Roger Federer and the 2012 Tennis Season

by Conroy

Roger Federer victorious at Wimbledon for the seventh time

Roger Federer collapsed awkwardly to the grass as Andy Murray’s backhand passing shot, the last stroke of the 2012 Wimbledon Championships, fell wide of the sideline. The Centre Court crowd cheered in appreciation as they watched the Swiss champion defeat their local hope¹. Federer had won another Wimbledon title, his seventh, had won another grand slam tournament, his 17^th, and reclaimed the number 1 ranking (all records). His fall to the turf was just about the only ungraceful step he took all day. His tennis was, by any measure, a sublime, vintage display as he outplayed an in-form Murray (and subdued the wildly expectant and partisan British audience) to win the competitive match 4-6, 7-5, 6-3, 6-4. With this latest win he is once again the king of tennis, the mighty Roger Federer, the greatest player of all time.

Perhaps no two points encapsulate just how well Federer played then the two points that ended the second set. The score is 5-6, 30-30 with Murray, leading the match after having won a close first set, serving to take the second set to a tiebreaker. The players engage in a neutral baseline rally before Federer rips an inside-out forehand off a short mid-court ball deep into Murray’s backhand corner. Murray plays a smart soft backhand up the line but Federer has anticipated it and streaks to cut the ball off at the service line, hitting a great drop volley that Murray, despite all his speed, can barely reach and pushes long of the baseline. Now the score is 30-40, set point. Again the players engage in a baseline rally until Federer hits a short angled forehand to Murray’s forehand sideline. Murray is forced to lunge for the ball hitting it back to Federer who then rips a backhand crosscourt to Murray’s backhand corner. The Scot scrambles madly to get to the ball, but Federer has anticipated a weak crosscourt reply and is already sprinting toward the net, where he intercepts the ball near the service line and plays one of the most exquisite drop volleys you’ll ever see, the ball landing close to the net and literally bouncing low and sideways off the turf, and making its second bounce (and stopping cold) before the sprinting Murray can reach it. The set was Federer’s and from then on the outcome of the match was never in doubt. These points highlight what Federer tennis is all about, variety, sharp ball striking, point construction and anticipation, and jaw-dropping shot making (I let out an audible gasp on seeing that set point). Match highlights (including these two points) can be viewed here.

Coming into the 2012 tennis season few projected the renaissance of Roger Federer. The whispers were of a fading champion whose time of winning had passed. When I last wrote about tennis before the major clay court tournaments leading into the French Open (Roland Garros), I suggested three likely outcomes as the tour went through the heart of the season from the European clay-court spring through the U.S. Open in September. My least likely outcome (of three possible) was Federer regaining the number 1 ranking. So how did he do it and where does that leave his main (and recently dominant) rivals Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal? And what about the rest of the men’s field?

2012 from Australia to Wimbledon
2012 has been a highly competitive year – between the three men that continue to dominate tennis. And unlike last year, when the story was repeatedly Novak Djokovic besting Rafael Nadal, 2012 has seen Federer elbow his way back into the mix. Compare the major tournament winners from the last two years:

Tournament	2011		2012
	Winner	Finalist	Winner	Finalist
Australian Open	Novak Djokovic	Andy Murray	Djokovic	Rafael Nadal
Indian Wells	Djokovic	Nadal	Roger Federer	John Isner
Miami	Djokovic	Nadal	Djokovic	Murray
Monte Carlo	Nadal	David Ferrer	Nadal	Djokovic
Madrid	Djokovic	Nadal	Federer	Tomas Berdych
Rome	Djokovic	Nadal	Nadal	Djokovic
Roland Garros	Nadal	Federer	Nadal	Djokovic
Wimbledon	Djokovic	Nadal	Federer	Murray

Federer stated after his Wimbledon win that after last year's disappointing losses he was determined to take a more offensive approach into his matches with Djokovic and Nadal. That’s been clear tactic in recent matches. Unfortunately, that approach is blunted on slow clay, but on hard courts, especially fast hard courts, and grass, it is a winning strategy. So in the table above we see Federer’s name on the winner’s line in several big tournaments in 2012 where he was absent in 2011 (including the novel, fast, and apparently very slippery blue clay featured this year - for the first and last time - in Madrid). (What this table also shows is that no other man has been able to break through and win a big tournament. 2012 has been competitive amongst the “Big 3”, but the field still lags behind. Through Wimbledon, Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic have won 30 of the last 31 grand slam titles².)

Nadal playing - and beating - Djokovic at Roland Garros

It’s also clear the Novak Djokovic has been less consistent this year than last. Last year he was winning on all surfaces, this year he hasn’t. That led to a major shift that was all the talk in the tennis world before Wimbledon, Rafael Nadal getting the better of Djokovic on the European clay courts, changing the dynamic from last year and positioning the Spaniard for greater success in 2012, more grand slams, and the number 1 ranking. The clay courts in Paris played very slow this year, conditions perfect for Nadal and his impenetrable clay court defense. He sliced through his draw (seven doomed men as Pete Bodo labeled them) and despite a temporary hiccup in the final against Djokovic³ he emphatically won his 11^th grand slam. The title was his record seventh at Roland Garros, and was correctly hailed as a historic accomplishment, leaving no one in doubt that Nadal is the greatest clay court player in history. Most pundits picked him to carry his success onto grass and claim another Wimbledon title. Instead, and as proof that all glory is fleeting, he was famously upset by unknown Lukas Rosol in the second round (it’s worth watching Rosol’s unbelievable performance⁴, see highlights here). Nadal’s 2012 was not going to be a repeat of his 2010 or even 2008.

Roger Federer nearly lost the next day as he had to fight back from two sets down to beat journeyman Julien Benneteau in the third round. He was two points from defeat on five separate occasions. A few points here and there make all the difference. He fought through back issues in his next match. But he found his best form and full fitness for the last three matches, including an impressive win over defending champion Djokovic in the semi-finals. The Wimbledon triumph was a culmination of Federer’s resurgence. Last year he repeatedly lost to Nadal and Djokovic (1-7 through the U.S. Open), but this year he hasn’t (2-3 so far and 2-1 on hard courts and grass), including beating Nadal on the way to the Indian Wells title. The balance of power in tennis rests on who wins and loses a handful of key matches. This year Federer has won some of the matches that last year he lost. Last year he was clearly number 3, this year the top 3 have been much closer.

Just consider how each man won at this year’s grand slams: Djokovic beat Nadal to win in Australia, Nadal beat Djokovic to win at Roland Garros, and Federer beat Djokovic to win Wimbledon. If any of these results were different, then the rankings and storylines would be too.

2012 After Wimbledon
So what might we expect for the rest of the season? I don’t make predictions but I feel confident in writing that the remainder of the 2012 tennis season will continue to be dominated by Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal. There is little evidence to suggest otherwise. They’ve won every big tournament so far and until someone else breaks up their hegemony (which we’ve been waiting for years to happen) there’s little reason to think they won’t continue to do so. So focusing on them, let’s first consider in a little more detail what has happened so far this year. Here are their season records through Wimbledon:

2012 Season
	Record	PCT.	Grand Slams	Titles
1. Roger Federer	46-6	0.885	1	5
2. Novak Djokovic	41-7	0.854	1	2
3. Rafael Nadal	42-6	0.875	1	4

These records are remarkably similar, just as they were before the big lead up tournaments to Rolland Garros. In fact, this similarity extends all the way back to the beginning of last season:

2011-2012 Seasons
	Record	PCT.	Grand Slams	Titles
1. Roger Federer	110-18	0.859	1	9
2. Novak Djokovic	111-13	0.895	4	12
3. Rafael Nadal	111-21	0.841	2	7

Novak Djokovic’s remarkable 2011 gives him the best overall statistics, but the similar number of wins and the overall success in both grand slams and titles is impressive for all three. But looking forward we need to consider the dynamics of the tennis season. Any given tennis season is really five shorter seasons, the opening hard court swing from January through March, the clay court swing from April to June, a short grass court season around Wimbledon, the hard court summer from July through the U.S. Open, and then a long post-U.S. Open hard court denouement through the end of November. So we’ve arrived at the point after Wimbledon when the tour returns to hard courts, where it will remain (outside or indoors) for the rest of the season. The wrinkle this year is that the London Olympics, where tennis is a sport⁵ and all of the top players will be competing, are being played on grass right back at the All England Club⁶. I don’t know what to expect at the Olympics, it’s a very rare dynamic to have consecutive highly valued tournaments played at the same venue, and grass is the least played upon surface. So who knows, but you probably have to favor those players that do best on grass. Those players are of course the usual suspects: Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal (and to a lesser extent Andy Murray and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga). You also have to consider the Olympic dynamic, which can lift players filled up on national pride to unexpected success.

But Olympics aside, when thinking about the rest of the season, I think it’s valid to look at the hard court/grass court (i.e, non-clay court) record of the Big 3 since the beginning of last year:

2011-2012 Hard Court/Grass Court Seasons
	Record	PCT.	Grand Slams	Titles
1. Roger Federer	84-11	0.884	1	8
2. Novak Djokovic	78-7	0.918	4	9
3. Rafael Nadal	60-18	0.769	0	0

Now a major discrepancy is revealed. Nadal’s performance off of the European clay courts has been clearly inferior to that of Federer and Djokovic. In fact, Nadal hasn’t won a non-clay court title since October 2010. This trend doesn’t bode well for Nadal’s chances to win the U.S. Open or reclaim the number 1 ranking this season. Add to that reports coming out of Nadal’s camp that his knee tendonitis is flaring up – and hard court tennis is no friend to painful knees – and Nadal’s season, which was looking so bright after his Roland Garros triumph, may end up being as frustrating for him as last year.

On the other hand, both Federer and Djokovic have thrived on hard courts. For Federer, since last year’s U.S. Open loss to Djokovic, where it should be remembered he held two match points while serving in their memorable semi-final, he has gone 40-2 on hard courts, winning six of the nine tournaments he’s played on the surface⁷. For his part, Djokovic has won the two biggest hard court tournaments this season, the Australian Open and Miami. He must surely be considered the best hard court player in the world considering he’s won the last three hard court grand slams⁸. The smart money would have to be on one of them winning the U.S. Open and ending the year ranked number 1.

Who Else Could Emerge?
As this post and the many tennis posts I’ve written over the last couple of years show, tennis in this era is a very deterministic sport. By that I mean that the outcomes, seemingly so variable and unpredictable from tournament to tournament and year to year, have in fact been highly predictable. Over the last eight or nine years the champions have always been the same men. This is in many ways the nature of the sport. There’s no clock to run out and point-after-point, game-after-game, set-after-set, gives time for the better player to establish their game and for the lesser player to make mistakes or wilt under the pressure. This is exacerbated at the grand slam where an upset has to be won over best of five set matches.

This might be tennis’ great golden era of super-elite players battling for their place in the record books and tennis pantheon. I believe there’s truth in that argument, and certainly no one can argue against the claim that the level of tennis being played by Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic has raised the entire sport in the last decade. But there’s another side. Such predictability, as seen in seemingly invariable outcomes, is counter to one of the core reasons why we watch sports: to see something new or unpredictable or surprising. Yes we want to see the best play their best, but we don’t want to see the same thing all the time. Today’s tennis has gotten the first part wonderfully right but not the second. There’s no blaming the Big 3 for this, they want to win; the change will come from someone else beating them. Could this happen this year?

I consider hard courts to be a neutral surface in that they play at a speed between slow clay and fast grass, and produce predictable bounces also somewhere between the high-bouncing clay and low-skidding grass. And the majority of the tour is played on hard courts. This means that more players stand a chance at winning than on the specialized clay and grass surfaces (Nadal and Federer, the best specialists in the world, have won 15 of the last 16 Roland Garros and Wimbledon titles). For competitive balance and the general hope of seeing something different than we’ve seen over the last several years, this is a good thing. So who else besides the Big 3 may prosper?

Andy Murray, the next to dethrone the Big 3?

First is Andy Murray. He played a very good match against Federer in his first ever Wimbledon final. Hopefully this will boost his confidence for his best surface – hard courts. His other three grand slam finals have come on hard courts (two in Australia and one at the U.S. Open) and he’s won eight hard court ATP 1000 tournaments, which is equal to Djokovic and trails only Federer (14) among active players. Murray can win on hard courts and if/when he wins a grand slam it’s likely to be in Melbourne or New York.  His challenge is beating the Big 3 at a grand slam; he’s lost his last eight grand slam matches to them dating back to the 2010 Australian Open (0-2 against Federer, 0-4 against Nadal, and 0-2 against Djokovic). He’s been stuck at number 4 for several years and the only way to breakthrough is to beat the guys ahead of him. No doubt Murray is capable, he just needs to win.

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, David Ferrer, Tomas Berdych, and Juan Martin Del Potro are all Top 10 players with complete games and past hard court success. Hypothetically they can all win if they get hot and the draw falls a bit in their favor. Their resumes include grand slam wins over all of the Big 3. But watching these men for years, I have little confidence that they’ll actually come through. Least likely are the handful of big-serving wild cards that could win on any given day, most notably John Isner and Milos Roanic.

Whether it’s Andy Murray or some other Top 10 player, it would be surprising but refreshing to see someone else lift a grand slam trophy. Tennis doesn’t have to be a deterministic sport, upsets can be exciting and unexpected champions can be someone to cheer for. I wouldn’t bet on it happening, but it would be something different for the U.S. Open, and that would be a good thing.

---

NOTES:

1. The English nation has been haunted by the lack of an English champion at Wimbledon since Fred Perry way back in 1936. English player Tin Henman famously failed to triumph at Wimbledon in the 90s and early 00s. Over the last several years the English public has seen Andy Murray (rightly) as their best hope to win a grand slam, and especially Wimbledon. So Murray, a Scot, has been adopted by the English as a local favorite under the general moniker of a “British” champion. (At the same time that the Scots are striving for greater independence within the United Kingdom, and especially less control from English London.)

2. The lone exception being Juan Martin Del Potro at the 2009 U.S. Open, a result that seems more and more amazing with every passing grand slam tournament.

3. In the final Nadal won the first two sets, both full of uneven play, before a steady drizzle dampened the courts and balls and took much of the sting out of his spinny groundstrokes. Djokovic took advantage dominating the third set and taking a lead in the fourth before the rain and growing darkness halted play for the day. They resumed the next day and Nadal was able to fight back, winning the fourth set 7-5, taking the match and a desperately needed grand slam win over Djokovic.

4. These types of early round upsets are so rare amongst the Big 3 that this might be the greatest upset in Wimbledon history.

5. And I will again note that I don’t believe tennis, a professional sport with a well-established tour and lots of public notice, should be an Olympic sport. But my view seems to be in the minority and the players certainly seem to value it.

6. Officially named the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club. A very English title.

7. His losses came to Nadal in the semi-finals of the Australian Open and to Andy Roddick in the third round at Miami. The latter was certainly the biggest win of Roddick’s poor season. Federer also withdrew from the season-opening Doha tournament before the semi-finals with a bad back.

8. And his record this year is a not-to-shabby 20-2 with his two losses coming to Andy Murray (another superior hard court player) in Dubai and John Isner in one of the finest ever performances by the American in the Indian Wells semi-finals.