Long Tennis Post 1: A New Era and the Streak

Until I do two things: 1. Decide what to name my future tennis blog and 2. Decide whether I want to use Blogger or Tumblr, I'm going to post this and any other tennis posts here. This will be the first post on that hypothetical tennis blog since it’s the first thing that I've written with that express purpose.

Inspired by Sunday’s eventsI want to begin my tennis blogging by summarizing my take on the current atmosphere in men’s tennis. For the past few years that I've been paying attention (as well as several years prior), tennis was dominated by Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer and now it isn't. Sunday Novak Djokovic earned his second win of the year against Nadal on clay (which, coincidentally, is his second win against Nadal on clay ever) and his fourth win in a row against him this year which brings his record against Nadal from 7-16 to 11-16. The moment Djokovic won yesterday’s final in Rome I realized, with complete certainty, that men’s tennis is in the midst of a new era. Of course, the moment one recognizes the existence of a new era is not necessarily the moment the era started.

Even though at the beginning of the year Djokovic was just as undefeated as he is now, it didn't mean as much. Nadal not winning hard court tournaments against Djokovic isn't exactly surprising, Djokovic had already won a major so his winning the Australian Open wasn’t that surprising either, and neither Federer nor Andy Murray were playing their best tennis. Also, even though Djokovic beat Nadal in Madrid on clay, which was surprising, Madrid is at a higher altitude allowing for faster play. It was definitely a majorly important accomplishment for Djokovic but I don't think it was as important a win as Rome.

That's not to say that he wasn't playing impressively or even excellently, he definitely was, but Sunday when he beat Nadal a second time on clay, in a tournament that Nadal has won 5 times in the past 7 years, I became utterly convinced that tennis is in the middle of a new era. Although, I think that in the future the exact point this new era began will be recognized as either Djokovic's win over Federer at the US Open semi-finals in 2010 or when Robin Söderling ended Federer’s epic Grand Slam semi-final streak at last year’s French Open, depending on how dominating a force Djokovic is in the future.

Right now he’s invincible. In the past Djokovic, while always a threat, had the occasional tendency to choke, exit tournaments early, and double fault often. It's like Failvak Chokeavic (a nickname endearingly used on tennis forums by frustrated fans) has been eliminated completely. It’s as if Djokovic, to use a reference to True Blood, went to Miss Jeanette and stabbed a flawed version of himself in some hallucinatory ceremony and all that's left is an unbeatable player who makes few, if any mistakes and double faults rarely. Or, to use a Buffy the Vampire Slayer reference, it's as if Toth used his separation ray on Djokovic and the half with the concentrated strengths is keeping the weak half chained in Giles' book cage, always far enough away so that none of its weakness rubs off. Less interestingly, in reality it probably has more to do with better conditioning, mental toughness and maybe even a gluten free diet.

The one thing I'm not sure of is whether Djokovic would have won in Rome had Nadal been playing his absolute best tennis. I'm going to answer that with a probably. I do think that if Nadal was as good as he can be the score would have been closer, and it was close, but I think there would have been tiebreaks involved. Also I think that some part of Nadal’s loss was mental. I think that the whole reason Murray lost the semi-final to Djokovic was mental, and I think there has been a mental component in many of Djokovic’s wins since, let's say, Indian Wells. There were only a few times, however, when that mental advantage made even a sliver of a difference because of the level of tennis Djokovic has been playing.

I think there are only three ways Djokovic’s winning streak will end; either by injury, which would be terrible, and, sad, and unfitting, or defeat by either a 100% on-form Nadal who has gotten over any streak-related intimidation, or someone like Thomaz Bellucci, who has less to lose and doesn't feel much pressure. If this streak had happened at this time last year I would have added a long match on a hot day to the list of steak ending scenarios but I don't think that's a possibility anymore.

Elaborating on the 'someone with no pressure and nothing to lose' theory; unlike Nadal, or Murray, there was no expectation for Bellucci to beat Djokovic in Madrid. If he hadn't injured himself he might have won that match. It'll be interesting to see Djokovic's draw going into the French. Someone like Bellucci or Jürgen Melzer, who have so much ability but virtually no pressure could potentially pull off the elusive win over Djokovic.

Finally, I want to clarify that by saying that Djokovic's win in Rome is, basically, the final nail in the coffin of the Fedal era, I don't mean that whatever new era we're in is going to be a strictly Rafole era. Djokovic's streak has lasted 5 months which is ridiculous and awesome and lots of other superlatives but it is nothing compared to the length of the Fedal era.

It's exciting that the state of men’s tennis is in flux. The era is defining itself as tournaments go by and players distinguish themselves. Anything can happen. Federer could return to form, Murray could finally win a slam, Söderling could win the French after losing the last two finals, Juan Martin Del Potro could overcome his injuries, win a few more slams, and reclaim a spot in the top five, Milos Raonic could continue to live up to his potential and consistently be a major threat. It's all happening now. Bring on the French.