Turning Back the Clock at Wimbledon Adam Gale It started, as it did every year, with the brightly garbed town crier merrily announcing the first day of the Championships at Wimbledon, to the clatter of a bell. A rush of exuberant fans then poured into the grounds of the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club, with tickets in hand and umbrellas at the ready, heading first to the stalls selling Kentish strawberries doused in cream or perhaps to the Pimms counter for the day’s first tipple, before play began. So far, so normal, for London in late June. What started typically, however, would end in astonishment. For a single fortnight, most of the country and much of the world watched as the great veteran turned back the clock. He’ll never win another one, the naysayers said, persistently. His reign is long since over; he has been eclipsed by two younger, brighter stars. The 30-year old former champ paid them no heed. He knew deep down that these lawns were his. He fought on, till only the world number one stood in his way, the younger of his usurpers, in the final. There, to the shock and applause of the Centre Court crowd, he clawed his way back from behind to take the match in five exhilarating sets. Overjoyed, the great champion waited until that incomparable moment when he held the trophy aloft as the announcer declared the winner of this year’s Championships to be…Jimmy Connors?
No, this isn’t Roger Federer’s favorite dream, but rather the story of another great player’s return to glory, thirty years ago. Connors’ triumph at Wimbledon — and his subsequent victories at the next two US Opens — crowned his already distinguished career. While the comparison between Connors and Federer might at first seem somewhat unlikely (I’m struggling to think of a player less like Jimmy Connors than Roger Federer in terms of style and attitude), there are in fact some surprising similarities in the shapes of their respective careers. Both players established themselves as the best in the world in their early 20s, but soon faced growing pressure on all surfaces from an enemy reared on the red clay of Europe, known and feared for their topspin ground-strokes and monumental resolve. Eventually, both Connors and Federer were displaced by their rivals, and subsequently fell behind even younger players of startling talent, who eventually claimed the number one spot themselves. After a certain point, neither the American nor the Swiss seemed able to overcome their conquerors on the big stage.
This chart shows the head to head records of Connors vs Borg/McEnroe and Federer vs Nadal/Djokovic. It is divided before and after the turning point in their grand slam rivalries — the 2010 US Open for Federer and 1979 Wimbledon for Connors (for the purpose of comparison, Connors’ “after” period ends just before Wimbledon 1982). It shows how both men experienced a drastic collapse against their top two opponents in the majors that was not reflected in other tournaments, or at least not to the same extent. It should be noted also that Federer and Connors each won roughly 90% of their matches against everyone else in the “after” period. What does this mean for Federer? On the surface, after all, we could say that he is in a strikingly similar position to Connors in the early 80s. His fans might well take it as a source of hope — a great player can indeed get back to winning majors after thirty, despite tough opposition. There are, however, two very significant differences, which might sound a note of caution. The first is that Connors’ comeback at Wimbledon 1982 came only after he was rid of Bjorn Borg, the man who had beaten him there no fewer than four times. The Swede’s de facto retirement came at the end of the previous year. The second difference is that Connors’ successive defeats to Borg and McEnroe were predominantly the result of the superior abilities of his opponents, while Federer’s grand slam losses to Nadal and Djokovic have come largely because the latter two played better matches. Federer’s level has been such that he genuinely could have won most of those six major finals and semi-finals he’s lost since the US Open 2010 (indeed, in two of these he literally had match points); although he gave it everything he had and had some close fights, the same could not really be said for Connors.
This is both good news and bad for Federer fans. The good is that he can win Wimbledon this year. His level has been high enough over the last few months, clearly, and his comparative advantage is still probably to be found on the grass. The bad news is that, despite this, he hasn’t been able to bring that level consistently enough when it counts, in the finals and semi-finals of majors. To make matters worse, if Federer is to follow Connors’ example and win Wimbledon this year, or any other major, for that matter, it’s likely he’ll have to beat both his big rivals in succession. It’s within his power, but he’d have to play brilliant matches, which he hasn’t done regularly against them at this stage for some time. As a result, a Federer victory remains possible but certainly not probable. If it’s tough for a sixteen-time grand slam champion, imagine what it’s like for everyone else. They have three great players in their way, and not just any three. Djokovic-Nadal-Federer are an even more dominant triumvirate than Connors-Borg-McEnroe, having won 30 of the last 32 majors between them. Even if one were to be knocked out, there would still be two prohibitive favorites. As a result, there are no other big contenders for the title, though there are challengers, among whom home hope Andy Murray is surely the most realistic. Tsonga, Berdych, Isner, Del Potro and rising star Raonic are all dangerous to say the least. However, for any of these giants to win the title might be just too much of a tall order. Of all the upsets of the last thirty or forty years, I can only think of one occasion where two prohibitive favorites were beaten by a relative outsider at Wimbledon — Michael Stich beat Stefan Edberg and then Boris Becker in the final in 1991. But even he didn’t have to beat three such dominant players. What, then, if it all goes according to pattern, and it’s Nadal and Djokovic facing each other across the net yet again in just over two weeks’ time? It would surely be harder than ever to pick between them, now that Nadal has finally halted Djokovic’s sweeping advance at Roland Garros. The psychology would be very different from last year. In 2011, Rafa was rattled. He’d lost time and again to this bionic Serbian, on all other surfaces. No matter what he tried, nothing seemed to work. In the Wimbledon final, he was uncharacteristically tight, particularly at important moments at the end of the first and fourth sets. Djokovic, on the other hand, was brimming with hunger and self-belief. He played a brilliant final, for three out of four sets, with his serve in particular standing out. Were they to play again, I would definitely expect Nadal to play a better match. The question is, would Djokovic be able to repeat his performance of last year? His supporters better hope that he can, because his best may well be absolutely necessary if he’s to defend his title. The Women
But enough about the men. What about the women? Women’s tennis may not be in a golden era as the men’s game is, but the flip side of that is that it’s less predictable. The last six majors have gone to six different players. As a consequence, perhaps, there is no clear pick to lift the Venus Rosewater Dish this year. Azerenka and Sharapova have been the most dominant players so far in 2012, but many people still favor Serena Williams, whose capacity to play brilliantly remains undiminished, but whose ability to win majors seems, like her long-time counterpart Roger Federer, to have fallen away somewhat over the last couple of years. Williams is, like Federer, too great a player to count out, but the forbidding inevitability that she once brought to court has surely faded. The way Petra Kvitova played at Wimbledon last year, it was no surprise many people saw her as the face of the future (did I pick Kvitova to win the Australian Open this year? I meant Azarenka). Thus far, that portent is yet to be fulfilled. The trouble with someone who has such a highly explosive game, especially one so young, is that they can be liable to implode instead, and the Czech has lost several matches she should have won in the last 52 weeks. When she gets into her stride in a tournament, however, Kvitova is surely still going to be a big factor. She can outhit just about anybody. It would be the greatest test of her mettle if she could bring the experience of winning here last year to bear, and defend her title, and despite her patchy performances lately, she remains one of the favorites to do just that. It’s a tough and notoriously dangerous business to make predictions about the future, particularly in something so fickle as sport. That’s why, this time, I won’t call it. Suffice it to say that it would be surprising if the women’s title went outside the four big favorites, and shocking if the men’s did. Though such a shock might be potentially more exciting, I must confess I’d still like to see Federer and Williams get to the final four and try to emulate that great warrior Jimmy Connors, to prove themselves against their younger rivals while they still can, and confirm their place in the history of these Championships. Somehow I don’t imagine I’m the only one.
As always, we would love to hear from you! Questions, comments, personal experiences all create helpful dialogue for everyone! Please click here to send us your email.
TennisOne Writers Store One of your many new benefits as a TennisOne membership is your ability to purchase selected instructional DVDs at 20% off ($7.50 off each) in our new TennisOne Writers Store (login in first to access members links):
Copyright Notice: The contents of the TennisONE web site and contents forwarded to you by TennisONE are intended for your personal, noncommercial use. Republishing of TennisONE content in any way, including framing or posting of these materials on other Web sites, is strictly prohibited. See our full copyright statement If you wish to be removed from our newsletter list, please send an email to newsletter-unsubscribe@tennisone.com and leave the subject line blank. A confirmation email will be sent to you, and you will be removed from our newsletter list once you reply to that confirmation. If trouble unsubscribing, simply email us with a request to unsubscribe at: t1staff@tennisone.com |
||||||||||||||||||||
