Djokovic and Soderling reach out to Ivanovic.

They have placed two options on the table for Ivanovic:

1. Either get back with Verdasco so he can revert back to his mediocre self.

2. Or start dating them with a date-to-dump already set.

European ATP tour and USA.

If larger audience resulting in a more lucrative cash stream throughout the year is the goal, it can easily be achieved by the following for all European events:

-To make up for the time difference, ALL matches should start at 5:00 pm local time translating that to 8:00 am for the west coast and 12:00 noon for the east coast – a far more respectable time for the Americans to participate. Final should be 8:00 pm local time.

Will that be enough to cover the lost revenue local events are able to produce for a 11:00 am or 1:00 pm start? Maybe. But in the long run, it cannot hurt – for all the other obvious benefits.

Similar changes for the US tour will work too, don’t you think?

Should Nadal skip Madrid irrespective of what happens @ Rome?

Federer has won Madrid twice – one of them by beating Nadal in the finals – in straight sets 6-4,6-4. That Nadal loss was attributed to fatigue. You think that may come into play again? If it misses because Nadal has already skipped Barcelona, Federer’s early exit @ Rome should cover enough ground to make it even, don’t you think?

If reclaiming Roland Garros is the ultimate goal, shouldn’t this experiment with Barcelona be taken a little further by avoiding the high altitude to be fresher for the FO? Federer will gain most of the momentum if not all by beating a ‘in whatever freaking condition’ Nadal at Madrid. That cannot be good for Nadal both from within and from what’s beyond his control.

Federer is already on a two match losing streak (Berdych and Gulbis) with the red dirt further testing his conviction and resolve. Federer would like nothing else than to win at Madrid to reclaim some of the magic. But if that comes after beating Nadal, Roland Garros prospects for Federer will instantly receive a boost Nadal can ill afford.

Why not take care of whatever is in your power to avert that and let Gulbis, Berdych and other clowns go at it to possibly hurt Federer’s confidence even more? Federer won the title last year adding even more pressure to perform for the point totals. Removing all logs that can turn things around for Federer should be the strategy to maximise chances on the big stage in France.

Rome ends May 2nd. Madrid starts May 9th. Roland Garros May 23rd.

Who is most likely to trouble Nadal @ Rome?

Ferrer on facing Verdasco next.

Click here.

Verdasco after beating Djokovic.

Click here.

Nadal after beating Wawrinka.

Click here.

Gulbis on facing Nadal next.

Click here.

Semifinals are set @ Rome.

Verdasco vs Ferrer.

Nadal vs Gulbis.

Verdasco-Djokovic match lived up to it’s hype to partially compensate for the two matches everyone was excited about. Once again Djokovic fails to take the lead based on his OWN showing. Last year he reached the final here after beating a far tougher opponent named Federer in the semis. So he will lose points on his own accord but will gain points by default on Federer’s slippage.

Granted Verdasco has been hot of late but to lose such a close match considering what all was on the line has to be devastating specially given his stellar clay showing last year and the experience it provided. It’s winning these big matches that allows you to elevate your game to where the big titles become a possibility if not a reality. Losing them takes you back to the building block with a revised blue print. But there’s just a limited window to go back and forth heightening the need to learn FAST.

Verdasco, on the other hand, has done good on his claim to be a deserving top tenner. He is on course to reach three straight clay finals – winning one of them at Barcelona. With Ferrer and Nadal next, it’s a road paved with material reserved for the warrior. Even though just reaching a final will be enough to validate his recent form, this is the time for Verdasco to seriously consider breaking through the final frontier.

If nothing else, Gulbis has at least allowed Federer to save face and rationalize the opening round loss to him. Will Gulbis’s showing against Nadal be indicative of what would have happened to Federer if he had made it this far? The variables are just too many to justify it but the temptation will be hard to resist – for both Nadal and Federer. Nadal demolishing Gulbis WILL send a message to Federer irrespective of how conflicting and baseless it might be – subconsciously.

However, considering Wawrinka was able to trouble Nadal with his serve in the first set and Gulbis’s claim to fame so far has been his high first serve percentage and power, it’s logical to assume that it may not be a as straight forward a match as it would have been if Gulbis had not defeated Federer. Typically everybody is able to hit a much higher number of aces against Nadal – at least higher than their career average.

Translation: If Nadal is unable to force long rallies due to Gulbis’s serve, it may very well come down to tie breaks – at least one – before Nadal uses his own service games to tire Gulbis to do what he did to Wawrinka late in the match. Add the stingy ‘time on court’ for Nadal so far and you know endurance will come into play / will be exploited.

But the question is whether we can expect another thriller from Verdasco-Ferrer? Verdasco leads H2H 6-3 and has won the last three clay matches – latest one was in the semis at Barcelona last week. He won the deciding set 6-1.

Photos.

Wait until Paris to assess Federer’s Rome loss. From Claire. Thanks.

CLAIRE

Wait until Paris to assess Federer’s Rome loss
Federer has a history of early exits and slip-ups in Masters events

Tiziana Fabi / AFP/Getty Images
After losing in his first Rome Masters match this year, Roger Federer’s record at the tournament since 2000 dropped to 19-10.

Off the court

Watching Roger Federer play the final two games against Ernests Gulbis yesterday in Rome reminded me of my favorite opening line from an album review. Greil Marcus wrote it in Rolling Stone in 1970, about Bob Dylan’s abominable Self-Portrait.

“What is this s**t?”

After his mind-bending mid-60s peaks, Highway 61 Revisited and Blonde on Blonde, which threw all the old rules out the window, and his smaller, mellower, autumnal end-of-decade gems, John Wesley Harding and Nashville Skyline, which showed what could still be done when you brought the old rules back, the long, weird, and deliberately irritating Self-Portrait was the first clear signal of decline, of exhaustion, of capitulation from Dylan. Is that what we saw yesterday from Federer? Was his loss to Gulbis his Self-Portrait? And by that somewhat dubious whimsical logic, will his 2010 Australian Open the equivalent of Nashville Skyline, a long walk into the sunset that was so smooth it deceived everyone into thinking he could pull it off forever?

I’ll start by saying that we’ve been here before, or close to here before. I wrote a post after Federer’s almost-as-ugly loss to Gilles Simon in Toronto in the summer of 2008 about how the world would be a different place if Federer never found his forehand again. He found it pretty quickly, in time to win the next Grand Slam, the U.S. Open.

The next thing I’ll say is that the end of this match was worse than Simon. When he was broken at 5-5, after Gulbis had, in Federer’s words, “donated” the previous game to him, it was as if Federer intentionally found different ways to get his forehand to land outside the lines. Over the last two games, the only shots I can remember him making were a few desperate stabs that barely crawled over the net. Federer had the match handed back to him, but he declined to take it. During changeovers in the third set he hunched under his umbrella like a chastened, fuming schoolkid, and tossed his empty water bottles behind him with exasperated disgust.

It was hard to read Federer’s mindset at those moments, and it’s hard to figure out why he’s performed so poorly at the Masters events this year, particularly at this Masters event. Like I wrote at the start of 2010, his season would be intriguing primarily because he was in a position that few, if any, players had ever reached. He was starting his tennis afterlife; Federer had reached every individual goal imaginable, but he still had years left on his career. Forget the inevitable physical decline, the question for the moment was: What would this do to his motivation? There really wasn’t anyone he could go to for advice.

But back to the physical for the moment. Decline, as we know, is inevitable. In fact, outside of the majors, it’s been happening to Federer for a couple of years now. His last dominant season when Rafael Nadal was healthy came in 2007. In tennis, I’ve always thought that age manifests iself not in loss of speed or power but in consistency, in the ability to do the same thing over and over with precision—ask Lleyton Hewitt or Pete Sampras. And there’s plenty of evidence for Federer’s lack of consistency in 2010, both from shot to shot and tournament to tournament. If the Gulbis case was extreme, it also wasn’t totally surprising from a shot-making standpoint. Federer is going to have bad days, he’s going to have very days, he’s going to lose.

What’s harder to gauge, of course, is the mental aspect, which brings us back to motivation. In his last three post-loss press conferences, Federer seems to have moved from bitterness to a bewildered acceptance of his newfound propensity for chucking away close matches. He was unhappy and even a little defiant in Indian Wells, but as you can see from the clip below, he was calmer in Rome, at least when he was answering these particular questions. He said he never felt saved, he couldn’t find his serve, he knows he’s got work to do (did he pick up “hard yards” from Brad Gilbert, by any chance? please give it back to him, Rog), he’s looking forward to the next tournament (he’s “curious” about what’s going to happen), it’s easier to take because he’s won so much, and that losing wakes you up to some of the things you’re doing wrong. The only strange element to the video is the noise that Federer makes as he walks into the press room, in answer to the fans’ cries. I don’t know what he says, but there’s a cranky old man aspect to it.

So, what does all this, the rancid forehands and the fairly low-key post-match assessment, tell us about Federer now and in immediate future? I’d venture to say that he’s in an odd psychological position when he’s not playing a major, not playing for history. On the surface of his brain, he wants to win and hates to lose as much as ever. But motivation and will and desire are only semi-conscious attributes—you can’t fool your own mind into wanting something more than it really does. What was disturbing in the second set was how quickly Federer faded away after Gulbis asserted himself early. What was disturbing in the third was how he didn’t capitalize on his extra chance at 5-5, seemingly because at some level he didn’t think it was his day to win. That’s where the extra, unconscious motivation may have been missing: Federer couldn’t manufacture a win purely out of his will and his experience. I’m sure, at that point, that even Gulbis believed that Federer would make him pay for his double faults and choked forehands. Maybe, after the losses in Indian Wells and Key Biscayne, Federer has become fatalistic about the Masters, maybe he’s starting to assume he won’t find his best game. Afterward, he even uttered a word that has never been associated with him: “I may have to get through some ugly matches.” Hopefully he’ll take that prediction to heart, but it can’t be a pleasant thought for the man who has always been aware of, and proud of, his “beautiful technique.”

There are plenty of mitigating factors to the loss. Gulbis is a good player; he can beat anyone (Federer made an interesting comment in his presser, about how much pace Gulbis can get on his second serve). This was also Federer’s first match on clay, his weakest surface. He lost early in Rome last year and went on to win the French Open. But if his present form continues, it will only get harder for him to summon his best on command at the majors. Or maybe it won’t—maybe that extra level of motivation will always be there for the big ones. The bottom line, as it always is with Federer these days, is that we won’t know the meaning of Rome until we see what happens in Paris. With him, no Masters result can be looked at separately from the ensuing Slam result.

Can the fate of Bob Dylan shed any light on Federer’s future? Self-Portrait was indeed a sign of decline, of artistic exhaustion and capitulation. And that exhaustion lasted for a few years. Then Dylan made Blood on the Tracks, which redefined what a rocker could do in his 30s—of course, it was also about break-ups and anger and regrets, but let’s not worry about that right now. The point is, nobody asked “What is this s**t?”

For more news from TENNIS.com, click here.

Players who have been Federized. From Dominic Anderson. Thanks.

DOMINIC ANDERSON

Players who have been Federized –At least 5 wins and less than 4 lose
H2H Record – Hard Clay Grass Carpet
Againts top 3
Carlos Moya 7-0 4-0 3-0 3-0 0-0
Marat Safin 10-2 4-1 3-0 3-0 0-1
Juan Carlos Ferrero 9-3 4-3 3-0 2-0 0-0
Andy Roddick 19-2 12-2 1-0 4-0 2-0
Tommy Haas 10-2 4-2 1-0 3-0 2-0
Ivan Ljubicic 13-3 11-1 0-1 0-0 0-1
Nickolay Davydenko 13-2 9-2 3-0 0-0 1-0

*Againts others top 10 and top 20
Robin Soderling 12-1
Fernando Gonzalez 12-1
Nicolas Kiefer 12-3
Jarkko Nieminem 10-0
Mikhail Youzny 10-0
David Ferrer 9-0
Tommy Rodredo 9-0
James Blake 9-1
Ivo Karlovic 9-1
Fabrice Santoro 9-2
Radek Stepanek 8-2
Thomas Johanson 7-0 (not top 20)
Feliciano Lopez 7-0 (not top 20)
Olivier Rochus 7-0 (not top 20)
Xavier Malisse 7-1
Andrei Pavel 7-1
Max Mirnyi 7-2
Andreas Seppi 6–0
Mario Ančić 6–1
Marcos Baghdatis 6–1
Richard Gasquet 6–1
Jose Acasuso 5-0
Nicolás Almagro 5–0
Jonas Björkman 5–0
Gastón Gaudio 5–0
Robby Ginepri 5-0
Victor Hănescu 5-0 (Not top 20)
Gaël Monfils 5–0
Potito Starace 5-0 (Not top 20)
Mardy Fish 5-1
Sjeng Schalken 5-1

The connection between beans and disapproving fans.

The strange pressure Nadal’s current clay rampage produces today.

If you are slated to meet Nadal in later rounds based solely on your seed placement, it’s virtually impossible to not let that meeting influence your play mentally and physically as you progress through the draw to stand in the path of a raging tornado.

While both Federer’s and Soderling’s losses may have other myriad of dominant reasons to impede their progress through the draw here, they cannot escape the accusation that facing a mad man on clay would not have played a part at all. Djokovic may be coming into that territory right about now. However, he may have far more ‘legitimate’ reasons given the competition comparatively but it’s impossible to completely dismiss it even for him.

Nevertheless, it’s one added wrench in the wheel that potential contenders have to deal with whether it really is making any impact on their psyche or not.

Conversely it reduces even some of the top ten players to the status of a tomato can turning the match into an exercise in futility. Wawrinka may be feeling he has been tricked into this by Soderling while Gulbis may be willing to trade his father’s jet in exchange for being forced to pull down his shorts in public.

Did Borg and Laver have this kind of intimidation? Federer?

Did you know?

…………….that you should NEVER click on anything asking you to update this or update that – like updating Adobe etc. Instead type in the company’s address yourself to make sure you are on the legit site for updating etc. For rock people, this is a common MO of the bad guys to infect your computer.

Can you get any more ‘gayer’? The gay shirt and that scarf. Geeezzzzz!!!!! And what’s Djokovic’s dad doing there? And who are the two broads? And why is one of them not wearing a scarf? Is she straight? Or male?

Billie Jean King writes Serena’s Profile for the 2010 Time 100. From M. Thanks.

M

Billie Jean King writes Serena’s Profile for the 2010 Time 100

Click here.

Hot shot @ Rome – Thursday.

Click here.

Murray on having no answer to Ferrer.

Click here.

Djokovic on facing Verdasco.

Click here.

Ferrer after beating Murray.

Click here.

Nadal on facing Wawrinka next.

Click here.

Photos.

Quarterfinals are set @ Rome.

Djokovic vs Verdasco.

Tsonga vs Ferrer.

Nadal vs Wawrinka.

Gulbis vs Lopez.

Only two of the above eight have lost a set(s) so far: Gulbis and Wawrinka. Does that mean the matches they are not involved with will be ‘going to the wire’ thrillers? Quite possible considering the cast there. That would be Djokovic vs Verdasco and Tsonga vs Ferrer.

With Federer gifting points so early in the season, Djokovic finds himself exactly where he is most uncomfortable – making a run at the next spot on the totem pole. He has already bungled that move what four freaking times already. While this current situation may not be as black and white and immediate as his previous mishaps in terms of gratification, it does put him under the gun further underscored with having to face a momentum-driven Verdasco next.

Even though Djokovic leads the H2H 5-3, the record on clay is even 2-2. BUT Verdasco won the last clay match at this year’s Monte Carlo semifinal – in straight sets – and followed that up by winning the Barcelona title after beating a hot Soderling in the finals. Besides he lost the Monte Carlo final to a brick wall called Nadal.

All that is way way way too much volatile powder to ignore if you are planning to break the pattern handcuffing your every move northwards. Even Nadal may be looking at Verdasco today as a real threat on clay specially after Verdasco dismantled a Soderling who had not lost a set the entire tournament at Barcelona – just days ago.

Besides, Djokovic is looking at Ferrer or Tsonga next, both of whom have winning H2H against him: Tsonga 5-4, Ferrer 4-4 but 3-0 on clay (Ferrer has won all three clay encounters – two in straight sets). And all that comes BEFORE hitting the wall called Nadal.

So it’s quite an uphill task one right after another. Contrast that with Nadal having to face Wawrinka and Gulbis. Unless Gulbis’s been taking the same pills Ljubicic went nuts on at Indian Wells to go on the giant killing spree, Nadal will land on that Sunday turf with more than enough firepower and fuel to take on both Djokovic and Verdasco at the same time.

Translation: For Djokovic, given the numbers and history it will be more of a mental battle than a physical one. But isn’t that the right of passage for anything worth going after?

For Verdasco it’s not only about validating the Barcelona title but it’s also about getting the admission card just to the lobby of the building housing the big cats. Getting hammered by Nadal again in the finals should get him there IF he handles both Djokovic and Ferrer with relative ease.

Even though we got robbed of the Nadal-Soderling fireworks not to mention the Fedal semi, this Djokovic-Verdasco is the closest thing now.

Rome 2010 Wednesday Highlights. From M. Thanks.

M

Can you manage to NOT move your body on this?

Nadal after beating Kohlschreiber.

Click here.

Thinking of what will ALWAYS get that sinking feeling in the stomach for these players?

Roddick: That backhand volley against Federer @ Wimbledon 2009 final.

Nadal: Losing to Soderling @ ’09 FO. It was a double whammy.

Sampras: Losing to Safin in straight sets @ the US Open finals.

Borg: Losing to McEnroe at Wimbledon.

Federer: Forehand that failed to clear the net on match point against Nadal @ Wimbledon finals.

How big a factor is Federer’s serve in his five losses this year.

No.	Lost to	Score	Round	Ist serve %age
1	Soderling @ Abu Dhabi	7-6,6-7,2-6.	Semi	NA
2	Davydenko @ Doha	4-6, 4-6	Semi	54
3	Baghdatis @ Indian Wells	7-5, 5-7, 6-7	Third	60
4	Berdych @ Miami	4-6, 7-6, 6-7	Fourth	55
5	Gulbis @ Rome	6-2,1-6,5-7	Opening	56

Glass half full / half empty on Federer’s current state.

Half full:

-All but one of the five losses this year have gone the distance (three sets).

-Two of them he had match point(s).

Half empty:

-He has now lost to five different players.

-“My game was definitely not up to speed,” Federer said. “My serve was not working at all. On clay you can lose the feeling sometimes. At one point I tried to go three-quarters speed but that didn’t work, either. So I just kept going for it and hoping that it would come back eventually, and it didn’t unfortunately.”

Does that make ANY freaking sense? Geeeeeeeezzzzzzzzz!!!!!! If you are not hitting your first freaking serve and you go three- quarters and if it still doesn’t work, how much of a moron do you have to be to give that up and go back to full throttle? Don’t you have a bigger chance of getting back on track if you press on with ‘three-quarters’ instead of going back to banging your long nose on the brick freaking wall? Geeeeeeeezzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!

-This notion that Federer will be able to flip the switch come big time and everything will fall in place is downright insulting and arrogant not just to the talent he owns but to the sport too – and to those little people called fans if anyone even cares about them anymore.

-Sure last year Federer won his first title at Madrid and then rattled two consecutive titles at the FO and Wimbledon to erase the memory of not winning anything till then at six previous events. Does that mean he is way ahead this year given that premise since he already has the AO title? Don’t think so.

Last year before his Madrid title, Federer had lost to just three players – Nadal, Djokovic and Murray – and Wawrinka too (that one is still under investigation). This year you have a list of tomato cans in comparison – Baghdatis, Berdych, Gulbis, Davydenko and Soderling.

Besides, of the six events he laid an egg at last year, he reached semis at four of them, final at one and third round at the last one against Wawrinka. Can you see the reason why it’s under investigation? This year he has one semi one third rd, one fourth rd and one opening round.

Additionally, all those three straight titles last year – Madrid, FO and Wimbledon – were all without someone called Nadal in the lineup – the guy who won two of those three titles a year ago. While that’s not Federer’s fault or business, the fact that this year it appears this dangerous kid may be around makes the encore from last year a tad convoluted if not uncertain – even on grass.

When you are on top of your game and in rhythm it’s hard to realize what all is working to make it all happen. But when you at that level for a while you tend to take it for granted. Even more of surprise is waiting for you if you are coming off a break. That’s when you FULLY realize what all was chiming in to make everything fall in place.

If you have ever played sports and have come back from an injury or illness break you will understand what I am barking about here. The absolute knowledge of how much it takes to be what you were before the break, hits you hard driving home the ‘taking for granted’ BS. Federer just learnt that lesson first hand prompting this from him: Federer said. “Sometimes it takes a loss to wake up and shake you up for your approach the next week. When you always win, sometimes you forget how hard it is.”

-With every loss Federer now reminds himself of the AO title, 16 big ones, last year’s showing and his pursuit of the calendar Slam this year to mitigate the pain from the humiliation to losing to players who should not even win a set against him. He knows he is fooling himself but there’s no other way to lend a positive spin on stuff given how stark and ‘in the face’ it appears to be getting with every event.

Press has been on the fence so far but things are about to get testy if he continues to languish at the bottom of the draw for too long. Granted winning just one more title this year – if it’s a Slam – will be more than enough to salvage the season but for that to happen out of nowhere seems more unlikely than likely given the rounds he has reached this year and the clowns he has lost to – forget about the ‘one title in ten outings’ BS.

Photos.

Rome 2010 Tuesday Interview Gulbis. From M. Thanks.

M

Rome 2010 Tuesday Interview Federer. From M. Thanks.

M

Gulbis vs federer. From M. Thanks

M

Happy birthday to Steph: April 28.

Don’t forget to send me some shirtless Safin pix.