In the finale to the fourth season of “Mad Men,” Faye Miller memorably tells Don Draper — in a moment which resonates through the full life of the show — “I hope she knows you only like the beginnings of things.”
Without getting too deep into “Mad Men” (especially for those who have not yet watched it), Don Draper is restless and easily seduced by the thrill of an affair. On the other hand, when strong, intellectually independent women such as Faye Miller and Rachel Menken challenge him, he doesn’t have the stomach for a relationship in a context of mutuality. He bails. He panics.
That line — liking only the beginnings of things — is hard to shake when considering the young career of Alexander Zverev. He is dashing and talented and can be very impressive when he wants to be… but he is not yet entirely comfortable in his own skin. When challenged, he often loses control. He had seemingly regained an important tennis lesson by toughing out a first-set tiebreaker against Pablo Carreno Busta in Friday’s Miami Open semifinals. He got punched in the mouth, absorbed the blow, and calmly regrouped to overcome a 3-0 tiebreaker deficit to win seven of the next eight points. THAT is what the German had lacked in the past several months since his Montreal title last August. That was the missing piece of the puzzle for the not-yet-21-year-old player with so much promise. He has the backhand. He can play very strong defense. Speed is not a deficiency. His serve can be very formidable. No, his forehand his not yet major league, but he showed signs of being able to hit through the court with it in Miami. He has long arms and considerable reach which help him get the racquet on a lot of shots other ATP players can’t retrieve. He has a lot of natural tools in a body that is still growing. If he can apply the mental arts to the rest of his tennis game, he will be a superstar.
Yet, that mental piece — seemingly rediscovered against Carreno on Friday — just as abruptly left him on Sunday.
Zverev liked the way the Miami final against John Isner began. Down a mini-break at 3-4 in the first-set tiebreaker, Zverev steadied his ship while Isner drowned in a sea of errors. Zverev was the calmer player, and with a one-set lead against an opponent known for lacking a strong return game, Zverev sat in the driver’s seat.
The plot complication: Isner’s serve keeps him in matches whereas Carreno and others can’t get as many free points. Isner can go through extended periods of futility as a returner and still stay in matches because of the ability to lean on the serve. This is exactly what happened at the end of set two, enabling Isner to square the match at a set apiece.
Fine — many good players blink against Isner and lose one set. It happens. Zverev resolved to be different in set three, but then came a dreadful service game at 4-4. The final error which sealed a break for Isner didn’t merely cede the competitive edge to his opponent; Zverev destroyed his racquet.
This might be a minor detail to many, but it doesn’t come across as minor to me. Here is the explanation:
Some players, every now and then, will smash racquets. It is not a noble thing, but in some cases, it has the effect of pushing a lot of negative energy out of the body. Stop and appreciate what that means, however: A player immersed in a bad patch — in the face of a day which is sliding downward — tries to regroup in time to reshape how the rest of his day is going to unfold. A player about to fall behind two sets in a best-of-5 match still has a third set in which to start fresh. A player down a set and 2-0 in a best-of-3 match still has most of the second set to attempt to make a rally. Racquet smashes in those or similar situations seem reasonable in terms of the dynamic explained above: trying to push negative energy out of the system and get the mind to refocus for the long climb ahead.
Zverev smashed his racquet just after a late-third-set loss of serve which put him one game away from defeat. Reasonable people can and do (and will) vary on this next point, but the details matter to me: Zverev was not refocusing his mind or expunging negative energy; he was mad he was about to lose. Narrowly viewed, we all hate losing, so that might not seem to indict Zverev, but the essential realization attached to his tantrum is that it suggested he was more mad about the result than the process. When an outburst comes at the very end of the match as opposed to the middle, it can carry a different message and a different level of weight. Such was my impression of Zverev in that moment. It looked like a young man not accepting what had happened.
Again, racquet smashes are not enlightened acts, but if they occur, they ought to own a restorative “clean the system” dimension. This did not feel like such an act. This felt like bitterness in the face of imminent defeat, which Isner quickly delivered to Zverev with an authoritative service hold moments later.
Zverev, in Key Biscayne the past two weeks, regained a lot of what elevated him to two Masters titles and the top five last year… but in the final, when a winnable match slipped away from him, he lost his temper. No, this is not unforgivable or unacceptable — this is a kid in tennis terms acting like a kid — but it does show how much Zverev still has to grow as a tennis player. There are times to “let it all out” and times to keep it within. Near the end of a match is a time to keep it in — why tell Isner, with that tantrum, that one is essentially resigned to defeat? That’s what the outburst conveyed more than anything which might have carried an internal benefit toward Zverev. The German only seems to like the beginnings of things; when the struggle becomes profound or complicated, he doesn’t stand in the arena and persevere, calling to mind his capitulation in the final two sets versus Hyeon Chung at the Australian Open.
It seems we are at a stage in Zverev’s career when — like his idol, Roger Federer — we are waiting for a moment at a major tournament when Sascha discovers a level of toughness he didn’t know he previously had. For Federer, this was the five-set win over Pete Sampras. The moment did not immediately lead to a gold rush of majors, but it just as definitely planted a seed and told the young Swiss that he had the ability to harness his talents. He needed time to do that, but once he got his first taste of sustained elite-level play at a major — at Wimbledon in 2003 — he roared into gear, and the rest was history.
Zverev needs that moment this spring at Roland Garros or in summer at Wimbledon. This doesn’t mean he has to beat an elite player, but he has to show toughness on a scale which has not yet emerged in his career. Once he does THAT, he will show himself that he can embrace a lot more than the beginnings of things.
Then his career will begin to take on greater and more impressive dimensions.
Right now, though, Zverev is too quick on the trigger with an emotional outburst, and too impatient about what he expects from his career.
He needs to become more artful at waiting… and at cultivating the toughness which will let him know when he is ready to graduate to a higher level of status and legitimacy in the tennis world.
Image taken from zimbio.com
Roundtable — What Shanghai Means For Borna Coric
QUESTION: How did Shanghai change your perceptions of Borna Coric, if at all?
ANDREW BURTON — @burtonad
Borna Coric had a big win over a Swiss star this past week. It wasn’t entirely unexpected.
Stan Wawrinka has showed hints of regaining his form since the U.S. hard court swing. He looked good in Cincinnati with wins over Diego Schwartzman and Kei Nishikori before going out in the quarterfinals. Stan also made the semifinals in St. Petersburg. But Coric, ranked 19 coming into Shanghai, was steady on his serve in set 3, and was able to pocket 1 of 3 break chances. So…
Oh, wait a second. He had a win over another Swiss star, too.
Coric’s win over Roger Federer wasn’t entirely unexpected either. Coric had been a tough out for Federer in their Indian Wells semifinal in March, winning the first set and being a break up in both the second and third sets. He had won a famous victory in the Halle final over Federer. I had the sense, then, that Federer had run out of gas in the third set (he had played nine matches on grass in two weeks), but Coric was well worth the win.
After the final I tweeted:
“Nothing but positive things to say about Borna Coric today – he was mentally really strong, had a solid game plan, served well and attacked the net intelligently. And took his chance in the first set TB, which was a huge moment in the match.”
On Saturday, Coric was even better than he had been in June: He was dominant on serve, conceding no break points. He won the short rallies, the mid-length rallies and the longer rallies. You can argue he won the net points as well, going 100 percent when he came to net, which was once (Federer was 11 of 15).
Coric’s reward was his first M1000 final against Novak Djokovic, who (as we discussed Sunday at Tennis With An Accent) is looking ominously close to his dominant best. Coric wasn’t blown out (as his near contemporary, Sascha Zverev, had been in the semifinal), but he won fewer than three points for every four won by Djokovic. It was a competitive match, but never really close.
Coric announced himself on the ATP World Tour with a win over Rafael Nadal at Basel in 2014, when he was not yet 18 years old. But in the early part of his career he looked to me like a pure grinder, winning matches more with his legs than his racquet. Four years on, he’s still winning more matches with power and consistency than finesse — a work in progress, not yet the full meal deal.
I can’t honestly say that Borna Coric shifted my perceptions of him significantly this week. I think he’ll be a good player, but I’m far from convinced he’ll be a great one.
MERT ERTUNGA — @MertovsTDesk
I have been following Coric since his younger years and am not surprised by the development in his game, nor by his success. In fact, I would argue that his injury-prone mid-2016 to mid-2017 period held him back tremendously, putting him behind peers such as Alexander Zverev, although Borna has been mentally ahead of them for many years (see, for example, Borna’s win over Sascha in Cincinnati 2015, in which mental toughness and maturity made the difference at the end).
Cool-headedness under pressure and a high IQ have always been a part of his pedigree. Having been forced to press the reset button late 2016 due to knee surgery and then suffering another setback due to other rehabilitation issues after a short comeback in early 2017, Coric could finally begin to focus on ameliorating his overall skills after that.
By now, he has had ample time to upgrade his stroke production and set the parameters for a complete all-around game with no visible weaknesses. His forehand and serve appear to be the biggest improvements, but I would add to that, the forward-backward first-step quickness which allows him to pounce on a shorter ball and move forward when he recognizes an opportunity.
This added first-step dimension, for example, allows his already sound net skills to come to the foreground. I am not saying that he is “faster” or that “he moves better,” but rather, that he is applying his existing great footwork to the enhancements in his game he has made over the last 12 months. This week was comprehensively the best performance of his career in my opinion, including the final.
The next (and the last) puzzle to solve for Coric, before he can be counted as one of the major forces in men’s tennis, is consistency in big tournaments in terms of results. This is where Zverev, to mention one of his equals again, is a step ahead of him. 2018 has not been “that” year for Coric… not yet.
MATT ZEMEK — @mzemek
Yes, Borna Coric should have beaten Roger Federer in Indian Wells, but he got tight and let that match slip away at the end. Therefore, when Coric met Federer in the Halle final, Coric had something to prove. He played like it, besting Federer in three sets and taking advantage of an ever-so-slight lapse by the Swiss in a first-set tiebreaker.
Over the course of his career, Federer has been very good (against players other than Rafael Nadal) at avenging losses in meaningful moments. The 2010 U.S. Open semifinal against Novak Djokovic was one of the most painful defeats of his career. Then came 2011 Roland Garros, one of the more satisfying wins of Federer’s tennis life. The 2011 U.S. Open semifinal might have been even more painful than 2010. No problem – Federer struck back against Djokovic in the 2012 Wimbledon semifinals.
The beat goes on, and the point is simple: Federer is good about correcting the losses which carry an extra sting – or if not sting, certainly an extra cost such as a Halle title.
Coric had more to prove in Halle after the Indian Wells “agony in the desert.” In Shanghai, this figured to be Federer’s moment of revenge, especially after a high-level performance against Kei Nishikori in the quarterfinals seemed to get him back into a rhythm.
Coric didn’t allow Federer to get comfortable at any point in a routine straight-set match. Coric’s serve – winning the amount of free points Nishikori struggles to win – will lend ballast to his career as long as it remains potent. Coric’s forehand can be very weak at times, but in Shanghai, it looked a lot more solid.
Do I think Coric will have a huge 2019? No… but I do think he will become more consistent.
Coric is like a WTA top-10 player – and this is not a criticism: His results veer all over the place, but he is good for a few very big runs at significant tournaments each season. That’s good – just in a volatile way. I think Coric won’t lose in the round of 64 or 32 at tournaments nearly as often next year. He will make more rounds of 16 and quarterfinals. That’s what this Shanghai tournament has done to change my perceptions of Coric.
Whether he can push beyond the quarters or 16s of big events is something I don’t yet feel confident enough to answer. Nevertheless, Coric is definitely moving in the right direction. Shanghai – specifically the “No, you’re not going to avenge your loss against me!” response to Federer – moderately but genuinely increased my expectations for what he can, and will, achieve.
Djokovic Wins Shanghai and Carries Excellence Everywhere He Goes
Question: What is the big story coming out of Shanghai?
MERT ERTUNGA — @MertovsTDesk
Novak Djokovic is getting it done, with a crushing level of domination since his Wimbledon title. The Shanghai title adds to his rise to the top — for me, the story of the year in men’s tennis — in that it is less what he is doing than how he is getting it done: on a variety of surfaces, in all aspects of the game.
He is winning matches with a considerable gap in the level of tennis between him and his opponents. Shanghai ATP 1000 is the tournament that moves the goalposts in 2018’s biggest story in men’s tennis: It moves them from Novak’s “comeback and rise to the top” to Novak’s “command at the top.” The former took place at Wimbledon. The latter is resonating since then, and it seems to be here to stay for a while. It also begs the question: How long will it continue? The last time Novak was in command of men’s tennis, it lasted a couple of years. Can it last that long this time around, too? After the Shanghai title, these are substantial questions that need to be put on the table.
For Novak to be as dominant as he was at his peak — I mean results-wise only, because game-wise, he is already there (another Shanghai confirmation) — he would need to collect titles on all court-speed variations over an extended period of time. Winning Shanghai brings him ever closer to that. He is not completely there (he may get there, depending on his results next Spring on clay), but this title represents a giant step in that direction.
ANDREW BURTON — @burtonad
Two big stories came out of Shanghai – a presence, and an absence.
The presence was the form of the tournament winner, Novak Djokovic. Djokovic has always enjoyed the Asian swing: Nick Lester, the Tennis TV commentator, tweeted after Novak’s quarterfinal win over Kevin Anderson:
Novak Djokovic’s @ATPWorldTour record on Asian soil since the start of 2009 now sits at 56-4.
Make that 58-4. According to Greg Sharko, the ATP stats guru, Shanghai 2018 was Djokovic’s first tour title without getting broken in the tournament. Djokovic won 85 percent of his first-serve points and 60 percent of his second-serve points.
If you couple that with Novak’s trademark return excellence, you have a very formidable tennis player. I took a look at Djokovic’s return stats for the tournament. Only Coric, who had put on a serving clinic against Federer in the semifinal, was able to win more than 50 percent of his second-serve points – a bare majority of 9 from 16. Over five matches Djokovic’s second-return points won percentage was 57, just below his second-serve points won percentage.
Craig O’Shannessy is a tennis analyst and strategist who tweets as @BrainGameTennis and consults with Djokovic. Craig spotted (in a match against Tsonga) that Djokovic had effectively played with three serves to the Frenchman’s one: Djokovic’s second-serve returns were as effective as his own second serves. This is what Novak did for the whole tournament in Shanghai, effectively played with three serves to one.
Novak scrapped his way to the title in the last Masters 1000 in Cincinnati, and a discerning observer (the tournament’s No. 1 seed) suggested that he still had room to improve before the end of the season. A U.S. Open and another Masters 1000 have followed; if Djokovic hasn’t reached his best level yet, the rest of the field ought to be fairly nervous for 2019.
The rest of the field? I hate to say it, but with the honorable exception of the players Djokovic beat on his way to the trophy, you have to mark it down as an absence. Two of the Big 4 were physically absent, with Rafael Nadal recuperating from a knee strain and Andy Murray having shut down his season. The fourth member of the group, Roger Federer, fought his way into the semifinals and looked to have run out of mental and physical energy against Coric.
Del Potro and Cilic, newly 30, had tournaments to forget, with Cilic falling in the first round to Nico Jarry and del Potro laboring with illness early in the week before retiring after a heavy fall caused a knee injury in his R-16 match with Coric. Stan Wawrinka and Dominic Thiem, like Cilic, couldn’t win their first match.
Del Potro has qualified for the ATP Finals in London. Barring injury or an implausible Jack Sock- like run in the last tournaments of the year, Cilic and Thiem will join him. But the second big story from Shanghai is the absence of any serious consistent competitor to the Big 3 for major titles.
As Federer and Nadal did before him, Novak Djokovic has returned from injury as an apparently unstoppable force. He will likely go into Melbourne in 2019 as the clear Australian Open favorite. It’s a long way off, but Roland Garros 2019 – and a possible clash between Djokovic playing for a second Novak Slam and Nadal for an almost unthinkable 12th French Open title – is a distinct prospect.
MATT ZEMEK — @mzemek
The big story could not be anything — or anyone — else: Novak Djokovic put his stamp of mastery and dominance on men’s tennis. At the U.S. Open, the oppressive weather conditions prevented him from playing at his best through the first five rounds, which he still managed to navigate with typical resourcefulness and drive. Once the weather became tolerable over the final weekend of that tournament, he played the lockdown lights-out tennis against Kei Nishikori and Juan Martin del Potro which defined him at his peak periods this decade.
Wimbledon was an extraordinary tournament and an equally extraordinary achievement for Djokovic because he wasn’t quite the transcendent, overwhelming force he had been in 2015 and the first half of 2016… yet still found a way to lift the trophy and very quickly complete his revival. Djokovic was outplayed by Rafael Nadal for most of that epic semifinal — a match which will likely be remembered as one of the most important in tennis history — but served remarkably well in crunch-time moments to prevail, 10-8 in the fifth set. That was a spectacular response to pressure, making Wimbledon once again the site of Djokovic’s proudest accomplishments.
At the U.S. Open, however, Djokovic escaped the withering heat and — in his last two matches in New York — kicked two very good players to the curb in comprehensive beatdowns.
We who cover tennis thought that this might be the launching pad for another Pax Djokovic.
That is EXACTLY what we received in Shanghai — only this wasn’t just a two-match finishing kick in the semis and final. This is how the whole week unfolded.
Djokovic is sitting in the clouds, high above Rafa and (even more especially) Federer. The distance between him and Zverev is enormous.
This is Novak’s world, and we are just living in it.
Saturday in Shanghai Confirms the Djokovic Restoration
It is one thing to desire revenge. It is another thing to deliver it, especially in a dominant fashion.
Novak Djokovic got everything he wanted out of his Saturday in Shanghai.
You KNEW Djokovic wanted to get on a court with Sascha Zverev after the 2017 Rome final in which the young German won his first Masters 1000 championship in a clean and methodical manner. Zverev calmly dissected Djokovic’s game that day in Italy, flashing on a big stage the talent which has since catapulted the (now-) 21-year-old to a large collection of ATP titles, including two more Masters trophies. Zverev is just beginning what has all the makings of a supremely prosperous career. What he did against Djokovic could reasonably be referred to as “The Moment,” a point in time I identify as decisive in a player’s career.
As I have written on previous occasions, “The Moment” — if a player does something significant enough to achieve it — marks a player for greatness. Roger Federer had “The Moment” against Pete Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001. Zverev announced himself in Rome one and a half years ago.
Yet, as well as Zverev played that day, the benefit of hindsight allows us to appreciate how physically limited Djokovic was. The Serbian superstar, we can acknowledge, was laboring through pain, which hampered him in an immediate sense, but also interfered with the mind-body dualism athletes need to maintain clarity and fluidity in everything they do. Zverev deserved all the credit for his performance, but Djokovic was not in a position to be at his best.
Saturday in Shanghai, Djokovic — fit, prepared, and at the top of his game — gained his chance to show Zverev what he was capable of.
The result was predictable, but said predictability should not — and cannot — take away from the majesty of a brutal beatdown.
This is Djokovic in full flight. This is the player who put the rest of the ATP Tour at his feet in 2015 and the first half of 2016. This was not about Zverev’s inadequacies (though they exist and need to be reduced by Ivan Lendl in 2019). This was about Djokovic being a fully restored player in every sense and delivering a butt-kicking which reminded Sascha how far he has to climb to reach the Djokovic standard.
In one hour, this evisceration ran its course.
Djokovic will technically be World No. 2 on Monday — surpassing Federer — but everyone can see that Novak is the world’s best tennis player by a considerable distance at the moment. If he chooses to play Bercy, he will be the favorite there. He will be the favorite to win the ATP Finals in London. He will be the favorite (assuming there are no injuries in the intervening months) at the Australian Open in January.
In his first great season — 2011 — Djokovic dominated the tour from January through the U.S. Open, but that immense workload took a toll on his body, and he ran out of gas in autumn of that year. In 2015, he carried his dominance through the ATP Finals, and in 2018, after a first half of the season spent regrouping and rediscovering his rhythmic balance, Djokovic is comparatively fresh with less tread on the tires. He is in position to roar some more — just as he has done against Kevin Anderson in the Shanghai quarterfinals and Zverev in the semis. It is hard to see him losing to Coric — who upset Federer in Saturday’s other semifinal — on Sunday.
A brief word about Federer: One can plainly see that the Swiss, despite his high-quality win over Kei Nishikori in the Shanghai quarters, is struggling to find a balance between rest and match play. It’s almost** as though being 37 years old requires tough choices and involves a struggle to discern the limits of mind and body!
** = NOT ALMOST!
The new world rankings on Monday reflect the flow of the 2018 ATP season: Federer has been the third-best player on tour. That is still phenomenal for a player his age, but Nadal is certainly second, and Djokovic is just as certainly Numero Uno.
The Djokovic Restoration Tour of 2018 continues unabated. That is what Saturday in Shanghai most authoritatively confirmed.
- ATP Tour3 days ago
Federer Douses the Flames of Doubt — and Nishikori
- ATP Tour4 days ago
Djokovic Roars Into His Comfort Zone — and Zverev — in Shanghai
- ATP Tour1 day ago
Djokovic Wins Shanghai and Carries Excellence Everywhere He Goes
- ATP Tour3 days ago
Saturday in Shanghai Confirms the Djokovic Restoration