One reason Roger Federer has had the longevity he's had is due to good scheduling. There have been those that have suggested a "streamlined" calendar would make it more interesting for the fans, thus, the idea would be to have 8 months of tennis, with 2 months devoted to the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon,
All things considered, Federer played pretty well. Expected to lose to Nadal, Federer actually broke Nadal a few times, had him in trouble. Nadal seemed poised to take a stranglehold in the match, but then Fed would break and leave the result in doubt. It always seems Fed was a bit behind and needed to
So it's come to this. A Federer-Nadal final. You'd think this would have happened some time ago, but it's been a year since they last met. At the time, Federer had a relatively straightforward win over Juan Martin del Potro in the semifinals who, up to then, had not had a great clay season. Nadal,
There was something that was going to give. Either Federer's 9-0 record over Ferrer would end, or Federer would show he's still got some game left. There was some thought Ferrer might be able to topple Federer, partly because he's been the most "successful" clay court player this season, if you measure success purely by
Well, the final that people were hoping for, but thinking they might not get, might actually happen. At the beginning of Madrid, Roger Federer had lost to Albert Montanes, a player not even in the top 20, in the semifinals of Estoril. Federer's game in Estoril looked pretty much liked it did in Rome, which
It's fair to say that the Federer playing in Madrid is not the same Federer playing the last few months. But it's fair to say that this Ernests Gulbis was not the same that played Roger Federer a mere two weeks ago. Ah, the journey of Ernests Gulbis. Two years ago, many touted this man
Oh Roger, how could we doubt you? Just because you've been mishitting balls since Indian Wells, and then Miami, and then Rome, and then Estoril. You kept telling us "everything is fine--I'm having good practices", telling us not to panic. But how were we to know? If you could play like today, then what was
Andy Murray's game has never been well suited to clay. The closest the game has to a finesse player, Murray generally doesn't like going on the offensive. Those who watched clay matches from the 1980s will naturally assume the game is still slow play from the baseline, but it is really about finding good opportunities
Ernests Gulbis. Loves. Drop shots. I mean, the man really loves them. In the 1980s, when clay court tennis meant interminably long rallies, the drop shot seemed a rarity. Few people could hit it well and some chose to almost never hit it. For every horribly awkward Lendl drop shot, there was a Mats Wilander
Madrid is the last of 3 Masters 1000 clay events. There's Monte Carlo, which is optional (you aren't fined for not showing up--it doesn't count as a 0). There is Rome (required). There is Madrid. For those of you who have not followed tennis in about a year, Hamburg used to be Madrid and Madrid
