Delving into just what makes a good tennis television commentator might seem a complicated subject, but for me it’s pretty easy. It’s the same thing that distinguishes a good writer from a mediocre one. The litmus test is simple: “Is he or she interesting?”
Granted, there’s a subjective element involved in that decision. But the important thing here is that all tennis commentators are “good,” in the sense that they know their stuff; the sport is too closely watched to suffer fools. But there’s a world of difference between those who can comment intelligently on what we collectively see, and those who can make us go, “Huh. That’s kind of interesting.” Or, “Hmmmm. . . I never heard it put quite that way, but it makes sense.”
One of my favorites in that regard is Jimmy Arias, who commentated on the ATP World Tour Finals for Tennis Channel. Some of you may remember Arias from his playing days; in 1983 (his best year), he was 19 years old and ranked No. 6 in the world. He has a particularly intriguing story, which maybe plays some role in why he has particularly interesting things to say.
Arias is from a blue-collar background in that tennis hotbed (not!) of Buffalo, N.Y. He was one of the first successful protégés of Nick Bollettieri, and a precursor of what I’ve always called the New World Game, for the way the style has run rampant throughout tennis. It’s the game based on stepping into the court and dictating with the forehand, even if it isn’t necessarily with a mind to attack the net.
I’m not sure that Arias, 5’9” and 150 pounds (soaking wet) ever hit a forehand with either foot on the ground. But a funny thing happened shortly after he hit his peak in 1983 with a win at the Italian Open. The revolution in racquet technology quickly enabled all his rivals and up-and-coming players to pursue that same New World Game based on an aggressive, whiplash forehand with far greater ease.
Jimmy once was unique in his ability to simply whale away at the ball and keep it in play, but the emerging technologies leveled the playing field. I’ve discussed this with Jimmy, more than once. He feels that the edge he enjoyed was swept away by technology, and if you’ve followed the evolution of strings and how they’ve impacted the game, you’ll probably have some sympathy for Arias.
But anyway. . .I jotted down a few bon mots from Arias while listening to his commentary on the David Ferrer-Juan Martin del Potro match, and share them with you. You can judge their “interest” quotient for yourself. I’m taking liberties with the quotations, because I’m working from jotted notes. The essence of the observations is accurate:
At the start of the match, Arias said: “One of the problems for Del Potro against Ferrer is that he doesn’t really open up the court. He doesn’t move the ball from side-to-side that well. He relies more on power, going straight ahead, and relatively flat. But Ferrer is quick and he will get a lot of those balls back.”
On Ferrer’s backhand: “It’s really a unique backhand. It’s like a pancake backhand, hit pretty flat and with a short, quick swing. It’s hard to believe that he can be so consistent with that backhand, because it has such a low margin of error, but he is.”
After watching Ferrer race into his fore-court to hit an on-the-run forehand winner: “On a short ball like that, you have to lead with your right leg, the way Ferrer did. Usually you think of stepping into the forehand with the left leg, but on the run you have to get out of your own way.”
On Roger Federer’s history with some of the “big men” in tennis at the end of 2009 and into the following year: “There was a period there, a couple of matches, where a few guys hit so big, flat, and hard that they caused Roger all kinds of problems. That’s what del Potro did (U.S. Open final), and also Tomas Berdych (4-3 against Federer since the start of 2010) and Robin Soderling (whose lone win against Federer in 17 tries was in the quarters of Roland Garros in 2010).”
On the del Potro-Ferrer match-up: “If Delpo plays behind the baseline, he can’t recover and respond when Ferrer opens up the court, while Ferrer can get away from playing that far back because he’s quick enough.”
On the importance of being able to hit the down-the-line backhand: “That’s the shot you need to have against Ferrer. I didn’t mind when guys would try to find my backhand, and drive me farther and farther to that side while I kept hitting forehands, the way Ferrer likes to do. But if they had that backhand down-the-line, it always made me a little nervous.”
On del Potro’s forehand: “That one forehand he hits, that slap-shot. I’m surprised it goes in so often.”
Also on del Potro’s forehand: “It’s like an old-fashioned forehand. He takes it back with an open face, where most guys close it. He takes a long swing and really extends on that follow through around his body. There’s none of that ‘windshield wiper’ effect, none of that brushing over the ball. It’s almost like a swing from back in the wooden racquet days, but somehow he manages to control it.”
On Federer’s movement: “Ferrer moves like you’re taught, with quick, little steps. Davydenko is that way, too. If you just watch their feet, it all becomes a blur. Roger is different, though. Roger’s first step into the court is huge. He just gobbles up the court with that first step, but then he just sort of glides and take small steps the rest of the way. It’s not how they teach you, but it obviously works.”
Arias is also very good at catching and describing the momentum and flow of a match, and picking out the larger, decisive trends—like which player is winning most of the big points. It’s a pleasure to listen to him because in my book “interesting” trumps merely “intelligent” any day.