mtenis.com.pl

Three hundred and sixty-five points.

Grigor Dimitrov may never have played better – and it took Rafael Nadal’s net play to deny him a maiden Slam final berth

One magical point a day to enjoy for the next year. Thanks for the gift, boys.

Rafael Nadal defeated Grigor Dimitrov 6-3 5-7 7-6(5) 6-7(4) 6-4, playing for a riveting four hours and 54 minutes. It felt like it took a year, and we absolutely never wanted it to end.

It was an epic encounter that could have easily seen Dimitrov finish the victor. In fact, the Bulgarian arguably played the match of his life, but walked away with a loss. Tough loss. Tough love. Better man for it moving forward.

The metrics of Nadal’s scintillating victory are eye-opening.

Firstly, the Spaniard had a losing record from the baseline. He won only 46.7 per cent (114/244) of his baseline points for the match. Dimitrov was at 43.5 per cent, despite hitting his backhand like a king.

Nadal lost the all-important 0-4 shot rally length 99-100. He also lost the mid-length 5-8 shot rally length 48-54. He also hit about half as many winners, contributing 45 to Dimitrov’s 79.

Yet he won. He won.

Finishing points at the net was part of Nadal’s salvation. When he made a first serve, he had a dead-even record (won/lost 40 points) when the ensuing point finished with Nadal standing at the baseline. But when he finished the point at the net following a first serve, he won a staggering 19 of 21 points.

The volleys are taking the first serve out for dinner real soon. Aussie BBQ, perhaps.

Nadal won a significant 86 per cent (25/29) of points at the net for the match. It was a great place for him to be, but he just couldn’t get there enough to make life easier. A massive 89 per cent of points ended with Nadal standing somewhere at the back of the court.

This was a match of exceptional level. So many momentum changes and significant points occurred. Just when you wanted to focus on a key moment in the match, a more important one was barreling at you from right around the corner.

This was the best loss of Dimitrov’s life. He played lights-out until 12.44am.



Dimitrov didn’t win, but in so many ways, he positively did. His backhand really stood tall. He crushed so many big backhands to a big cross-court target that Nadal must have wondered if he was playing a ball machine set on double speed every time he got into an ad court exchange.

Nadal had served a lot of first serves to opponent’s forehands in both the deuce court and ad court leading into the semifinal, but he reverted to his typical lefty patterns against Dimitrov, hoping to unhinge the one-handed backhand. It didn’t materialise.

In the deuce court, Nadal served 41 first serves to the centre, 15 out wide and 12 at the body. In the ad court, he served 42 wide sliders, 15 down the centre and 10 at the body.

Nadal’s baseline performance was largely dictated with how the point began.

When returning against a first serve, Nadal had a losing record at the baseline (34 won/49 lost). But against Dimitrov’s second serve, Nadal made hay, winning 23 points when he finished at the baseline, and losing 22.

Metrics don’t do a match like this justice. Sitting in Rod Laver Arena seeing the action unfold, hearing the pulse of the crowd and witnessing the quality of the tennis was so, so special.

Imagine Dimitrov calling home after the match, and saying he lost.

Come on. That’s just not fair.

Dimitrov won. Nadal won. Everyone at RLA won. These kind of matches lift our sport up onto its shoulders. They are a gift we can enjoy every single day of the year.

A former great calls time on calling, and an extraordinary Australian Open continues to amaze.
1. This is an extraordinary Australian Open
OK, so we knew this before Day 12, but it’s a point worth emphasising in the aftermath of the confirmation of a final line-up that reads like something out of HG Wells’ ‘The Time Machine’ or Audrey Niffenegger’s ‘The Time Traveller’s Wife’. This Australian Open is defying time, rewriting the laws of at what age tennis players can still hope to win the biggest titles, and showing that there is still room for aesthetically beautiful tennis to feature at the highest level. And history appears to be repeating itself in other ways. The only time Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal played in the final here was in 2009. That year, Federer played his semifinal on Thursday and came through a relatively short match, while Nadal went over five hours before beating Fernando Verdasco 6-4 in the fifth set. Everyone thought Federer would have the edge based on the length of the two semis, but Nadal won the final in five sets. He’s now eight years older so his recovery is less of a given, but then so is Federer. It really is history in the making.

2. He cried in the car, he cried on the court
We’re used to Nadal shedding tears of joy when he wins an emotional match, but after beating Grigor Dimitrov in a five-hour epic, the Spaniard admitted that he cried in the car as he drove from Roland Garros to his hotel last May after he had to withdraw from the third round of last year’s French Open because of a wrist injury. It was the lowest point in a 2016 that left the 14-time Grand Slam champion feeling deeply demoralised, but he never gave up hope. “I am a positive person,” he said. “I’ve worked very hard to be where I am. Before the tournament, I said I’m practicing very well. I didn’t think about being where I am today, but I always had the confidence that if I can win some matches, then anything can happen.”

3. 'Spiderman and the Czech wall’ are the champions
Bethanie Mattek-Sands is always worth listening to, if only because of her limitless natural exuberance and love of life. And after winning her fourth Grand Slam women’s doubles title with Lucie Safarova, she was as effusive as ever. Asked about their slightly unorthodox tactics of having Mattek-Sands charging to the net while her partner stays at the back of the court, the American said “I’m Spiderman at the net and she’s the Czech wall.” The serious point she was making was that the American-Czech pair vary their tactics so their opponents never know what to expect. “We actually mix it up based on how our opponents are playing,” said Mattek-Sands. “And we go with what we like too.”

4. A great career has ended
Fred Stolle, the former French and US champion in singles and doubles, has commentated on his final match at the Australian Open. ‘Fiery’, as Stolle is known, was runner-up at the Australian championships before it went ‘open’ and was beaten in three successive Wimbledon finals. But he won the doubles at all four, including at Roland Garros and Forest Hills in the professional era. For the past 20-plus years he has been a commentator for various television services, but at the age of 78 he has said enough is enough. In his final match he was unable to help the Aussies over the line, as Sania Mirza and Ivan Dodig beat Sam Stosur and Sam Groth. Stolle, whose son Sandon played Davis Cup for Australia, isn’t completely finished as he’ll be at this year’s French Open, but he’s done with commentating at his home Slam.

5. Has Hana blanked out the Fed Cup’s greatest moment?
Czech great Hana Mandlikova is back in Melbourne, and will present the Daphne Akhurst trophy to one of the Williams sisters after Saturday night’s singles final. In preparation for it, Mandlikova did some reminiscing about her two Australian Open singles titles (December 1980 and January 1987), and how her two children’s interest in tennis ended her 10-year abstinence from the sport. But there’s one event she seems to have either forgotten or blanked out. Asked about the resonance Fed Cup had back home in the Czech Republic when she was playing, she replied “I don’t know. At my time we never played at home. It was a different setup. We didn’t play in our country.” The oversight can be forgiven, because Mandlikova was put in a very awkward position at the 1986 Federation Cup finals, which were played in her native Prague. It was Martina Navratilova’s great homecoming after her defection to the USA in 1975, creating a bizarre tennis story that still counts as the most remarkable event in the 54-year-old team trophy’s history. But it was set of circumstances that put Mandlikova, then Czechoslovakia’s top female player, in a very difficult situation – she was buffeted by the government who wanted her to be the star, and the world’s media who wanted the Navratilova story. Still, she has some good reason to remember that period – that was when she met her Australian husband Jan Sedlak, which led to her becoming an Aussie citizen.