This week I'm discussing the 2006 season, and looking forward to 2007, with ex-pro and expert analyst Hank Moravec (also known as Dunlop Maxply here and at Tennis World).
Hank,
You’re right, it’s a little early to give Maxply Jr.’s 10-and-under scene the Caddyshack treatment (do they have a 10s division in Cali now?). We wish him good luck this season, though. Your story reminded me of my first junior match, in Carlisle, Pa., when I was 11. I kept my sweat pants on even though the tournament was indoors, pushed my brains out, and literally prayed to God for help before each point. There must be a God, because I won a close one before getting tuned by the top seed in the next round. I still find it odd that I wanted to compete so much then that I would travel long distances to do it. I don’t really have any taste for competition now. I’m not sure if that’s because I did it for so long at a young age. Ring any bells, Hank, or do you still relish going to battle on court?
Thanks for the Indian Wells court report. I’ve played at Key Biscayne, and the surface isn’t quite that slow, but still much slower than Flushing Meadows. As for serve-and-volley possibilities, I still think that if you took the most talented kid in the country and trained him in the Sampras mold, with a one-handed backhand and non-Western forehand grip, you could produce a very successful serve-and-volleyer on any surface other than clay. I don’t care who you are and how slow the court is, it’s tough to make passing shots all day.
Before we move on to other issues, let me spend this post talking about some ATP players who made a dent in 2006 and giving my prediction for their 2007. On the men’s side, at least, there’s a pretty talented and stylish group of youngsters who are on the collective rise. Their progress will be the most interesting element of 2007 in my mind.
Marcos Baghdatis
He was responsible for one of my best tennis-watching memories of 2006. In Key Biscayne, he was urged to challenge a call by the audience, so he did, with a sort of “what the hell” look. When he was proven right, he stuck his tongue out and looked up to the sky with an ecstatic, surprised laugh as if he couldn't quite believe this whole replay thing. No doubt about it, his looseness is infectious. (Then he folded against Davydenko, but whatever.) It was also thrilling to watch him dismantle Lleyton Hewitt at Wimbledon with all-court ease—you’re right, the ATP seems to have gotten past it’s boring baseline days. Baghdatis is a big-match guy with a couple Slams in him, but I don’t think he’s ready for one in 2007—he’s never beaten Federer and generally looked bad against Nadal.
Richard Gasquet
He had a tragic Davis Cup quarterfinal against Russia, playing great tennis for 10 sets only to come away the goat; he hit the shot of the year against Hewitt at the Open; and he gave us a glimpse of how he might go about becoming the next great player in Toronto, where he ranged far behind the baseline and threw up an impenetrable counter-punching fortress that got him to the final. Is Baby Federer ready to bring his myriad skills into focus the way Adult Federer did in 2003? I think he is ready to do it—in a Masters event, not a Slam.
Andy Murray
His variety and court sense are unmatched among everyone not named Federer, he’s got a great motivator in Brad Gilbert in his corner, and the two of them actually got ahead of schedule with their success over the summer. And Murray’s win over Fernando Gonzalez at the Open was one of the most entertaining, see-saw matches of the year. So why am I a little skeptical of him as a Slam winner anytime soon? I guess it’s his lack of physical presence, which makes me think he won’t hold up over two full weeks. Baghdatis simply muscled him off the court at Wimbledon. There’s also his lingering adolescent sourness. That said, he’s another guy who will challenge Fed and Nadal at the Masters events in 2007.
Novak Djokovic
The Serb's not as likeable as Baghdatis or as flashy as Gasquet, but his game may be the one that ages the best. There’s no weakness here, he’s utterly confident (to the point of delusion; not a bad thing, necessarily), he’s equally comfortable on clay and grass, and as my colleague Tony Lance has pointed out, you can’t get much more textbook—call him a player’s player. (And check out that shoulder turn on the backhand.) One big problem: Federer doesn’t like him.
Tomas Berdych
No one makes raw power look more effortless; but none of the top players can look quite as awful, either. The world’s tallest baseliner has Nadal’s number, and he has the serve to bail him out of problems, but he needs to be in total control of the rallies to win—defense and all-court skills are not in the playbook. Neither is patience or warmth; Berdych is testy to the core when he’s on court. A major quarterfinal, and a few indoor wins seem in order for 2007.
Nikolay Davydenko
The world No. 3 has shown he can play with anyone, now he just needs to believe it himself. He has the right mix of consistency and explosiveness for today’s medium-pace surfaces. It’s now a matter of how much he wants to win big titles, rather than lots of matches. It will take a change in desire and emphasis for him to overcome his sometimes crippling nerves. I think he’ll beat Federer somewhere this year, but try as I might, I just can’t see him holding up a Slam trophy.
Dmitry Tursunov
Like Kolya above, he’s another Russian who has surprised himself with his recent success. Let’s see if he can make up his mind to live up to it, something that other Russian, Marat Safin, has struggled to do for years. Tursunov’s first two sets against Roddick in Davis Cup were the most jaw-dropping performances of the year (Fed included), and to see him play up close is to see tennis athleticism at its finest. But he still tends to hit a winner and immediately hang his head, as if he’s a little ashamed of doing well. This is not the American way, Dmitry! Take a lesson from your new countrymen here and embrace your success.
David Nalbandian
The Argentine crept closer to returning to a major final in 2006, but stopped short at the brink twice. He finished the year with impressive wins in the Davis Cup final, over Davydenko and Safin. Will he use that success to take the next step, hire a coach, focus on improving his quickness, and treat his tennis as serious business? If he does, he's got more glory in him. But something tells me he won't.
Andy Roddick/James Blake
A quick word on the Yanks. Roddick is on the right track with his barrel-forward style, but, Connors or no Connors, there seem to be more guys around now who can beat him—Baghdatis did it in Melbourne, Nalbandian in straights in Shanghai, Berdych in straights in Madrid, Blake and Murray twice, and Tursunov clipped him in Davis Cup. Roddick actually seems to play his best against Federer; it's getting to him that will be the trick in 2007. The opposite seems true for Blake—last year he had break through wins against a number of players. Now that he’s shown himself he can reach a big final—the Masters Cup—he should be a real threat to take the next step and win a Slam, most likely the U.S. Open or, maybe, the Aussie Open.
Any of these guys look like big winners in the near-future to you, Hank, or will the Federer/Nadal reign continue indefinitely? Looking back on my predictions, I seem to have the No. 1 and 2 dominating at the majors again. What do you think of Monfils, whom I didn’t mention here?
Steve