From the “case studies” on the previous page, it is not possible to obtain a univocal indication of the future of Osaka outside of the hard courts. Here’s Naomi’s Grand Slam performance so far:
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | |
| Australian Open | DNP | 3R | 2R | 4R | W | 3R | W |
| French Open | DNP | 3R | 1R | 3R | 3R | DNP | |
| Wimbledon | Q1 | DNP | 3R | 3R | 1R | NH | |
| US Open | Q2 | 3R | 3R | W | 4R | W |
At the French Open, she has a 6-4 record – at Wimbledon, it’s 4-4. Overall, not an exceptional resume, with only one win against Top 30 competition (world N.23 Barbora Strycova on grass) and a 0-4 record against Top 20 opponents: Halep and Keys in Paris, Venus and Kerber in London.
However, the numbers are clear, and further punctuated by the fact that last year Naomi did not play any of the European Grand Slams (Roland Garros due to an injury, Wimbledon due to cancellation), to which must be added her absence at the 2016 Championships, again due to injury.
At the moment, we are unable to establish whether Osaka will be able to follow a positive or negative path away from hardcourts. I would say that two equally-legitimate-but-opposite hypotheses can be advanced. The pessimistic one suggests that with a markedly hard-oriented technical imprinting, Naomi will always be destined to struggle on the surfaces she did not practice on at a crucial developmental age – Wozniacki and Radwanska’s trajectories suggest this. But we can also put forward the optimistic hypothesis: over the years, experience could help her fill the gaps in her upbringing. Let’s try to go a little more into the technical detail of the matter.
NAOMI OSAKA’S FUTURE ON THE DIRT
It must be said that there are different types of clay. Because it is one thing to play well in Madrid, in medium-high altitude, with a quick-spinning ball, another is to succeed on the slower courts of Rome or Paris. Petra Kvitova, for instance, has won three times in Madrid, but has never reached further than the semifinals at Roland Garros. At the moment, I think Osaka can adapt more easily to the playing conditions in Madrid than in Paris. But who could rule out a kind of progress that would make her competitive in the latter event too?
At present, Naomi is more vulnerable against two types of players on the Parisian dirt: very strong defenders and creative players. Halep and Svitolina are in the former category, Jabeur and Swiatek in the latter.
Let’s start with the grinders, highlighting a couple of significant facts: in 2018, Osaka burst onto the scene with her success on the hard courts of Indian Wells, where in the semifinals she defeated the then world number one, Halep, 6-3 6-0. Naomi and Simona would then meet a few weeks later in Rome, and the score was reversed: 6-1 6-0 for Halep. Factoring in the form that a player can display on a given day, the enormous difference in these two matchups proves, in my opinion, that the surface can be decisive for the final result, starting with the different incidence of the first shots of a rally to the importance of the more attritional phases. This means that getting a winner at Indian Wells is certainly easier than on the courts of Rome, and that breaking the defenses of a tennis player like Halep on clay is far more complicated than on a hardcourt.
As for the comparison with tennis players like Jabeur or Swiatek, I would say that usually the clay favors more creative solutions on the vertical axis, and it helps a type of tennis based on non-rhythmic sequences of shots: slices mixed with topspin, perhaps alternated with one fake slice, which ultimately results in a drop shot… We know that Osaka tends to fare better in more linear rallies, and therefore, if a bout shifts to a more elaborate narrative, she finds herself at a loss. But since Naomi’s groundstrokes have quality to spare, it is not at all excluded that she might be able to find effective countermeasures without having to change her game too much. But in order to do so, she needs to play many matches against players of this kind. In a nutshell: experience is needed. And that comes only by trial and error.
But I don’t think it’s right to only see the negatives. Clay could prove to be her friend in other respects. In fact, Osaka has a lot of power, and the clay is a surface that can also reward big hitters who can easily generate their own pace (i.e. without having to rely on the opponent’s power as a counter-puncher). Sharapova did that, and the same is true for the likes of Ostapenko.
However, compared to the faster surfaces, the will to suffer is a must-have on the dirt, the acceptance of battles that are physically and mentally exhausting. It is therefore necessary to have a great competitive spirit, and I’d say Naomi is building it. Her recent wins against Azarenka in New York and against Muguruza in Melbourne came after having recovered from very complicated situations and testify to this kind of mental quality.
Finally, the issue of sliding cannot be overlooked. It is obvious that, if Naomi could learn to slide properly, she would have more chances on clay; but it is not a simple thing for those who did not grow up playing on clay. In 2019, I got the impression that she knew how to slide, but only after having hit the ball. However, “run-slide-hit” is still the optimal sequence on clay, and it is the real added weapon for the most adept specialists of the surface, because if you first slide and then hit you are immediately ready to reverse your direction, having already absorbed the momentum. An advantage that on defence allows to stay in the rally by recovering attacks in succession, something that on other surfaces would not be feasible. At the 2019 Madrid Open, Naomi explained: “Now I feel more comfortable sliding and moving. Last year, I had a strong preference for hardcourts, and I had no positive feelings towards clay. This part of the season as an inevitable obligation to me. This year, however, I’m putting all my energy into training and learning how to move better”.
On Page 4, her prospects on grass
