Pretenders
Whether Federer’s recent form is just a hiccup or his dominating days are actually at an end, it’s clear that Djokovic is in, by far, the best position to succeed him. It’s also clear that most tennis fans are less-than-thrilled about this. So let’s take a look at who else is out there to (potentially) challenge the Djoker over the next few years.
For the purposes of this exercise we’re going to pretend that Federer doesn’t exist. No doubt some die-hard fans out there are getting sweaty palms just from reading that last sentence (maybe even stigmata), but note the word “pretend”. It occurs to me this game might have been more fun to play a year or two ago when a Fed-less tennis landscape was well-nigh inconceivable–but it would have been purely speculation for speculation’s sake–whereas, now, it has some teeth…
Out of respect, we have to start with Nadal. He’s still No. 2 in the rankings, and, aside from Djokovic, he’s the only Grand Slam winner on tour younger than Roddick. The problem, of course, is that Rafa’s three Slam titles have all been earned on the red clay of Roland Garros. He had to go through Djokovic (versions 06 and 07, minus some mammoth upgrades) for two of those titles, but even if he does it again this year, that does nothing to change the reality that most of the season’s tennis is played on hard courts, and Nadal has now dropped three of their last four matches on variants of that surface in straight sets (with his own straight-set win coming when an exhausted Djokovic was getting blown out by everyone at the Masters Cup). Still, if he can continue to utterly dominate the clay over the next couple seasons, he may be able to bank enough points that it all comes down to Wimbledon. But is grass a neutral surface in the war between Djokovic and Nadal? Last season, a spent Djokovic was still able to wrangle the first set away from Nadal before retiring, and the way his serve has been getting him out of trouble lately, it’s hard to imagine the Djoker won’t be extremely effective on grass. But, until the grass season comes around in June, it remains an open question–and possibly Nadal’s last, best hope for achieving the No. 1 ranking.
If we go by the current rankings, Davydenko and Ferrer are up next, but I seriously doubt I’ll be getting any angry comments for skipping over them–neither is a future No. 1. Roddick–a former No. 1, don’t forget–and Nalbandian are currently sitting in the 6th and 7th spots, and the Roddick that dusted Nadal and Djokovic a couple weeks ago in Dubai may have looked like a future No. 1, as did the Nalbandian who decimated everybody in Madrid and Paris last fall. But it’s hard to imagine either of them maintaining that level conistently, Nalbandian for mental reasons as unfathomable as the mirrored lakes of his Argentine home-land and Roddick for the more prosaic reason that the game has caught up with him, and he has to be absolutely flawless in his attack to beat the best in the world today. The big serve and forehand (when he uses it) don’t buy Andy the same amount of breathing room that they did five years ago, simply because they don’t knock the wind out of everyone else to the same degree.
The rankings computer has Gasquet next, so we might as well deal with him now. Does he have the game to do mortal battle with Djokovic over the long haul? That’s a tough one to answer. I’m tempted to say the answer is the same as with Roddick: no, because he has to play his game flawlessly to be in the conversation. But his head-to-head with the Djoker tells a different, fairly convoluted story. In their last meeting, at last year’s Masters Cup, Gasquet routined Djokovic 6-2, 6-3, though, as I said above, Novak was exhausted from a long, breakthrough season, so it’s hard to take much from that result. Their previous two matches were won by Djokovic, one on clay, also in ‘07, and the other in Madrid, toward the end of ‘06. The nearly identical score-lines read: 7-6, 0-6, 6-1 and 7-6, 1-6, 6-1, which proves only that both players are very uncomfortable playing against each other’s all-around athleticism and shot-making abilities, but that–when things get tight–Djokovic has been able to win the points that matter. No surprise there. The big knock on Gasquet is that there’s pudding running between his ears instead of the toughness that wins major championships, and that pudding is likely to render his head-to-head with the Djoker moot, because it doesn’t provide much of a foundation upon which to build a dominant season of tennis. Gasquet plays too passively much of the time. His mellifluous talent can be harnessed to an attacking game plan only when inspiration hits him. It’s been hitting with greater frequency in the last twelve months, but he still doesn’t win enough of the really important matches to inspire any kind of faith.
At this point, we look past Blake, Berdych, and Youzhny to see that Gasquet’s compatriot Jo-Wilfried Tsonga has squeezed himself ahead of Andy Murray, to No. 13 in the entry rankings. It’s not just a numerical thing either, Tsonga powered his way to the Australian Open final out of nowhere, while Murray’s been in and out of the Top Ten, and in the discussion of top contenders at big tournaments for at least a year now without making a single Grand Slam quarterfinal or Masters Series final. Murray has his share of wins over top players, and a respectable five career titles, but it’s becoming hard to ignore the fact that he racks up most of his points at smaller events, never seeming to excell on the big stages–especially when all eyes are on him. His win over Roddick at Wimbledon in ‘06 is a partial exception, in that it’s the biggest of stages and all eyes are on him all the time in Britain, but no one expected him to win that match, so he wasn’t under the same pressure he has been more recently (or will be at the All-England Club this year, and every year until he retires). Also, Murray lost the following match in straight sets to Baghdatis, an example of a key stat that AJ pointed out in regards to an earlier post: Murray is woeful against the other young bucks, without a single win against Nadal, Djokovic, Gasquet, or Baghdatis. Murray’s game is founded more on strategy and versatility and less on big weapons than any of the other guys in this discussion, so, in a sense, there will always be more mental pressure on him because he needs to think more to win matches. And thinking in sports is a classic two-edged sword, sharp enough to behead Federer one day and then turn around to impale one’s self on the next.
That brings us back to Tsonga, who lost the last paragraph to Murray mainly because Murray is so much more of a known quantity than Tsonga. Jo-Willy is a true wild-card, and a guy who–at his best–plays smart while at the same time reminding you how simple the game of tennis is. If you have a jackhammer of a forehand, use it to hit the ball where your opponent isn’t. If you’re blessed with the best touch on the singles tour, then get into net and make the ball die so that even Nadal can’t prolong a rally. If your opponent is, by now, cringing in anticipation of your power, why not throw in an occasional moon ball to keep him off balance–especially if you’re capable of taking his own cute response and slamming it down his throat with said jackhammer forehand? At this point, the only thing that’s clear is Tsonga has the talent to beat anyone, and a huge helping of big-match brio to go along with it. If only because there’s so much we don’t know about him, he has to be counted as one of the major hopes among Djokovic-haters.
A guy like Marcos Baghdatis makes for an instructive, possibly cautionary, comparison. Following his own surprise run to the Aussie finals in ‘06, Baghdatis showed the same kind of joy in competing in front of large crowds, doing very little between January and June of that year, but then coming back from the brink of defeat in the first round at Wimbledon, to make it all the way to the semis, where he was simply out-competed by Nadal. He then figured in the last memorable match of Agassi’s career (too bad subsequent loss to Benjamin Becker can’t be wiped from our collective memory), going down in five sets, but impressing as a player who will not die easily in the Slams. Of course, he would go down tamely in three of the four Slams in ‘07, although he further cemented his big-match reputation by competing in truly epic five-setters against Djokovic at Wimbledon and against Hewitt at this year’s Aussie. The trouble is, he lost both matches. At present, few are expecting him to be anything other than a volatile, unresolved talent, and it is a path Tsonga could follow him down. But the Frenchman has superior fitness, ability at net, and just some ineffable solidity going for him that I believe will contribute to a steadier record on the tour.
The above names are all fairly obvious. Who else out there iscapable of threatening Djokovic in the next couple years as he tries to establish himself as a dominant champion? Anyone who’s seen 19 year-old Latvian Ernests Gulbis play would be a fool to write him off. Gulbis trained at the same academy as Djokovic, and presents a similarly robotic, aggressive back-court game–dead solid off both wings–but even more relentless in taking the ball early. He carved up Tommy Robredo so bad at the U.S. Open last year, Robredo requested a recording of the match so he could see what the hell had happened, and as recently as last week he was up a break in the third set on Nalbandian. When Gulbis is on his game he can inspire a dread akin to the young Marat Safin, but, at this point, we know considerably less about him than we do about Tsonga.
I’ve already written about how much I wish Donald Young was at the top of the men’s game, and there has been plenty of ink spilled elsewhere about both his potential and his early inability to live up to it. He’s still only eighteen, though. He has all the time in the world to live up to the hype or burn out on it. His shot-making skills and court coverage look like the real deal to me, and he certainly appears to crave victory in the way that I can’t say Gasquet does. I’m betting Young will break the Top Five at some point, but it’s hard to see him pushing and shoving for a spot at the very peak of the tennis world. He almost seems to have too much energy, too much flash–like the young Agassi–but without the mold-breaking recklessness, the rebellion that Andre would eventually shore up into the armor of a veteran warrior. Still, if Agassi proves anything, it’s that people can surprise you.
Other young prospects include Querrey and Isner. I see Top Twenty in Querrey’s future, and forties or thirties for Isner, but no more. Then there’s Somdev Devvarman, the young Indian player who defeated Isner 7-6, 4-6, 7-6 in the NCAA finals last summer. I haven’t heard much of anything about him since, but that result, alone, merits attention. Juan Martin Del Potro looked to be making a move this time a year ago. He had some decent wins, but there was a lot he needed to work on, and now injury has shut him out of the ‘08 season almost entirely. And don’t forget Djokovic’s brothers. Marko is rumored to be the most talented of the three…
But now I’m approaching speculation for speculation’s sake, mostly because none of the likely names seems likely enough to me. I can’t get rid of Djokovic, no matter where I look in my crystal ball. And I can’t help hoping some shadowy figure is quietly getting himself ready in there, waiting to surprise us all…
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, March 25th, 2008 at 8:20 pm and is filed under Marat Safin, James Blake, Marcos Baghdatis, Benjamin Becker, Donald Young, Tomas Berdych, John Isner, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, David Nalbandian, Andy Murray, David Ferrer, Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, Richard Gasquet, Nikolay Davydenko, Andre Agassi, Andy Roddick, Roger Federer.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
THE AUTHOR
POLL
Adobe Flash Plug-in Needed
This website requires a Adobe Flash plug-in. Please download the latest version of the Flash plug-in by clicking here
ARCHIVE
SPONSORS
15 Responses to “Pretenders”
March 26th, 2008 at 5:42 am
Thanks Nate, great post. I don’t know about all this, but really I have to agree with you. I think many of us would like Rafael to sneak in to the No 1 spot, but it won’t be for long, because I think Djokovic will overtake him eventually. I will mention D-Nal, because really he should have been swapping places with Roger years ago with his all court game, if only he had addressed his weaker serve at the time, a case of what should have been [sigh]. As you say Argentinian lakes, I could add rally cars! I always thought Gasquet had the potential, still has, but I don’t think he has the steel resolve of Djokovic. Tsonga, great flashy player, love the guy, I’m on the fence with him. He has the Wimby game, has no fear - I’ll look to see how he performs on the grass, especially if he has to cope with rain delays. Andy has improved his game, but in all honesty, I can’t see him really hitting the top spot again, still see him in the top 10 though. Murray is another enigma, he is injury prone and not consistent, he could do it eventually, but not this year and how long could he stay there. I’ve never seen Gulbis play. I have been impressed with Marin Cilic, he has the strong head too, I’d like to see him do well. Do you think Almagro can shed the clay?
All in all, it’s a slow bubbling stew. So much talent out there, but all so inconsistent. I think frustrating, but interesting times are ahead. At the moment I can’t see beyond Djokovic, but I’m going to remain cautious and just wait and see. The Fish serve let him down in Indian Wells, but Novak remained calm and won the match, which is what champions do. I’ll continue to support my players and Nadal, because I want to see them in Shanghai.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:45 am
I really like the Nalbandian. Watched him play at the 2007 US Open and he was insanely good EXCEPT his mental game is still not there yet.
It always amazes me that the mental game is what seperates the legends from the #5-#10 positions. Tiger Woods know this one already.
http://www.tennisplaza.com
March 26th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Jenny, Good call on Cilic. I should have mentioned him…All in all I wonder if the future in tennis usually appears so preordained? I don’t think so. Federer had all the talent, but none of the follow-through when he was Djoko’s age. And, I guess, that’s another lesson. When of the talented, undependable youngsters could suddenly mature…
TennisPlaza, you’re definitely right about the mental game. A lot of these guys have all the shots, but only a few of them are going to be able to hit the right ones at the right time in a Grand Slam final…
March 26th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
I wonder why we are so ready to play the funeral march for Roger and Nadal???…I agree with you Nate that Djoko wants it so much that he is there in an even fight and he is as powerful and tough as they both are. We have an interesting battle and it is good to know they can win or lose any time and nowt with each match there is a lot at stake.
Nalbandian, Murray,Roddick, Davi,Gasquet, Tsonga Baghdatis etc are not as focused and as willing to pay the prize of coping with the pressure to be at their very best every match…so they will be a menace to the top 3 if they are in a good day and they will contribute to have many more interesting matches even though they do not have what it takes to be consistently top 3.
What I see is more competitive tennis, less distance separates the good, the bad and the ugly and we can enjoy the emotion of not knowing until the last shot of the match who will win as just happened in the Nalbandian-Fish battle at Indian Wells..that is so good for a change….so refreshing.
I have to admit that Federer has not been implacable Federer lately but maybe that is a desirable thing, a more even competition with no super powers….and then the possibility of having o improve your game even if you are at the top can only help to raise every-body’s game….
I bet it is going to be a good year for tennis fans!
March 26th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Maria, there’s no doubt that this year will be very exciting. What I’m wondering about is more like the next three, four, five…I hope Djokovic will have consistent challengers in the Slams…
March 26th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I am rubbing my stigmata as I write this!!! I think you’re a clever rhetorician, Nate! You’ve made it virtually impossible to back anyone else but Djoker with your analyses!!! Clearly, he has the mentality and the game to get to number one, but I sincerely hope not! Here’s a different way to look at things—My sense is that while the Djoker might indeed dominate, he won’t do so as consistently or as thoroughly as Federer did. What this will mean is that we might have a see-saw scenario (ok, just remember this is still a game of PRETEND) as we do in the women’s game, where we might have Nadal and the Djoker swopping positions through the year. But, as I said, my money is still on Fed. he may be losing, but that’s more because he appears listless than beat by a better player!!!
March 26th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Nate, I had to go to the Top Ten list and think about that a bit, then I had to go into the Top 100, and you are right, the pickings get like, slim(!)
The problem is, we’re whittled down to two categories, Guys On The Make as it were, and the Guys There Already. There are lots of guys in the first category, I’d throw in Monaco Andreev Wawrenka Cilic Darcis Gulbis Dancevic and Fish. They should all be in the Top 20. But the guys who can really challenge the top three? Not so many. Murray and Tsonga look like the best bets over Gasquet and Berdych, because their games keep improving and the other two are static now. Nalbandian I would love to see but I think he will backslide again. And I still would not rule Roddick out of the mix entirely, if he can put together another Dubai-like week and I think that is possible.
So, we’re back down to the Infernal Trio, Fed-Rafa-Djoko. Every weekend it will probably still be them, and one loose cannon (i.e. a Fish) who comes along for the ride. That’s not so bad, as long as the three of them keep beating each other up properly. I can live with that scenario.
March 26th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Interesting article, but why look past the Djoker? He’s the real deal and has a fun and outgoing personality - great for tennis after the professional and respectful Roger/Rafa duo (not that they’re going anywhere fast anyhow). That said, Cilic is someone to watch, as is Young.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Sakhi, listless is the perfect word to describe not only Fed’s recent play, but his countenance on the court when losing (i’d say an alternation between general listlessness and short bursts of intense frustration). But don’t forget that Djokovic took him out in Canada last summer…I agree with you that he will never win every week like Federer used to do. But he do believe he may approach Federer’s dominance of the Slams, and possibly Masters events as well…If you need some balm for those stigmata, keep in mind that “listless” might be the best adjective to describe how mono will make you feel…
March 28th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Hi Nate. I really enjoyed this one. I agree with you that Joko is likely to hit number one before Rafa, which makes me feel bad for Rafa. Still, Rafa had been number 2 for almost three years straight which is not a bad thing to put on one’s report card. I still think-as I started to think last year-that the people who beat Roger are the ones over whom he has no psychological dominance. Roger said that he had “created a monster” and so he has, but he’s had help. There’s his immense all-court talent’ that hunger beyond all hungers to be number one and a lot of the press and the fans who have turned him into something resembling the Trinity. There seems to be a thing that says that if you love Roger, you automatically hate Joko. If Joko gets to number one I guess it will be sort of like going from Bjorn Borg to John Macenroe as far as the lovers and haters are concerned. Meanwhile, there is Rafa, who has never expressed a desire to be number one, at least not in English. For some reason, I just adore Rafa in a way I don’t my other five. I want his knees to hold up so that he can have a good, long satisfying career. As for Joko, he’s outgoing and friendly and should make a good number one personality as long as he knows about the painful side of number one and is ready for it as well. If Richbard Gasquet can shake off being “baby Federer” perhaps he’ll become RICHARD GASQUET instead of just Richard Gasquet, the way Roger became ROGER. I can’t imagine Andy Murry at number one simply because he gets injured so much, but I can imagine him being like an annoying little gnat, picking off the top ten players, especially the toop three when they and we least expect it. For a while, I thought that Nikolay Davydenky had carved out a permanent spot and was just going to stay there while other players jumped back and forwards over him. It’s sort of interesting. I’d like to see Marcos B. come up in the rankings and the match at Wimbledon between him and joko is one of the few tennis matches that I think I’d actually buy and listen to again. It just was sooo good, at least from my linistening standpoint and the standing ovation at the end was so merited. I don’t want to listen to the Rafa Roger final, although it was good because I felt really really really bad for Rafa and happy for Roger’s setting another record. Rafa was still sighing wistfully about it even after he won the next tournament he went to, “I am good loser, but at first, it is hard.” As for Joe-Willie and Marty and John and Donald and my Davis cupt boy, we’ll have to see. I just want Andy Roddick to beat Roger again and to not die of joy afterwards! lol
March 29th, 2008 at 8:03 am
Hi Debra, hope the move went well or are you still packing?! I enjoyed your comment. I was brought up on the grass as it were, we didn’t get to see clay or hardcourt because of limited TV coverage. As a teen, Borg inspired me and it wasn’t just his prowess on the court, I knew nothing about the game then. During his reign I began to appreciate his tennis more, rather than the man. Mac came along with his artistry and by that time I was well into it. Having said that, I was totally gutted when Borg retired. We were then treated to the Sampras era, loved the guy, was a fan, again I was gutted when Roger beat him. Even then I loved Roger’s artistry on the grass and thought he was special, I still do. I always wanted more Andy/Roger finals at Wimbledon and Andy had such I admit I did become a Fed fanatic. I loved Nalby’s game, but was almost afraid to admit it for fear of being disloyal, totally ridiculous and irrational, because I’m not naturally obsessive about people. After a while I thought I’m getting tunnel vision, I naturally like variety and different styles, and have grown to love the clay. Whilst not a particular ‘power’ fan, I couldn’t resist the colourful Rambo blast fest of the talented Gonzalez, a nice guy, and as Pat would say, a flamethrower! I admit I didn’t like Rafa’s game initially, it wasn’t aesthetically pleasing to me, although I rather liked the man, but must confess I warmed rather more to Ferrer, who was battling away behind the scenes with that frightening intensity and passion, to see him break through his barriers was great. I know he’ll never be No 1, but If I had a secret wish, I would love to see him win the French, or at the very least reach the final before he retires, I don’t think Rafa would mind too much, he’s a friend, that’s of course if Roger doesn’t get there first! Appreciate Davydenko too. When I first saw Novak, I thought this kid’s good, more than damn good, and actually I prefer watching him to Murray, so no hate from me. Oh dear, Richard, it surely has to be in his head doesn’t it? Obviously I want my cemented favs to do well, but if the better player wins on the day, sure I’m disappointed, but I can move on, it isn’t the end of the world. I can relax and enjoy the rest of the tournament, if a w/c or qually wins the title that’s okay by me too!
March 29th, 2008 at 8:08 am
Sorry I omitted… and Andy had such a chance in 04. I admit…
March 29th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Jenny, do drop me a note off-list. I am adgardner2@satx.rr.com. I feel sometime that my comments aren’t quite “tennissy” enough and that I should save space for you guys that really know what’s going on out there on the court. Thanks to Nate, nina, Pat etc. I now know more about th game than I did, it’s still very much a sighted person’s game and what I like is what I can actually hear. When I was listening to the IndianWell final, the two guys calling it said just enough for me to understand what was going on, didn’t clutter it up with adjulatory gossip, and the microphones were very close so I could hear the slamming of the ball and the moving of the feet when they ran across the court. I guess in some ways I must like the long points because the ball is constantly going back and forth until one of them gets it where it needs to go to score a point When I listen to Roger play, he gets his points so quickly that there isn’t much “backwards and forwards” going on unless he plays someone who makes it hard for him to wrap up those points quickly. I recognize the artistry of someone like Roger, but I can’t relate to it. I spent a lot of last year trying to relate to something I just couldn’t because I couldn’t literally see it with my eyes. I got so obsessed about it that I actually posted on his site apologizing for not being able to think of him the way everyone else did. I looked at the stats and understood that anyone with stats like that should be at number one. I think that article, “Roger Federer as religious experience” really knocked me for a loop. After a while, I just couldn’t cope with trying to pretend to “see”-you’d be surprised to know how many of us do it as we try to fit in-. Now I get more sleep at night. I appreciate the great ones, but have to be drawn to them as people, and I also appreciate the “woodwork” section; those that emerge and pick off the great ones and sometimes stay around and sometimes disappear again. It’s sort of cool to me. What a pot boiler. As for the move, write me and I’ll tell you about it, Jenny.
March 29th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Hi Debra, would be delighted to share, I’ll contact you within the next couple of days.
Thanks to the guys at Tennis Diary for the great posts, and for bringing us tennis fans closer together, we may not always agree, but I respect the different thoughts and ideas posted here from international fans - a great learning curve.
March 29th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Me too, Jenny.
Leave a comment