In 2009, Juan Martin Del Potro defeated Roger Federer to win the US Open. So fierce were his serves and volleys, so vast his reach and so fast his strides, it was thought that a new World Champion had born. Potro was not lucky and has been in the grip of injuries for about a year now. He hasn't regained his form, as is proved by his recent losses to little known players. As of now, no Grand Slam is visible on his horizon.
Robin Soderling finally managed to conquer Federer at the French Open (36 63 75 64) but fell to Rafael Nadal in the final. Federer has since taken revenge not once but twice: first at the US Open (64 64 75) and then at Shanghai (61 61). With this the already dismal record of Soderling against Federer has become more dismal: 14 losses and just one win. Soderling has been defeated by lesser mortals too, after the US Open: by the little known Andrey Golubev at Kuala Lumpur (36 26) and by David Ferrer at Beijing (26 46). The promise he held out at one point of time has dissipated. A Grand Slam for him seems far away.
Tomas Berdych beat Federer at the Wimbledon (64 36 61 64). The forceful way he played that match made me think that he would go ahead and beat Nadal in the final. The suspicion was unfounded. He fell meekly to Nadal (36 57 46). A number of players have defeated Berdych since then: Xavier Malisse, Marcos Baghdatis, Michael Llodra, Novak Djokovic, David Ferrer, Michael Berrer and Guillermo Garcia - Lopez, besides Federer himself (36 75 67). The interest kindled by his wins against Federer and Djokovic at the Wimbledon has been doused by his too many subsequent losses. I do not see him winning a Grand Slam in the near future.
Novak Djokovic's victory over Federer at the US Open semifinal (57 61 57 62 75) was another remarkable event. It was the perseverance of Djokovic that helped him clinch that gruelling five-setter. If he had continued to maintain the same form, he would have defeated Nadal and won his second Grand Slam. It was not to be. He lost to Nadal (46 75 46 26 ). His tragedy did not end there: he meekly surrendered to Federer at Shanghai (57 46). Djokovic is a great player no doubt, but ever since winning the Australian Open of 2008, Grand Slams have been consistently eluding him. Nonetheless, he is one of those few players who are close to a Grand Slam.
Federer himself looks like a bright star that blinks very often. One instant, he loses to Soderling and the next he rises like a phoenix and demolishes him. One day he surrenders to Djokovic and the next, he avenges the defeat. He had literally toyed with Andy Murray at the Australian Open (63 64 76), but the other day at Shanghai, he fell to Murray in two straight sets. Federer was majestic at the Australian Open. Since then, a great deal of his accuracy has deserted him. As of now, a 17th Grand Slam seems to be ever so slowly sliding away from him. Nadal, Djokovic and Murray besides Berdych, Soderling and Davydenko are capable of conquering him on a day which is not his. Somehow I have come to have a notion that Federer has reached a stage where he plays tennis for the sheer love of it and is no more worried much about the outcome. The fact is, when he plays well, he thrills tennis lovers like no other player does. On his day, he still can defeat any one. I will count him in for now.
That takes us back to Nadal. He has won the French Open, the Wimbledon and the US Open, all in a row. A remarkable feat which very few players have performed in tennis history. But of late, he has lost to the 53rd ranked Guillermo Garcia Lopez at Bangkok and to the 12th ranked Jurgen Melzer at Shanghai. (Federer had beaten Melzer effortlessly at the Wimbledon and the US Open). Perhaps Nadal has been playing too many matches. Rest for him in the near future is unlikely: he will be playing at least two more tournaments and three back-to-back charity matches against Federer before the year ends. So many matches in so short a time will have a telling effect on Nadal. (Federer is wiser on that count: he plays less). Despite all this, my mind tells me that Nadal is more likely than anybody else, to win the next Grand Slam.
However, to be sure, I turned to the RICOH ATP Match Facts. Statistics have no sentiments. They are neutral. They don't look at faces. I tried to find out whether they gave out any clue as to what the immediate future holds for us, the tennis lovers.
The RICOH statistics compare players on as many as ten parameters starting with aces. John Isner has served 962 aces which is 674 more than Nadal's 288, and 714 more than Djokovic's 248. Had aces been enough to clinch the issue, Isner would have been the World Number One, hands down. The reality is, Isner is ranked way below, at 20. It is worth noting that among the top ten players, Federer has the most balanced position: he has the third highest number of aces (506) while being the World Number Two.
The 1st serve is almost always more powerful than the 2nd serve. It is easier for an opponent to return the 2nd serve which is often weaker than the 1st serve. Being more powerful than the 2nd serve, the 1st serve is likely to win more points than the 2nd serve. This makes it mandatory for us to consider the parameter, '1st Serve Percentage.' Here, Roddick is the leader, with 69%. Nadal and Verdasco have 67% each. Ferrer has 65, Djokovic & Youzhny, 64, and then, only then, comes Federer, with 62%. Murray has the lowest score: 55%. Soderling has 59% while Berdych has 57%.
Despite his high number of aces, the accuracy of Federer's 1st serve has been much lower than Nadal's and Djokovic's. This, perhaps, is one of the reasons for Federer's unsatisfactory performance so far during the year.
Let us now look at the 'Service Games Won.' There are four parameters that precede the service games won and they are: (1) Aces, (2) 1st Serve Percentage, (3) 1st Serve Points Won and (4) 2nd Serve Points Won. Each of these four parameters has a bearing on 'Service Games Won' which, therefore, is the net result of the four. Considering Service Games Won will be more meaningful than considering its four components separately. Let us see who leads or lags on this vital count.
No surprise, it is Andy Roddick who leads the pack of the top ten. He has the highest score of 92%. Obviously, the very large number of aces he has served must have seen to it. The next name surprised me: Nadal, with 90%. But when he is the World Number One, it is only natural that he should have won most of his service games. Federer follows him with 88%. So does Berdych. Soderling, Murray, Djokovic, Ferrer and Youzhny follow with lesser scores.
I had always believed that the number of serves a player was able to return was as important as the aces he himself served. When a player finds it difficult to return serves, he cannot hope to break the opponent's serve. The receiving player should have quick reflexes to reach and return the ball before it swishes past him. Some of these balls might be bullets moving at 200+ kilometers per hour. So the 'points won returning 1st serve' is, according to me, a very important measuring scale. Novak Djokovic leads the pack with 35% while Federer (and David Ferrer) follows him closely with 34%. Murray has 33 percent and Nadal, 32. I had expected Nadal to be the leader, but he is not. Incidentally, Isner's figure is a low 22% and is proof that a habitual ace-server need not be a good returner of serve.
The 'Return Games Won' should have followed more or less the same pattern as the points won returning 1st serve, but showed some variation. Here too, Djokovic was the leader, with 34%. Murray and Ferrer, both came second, with 32%, while Nadal, with 30%, came third. Federer came fifth, with 27%, behind Youzhny who had 28%; this must be the main reason behind the dismal performance of Federer. Fernando Verdasco (27%), Soderling (26%), Berdych (25%) and Roddick (18%) followed. Ferrer has done surprisingly well on these two counts.
Now that we are done with the analysis of most of the important parameters, let us ask ourselves: who are the leading players? Three names rush to my mind: Nadal, Federer and Djokovic. I believe a match between Federer and Nadal is impending. Although Federer's record against Nadal favours the latter, I can't help remembering what Murray said at Shanghai the other day: "Federer is no push over." Nadal is not invincible. Neither is Federer. Federer is as capable of defeating Nadal as Nadal is capable of defeating him. Now that Federer has defeated Djokovic, Soderling, Berdych and Melzer, he can very well beat Nadal too. While I have confidence in Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, in that order, I consider Andy Murray as a player who has the caliber to turn the tables on all of them. David Ferrer has progressed well, that too silently; still a Grand Slam does not seem to be within his reach.
Statistics have one defect: on any given day, a player can perform better or worse than what the statistics tell. It all depends on the mood and fitness of the player while on the court. There have been instances of the same player looking like a ferocious lion in one match and a toothless wolf in another. Players tend to be erratic at times, without any apparent reason, letting statistics go down the drain. And, interestingly, this is one field where mathematics doesn't exactly work.
Before I conclude, the names that linger in my mind are: Nadal, Federer and Djokovic plus Murray.
