Rod Laver

Andy Murray’s No. 1 ranking is great for tennis, but is the timing bad?

Posted on by ginnandtopics

By Leighton Ginn

It’s been a fantastic year for Andy Murray and firmly established him as one of the Big Four in what could be the greatest generation in tennis.

Murray’s has been steady all year, reaching the finals of both the Australian and French Opens. But then it went into overdrive with his Wimbledon title, following by his repeat as an Olympic gold medalist.

Last week, Murray won the year-end ATP Tour World Finals to clinch the No. 1 year-end ranking.

However, the timing could be bad for the rest of the sport.

This has nothing to do with Murray, so don’t mistake this as a criticism of him.

But Novak Djokovic was having a historic year at the start. By winning the Australian and French Opens, Djokovic clinched the Nole Slam as he won four consecutive majors, a feat that hasn’t happened since Rod Laver in 1969.

What Djokovic had done elevated him past the standard bearers of this generation — Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.

After the French Open, Djokovic was in the conversation of the greatest ever.

Djokovic will finish the year No. 2, but his fall was significant. He only won one title since the French Open.

Earlier, his coach Boris Becker blamed the drop to the fact he wasn’t pushed by Federer nor Nadal. There is validity to that theory most times, but not in this case.

Djokovic wasn’t just chasing history, he had a chance to rewrite it.

During Wimbledon, Djokovic alluded to personal issues in his family life.

Whatever the case, Djokovic’s slip was disappointing because it could have meant so much for tennis.

Again, don’t mistake this as a shot at Murray, who is one of the top personalities in tennis. His story is great, and who isn’t charmed by the push to get him knighted in England.

Actually, why hasn’t he been knighted already for ending the curse of Fred Perry when he won Wimbledon in 2012, or his US Open title in 2011?

Murray is a great No. 1. It’s a great story.

But Djokovic was at such a high level that his success would provide more crossover attention.

Djokovic was challenging how we defined greatness in tennis. The run he was on was unprecedented.

Historically, when we look back on 2016, more likely, we will talk more about Djokovic than Murray.

And what could have been.

 

 

Am I the only one surprised at the lack of hype over Novak Djokovic’s possible Nole Slam?

Posted on by ginnandtopics

DSCN8765

By Leighton Ginn

With Novak Djokovic’s impressive semifinal victory over Rafael Nadal, it’s becoming more and more clear that Nole’s chance of completing the first Grand Slam since Rod Laver in 47 years is a real possibility.

It was during the BNP Paribas Open when it struck me that no one was asking Djokovic about the Nole Slam. He came into Indian Wells, Calif., as the reigning champion of Wimbledon, U.S. Open and Australian Open. Djokovic has been to the finals of the past five Grand Slam events.

The French Open will be the final piece to the puzzle for a career Grand Slam as well as a year-round Grand Slam, where he holds all four major titles.

But Roger Federer and Nadal have also been winners of three consecutive majors only to fall short.

Federer won three consecutive majors in 2005-06 and 2006-07, but lost to Nadal both times in the French Open finals to deny him the Grand Slam.

In 2010, Nadal won the French, Wimbledon and US Open, but fell in the quarterfinals of the 2011 Australian Open to David Ferrer, where he suffered an apparent hamstring injury.

Unlike Nadal and Federer, Djokovic has a gaping hole in his resume in that he’s never won the French Open.

To get to the French Open title, he would have to get past Nadal, who has won Roland Garros a record nine times. Last year, Djokovic beat Nadal to end his 39-match winning streak on the red clay. Only Djokovic and Robin Soderling have beaten Nadal at Roland Garros.

This year, Nadal is playing much better, and you have to imagine the incentive of winning a unprecidented 10th French Open title will be a huge incentive.

But if Djokovic wins the French Open title, not only will he complete his major collection, but he will be able to accomplish something that Federer and Nadal haven’t with the four consecutive majors.

Currently, Djokovic has 11 major titles and the French would be his 12th to tie with Roy Emerson, and trailing only Federer (16), Nadal (14) and Sampras (14).

But the victory would firmly entrench Djokovic in the arguments of the greatest tennis player ever.

 

 

 

Serena Williams’ loss might be the most disappointing in tennis history

Posted on by ginnandtopics

Serena Williams talks to the media during the BNP Paribas Open in March, 2015.

Serena Williams talks to the media during the BNP Paribas Open in March, 2015.

It is rare air to get a whiff at completing the Grand Slam, but Serena Williams coming within three sets of completing the historic milestone might be the most heartbreaking of losses.

Williams saw her Grand Slam dreams come to an end when she was upset by the unseeded Roberta Vinci 2-6, 6-4, 6-4, which also saw Williams have an early break in the third set.

Twice, Williams has won four consecutive majors, including this year, which she’s dubbed the Serena Slam. But the true Grand Slam is winning all four in the same year, starting with the Australian Open and ending with the US Open. The last person to do it was Steffi Graf in 1988, a year where she also won the Olympic gold medal.

Had Williams won, she would have joined the exclusive sorority of Graf, Margaret Court (1970) and Maureen Connelly (1953) as the only females to do it in women’s tennis. On the men’s side, only Rod Laver (1962, ’69) and Don Budge (1938) did it.

Completing the true Grand Slam would have been an indisputable fact when people argue who the greatest tennis players ever were. This is why in some circles, Laver is still considered the greatest tennis player, because he’s the only player in history to complete the Grand Slam twice and the only male player to do it on the Open era.

Because Williams didn’t complete the Grand Slam, Graf and Court are the only females to complete the Grand Slam in the Open era, and Graf is the only one to do it on three different surfaces.

Who comes that close to a Grand Slam and loses it by three sets? That will be a tough one to swallow for Williams, who was so close from a historic achievement.

Williams has tried to talk down the significance of the Grand Slam, but judging by her brief post-match press conference, it disappointed her more than she wanted to let on.

Everything was set up for Williams as she would not have had to face a top-10 player in the US Open to the title. It was tailor made for Williams to complete the Slam.

Now everyone wants to make out that this is a huge upset in the ranks of Buster Douglas knocking out Mike Tyson, Villanova beating Georgetown in the NCAA final or the US Olympic hockey team beating the Russians. And maybe it is, as Vinci was only ranked 43rd coming into the US Open and never made it this far in a major.

But here’s a few things to consider as well: Williams has a habit of losing to unlikely players in big tournaments.

Since the start of 2012, Serena Williams has lost eight times in major tournaments, and the highest-ranked player she lost to was No. 14 Ana Ivanovic in the fourth round of last year’s Australian Open.

Her other losses have come to No. 56 Ekaterine Makarova in the fourth round of the 2012 Australian Open, No. 111 Virginie Razzano in the first round of the 2012 French Open, No. 25 Sloan Stephens in the quarterfinals of the 2013 Australian Open, No. 24 Sabine Lisicki in the fourth round of the 2013 Wimbledon, No. 35 Garbine Muguruza in the second round of the 2014 French Open, No. 24 Alize Cornet in the third round of Wimbledon. Vinci is ranked 43rd heading into this year’s US Open.

There is another perception of Williams that appears to be misleading. While Williams has completed her second “Serena Slam,” winning four consecutive majors, she has been anything but dominant.

In the Serena Slam from 2002-03, Williams lost four sets. This year, Williams lost five sets in the French Open alone, and a total of nine during the Serena Slam. At the US Open, Williams lost four sets (one of Bethanie Mattek-Sands, one to Venus Williams and two to Vinci).

It has been an exceptional year for Williams, but not as dominant as she can be.

The first Serena Slam was so much more impressive if you look at the depth of the women’s game, particularly at the top. During the 2002-03 Serena Slam, Williams defeated the likes of sister Venus in all four finals, but also Hall of Fame players Lindsay Davenport, Martina Hingis, Mary Pierce, Amelie Mauresmo, Jennifer Capriati and Kim Clijsters. Another Hall of Fame player in that era was Justine Henin, who ended Williams’ Grand Slam winning streak in the semifinals of the 2003 French Open.

During this Serena Slam, Williams only beat three players ranked in the top-10, and two of those wins were against Sharapova.

What made this Serena Slam so remarkable is that Williams did it on grit. She was big in the big moments, to pull out some amazing wins. And to do it at 33-years old (actually 32 at last year’s US Open which started the Serena Slam), that is a pretty remarkable outcome and a tribute to her longevity.

But coming into the semifinals against two players she had never lost to, and up a break in that third set against Vinci, this might be a loss that Williams will never be able to forget.