MELBOURNE – After retiring from his quarterfinal match against Marin Cilic at this year’s Australian Open, Rafa Nadal caused major controversy when he complained about the tour calendar that includes too many tournaments contested on hard surfaces. According to Nadal, this is one of the main reasons why so many players have been suffering from multiple injuries in recent years.
If we took other sports into consideration, would it be fair to have soccer fields with the exact same synthetic grass implemented by the same manufacturer, ski resorts with the same slope and path, sailing races with the wind blowing in the same direction and with the same speed or formula one races with every car using the same tires and every track featuring the same asphalt?
For years the tennis world has been discussing whether a playing surface homologation is good or bad for the sport. In my opinion, the players’ health has to come first. If hard-courts were the same in every ATP tournament, players would have the opportunity to prepare themselves, study better strategies and implement specific training programs. This would probably reduce the number of injuries. Other variables such as weather, altitude or outdoor/indoor conditions would still play a key role into making each tournament unique and different.
Not every player has the luxury to play on their favorite surfaces like Federer did last year when he skipped the entire clay court season. Most of the top players have to play at least 60 or 70 matches a year if they want to remain part of the elite. Dimitrov last year played 68 matches in 23 tournaments and was able to climb all the way to No. 3 in the world. It’s a vicious circle: If you only play a few selected events, you don’t have the opportunity to collect enough points and remain at the top of the rankings. If your ranking drops, your draws will be much tougher and the risk of losing in the early rounds will be much higher. As a top player, you will continue to lose ground.
The ATP rules unfortunately don’t allow the players to skip mandatory tournaments until they turn 30 and reach 600 matches on the tour. In my opinion, injuries should be prevented before the players turn 30, not after.
Last year Nadal played 78 matches in 18 tournaments. Many will say that he played too much, but in reality, he competed in as many events as required by the ATP. When you are one of the best players in the world, you will go deep in almost every tournament, that is why Rafa found himself competing in a ridiculous number of matches.
In the women’s event, Elise Mertens is the only player to qualify for the semifinals without dropping a set throughout the entire tournament, despite being the least decorated of the four semifinalists and the only one that hasn’t been No. 1 in the world. The other three more popular contestants have all been on the brink of elimination: Simona Halep saved three match-points against Lauren Davis, Caroline Wozniacki was down 5-1 and 40-15 in the third set against Jana Fett and Kerber had to come from behind against the surprising Hsieh Su-wei.
After dominating Madison Keys in the quarterfinals, Kerber seems to be the favorite to capture the title. She’s also the only Grand Slam champion left in the competition.
In the men’s tournament, there is a lot of curiosity surrounding the semifinal clash between Roger Federer and the young rising star Chung. The South Korean has meant business and showed very few emotions so far in the tournament. He is certainly more mature than his age and it will be interesting to see how he fares against the Swiss legend.
Kyle Edmund of Great Britain is the other surprising youngster that emerged from this year’s Australian Open. His technique and looks certainly remind me of Jim Courier. Edmund’s forehand is an incredibly explosive shot, while Chung is a better athlete and counter-puncher. I wouldn’t be surprised if both guys broke into the top ten in the near future.
In the semifinals, Edmund will play former US Open champion and top-ten fixture Marin Cilic, who probably represents Federer’s biggest threat to win the title.
While a final between Federer and Cilic would be the most obvious outcome at this point, I wouldn’t underestimate the possibility of a final between the new newcomers Edmund and Chung. Tennis history teaches us that generational changes sometimes happen when we don’t expect them.
(Article translation provided by T&L Global – Translation & Language Solutions – www.t-lglobal.com )
