2015 Australian Open…ATP 2000...Melbourne, Australia

[don_budge]

Swinging volleys, Vampires, Bagels, M.P.A.T.S.O.T.B., Timing is certainly everything

Then the Vampire Djokovic wins the last 9 games...he is a vampire and you have to put a stake through his heart.

Short of putting a stake through his heart, Novak Djokovic will not go away!

Another wipe out final set.

Real costly, wasn't it? Anything would have done...just a plop over the net even. Tight sets like that are won or lost by the tiniest of margins.

Timing is everything.

Djokovic is better version of Murray. Better mental strength when it counts.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

The match? Pretty boring if you ask me. Sure…I can admire the athleticism but for overall entertainment value on a scale of 1 to 10…I give it a very weak 5. That's only because there isn't much else to do on a Sunday afternoon. But given the choice…I was out shovelling the white stuff of which we got a fresh supply yesterday and thank God for that. I mean it. I love to shovel snow. Almost as much as I love playing tennis. I watched the entire match but would slip out once a set to have a go at the powder. Actually it was pretty heavy stuff and I beat the neighbor coming over with his snow-plow. I love it when that happens…he turns around and just does the 400 meter driveway down to the dirt road.

This is an eclectic collection of quotes from eclectic bunch of astute tennis coaches. Thanks guys for your thoughts. Excellent stuff.

Swinging Volleys…There you have it. My argument against the dreaded swinging volley personified. A muffed forehand volley by Andy Murray at arguably what was to become the most important point of the match. THE pivotal point. Andy had been down a break early on in the first but manage to square things away in time for a first set tie-breaker. The best of all possibilities…from where he was standing. At six apiece and five all in the tie-break he worked Novak Djokovic over real nice during a twenty something shot exchange, maybe it was even thirty, and he was presented with the most desirable of outcomes. A shoulder high volley from where he was standing a meter away from the net. If he wins that first set it's an entirely different match. As it was Djokovic had a one set lead…which he has a knack of making insurmountable.

Now there is more to this story than this split second decision that we leave Andy hanging over at this point in the narrative. All tournament long Andy Murray has been playing the swing volley on balls that he has been transitioning to the net behind. For the most part everything that I saw were around the service line or so. So perhaps this ball was just a bit too close for him to feel comfortable to swing at. I don't know. I do know that when the ball is in the air and it has not bounced yet it is traveling approximately twice as fast before it has bounced. So there is incrementally less time to decide upon what to do with the stupid thing. In this case he could have done virtually anything except what he did…he hit one inch long to put himself down set point in the first set of the Australian Open finals. That my friends is what you call a mental error. A brain fart.

Murray found himself betwixt and between…there was just a moment of indecision as his impulse was to swing at it but he made the wise choice…the fundamentally correct (FC) and he tried the classic volley technique. There is no time to think…just barely enough to do. But he impulsively took his racquet back just a tad too far leaving the face open and he miscalculated or mistimed it ever so slightly and boom…there goes his opportunity to seal the deal and he let's the most dangerous of opponents back in the door. Fire the coach…a woman cannot teach a man to play the men's game. (Gloria Connors being the exception historically speaking)

Vampires…Nonsense. The Human Wall is more like it. A couple of the very first things that you learn on "The Road" to becoming a tennis player is number one the point isn't over until the ball bounces twice. How many times do you let up thinking your opponent won't get it and then he surprises you with the unexpected. Number two the match isn't over until the last point has been won. How many matches get away from a player when he thinks he has it in the bag and he lets up…just a bit. Before you know it…you are taking it on the losing end.

Novak Djokovic could have a Marvel Comic book character written in his honor with the name of "The Human Wall". This guy understands two of the most basic rules in tennis. The two that I have quoted above. When you are playing Novak there will be countless points in a match that it appears that he is hopelessly out of the point…but somehow he regains footing in the point and he turns it around and beats you. This guy makes a living doing just this. He is great on the forehand side at doing this and a number of times in this tournament he ran down balls and put up lobs with in millimetres of the baseline…that is just for example. He can do a lot of things. But to me…the really amazing side is the backhand where he can redirect balls from impossible angles and depths to hit balls back the are very awkward to play or even clean winners. A word of advice to anyone playing Novak…it ain't over until the ball bounces twice.

M.P.A.T.S.O.T.B. ...Now with regard to the match play in general (refer to "Match Play and the Spin of the Ball" by William Tilden") never count your opponent out until the last point has been won. Especially if that opponent has won so many times right in front of you pulling out entire matches from seemingly desperate situations. This business of gamesmanship and Novak "acting" as if he is down and out is really beside the point and again…fire the coach. If Murray doesn't understand that what Novak did was completely within the rules then I don't know what to advise. Djokovic is a master at the ebb and flow of match play. He is a master at "letting the game come to him". There are times instead of knocking your head against the wall when your opponent is shelling you a good strategy is to "rope-a-dope" as Stotty said. Let your opponent swing himself out and then turn around when he relaxes his grip just a bit and knock him into next week. Djokovic may have been feeling a bit woozy. He seemed to have tweaked something in his foot or leg. Sure he may have been dramatizing a bit. Players are always doing that. Guess who does it the most? Andy Murray.

Bagels…It's quite disturbing the way that Novak's two matches ended in bagels…in six games to love sets. Did both players throw in the towel? Didn't they have anything left in the tank in one of the four most prestigious tournaments in the world? Any tennis player worth his salt will fight to the bitter end to avoid a six to zero finish. One has to wonder about a couple of things with these guys. It is too basic and too primal to even discuss. Stan Wawrinka and Andy Murray both went away at the end of their matches which is why they will never attain the heights of…Novak Djokovic.

"The Human Wall" deserves all of the credit for maintaining his composure and his resolve through thick and thin. One might say for instance that Murray is only "Djokovic Light". They certainly match up on a shot by shot basis so the real difference once again highlights the fact as to just how "mental" a game tennis is. Keep the ball in play. Run down every single ball. That is how it started for Novak Djokovic…just as with any other great champion. Don't let the ball bounce twice and make damn sure that you win the last point.

[klacr]

Tied at 6-6 and 5 all in the tie-breaker Andy Murray plays a twenty something stroke point and finds himself at the net. Novak's return is an absolute sitter of a forehand volley and Murray muffs it…one inch long.

The thing is Murray has been swinging at his forehand volleys all tournament long…and he has been making most of them. But on the forehand volley that he needed the most…he muffed. His consistency on his classic volley may have been compromised by all of the swinging volleys. It's a mental game. Perhaps it was indecision as to whether to swing or "volley".

He went on to lose the next point and lost the all important first set. Now we will see how he handles this adversity. The set was there for his taking. If he makes that volley he is in the driving seat.

Ironically, They both won same percentage of net points.
Djokovic 26/37 (70 %) Murray 23/33 (70 %)

Unfortunately, Timing is everything. And when Murray he duffed that volley long that was a bad time.
When Djokovic decided to serve and volley down set point in 2nd, probably not the best time to go to a style that for him is "a work in progress"

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[klacr]

It seems to me that Djokovic is simply Murray version 2.0. On paper, what does Murray do that is better than Djokovic? Djokovic has same strengths as Murray just greater. Then again, matches never get played on paper.

And yes, The Australian Open is all about the sweat equity done in December.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Djokovic is better version of Murray. Better mental strength when it counts.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

Irreversible turmoil...

Tied at 6-6 and 5 all in the tie-breaker Andy Murray plays a twenty something stroke point and finds himself at the net. Novak's return is an absolute sitter of a forehand volley and Murray muffs it…one inch long.

The thing is Murray has been swinging at his forehand volleys all tournament long…and he has been making most of them. But on the forehand volley that he needed the most…he muffed. His consistency on his classic volley may have been compromised by all of the swinging volleys. It's a mental game. Perhaps it was indecision as to whether to swing or "volley".

He went on to lose the next point and lost the all important first set. Now we will see how he handles this adversity. The set was there for his taking. If he makes that volley he is in the driving seat.

Real costly, wasn't it? Anything would have done...just a plop over the net even. Tight sets like that are won or lost by the tiniest of margins. Strange the way the game fell away as it did. The first two sets took ages; the last set and half went in a blink. When Murray loses control of his emotions and goes into inner turmoil like that, he has never yet been able to turn things round...not that I have witnessed anyway. Once he gets into that state, he's finished. His recuperative powers are far weaker than the other three...

[GeoffWilliams]

It will be just another Murray loss in a final. Faking injuries and leg grabs, only when he loses a point. D will deservedly wipe him.

Another wipe out final set. D becomes a robot, the only guy to ever play better while becoming more rigid in his form. M forehand disintegrated and he was missing fh that I don't miss. Sliver hitting under pressure is what D does better than anyone else on hard courts.

[stotty]

Well played Novak...

End of set one: 42 points apiece.
End of 2nd set: one point difference.
3-3 in 3rd set: still only one or two points difference, if that.

Then the Vampire Djokovic wins the last 9 games.

You know how the vampire gets off the floor after he should be dead in the movies and you say, "Oh that's ridiculous. No one could survive that beating, etc." But, of course, he is a vampire and you have to put a stake through his heart.

Short of putting a stake through his heart, Novak Djokovic will not go away!

But those first 32 games were an amazing 3 hours.

don

PS It will be interesting to hear Djoker's explanation about his apparent exhaustion in the 2nd and 3rd sets. But there is such a thing as an energy system that takes some time to take over after you exhaust the immediate energy supply. The body takes some time to turn on the fat burning system that converts fat to energy by gluconeogenesis; I wonder how much of that contributes to explaining Djokovic's second wind. But he also knows that second wind is coming and he plays the apparent exhaustion for everything it is worth. He's done this so many times that Murray has no right to be surprised or upset by the tactics/antics. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Djokovic has fooled his opponents too many times for them to be surprised or upset by his histrionics. That's why I call him the Vampire Djokovic!

I saw the tie-break in the first set. It was a really tight stuff but Djokovic pulled out a terrific defensive lob and went on to win the set. I missed the second set and the fourth. I saw the whole third third set. Murray went up a break but then fell for all the rope-a-dope stuff from Djokovic and took his foot off the accelerator and lost the plot. How many times as Djokovic pulled that stunt in the very biggest of matches? I assume Murray just fell away in the fourth...

He is great though Djokovic. In the third set he hit a backhand down the line then a forehand down the line in the same game a few points later that were just out of this world. I wonder what it must feel like to hit a ball that hard, that cleanly!

I don't like this rope-a-dope stuff, though, and wish he wouldn't do it when there is nothing wrong with him. I also find it strange how he feigns slipping. He's hit the ball on balance....it's crossing the net...then he slips. It's about as convincing as my youngest faking illness to get a day off school.

Hats off to Djokovic....he played really outside of the antics.

[tennis_chiro]

End of set one: 42 points apiece.
End of 2nd set: one point difference.
3-3 in 3rd set: still only one or two points difference, if that.

Then the Vampire Djokovic wins the last 9 games.

You know how the vampire gets off the floor after he should be dead in the movies and you say, "Oh that's ridiculous. No one could survive that beating, etc." But, of course, he is a vampire and you have to put a stake through his heart.

Short of putting a stake through his heart, Novak Djokovic will not go away!

But those first 32 games were an amazing 3 hours.

don

PS It will be interesting to hear Djoker's explanation about his apparent exhaustion in the 2nd and 3rd sets. But there is such a thing as an energy system that takes some time to take over after you exhaust the immediate energy supply. The body takes some time to turn on the fat burning system that converts fat to energy by gluconeogenesis; I wonder how much of that contributes to explaining Djokovic's second wind. But he also knows that second wind is coming and he plays the apparent exhaustion for everything it is worth. He's done this so many times that Murray has no right to be surprised or upset by the tactics/antics. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Djokovic has fooled his opponents too many times for them to be surprised or upset by his histrionics. That's why I call him the Vampire Djokovic!

[gzhpcu]

Djokovic deservedly once more. Terrific 4th set. Murray just goes up to the net, very briefly shakes hands and goes away. No congratulations, nothing.

[don_budge]

The Problem with Swing Volleys...

Tied at 6-6 and 5 all in the tie-breaker Andy Murray plays a twenty something stroke point and finds himself at the net. Novak's return is an absolute sitter of a forehand volley and Murray muffs it…one inch long.

The thing is Murray has been swinging at his forehand volleys all tournament long…and he has been making most of them. But on the forehand volley that he needed the most…he muffed. His consistency on his classic volley may have been compromised by all of the swinging volleys. It's a mental game. Perhaps it was indecision as to whether to swing or "volley".

He went on to lose the next point and lost the all important first set. Now we will see how he handles this adversity. The set was there for his taking. If he makes that volley he is in the driving seat.

[GeoffWilliams]

It will be just another Murray loss in a final. A mama's boy through and through. 9 yrs. with that suffering girl friend in the box. Video games 6 hrs. a day. Faking injuries and leg grabs, only when he loses a point. D will deservedly wipe him.

[stotty]

It's tight for sure...

We talked about and compared the serves of Stan Wawrinka and Novak Djokovic. There wasn't a big swing in either camp. When you look at Andy Murray there isn't a whole lot to differentiate one from the other either.

Both backhands are awfully tough and serve wise there doesn't appear to be anything really telling. It's as klacr puts it…anything that Murray can do…Novak may be able to do just a tad better. Mentally the nod has to go to Novak. While Murray seems to have "grown a pair" recently it may too early in the game for him to hold his milk in a Grand Slam final. Although I do remember him beating Novak in a Wimbledon final. But Wimbledon this isn't. This is down under…Novak has staked his claim.

Good assessment.

Ridiculous though it my sound, when Murray is on song I feel he has a tad more than Djokovic. He is slightly more penetrating off the ground for me with his flatter backhand, which showed when he defeated Djokovic in the US Open a few years back. He moves just as well...for sheer speed he may even be slightly quicker. What Murray doesn't have is Djokovic's deep rooted self-belief that somehow he is going to win whatever it takes however well or poorly he plays. Djokovic is a winner through and through; Murray a doubter.

Djokovic has ploughed through the field with his usual consistency while against Berdych, Murray has played the best tennis of the tournament so far in those last three sets. One thing for sure is Djokovic cannot hit Murray off the way Federer can. If Murray hugs the baseline, plays his best, serve wide astutely....and above all stays resolute, he can do it. He's now back to his best after a patchy couple of years and major back surgery.

But that's enough keyboard talk. The proof of the pudding is tomorrow when all the my theories will be put to the test. I will miss the final as I have to go to work and bring home the bacon. If it rains, as is forecast, I may see a set here and there.

[don_budge]

Hot and Heavy Navratilova fans...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/15/sports/tennis/martina-navratilova-adds-coach-and-wife-to-list-of-titles.html?action=click&contentCollection=US%20Open&region=Article&module=Promotron

For the hot and heavy Martina Navratilova fans. I've never been a big fan. But that service motion may just have been the best for a woman. She is heavy into the LBGT movement or whatever it is. She had a transexual for a coach for a while. His/Her name was Richard Raskind or Renee Richards. Martina is certainly on the cutting edge alright.

Here's Richard/Renee. See the cast of characters lining up to comment. Martina is right up there…of course. My favorite is Howard Cosell…but you guys are too young to remember him. He wrote a book called "I Never Played the Game" that was quite good. The one line that I remember was him saying…something to the effect that tennis players and golfers were like thoroughbred race horses…they were bought and paid for. You have to admit the wisdom in that little nugget.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OBPzN_ajXc

Chris Evert used to gripe that she was playing against someone who was on PED's. I wonder who that may have been. When the first oversized racquets came out it seems that Martina was one of the first of the top players to jump over. Opportunist? Someone that is a bit more willing to stretch the rules than others? Who am I to judge?

I saw her defeat Chris Evert in 1984 at the U. S. Open in the best woman's match that I have ever seen. The whole stadium was pulling for Chris. I guess I am not the only one…again.

[don_budge]

Andy Murray vs. Novak Djokovic

lc, I think you are spot on, the only real advantage Murray has over Novak is the slice backhand, but in that one particular shot, it is not a close call. To me, Novak, like Nadal, has too weak of a continental grip on that shot, and because of that, a weaker wrist position on contact and consequently, less bite on the ball.

We talked about and compared the serves of Stan Wawrinka and Novak Djokovic. There wasn't a big swing in either camp. When you look at Andy Murray there isn't a whole lot to differentiate one from the other either.

Both backhands are awfully tough and serve wise there doesn't appear to be anything really telling. It's as klacr puts it…anything that Murray can do…Novak may be able to do just a tad better. Mentally the nod has to go to Novak. While Murray seems to have "grown a pair" recently it may too early in the game for him to hold his milk in a Grand Slam final. Although I do remember him beating Novak in a Wimbledon final. But Wimbledon this isn't. This is down under…Novak has staked his claim.

[stroke]

db, I agree with you completely about Serena on court watchability and Wawrinka's one handed backhand. Maria's shrieking, glaring, and back to the server routine is very, very tiresome also.

lc, I think you are spot on, the only real advantage Murray has over Novak is the slice backhand, but in that one particular shot, it is not a close call. To me, Novak, like Nadal, has too weak of a continental grip on that shot, and because of that, a weaker wrist position on contact and consequently, less bite on the ball.

[vrc10s]

Is it too much to hope for?

Serena would have to win 6 more Slam Titles to pass Court. Even at 3 per year that would be 2017 before she would get to 25. At 2 titles per year it would be 2018. Plenty of time for Keys and Brouchard to develop.

Keys has the power, serve, and foot speed to get there. Just needs to be consistant and be mentally tough.