The second week of the year’s second major is underway, and as usual the big names in men’s tennis are all positioned well.
That’s hardly surprising when you consider the consistency of the game’s elite over the last four or five years.
And (again, as usual) it appears that it’s ultimately a two-horse race between Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal.
But can another player step up and stop the usual ‘Djokadal’ quinella?
On first analysis the answer is simply no. But if you think back to this time last year, Djokovic had not lost a match all season and was an unbackable favourite before Roger Federer took him down in four sets in the semi-finals.
Federer’s genius of course makes him a threat in any tournament, and he has moved through the draw with usual efficiency, albeit dropping a set or two along the way. He is the people’s champ and probably the most popular player in history – but it’s now over two years since he won his last slam, and the red dirt of Paris was always his least likely stage on which to deliver.
He’ll make the semis, but that’s as far as he’ll go.
Andy Murray, the last of the ‘big four’, has been troubled by a back complaint during the first week but has still moved smartly through to the final 16. I also expect him to make the semis, but a showdown with Nadal is likely to leave the Brit still seeking an inaugural slam win.
So, if all goes to plan, the third and final Sunday at Roland Garros will pit the two best players on the planet against each other for the 33rd time overall (Nadal leads 18-14) and for the fourth consecutive grand slam final.
Rightly, Nadal is the favourite given his form and brilliant record here.
In a lovely shade of magenta he has dispatched all comers with typical ease and appears as ruthless as ever. Motivation is never an issue for Nadal, who equals Lleyton Hewitt as the most competitive player I have ever seen – but he has an extra carrot dangling in front of him this year, with a chance to become the only man in the open era to have won seven French Open titles.
Djokovic though, has timed his run perfectly on the clay this season and is my pick to win.
The Serb is a wily customer and a fierce competitor. There’s no doubt he wanted to head into this tournament under the radar (or as under the radar as you can get when you’ve won the last three slams).
Last year I felt that the burden of entering Roland Garros undefeated hampered his performance through weight of expectation.
No such burden this time around, though. He is peaking at the right time.
Equally important, his game matches up well with the Spaniard on clay. His height coupled with the world’s best backhand helps him negotiate Nadal’s cobra-spitting top-spin forehand. His scrambling and flexibility will also see him retrieve balls others simply cannot. He is also more aggressive than Nadal on returns and his depth of shot will give him better court position.
Finally, he also has the psychological advantage over five sets, having beaten Nadal in their three most recent grand slam finals – most recently that near-six-hour epic in Melbourne.
If he wins, he will be the first man since Rod Laver in 1968 to hold all four grand slams at once, a feat so remarkable that it has proven elusive to all other modern greats.
Personally, I think he can do it. But whoever wins will be made to earn it
clipper
Guest
Rory - that's certainly true in Sydney, but in Melbourne I believe the majority of courts are ontecar, but I have no idea about the other cities. The advantages of synthetic grass are that they drain quickly, are easy on the knees and are relatively cheap to lay and maintain, but are not the best to train the elite juniors on. Another example of each state going their own way instead of a uniform approach.
Rory
Guest
In Australia most are actually brought up on synthetic grass which is very different again and essentially is carpet.
clipper
Guest
The current top players are much more all rounders than in other periods. You wouldn't put Sampras anywhere near the top 100 clay courters and McEnroe wasn't that much better - but there was Borg and to a lesser degree, Agassi, who were equally at home on different surfaces.
Brendon
Guest
When Rod Laver won his Grand Slams 3/4 surfaces were on grass. So dont give me this "all surfaces are the same" whinge. Note to Untimely: no major tournament uses Rebound Ace. Aus Open uses plexicushion and has done so for a a few years now.
Savvas Tzionis
Guest
It would be intereting if the tennis authorities imposed a a variety of surfaces on the 15 major tournaments of the year. The problem would be that most players are brought up on cheap to upkeep hard court surfaces. Is it right that the majority of players are forced to change their game to suit the faster surfaces?
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
It's the point of difference tennis has over pretty much every other sport... different surfaces. I agree that more should be done to keep the surfaces unique in their own ways. The same players would probably still dominate, but it would be nice to see them adopt some different tactics.
Savvas Tzionis
Guest
I am really surprised that no one has bothered to look into technology that reduces the costs of maintaining lawn courts. The uniformity of todays courts is not healthy. Imagine Borg v McEnroe in todays ultra competitive climate. They would both be fitter and faster and harder hitter's.
Matt F
Roar Guru
Good point. The trend around the world seems to be for slower surfaces which is making the sport quite one dimensional. The declining court speed at Wimbledon is sad to see.
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
Interesting observations, Untimely. On that, I think Wimbledon need to get some more speed back into their courts so serve-volley players are brought back into the game. Right now there's only a few who regularly adopt this method - Lopez...Llodra... Stepanek... can't think of many others in the top 50? It's a dying art.
Untimely
Guest
ADAM - have you noticed that players are sliding on the clay less and less? Their games are getting bigger, their groundies harder hit. And their serves comes off the RG courts only slightly slower than they do off Rebound Ace. The gap between players who are great/poor on clay and those who are great/poor on hard/grass seems to be getting smaller.
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
Cheers mate. Conditions also really looked to played a part last night. It was very heavy and Djokovic was struggling to hit through the court. Credit to Seppi though he played out of his skin for the first two sets.
Paulus of Sydneygrad
Guest
I agree with your analysis of Djokovic, but I think he is not yet the complete player. His inability to serve and volley counts against him on hardcourt and grass. He will burn himself out if he keeps slugging it out for hours from the baseline at the 3 slams other than the French. The Australian Open showed that he needs to develop a serve and volley game and an approach shot and volley game to shorten points, otherwise his life expectancy at the top will be brief. Nadal to win on his patch at Roland Garros.
RonnieS
Roar Rookie
Nice article. Looks like a few of the big guys have struggled with the pace of the courts this year too....
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
Interestingly, Nadal and Djokovic have only met once at Roland Garros, and that was six years ago. It will be an epic final if it eventuates.
clipper
Guest
While Djokovic certainly has the psychological advantage over Nadal in the other Grand Slams, I don't think that will carry over into the French where Nadal rightly believes he is invincible. If it does emerge that the top 4 play the semis (the first time in history where the top 4 have met in 3 consecutive GS) then Nadal will have the far easier game against Murray and will arrive fresher.