. That records still stands today. Names like Chris Evert, Steffi Graf, Monica Seles, Gabriela Sabatini, Martina Hingis and Billie Jean King all featured prominently throughout the years. King was the first woman to win it. The WTA Finals in 2014 were most definitely a success with the public: 129 000 people attended the 10-day tournament, which featured charity events and matches with old champions, in addition to the singles and doubles matches played by the qualifiers. The three editions in Istanbul also posted good numbers: in 2012, 73 072 tickets were sold for the seven-day event, which was the most since 2000. A year later the number fell to 69 983, with about 16 000 attending the final. Four of the eleven sessions sold out completely this time around, filling each of the 10 000 seats in the stadium.
Interview: Marin Cilic by David Cox
“There’s a lot more attention now,” he smiles.
“It was extremely special,” Marin Cilic reflects as he looks back to the day in September when he returned to Croatia as a Grand Slam champion, their first in thirteen years. “There must have been 30,000 to 40,000 people in the square in my hometown. I absolutely didn’t expect so many to turn up. But a lot of them have followed me since the start of my career so they were excited. The only annoying thing was I had little time there. I barely had time to sit before I had to move on.” I’m speaking to Cilic deep in the bowels of the O2 Arena in London as he prepares to take his place at the World Tour Finals for the first time in his career. It’s the end of a stretch which has taken him through Holland, China and Russia over the past six weeks with barely a pause for breath. “There’s a lot more attention now,” he smiles. “It’s a bit new on and off court. Other players are looking at you more. They respect your game a bit more. And there’s more focus from the media. But this is where I want to be.” Cilic knows he can rely on the helping hand of Goran Ivanisevic to steer him through some of the
madness. Ivanisevic’s status as a national icon in his homeland became almost mythical after he won Wimbledon in 2001, a moment his new protégée remembers vividly. “It’s probably the most asked question in Croatia, because everybody in Croatia knows where they were during Goran’s final,” he laughs. “It’s probably one of the most watched sports matches in Croatian history. I had a tennis camp close to my home alongside my friends. It was big fun for us definitely and a huge win for Goran. Perhaps one day people will ask that question about the US Open final.” Of course, while Cilic’s triumph was unexpected, it didn’t quite have the fairytale quality of Wimbledon 2001. Seemingly down and out as a competitor, ranked outside the top 100, Ivanisevic provided one of sport’s great storylines. “Goran as a character is really loved by everybody in Croatia and to see him losing three times in the final was really devastating for everybody,” Cilic explained. “We knew how much Wimbledon meant to him and when it came to the fourth final in 2001, it was in the air. Everybody was expecting that he was going to win. It was such an unbelievable story it had to be like that. When you think how many people were waiting for him when he arrived back in Split a few days later, it was probably one of the best atmospheres ever.
It was fitting that Ivanisevic was the man who finally unlocked the puzzle of how to get the best out of Cilic. Almost 200,000 people in Split just celebrating the victory.” It was fitting that Ivanisevic was the man who finally unlocked the puzzle of how to get the best out of Cilic. Their paths first crossed when a 9 year old Cilic was among the ballkids for an exhibition match in Croatia against Thomas Muster back in 1997. It would be another five years before Cilic, then one of the top juniors in Europe, was formally introduced. “I was 14 and we practised together,” he remembers. “I didn’t talk much, I was pretty shy and Goran straight away after the training was saying, ’There is something about this kid. He’s going to be good,’ even though I was completely nervous and I couldn’t put a ball in the court. But he just knew, so it was a big experience for me.” Ivanisevic has continued to have the same deeply held belief that Cilic would one day beat the best
in the world. For him, one of tennis’ most flamboyant characters, it was a change in mindset and personality which Cilic required more than anything to get the best out of himself on court. “He’s very calm as a coach,” Cilic says. “His personality is different now he’s coaching, from when he used to play. He knows what he’s doing and he’s a lot of fun so the time goes very quick. He said from the start that I needed to change my character a little bit. And that wasn’t easy. So it took a little time to sink in and for me to understand that was the way I needed to be in matches. But I felt things were coming together after the French Open. I was up against (Novak) Djokovic and I played really good tennis on a surface which doesn’t suit me.” Hard courts have always been the territory where CIlic is most dangerous and he’s looking forward
Ivanisevic believes Cilic can go on to achieve what he never managed and win a second Grand Slam title
to January’s Australian Open, an event where he’s a former semifinalist. It’s easy to forget how different things were twelve months ago. Cilic was returning from a doping ban, incurred after he accidentally ingested a banned substance while seeking medication for a cold at a tournament. “It’s very distant in my memory now but I felt from that period, I gained so much maturity,” he says. “Since then I’ve known what I want to do, I’m pushing much more in training and I want to use every opportunity I have to get better. When you find yourself in that sort of situation, it’s difficult as you don’t know when you’re gonna play tennis again. Something you love which you’ve done for all your life. And then when you come back, you appreciate much more what you have and you don’t want to waste any minute on the court.” Ivanisevic believes Cilic can go on to achieve what he never managed and win a second Grand Slam title, perhaps even on the grass of Wimbledon, a surface which is gradually becoming more natural for him. For now everything is rosy but Cilic is still aware that you can’t take anything for granted in sport. “You never know what’s coming over the hill,” he says. “But the best tournament of my career may still be to come. I’m ready to take the opportunities I have in the future in the best way I can.”
The Belgian Beast by Marco Di Nardo
For a while it appeared as if David Goffin was a lost player.
For a while it appeared as if David Goffin was a lost player. After an excellent 2012, the Belgian had many pundits believing that he would soon be a Top 10 contender. But a torrid 2013 saw him fall out of the Top 100, and loss after loss at the beginning of this season seemed to point to a short career for the youngster. He simply could not compete with other top players, and rarely recorded back-to-back match wins. Yet suddenly and completely out of nowhere, he turned it around in the second half of 2014. He strung together a number of impressive weeks, often making it deep into very tough and competitive tournaments. He even made it to the brink of the Top 20.
It all started at the Challenger event in Scheveningen. Goffin, ranked 106 at the time, dominated the tournament without losing any set, and two weeks later repeated the feat in back-to-back Challenger tournaments in Poznan and Tampere. The mental aspect is often decisive in tennis, and winning 30 consecutive sets is the perfect cure for a player who had been lacking confidence for the better part of 18 months. When he arrived in Kitzbuhel, he played like a man on a mission, proving just about unbeatable for the whole week. After three successful Challenger wins, he finally triumphed at his first ATP-level event, beating Dominic Thiem in the final.
Goffin carried his magic touch to Metz, where he won his second career title The winning streak continued in Winston-Salem, where Goffin went from qualifying to the quarter-finals. His 25-match winningstreak came to an end with a loss to Jerzy Janowicz. Unfazed, he won two matches at the US Open before falling to Grigor Dimitrov, but even then he did not go without a fight, winning the first set 60. It was the first time since January of 2012 that Dimitrov had lost a set to love. Goffin carried his magic touch to Metz, where he won his second career title before winning yet another trophy at the Challenger in Mons. He even made it to the final of the prestigious event in Basel, though he had little luck in contending with hometown favorite Roger Federer. That being said, solid wins over Borna Coric and Milos Raonic en route to the final will give him plenty of confidence going forward. In all, he won 43 out of 45 matches during his streak, something usually only associated with the likes of Djokovic and Federer. Certainly the level of the tournaments where Goffin won most of his matches were not particularly high, but that doesn’t distract from the extreme difficulty of winning so many matches. He ended his season with a second round exit at the Paris Masters 1000 event in Bercy, but he will head into the offseason believing that he will be a difficult player to deal with next year.
Davydenko Calls It Quits by Alessandro Varassi
Nikolay Davydenko, the former world number three, has officially retired from tennis.
The Kremlin Cup was, perhaps fittingly, the last professional event Nikolay Davydenko would ever attend. The slender Russian has finally decided that enough is enough, and that he will no longer continue to try and pursue a career in professional tennis. A seemingly endless string of injuries – most notable to his wrist – have forced him to call it quits. Born in 1981, Davydenko achieved a career-high ranking of number three in the world in 2006. He won 21 ATP titles, many at very prestigious events. Though he would never win a Grand Slam, he did manage to lift the trophy at the ATP World Tour Finals in 2009. His last consistently good results came in 2009 and 2010, when he regularly beat top players such as Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. In 2010 he beat Nadal in the final at Doha, after losing the first set 6-0. His loss in the quarter-finals of the Australian Open against Roger Federer, after building up a huge lead, was the last occasion he would really feature prominently on the sport’s biggest stage.
Davydenkio also won three Masters 1000 events (Bercy in 2006, Miami in 2008 and Shanghai in 2009), and reached two semi-finals each at Roland Garros and the US Open. There he often ran into Federer, however, and he lost three such matches against the Swiss. His best year was undoubtedly 2006, when he reached seven finals and won five titles. He also helped Russia win its second-ever second Davis Cup. Many fans called him “the robot” because of his incredible consistency from the baseline. Though he didn’t have any major weapons, his excellent technique and wonderful stamina won him many matches. He was an insular character, never giving away too much to the media thanks to his poor English, but Davydenko built up quite a following on the ATP Tour. The darkest chapter in Davydenko’s career was when he was linked to sports betting in 2007. In August of that year, Davydenko played Martin Vassallo Arguello in Sopot, Poland. After winning the first set 6-2, Russian betting sites saw a sudden surge in bets against Davydenko. Incredibly, those bets would pay off when he retired in the third set due to a foot injury.
Many people continue to believe that his retirement was more than a coincidence. Though he was never officially charged with anything, and never faced any disciplinary action from the ATP, many people continue to believe that his retirement was more than a coincidence. A few months later in St. Petersburg, he was reprimanded for not giving his best effort against Marin Cilic. He was fined $2000. A similar punishment was reportedly considered when he lost miserably to Marcos Baghdatis 6-2, 6-2 in Bercy, but that was never enacted. Davydenko has always maintained his innocence in these matters, and it is sad that such a large part of his legacy will be bound up in these accusations.
Since 2010, he has never again been a force on the Tour. Though he tried to make a comeback on multiple occasions, he could never build up much momentum before injuring himself again. That being said, he does go into retirement with one notable achievement: he boasts a winning record against Rafael Nadal. He beat the Spaniard six times with only five losses, and three of those wins were in finals. Not too many people can claim that.
n째 p
Eugenie Bouchard by David Cox
Driven by the March of Time
“Before I know it, I’ll wake up and I’ll be 30,” says Eugenie Bouchard in that disarmingly frank manner which has held so many journalists in thrall over the past twelve months. Sports Illustrated labelled her ‘a jock’ at the start of the year and the New York Times Magazine followed suit ahead of the US Open, describing her as ‘a player on the brink.’ Tall and lithe at 1.78m, Bouchard’s obvious aesthetic appeal has already endeared her to a burgeoning fan club stretching across North America, Asia and Australia, but it’s not merely her poster girls looks and penchant for selfies which have cut such a swathe among both the marketing men and some of sport’s most hardened hacks. Quite simply, Bouchard isn’t your conventional 20 year old sportswoman. She sees both the
game and life in general through subtly different eyes, eschewing the customary clichés and mediadriven perceptions on the thoughts and emotions a player of her age should be experiencing, in favour of a direct honesty which is as startling as it is refreshing. “People say I’m young but I’m not that young,” she continues. “I feel old already. I’m starting to think I might be getting wrinkles.” Bouchard’s mock fretting about her facial features is admittedly tongue-in-cheek but she’s deadly serious when describing the urgency which underlines her pursuit of success. “I want to be the best player I can be as quickly as possible. That’s why every time I go to a tournament and I go on court I always believe I can win. I want to keep going forwards. I’ve played tennis now for a decade and a half since I was five. I’ve worked very hard. When I get results, I feel I’ve deserved them and I expect them because I’ve dedicated that time and effort.” Going by prevailing stereotypes for a player of her age, Bouchard should be taking her place in the ‘Promising Youngster’ category alongside contemporaries like Madison Keys, Laura Robson, Sloane Stephens and Monica Puig.
Instead, having defied expectations to reach the Wimbledon final and two Grand Slam semi-finals she has been plagued by enquiries as to whether she’s ‘overwhelmed’ at achieving so much so soon. It’s a mentality which Bouchard has little time for. “Why should I stop because I’ve achieved something new?” she questions. Bieber Fever This attitude underlies Bouchard’s much publicized admiration for her compatriot Justin Bieber, an admission which drew decidedly mixed reactions during the Australian Open. But it’s an admiration which stretches beyond Bieber to anyone who’s built themselves up from scratch, especially at a young age.
“I just love the stories of people who have made themselves into something, especially when they come from fairly average beginnings. They may have earned big but it’s come through them. I’ve worked hard to go out and try to make my dreams reality, and look positively on life. I definitely appreciate others who did the same and have achieved things.” Bouchard talks little about her own wealth and projected future earnings which are predicted to be stratospheric. In July she signed a three year multimillion pound deal as the face of Coca-Cola in Canada and industry experts have predicted that her eventual career gain could far surpass that of Sharapova who netted $29 million in 2013 alone from her endorsement contracts with Porsche, Nike, Head and Samsung among others. Her impact stems partly from being Canadian and being at the forefront of a sport which her country has traditionally had little impact in. “I get recognized so much more back home these days, so I have to really think about what I wear anytime I go out,” she says. “I can’t go looking too slouchy in my sweat pants anymore.” Personal Cost However her rise from relative obscurity to the future face of women’s tennis in a matter of months has come at a personal cost. She has admitted her relationships with peers such as
Outwardly Bouchard shows few signs of being affected. Robson, her childhood friend for over a decade, are now almost non-existent. Robson was once thought to be the more promising talent, but while Bouchard has propelled herself into the top ten in 2014 she has been forced to watch from the sidelines, stricken by injury. After beating Robson at the Family Circle Cup in April 2013, Bouchard quipped to the media, “Yeah we hate each other now,” but eighteen months later the strain of being rivals in a fiercely competitive sport really does appear to have soured things somewhat. Outwardly Bouchard shows few signs of being affected. One suspects she always knew it was an inevitable price to pay, just as Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic ultimately discovered that being best friends and adversaries was not a compatible mix.
Sharapova has often said that she’s not interested in making friends on tour but Bouchard is not especially comfortable with comparisons being drawn between the two. “Of course it’s a compliment,” she says. “Maria’s a great champion, she’s won four slams and been No.1 in the world. As a child I definitely looked up to her. I remember watching her win Wimbledon on TV and thinking that she was so cool. But these sort of comparisons have both a positive and a negative aspect. You want to be your own person, be judged on what you achieve and let that be that.” It’s easy to see the similarities. Both left home at a young age to pursue their dreams, Sharapova to the Bollettieri academy in Florida while Bouchard came under the guidance of another wily old veteran in Nick Saviano, a man she
describes as like a ‘second father’. But while Sharapova’s renowned toughness as a competitor may have been partially honed by the traumatic experience of being separated from her mother to lead a fairly solitary existence in a bootcamp style atmosphere on the other side of the world, Bouchard was only too excited at the chance to leave Canada. “I was only 12 but I wanted to improve my tennis,” she says. “I wanted the opportunity. At that age I already saw it as my full-time job and my parents thought it was the right thing to do. But I had my family around me which helped a lot – my mom, my brother and my sister. So it wasn’t like it was sad or anything.”
Her mum Julie says that from a young age, Bouchard always stood out as being the most intensely driven and determined of her siblings, whatever the task in hand. “I remember being intensely determined to get the top marks on all my maths tests when I was in school,” Bouchard remembers. “I think that kind of mindset has definitely translated to tennis as I’ve got older. But I enjoyed school. While I love tennis, I would also have loved to have gone on to university and done that. Maybe when I’m 30, I’ll go back and hang out with all the 20 year olds.” Her twin sister Beatrice is currently doing just that but there is no rivalry or jealousy between the sisters, just an acceptance that they were always destined to follow very different paths. “We keep in touch all the time and we’re very close,” Bouchard says. “I always want to know her grades in class and that kind of stuff and she really supports me and thinks that what I do is insanely cool. And I do truly love what I do. I’m lucky to be able to travel the world and I always try to make sure I realize that I have a special life. But at the same time, I think that her normal university life is really cool because I don’t do it.” For just a fleeting moment Bouchard sounds as if she would rather fade back into obscurity than go on to cement her growing status as one of tennis’ most recognisable faces. While the limelight is at its most intense in Canada, she
benefits from sharing it with Milos Raonic, and to a lesser extent Vasek Pospisil, both of whom have made substantial breakthroughs over the past year. “I think it’s quite a nice coincidence that a number of us have been doing well at the same time,” she says. “But it’s just that – a coincidence. All three of us are from completely different backgrounds and we’ve made our breakthrough in totally different ways so it’s not like there’s one specific reason why Canadian tennis is suddenly doing well.” Such is the popularity of Bouchard and Raonic that tennis even finds itself occasionally fighting for space amongst the more traditional sports of ice hockey, football and lacrosse on the back pages. It’s novelty for Bouchard who found herself idolising Steffi Graf as a child in the absence of any home-grown players to support. “People in Canada are definitely paying more attention to tennis now rather than just hockey all day, every day,” she said. “That’s nice, hopefully it will continue to become a bigger sport. I never really looked up to any Canadian
players growing up but maybe that will change. Maybe one day some players will look up to me.” Side Bar: Genie on…. Celebrity Fans: “Owen Wilson says he’s watched me on TV and I’m a huge fan of his so that’s really exciting. And Jim Parsons from the Big Bang Theory has emailed me after every single match I’ve played.” On getting stuffed animals from the ‘Genie Army’: “I’ll have to get a room for the full menagerie. In Mexico I got four Angry Birds, I’ve received stuff from people in Japan and I have this Chinese fan who always sends me stuffed animals. It’s really nice but I don’t know what to do with them all.”
Superstitions: “I'm superstitious about not being superstitious. Whether you have two or three eggs in the morning, that won't affect what happens on the court.”
The Scourge Of Illegal Betting In Tennis by Marco Avena While tennis has never had to deal with performance enhancing drugs to the extent that other sports have, the scourge of betting has more than once reared its ugly head.
Betting and the throwing of matches does, of course, occur in other sports as well, but tennis is particularly vulnerable to it. The reason is simple: tennis is an individual sport, and fixing a result is easy, since you have no team members to convince. You only need to do it yourself. In football, throwing anything is rather trickier, since you need the cooperation of various individuals, which obviously increases the risk of the whole enterprise. Sportradar AG, a leading company in the worldwide prevention of fraud in sports betting, closely tracks information regarding matches in order to detect irregular patterns of activity. “Technically, to throw a tennis match or even a set is easier than a football game,” the company says. “We have mathematical models and methods of observation which vary from sport to sport. These days people even bet on Challenger tournaments, so everything needs to be observed." Without going into the details of who did what, it is clear that matches are being observed
more closely than ever, and prosecutors have their eyes on various players. Yet bookmakers and players all know this, and are trying to stay one step ahead of law enforcement. Various countries allow people to bet on low-level tournaments that often escape much scrutiny. Even worse, gamblers are allowed to bet on even the most granular of outcomes, such betting on a single set instead of a match. Tour-level events from ATP 250 tournaments and upwards are more difficult to influence, since the matches are observed so closely by so many people, but that doesn’t mean nefarious activity is entirely absent either. Betting still happens at these events, and curious match results often occur. Matches involving extreme underdogs are the most prone to interference. If a player ranked 800 in the world beats a player ranked 250 in the world, nobody in the wider tennis community will take much notice. But such matches often attract much betting, and offers to throw a match can often be tempting for a player not earning that much on the Tour. The fact that such upsets do occur honestly further complicates matters, making detecting of underhanded activity all the more difficult.
Betting can be a pleasant entertainment for the enthusiast who wants some more excitement while watching the match on TV, but it is inexcusable for tennis pros or anyone connected to them. How to throw a match It is surprisingly easy to get mixed up in the world of match-fixing. You don’t need physical meetings or bags full of money anymore. All you need is a computer with an internet connection, and the deed can be done by both parties with the same ease as ordering a new racket online. The money can be quietly paid to an account that nobody even knows exists, apart from the player and his fixer.
If the player throwing the match then also bets against himself, he will be able to make a double profit. As a professional you cannot officially bet online, but you can use someone else’s details to easily do so. As already mentioned, only the player himself is needed to fix the match, nobody else. It is, of course, very difficult to accuse someone of intentionally missing a shot by just 30cm. Players miss those shots all the time, how are we to know when someone does it on purpose? Players can even ethically justify their behavior to themselves and to each other. They can, for example, each agree to lose a set for betting purposes and then play the third honestly to still determine an honest winner. No one will notice a thing and at the end of the match and both players will walk away with heavy pockets. Travelling the world for tournaments makes things even easier, since players can acquire untraceable internet connections without much trouble and bet against themselves. Winners and losers Hiding the money is often the easiest part, with so many tax havens and shelters willing to conceal the income streams of their clients. Though various agencies and even players are doing their best to stamp out this sort of behavior, it is getting increasingly difficult in this modern age of ours. As long as people want money, there will be dishonest characters
looking to do whatever they can to get money, and betting like this is as easy a way as any for criminals to get some. Only through thorough education and change from the players on up will the situation ever change. People need to realize – and care – that their actions are ruining the sport they love. Bringing about such a major change in attitudes is of course very difficult, and one wonders if we will ever be able to accomplish it. That being said, we cannot give up hope – tennis is worth defending.
Coaching On And Off The Court by Stefano Massari
I work with, being able to divert attention from the focus on results is very difficult
I am in La Spezia and it is Saturday afternoon. It’s July and it's hot. The streets are almost empty, and the wispy clouds are lazily making their way across the sky. I have just finished a meeting with some colleagues and am walking to the station. After every step, my shirt sticks to my skin a little more. I feel the weight of my mobile phone in my pocket, and it occurs to me that Luca had his exam this morning. Luca is a tennis player with a 2.5 ranking, and we have been working together all year. He is intelligent and has a huge desire to win, although he can be a little impulsive on the court. I decide to give him a call. Before I can even greet him he starts speaking very fast.
He apologizes for not calling earlier and says something about a broken phone. I manage to ask him how the exam went, and he tells me it went very well, but that he had not thought it would go well last night. He had gone to bed in a very bad frame of mind. But, he tells me, he had woken up as if he were another person. He had decided that he did not want to live another day of his life in fear or doubt, but instead wanted to experience each day as the intense and beautiful wonder it is. This thought, he continues, has changed everything. It allowed him to sit in front of the examination committee with a different spirit and give the best of himself.
He was able to say everything he knew, and even when he did not know something he didn’t simply fall silent. He says that he was even able to help out a classmate by telling him about his new philosophy. It worked for him as well. Finally, he pauses, perhaps for breath, before saying that today he was finally able to practice in his life something which he had been using on the court for so long. He says that on the court he sees every challenge as an opportunity for gratification, fun and growth, and realized that he can adopt this in his everyday life as well. For someone like him, and like so many other athletes I work with, being able to divert attention from the focus on results is very
difficult. But when they are able to forget about the result, and focus instead on what gives them pleasure and gratification, to focus on the journey rather than the destination, I see a massive change in all my students. They are able to express themselves more positively on the court, and play to their full potential. But managing stress is not easy. We live in a culture or results, and moving away from that is a massive challenge. When, as a boy, I came home from school, my mother asked me what I had learned, while I focused more on what grades I had received. Of course, I am not saying that results do not matter at all. However, I maintain that focusing too much on results lead us to obsess over them, which causes stress and anxiety. Focusing instead on what we want to achieve can be a joy in of itself, and lead to positive results. Luca asks me if we can make an appointment for next week. I say that we can, and think about how proud I am of Luca for realizing that he can live his life in such a positive way, by living in each moment and appreciating its uniqueness. But I do not tell him this. I know that he has already embraced the philosophy fully, and that words will add nothing to his happiness. I say goodbye and get on the train, putting by phone back in my pocket. The train departs and I look up at the sky, and for some reason the sun looks a little brighter than it ever has.