The Grandstand’s Ricky Dimon and Chris de Waard of Tennis Atlantic preview and pick four of the best men’s singles matches on Saturday at the Australian Open. Among those in action are seeds David Ferrer, Gilles Simon, and John Isner.
(9) David Ferrer vs. (18) Gilles Simon
Ricky: Haters will label this as a push-fest, but in actuality it could be an epic battle. Ferrer vs. Simon has absolute war written all over it. The rivalry, which favors Ferrer 5-2 in the head-to-head series, has never really lived up to its potential. A 2011 Cincinnati encounter was especially competitive, but the rest were for the most part straightforward. Both men appear to be in fine form, with Ferrer coming off a title in Doha and Simon once again enjoying an almost-magical Australian Open resurrection in the wake of early-season injury problems (the Frenchman did the same last year, beating Daniel Brands and Marin Cilic in five sets just a few days after being on crutches). As such, this one will not disappoint. Ferrer 5-7, 6-3, 6-3, 6-7(4), 6-2.
Chris: In a rematch of their 2014 U.S. Open encounter, Ferrer will try to get revenge on the Frenchman. He went down in four sets but was clearly hindered by a physical ailment. Ferrer seems to have hit it off with his new coach Paco Fogues and it already paid off in Doha, with the Spaniard looking sharper than last year and taking down the title after beating Tomas Berdych in the final. This fortnight he dropped the first set against Thomaz Bellucci and Sergiy Stakhovsky, but since 2012 it has become a habit of Ferrer to randomly drop sets against lower-ranked opponents, so that isn’t an alarming indication of his form. Simon breezed through in his matches against Robin Haase and Marcel Granollers without dropping a set. In general, Simon is a good matchup for the Spaniard. Ferrer doesn’t give him the pace he likes to feed off and the No. 9 seed is unlikely to hit a lot of unforced errors, thus forcing Simon out of his comfort zone. Naturally, that makes the underdog more vulnerable. I expect Ferrer to get through, after traditionally dropping the opening set. Ferrer 4-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-4.
[polldaddy poll=8601971]
(19) John Isner vs. Gilles Muller
Ricky: Isner does not often find success against left-handers, but his record versus Muller is a sparkling 3-0. With new coach Justin Gimelstob in his corner, the 6’10” American is off to a fine start in 2015. He played well at the Hopman Cup then took a week off to rest for this major. So far it is paying off, as Isner in his first two rounds was broken only once and faced a total of three break points. But this should be competitive, because a resurgent Muller reached the Sydney semis and is serving huge in Melbourne. Of his three losses to Isner, two went the three-set distance and the other resulted in a pair of tiebreakers. But the Luxembourgian cannot afford dips like when he won nine points in the entire second set against Roberto Bautista Agut. Isner 7-6(8), 3-6, 6-3, 7-6(4).
Chris: Exactly one year ago, Muller was just returning from injury and ranked 364th while playing a Challenger in Germany, where he lost in the second round. A lot has changed since then. As we can see these days, he is having a late-career resurgence in his thirties. No matter what happens against Isner, Muller will have a new career-high ranking inside the top 40. On Thursday the Luxembourgian upset Bautista Agut, who admittedly didn’t have the best preparation for this tournament after retiring in Auckland citing sickness. Against Isner it will be a different story. Muller’s return game is fairly poor, meaning he is unlikely to offer much resistance in Isner’s service games (which is hard enough even for the greatest returners). He will pretty much be trailing on every front, needing to serve lights out to give himself a chance. Unlike Isner, I don’t think he can keep that up in a best-of-five match. Their head-to-head reflects the bad matchup, with Isner leading 3-0. Isner 6-7(5), 7-6(4), 6-4, 6-4.
[polldaddy poll=8601966]
Steve Johnson vs. (5) Kei Nishikori
Ricky: Johnson is consistently advancing far enough in tournaments that he is building up a decent-sized history against opponents in Nishikori’s ranking range (in the top 10 but outside the top 4). Those matches generally do not end well for the American, but he is almost always competitive. There will be no secrets out there versus Nishikori, whom Johnson has faced twice (both since last summer). A recent Brisbane encounter went the way of the Japanese star 6-4, 7-5. Johnson has been dominant through two rounds, whereas Nishikori struggled against Ivan Dodig. As usual, though, the favorite’s willingness to play aggressive tennis right on top of the baseline will allow him to dictate rallies and exploit Johnson’s backhand weakness. Nishikori 7-6(5), 7-5, 6-3.
Chris: Johnson is playing great tennis, easily dismissing No. 30 seed Santiago Giraldo in the second round, and he can be proud of the steady progress he is making. Against Nishikori, however, he will be outgunned. Nishikori had a bit of a scare against Dodig in the previous round, losing the opening set and barely winning the second set 7-5, but in reality that is just what he needed to warm himself up. Johnson and Nishikori played each other in the second round of Brisbane two weeks ago, with Nishikori winning 6-4 7-5. And that is exactly the scenario I expect again–Johnson challenging Nishikori in relatively tight sets but lacking the arsenal to really trouble the favorite. Nishikori 6-3, 7-5, 6-4.
[polldaddy poll=8601970]
(12) Feliciano Lopez vs. Jerzy Janowicz
Ricky: Lopez may not have nine lives Down Under, but he at least has three. First he saved a trio of match points to outlast Denis Kudla 10-8 in the fifth set. Then he was getting clobbered by Adrian Mannrino, who served a straight-set victory only to get tight in the head and then tight in the muscles. Lopez ultimately got a fourth-set retirement. Janowicz also caught a break when Juan Martin Del Potro withdrew, but there is no doubt the Pole has earned his spot in the last 32. He was awesome against Monfils and absolutely destroying the ball, paving the way to a five-set win. Janowicz still isn’t consistent enough to win in three, but he should have a clear edge in this one. Janowicz 6-3, 3-6, 7-6(6), 6-2.
Chris: Janowicz finally overcame some of his demons in his second-round match against Monfils, beating him over five sets after having trailed 2-1. The Pole looked ready to fade away in the fifth, hitting two double-faults in a long game that could have seen him go down a break, but he held and eventually took control. Perhaps this is the year Janowicz will finally book some consistent results. Lopez reaching this stage is nothing short of a miracle. In the first round he beat Kudla 10-8 in the fifth set, but against Adrian Mannarino he took it to a next level. Mannarino led by 6-4 6-4 *4-0 30-0 and missed a match point, before being forced to retire halfway through the fourth set. Given their respective forms it’s hard to look past Janowicz and if the Pole avoids a lapse in concentration he could even do it in straight sets. Janowicz 7-6(5), 6-4, 6-3.
[polldaddy poll=8601973]
[polldaddy poll=8601961]
[polldaddy poll=8601956]
Garcia Lopez in 4
Ferrer in 5
Muller in 4 (the head to head is 3-0 Isner but all were close and all came in America. I don’t need to tell you Isner is a different player there than he is everywhere else)
Nishikori in 4
Janowicz in 4
great point about isner-muller, created
sent u an email VR
Verdasco is playing well but his BH is abysmal and it’s what cost him the 1st set. Robbie Koenig says, “this is what great Champions do, eke out a win when they are not playing well”. Thankfully his co-commentator disagrees and says Novak is playing well.
The Novak propagandists are really annoying. According to them, the only way Novak can lose is because he is not playing well, not because the other guy is playing well.
Djokovic will win this in straights, Fer should have won the first set………..
When did Rafa play well and lose? I am not aware of this ever happening. Maybe augusta08 knows.
#DoYou???
2012 Australian Open Final, Rafa played well against Djokovic and he lost. I know because Rafa said so himself.
In any case, Rafa is not Djokovic. The only time Rafa ever plays badly, and loses, is when he plays injured. Djokovic never gets injured so when he loses, it’s because he just played badly.
RT @tumcarayol: “I find it deplorable that we allow Simon and Ferrer to play each other for our entertainment.”
Rafa didn’t play well enough in that 2012 AO to beat Novak. At that point in time, he had endured six straight losses to Novak. He was still trying to find the answers. I do believe that in that match Rafa did come away with those answers. I think he even said it himself after the match. He would use those answers to proceed to beat Novak the next time they met in the clay season. From that point on, Rafa started getting the better of Novak. But he wasn’t able to implement all of it in that match and that’s why he lost.
I will always remember how Rafa fought back in that match when he seemed to be done in that fourth set. He forced a tb and won it and took it to a fifth set. He was unable to do that in his previous six losses to Novak. He was actually up a break in that fifth set and seemed to be on the brink of winning. But Novak broke him and ultimately won the match. Rafa also said after that match that his serve let him down. He would work on his serve and also on changing up the dynamics in his shotmaking against Novak. That’s when he realized that he needed to use his dtl backhand more against Novak.
So I don’t think Rafa played his best in that match. But that was the match that changed the tide for him because he figured out what he needed to do in the next match.
I agree with NNY’s assessment of the AO 2012 final. She has summed it up pretty well!
There were definitely areas of rafa’s game that were not functioning so well in that final. I agree that the biggest success of that match for rafa was to find a way to win that fourth set! We thought it was all over when he was down 0-40 ,3-4 on his own serve but then we saw an inspired saw who fist-pumped his way to a tie-break win .
He was blasting forehands in that fifth set to go up 4-2 30-15 but a very easy backhand putaway that he missed let him down . He talked about that backhand miss many times in the future. Anyway,his attitude was shockingly positive! One would expect a player to be heart broken and nothing else but rafa took out so many positives right away! His court positioning for the first four sets was far from the desired level and he was not attacking consistently enough but his fighting spirit was there, stronger than ever. That is what makes him RAFAEL NADAL!
Exactly. So no one can name a match where Rafa played well and lost. It is not possible, for sure, no?
wimbledon 2007 😛 haha..there are many ..I know what you mean though lol
No!!! Rafa was only 21 and had yet to find his full mental prowess against Federer in 2007.
Rafa (as far as I know) is the ONLY undefeated player when playing well.
🙂
#TryAgain?
…against Federer on grass that is.
hahah…ok 😛 what about Miami 2011 final? hehe
#JustEnjoyingTheGame
Agreed. Wimby ’14 IMO also.
#RareEvents
#EveryDogHasItsDay
#CourtingScorn
#DoYou???
hawkeye63 says: January 25, 2015 at 6:42 pm
Exactly. So no one can name a match where Rafa played well and lost. It is not possible, for sure, no?
I see you are determined to argue over opinions……………..
Can’t argue with that.
@hawkeye, hahaha … good stuff
Isner smashes his racquet against Muller
http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2015/01/nadal-explains-strategy-changes-against-anderson/53796/?hubRefSrc=email#lf_comment=263602438
Rafa has said that he has to be at his best to beat Novak. I think after that 2012 AO loss,, he found the answers and implemented some different tactics. He did play his best to beat Novak in the clay season and most importantly, at RG. He’s had the better of Novak since he endured that tough loss at the 2012 AO.
I remember on a tennis site, I think it was tennis.com, some were saying that Rafa would never beat Novak again. I remember arguing with someone who asked me what about 7-0 did I not understand? He assumed that because Rafa had seven straight losses against Novak, that it was all over. I told him – never say never in this sport. I told him that Rafa found the answers and took the positives out of that match. That’s what great champions do. It’s how they deal with such difficult losses. We can see how Rafa has triumphed over Novak since then, especially in slams where it counts the most.
Rafa was still playing too defensively against Novak in the 2012 AO. That is part of the reason that he lost. He was still having to come from behind. But in that match he at least fought back to even it up at 4 sets apiece and force a fifth set. He was unable to do that in the six previous losses. That was the fight that was missing. Rafa was thinking out there, trying to change his tactics and strategy. It’s a work in progress.
Rafa may have said he played well, but not well enough to beat Novak. He learned from that match and we have seen the results since in his rivalry with Novak.
“Rafa (as far as I know) is the ONLY undefeated player when playing well.”
Oh, oh……….someone’s been drinking from @nadline10’s Rafa Kool Aid jug. Or is it Gussie’s??
*wags finger* 😉