It was a mantra Pete Sampras loved to recite. Again and again we heard that to beat his great rival Andre Agassi, he had to play his very best. After all his rival — the bald, pigeon-toed blaster — forced him to raise the level of his game to its greatest heights. And it’s just that way on the men’s circuit these. A quartet of great players – fast, tall and strong — who use great gear to unleash thunderbolts, has lifted the game to astounding heights.
The break-out genration of Bjorn Borg, John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors and Vitas Gerulaitis, brought an incomparable sizzle that once and for all wrested a pleasant game from leafy clubs and (kicking and shouting) made it a must-see drama for the masses. Tennis’ next generation – Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, Sampras, Agassi, Jim Courier – brought a sensible, grown up professionalism: skill and stability.
But now folks we are in a golden era, which at the 2012 Australian Open, clearly went platinum due to the long dominant Fab Four — Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer and Andy Murray, who incredibly have accounted for 27 of the last 28 Slams.
Scotland’s slamless wonder is young and tall, powerful and fit. Though criticized for having a grave digger’s demeanor, Murray nonetheless calls on an astounding arsenal of weapons – subtle and severe. But, despite his Braveheart intentions and a new unsmiling coach named Ivan, his trophy case (when it comes to majors) is noticeably bare. In any other era he would be the conquering hero of the British Isles. Instead, after once again failing to summit a Slam (he came within a couple of points of beating Djokovic in a five set marathon which would have propelled him to his fourth Slam final) Murray was left to ask his new mentor, Mr. Lendl, “I’ve tried everything, so what the heck can I do in an era like this to break through?”
Perhaps even more perplexing is the fate of that handsome lad, Roger Federer. Few would deny that the sublime Swiss shotmaker is the greatest to ever lift a racket. He’s just 30, but boy (allow us to joke) is he adrift. He hasn’t won a major in eight tries and is stuck with a distinctly un-Federer-like ranking – No. 3. He again seemed superb as he went deep into a major and early in his semi against Nadal, he had the upper hand as he effortlessly stroked many a beautiful winner. But ultimately his match-up against the lefty Spaniard with the hefty thighs, bulging biceps and heavy, high-bouncing forehand – seems to disintegrate and in Melbourne, despite the hopes of many a fan, Rafa again prevailed, winning for the 18th time in 27 matches.
After all, against Federer, Nadal believes. But on other fronts there is doubt in Rafa’s once jolly world. The humble, increasingly reflective icon with ten Slams, just a year ago was going for the “Nadal Slam” of four straight majors. Now, sounding like a dispirited, late-career Borg, he complains of the tennis grind that wears down so many. Even though he’s just 25, he says feels like he is 100. (Hey Rafa where have all the flowers gone?) Plus, Nadal became entwined in the not-so-pretty world of tennis politics and then, on the eve of the Aussie Open, he suffered a quirky knee injury in his hotel. A teary Rafa was not pleased.
But what had to please Nadal, was that Djokovic had barely survived his 4:50 semi against Murray. Still, in this game of match-ups, Nadal doesn’t line-up well against Novak who since last March, had beaten him in three straight Slam finals and six finals overall. After his last loss to Djokovic, Rafa’s Uncle Toni was blunt, saying “Happy, Happy, Happy – we’re not.” Obviously, there was no way the Serb wasn’t into the Spaniard’s head.
So Rafa, more rested than his foe, quickly got into the Aussie Open final. Taking advantage of some scratchy Djokovic play, Nadal claimed the first set in 80 minutes, only to see Novak re-load. (Yes, there’s reason the Serb went 62-2 through last year’s U.S. Open.) Playing great ‘stretch and stab’ defense, the gaunt man with the short hair, over-sized strike zone and penetrating linebacker eyes, methodically collected the next two sets and seemed en route to victory. But Nadal is nothing if not a ferocious fighter. Down two sets to one and 3-4, 0-40 in the fourth set, he gallantly fought off three break points and soon turned the tables, to force a fifth and high drama final set.
A snarl on his face — as if to say nobody beats Nadal in seven straight finals – the Spaniard stepped in and stepped up. Firing his potent howitzer forehand, he fought his way to 4-2, 30-15 lead, when a simple twist of fate changed tennis history. After a modest scramble, Nadal ran Novak out of the play. All Rafa had to do was to bunt a simple backhand sitter to a wide open court to get within a point of having a monumental, 5-2 lead. Baryshnikov never stumbles. Michael Jordan never blows a lay-up. But neither ever found themselves deep into the fifth set of a Slam final.
Rafa blinked. He blew the gimme.
Novak was re-born. In a flash, a glint came to his once glazed eyes. His legs, so drained a moment ago, now bounced with a vibrant energy.
Game on!
He knew there was hope. He believed.
Never mind that most in the arena shrieked for the tan, charismatic muscle man. After all, deep down didn’t Novak know that he owned this guy.
He quickly broke Nadal to get the decisive set back on serve. Sure, Rafa had worn down Federer in the semis. Now Djokovic – just slightly fitter, stronger and faster than his foe – returned the favor as he scored a critical break in the eleventh game of the fifth set and, in the next game, when he stroked an inside-out forehand for his 57th winner, the battle was his 5-7, 6-4, 6-2, 6-7(5), 7-5.
Eyes-bulging, shoulders slumping, subsumed by wonder – the victor ripped off his black shirt. But what he really shed was the record book.
For only the second time in 135 Slam matches, Nadal lost after winning the first set. Sadly, Rafa now was the first man ever to lose three straight Slam finals. The 5:53 match was the longest in Aussie Open history, the longest Slam final ever and was the latest finish for any Slam. Okay, it’s said that the 2008 Nadal-Federer and 1980 Borg-McEnroe Wimbledon finals are the best matches of all-time and the 11:08 John Isner – Niclolas Mahut marathon was a happening unto itself. But where, many immediately asked, will this Aussie Open Classic land in the pantheon of memorable tennis matches? And as for Djokovic, this was the first time he had ever won back-to-back five setters and the increasingly dominant Serb has now triumphed in four of the last five Slams – whew!
Just after the match – which AO radio instantly called “the greatest final we’ve seen in the history of this arena” – the stadium announcer proclaimed, with little exaggeration, that “If ever there were two athletes who deserved a standing ovation … it’s these two warriors [who between them now claim the last eight Slams.]”
But even the wise observer Richard Evans seemed dazed when he said of the Djokovic’s Herculian feat. “I don’t know how he did it. I really don’t know how he did it.”
Yes, Novak moved beautifully and displayed his usual (Kim Clijsters-like) ankle-crunching elasticity. Time and again he twisted his powerful wrists to create (how’d he do that?) whiplash angles: such power and surgical precision. He continually neutralized Nadal’s imposing power, attacked his backhand, pushed him corner to corner and pounded the Spaniard’s second serve while holding his own on his own second.
Asked earlier in the tournament what set apart the Fab Four from the rest of the field, Djokovic simply said it is all about execution under pressure. So not surprisingly at crunch time, Novak seemed to just flick off his bothersome gaffes as he lifted his game. More than this, the Serb who just a while ago hovered in the shadows of giants Federer and Nadal and tended to pull out of or quit in key matches, now has emerged as the John Lennon of tennis’ Fab Four: a smart, innovative and unafraid leader with a hefty heart, a battle worn toughness, a certain quirky sense of humor who is taking his craft to new unexplored domains and leaving us mere mortals to ask (“you know it ain’t easy”) questions.
Can this curious man from the little mountains of a little nation continue to score big? Can he win the French Open (which clay-miester Nadal seemingly owns) to secure four straight Slams – “the Djokovic Slam?” Can he possibly defy the critics and replicate his year of wonder in 2011? Can he even win the Grand Slam, all four majors in ’12 and (are we allowed to ask this?) can he soon enter the conversation on who is the best player of all time?
