Yet in 2007, after having attained the Number One ranking and a second Grand Slam title (US Open, 2006) Sharapova suddenly began to look more like a fish out of water. The weaknesses in her one-gear game were revealed: the inconsistent serve, a failure to close out big matches and - perhaps most importantly - an inability to out-think as well as out-hit her opponents.
Sharapova’s flaws were on full display in her 4th round loss to Venus Williams at Wimbledon; she paddled furiously at this rainy Wimbledon, but ended up a 6-1, 6-3 loser to Venus Williams. It was her third-straight Grand Slam embarrassment - there is no other word - in as many majors this year.
Yet Sharapova hasn't floundered in a school of small fish: her first loss of the Slam year was inflicted in Melbourne by Miss Comeback herself, Serena Williams. Sharapova was routed in the semifinals of Roland Garros by green but gifted Ana Ivanovic, and Venus took her turn pounding Sharapova in London. But was less about who she lost to, than how she went down: 6-1,6-2 against Serena. 2 and 1 to Princess Serbia. And 1 and 3 to Venus. She got 10 games: not quite enough to add up to what it takes to win one match.
The curious thing is that Sharapova has been losing more rather than fewer lopsided matches, even as her ranking and status have flourished. In the first five years of her career, she failed to win at least four games on just eight occassions (WTA Tour matches). This year alone, she has lost four matches that decisively. Here's the rec
Year/Tournament Round Opponent Score
2002 Indian Wells R64 Monica Seles (4) 6-0, 6-2
2003 Seat Open Luxembourg SF Kim Clijsters (2) 6-0, 6-3
2004 Indian Wells R16 Anastasia Myskina (5) 6-2, 6-1
2004 FRENCH OPEN QF Paola Suarez (14) 6-1, 6-3
2004 China Open Beijing SF Svetlana Kuznetsova (5) 6-2, 6-2
2005 Indian Wells SF Lindsay Davenport (1) 6-0, 6-0
2005 Tour Championships RR Nadia Petrova (10) 6-1, 6-2
2006 Pan Pacific Tokyo SF Martina Hingis (UR) 6-3, 6-1
2007 AUSTRALIAN OPEN F Serena Williams (81) 6-1, 6-2
2007 Sony Ericsson Open R16 Serena Williams (18) 6-1, 6-1
2007 FRENCH OPEN SF Ana Ivanovic (7) 6-2, 6-1
2007 WIMBLEDON R16 Venus Williams (23) 6-1, 6-3
So what happened to the champion that so many billed to be the future of women's tennis after the 2004 Championships? Why is her drive to be a dominant champion slowing, perhaps even stalling out ? Why hasn’t Maria turned her big-money game into a big-match game?
Her downfall is the result of the same ingredients that led to her rise: big strokes and a big game, but nothing more (or less) than that. But when Plan A crashes, then what? That's question to which Maria must find an answer - the way players have found answers to Maria's Plan A.
Sharapova’s inability to be a multi-dimensional player on the tennis court makes her vulnerable to girls who can belt the ball back with equal Oomph! She hasn't adapted to that very well. Venus won Wimbledon by using the whole court with superb angles and terrific serves; she adapted, and relies less on Oomph! than in the past. Maria is still trying to figure out how to go from big-hitter to switch-hitter.
Recent shoulder problems have hindered Sharapova, and her confidence has taken a hit because of it. But she still seems bent on banging her way through matches instead of trying something different - venturing to the net, throwing in some spins, or taking a little pace off the ball. For now, if the defending USO champion wants to repeat her title run from 2006, she has a clear mission: add some versatility, both in how she plays and in how she thinks.
Sharapova has proven she’s versatile off the court: she's signed big endorsement deals, posed for magazine covers, and helped develop and launch a perfume line of her own. But now, she must demonstrate that she has on-court versatility as well: that she can out-think, out-wit and out-last the shark with whom she swims.
The big-game girl needs to answer the big-game question.
-- Nicholas McCarvel
