INDIAN WELLS, CALIF.—One of the fringe benefits of attending a professional tennis tournament as a member of the press, aside from the free donuts, the face time with genius known as Marion Bartoli, the discount rate at the roach motel, and the sunburn, is the chance to pick up all kinds of borderline-pointless pieces of tennis trivia from your colleagues. They’re the lifeblood of tennis journalist and tweeter alike. Here’s one that no one around these parts seems to have an answer for yet: When was the last time that the four semifinalists in a men’s tournament were the last four men to win Grand Slams? Let me know if you come up with anything.
Whether of not that’s ever happened before, that’s what we’ll be treated to on Saturday at the Indian Wells Tennis Garden, when the last two U.S. Open winners, Rafael Nadal and Juan Martin del Potro, face off at 11 A.M. Pacific Time, and are followed by the last two Australian Open winners, Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer. What we do know is that, from del Potro’s comeback to the battle for No. 2 between Djokovic and Federer, it’s going to be a big day. Let’s take a look at what we might be looking at when the matches go off.
Nadal vs. del Potro
The stat that keeps getting batted around in the press room is del Potro’s three straight wins over Nadal coming into this match. It’s relevant, considering that all of those matches came on hard courts. But it’s not incredibly relevant, considering that all of those matches took place in 2009, before del Potro’s wrist surgery and before Nadal’s epic 2010. It should also be noted that Nadal won the four times they played prior to that, including here in straight sets in 2009.
That said, del Potro presents what we like to call match-up problems for Rafa. He’s tall enough, and has the two-handed backhand, to handle his topspin. He can hit past Nadal, or at least hit hard enough into his forehand side to open up the backhand. And from his improving forehand to his tank-like confidence, del Potro is close to his 2009 levels, despite his caveats about how it’s going to “take another year” before he’s ready to play with the big boys. You only have to look at the way he came back from a 1-6 deficit in the second –set tiebreaker against Kohlschreiber in the last round to know that he’s settled back in.
Still, the money must go with Nadal. He played, by his own admission, “terrible” in the fourth round against Devvarman, but despite the fact that he barely escaped Karlovic Thursday night, I thought Nadal was sharp for most of it—it’s extremely tough to gauge form against Dr. Ace; surviving is the only aim. Nadal himself said he thought he played better than Karlovic in the first set, even though he lost it, and that he was at the top of his game in the second set. And if any match sharpened his return, it was that one.
Nadal will try to get the taller man moving across the baseline. Del Potro will try to hit the ball through the court and take Rafa’s high-kicking shots early. Whoever wins—and I have Nadal winning the tournament—it will be good to see del Potro back where he belongs at last, back up among his fellow Grand Slam champs.
*
Djokovic vs. Federer
For those of you who have followed this rivalry closely, especially in recent months, here’s the answer to your biggest question right up front:
“I mean, I won’t be chipping the ball. I’ll definitely go after it.”
This was Roger Federer today when asked about his thoughts on his semifinal with Djokovic. The last two matches they’ve played, both of which were straight-set wins for Djokovic, Federer drifted between attacking and mixing it up, between bringing the heat and throwing in the off-speed stuff. He had success with neither. Still, I thought the only period in those matches when he got any traction—the first part of the second set in Melbourne—he did it by chipping and looping and not going after it.
Federer has been reunited with Paul Annacone, the coach who has advocated aggressiveness, in Indian Wells, so perhaps he’s been an influence. Whatever it is, Federer has decided that he must win the battle for court position. “He’s a very good defensive player and attacking player, too,” Federer said today, “so you’ve got to take it to Novak.”
As Federer also noted, that style worked against Djokovic last year, when he beat him four times. But according to weather reports, the conditions on Saturday in Indian Wells will be close to what they were in Melbourne when the two played. Fairly cool temperatures—73 degrees—and even slower courts, both of which suit Djokovic more than Federer.
As for the Serb, he’ll surely keep trying to do what he’s been doing: Use his improved serve, get the ball to Federer’s backhand and open up the inside-in forehand, and, as Federer says, win the battle for court position. In both of their matches, he’s hit a lot of superb down the line winners off both wings. Can he hit those again?
The bigger question is: Can he beat Federer three straight times? It’s a rare feat: To my knowledge, Nadal is the only person to do it in recent memory. It would, to my mind at least, signal that Djokovic had gotten to Federer not just in the rankings, but in the head as well.
As of today, though, Djokovic hadn’t gotten quite that far. “I know I can beat him," Federer said, "and that’s all I care about right now.” Will he still feel that way at this time on Saturday?
I think Federer is hungrier for this one, Djokovic’s run—he’s won 18 straight matches—will end sooner or later, and he played poorly for stretches today. But I picked Novak to win this showdown at the start of the tournament, so I’ll pick him again now.