8 Questions for '08

Back to work, back to winter, back to tennis—the break was nice while it lasted. New York is a great place to be a tourist in your hometown for a week or so. I came in from the boroughs one day after Christmas and strolled through the Upper East Side thinking what any out-of-towner might think: “I feel like I’m in a Woody Allen movie.”

There was plenty of spare-time entertainment around town. A retrospective on Richard Prince at the Guggenheim and a Bob Dylan documentary downtown (not that most-likely-awful Todd Haynes thing, but a simple doc of his shows at Newport from 1963 to ’65, including the notorious “Dylan goes electric” moment). But most entertaining of all may have been the vintage Aussie Open final from 1991 that the Tennis Channel was running, between Boris Becker and Ivan Lendl. Those guys were playing some ball. (See the last game here.) I’d forgotten how complete a player and outstanding an athlete Becker was. He broke Lendl with a running, hooking forehand pass to win the third set, and then won the match in the fourth by taking a forehand return on the rise and rifling it down the line for a winner.

That was 17 years ago, and I’d say either of these guys would be Top 5 now, even Top 3, without changing a thing, including their racquets. Hopefully they would change their shirts, however. Lendl had what I think was an eagle screaming across his chest, while Becker might have been mistaken for a NASCAR driver with the Ford patch on his shoulder and the yellow mullet draped over his neck.

We’ve all heard that tennis evolves over the decades, but I think it’s safe to say that the evolution has slowed considerably in the last decade and a half. Rebound Ace in Melbourne routinely brought out the best in players, but Becker and Lendl were using the same power-baseline style we see today, with big serves and more forays to net from Becker. I’d forgotten how solid Lendl had made his backhand by his later years; he had something like 15 winners from that side in this match, and it was tough to attack. As for Becker, the quality and consistency of his return was a stunner. His big serve, big forehand, and all-court skill would make him a tough match-up for anyone today, including Federer and Nadal.

Speaking of which, those two guys, along with the rest of the tennis world, are in full warm-up mode already for the new season. Nadal has even won a quasi-classic, three-tiebreaker match over his old buddy Carlos Moya in Chennai. I don’t know if I’m quite ready for full-on pro tennis, but let’s look ahead anyway. Here are eight questions, and possible answers, that we'll be asking in ’08.

1. Will someone win the Grand Slam, already?

It’s been 20 years since the calendar-year Slam was “won”—the proper word is “existed”—when Steffi Graf took home her once-in-a-lifetime golden version, which included Olympic gold. This year, with the Games in China, a repeat is not entirely out of the question. Roger Federer has been knocking on the Slam door for a few years, and Justine Henin is coming off a similarly dominant season.

It’s not going to happen, though. Federer wants the Olympics badly, and he’ll be the favorite to go gold, but his best shot at the French Open came over the last two years. He’s not a natural grinder and is due to lose to someone before he faces Rafael Nadal in 2008—Guillermo Cañas, David Nalbandian, Richard Gasquet, and Novak Djokovic have all beaten the world’s best before, and all know their way around a dirt court.

Henin, as great as she is, has never been as smooth a championship machine as Federer. It’s often said she’s a finely tuned engine that can misfire now and then, and we saw it again last year at Wimbledon in her inexplicable loss to Marion Bartoli. She’s good, but not 28-0 at the majors good.

2. Is Novak Djokovic due for a sophomore slump?

I know he’s been on tour for longer than a year, but you get the idea—how will he react to such stunning and comprehensive success in 2007? There’s no doubt he’s the real deal, and not a one-year wonder à la Rainer Schuettler. Djokovic belongs where he is, and maybe even higher. I see him winning a Slam in ’08 (tell you which one later) and challenging Nadal for No. 2.

But there will be hiccups and bad losses. Despite his seeming good nature and sense of humor, Djokovic remains volatile and a little impatient during matches, traits that may become more pronounced now that he expects to win virtually every time he plays. He also has a tendency to lose concentration in five setters and make things tougher on himself than they need to be—witness his matches against Olivier Patience at the French, Marcos Baghdatis at Wimbledon, and Radek Stepanek at the U.S. Open. It makes for great theatre, but the high wire is not where a tennis player wants to spend a lot of time.

3. What can we expect from Venus and Serena Williams?

The unexpected, of course. I doubt Serena will be consistent enough to reclaim the No. 1 spot the way she’s aiming to (“Justine, you are warned,” she’s been saying recently), but just when you count either of them out… As Serena showed in Melbourne and Venus confirmed at Wimbledon, the will and talent to win Slams are still there, but only if the sisters can survive a couple close calls in the early rounds and build momentum during the second week.

This year is shaping up to be a crossroads for Serena in particular. She turned 26 last season and for the first time was passed by another player in Henin, who beat her at three majors. Serena won’t be able to claim she’s really the best in the world now until she goes out and proves it both to herself and to us. We’ll see how far that kind of motivation takes her at this stage in her career and life. As I said, just when you count them out.

4. Will Rafael Nadal’s punishing style begin to take a toll?

Grinders generally don’t last as long as attacking players. See Jim Courier and Lleyton Hewitt. Or do they? No one lasted as long as Andre Agassi and Jimmy Connors, neither of whom got many easy points over the years.

Nadal-Hewitt is not a perfect comparison, anyway. Rafa is a stronger athlete and player who doesn’t rely on getting one more ball back than his opponent. Like everyone else, Hewitt has begun to miss more as he’s aged. This, along with injuries, is bound to happen to Nadal as well, who puts in more miles and plays with more intensity than anyone. A slight dip in that intensity could mean a big dip in results. Nadal could also be compared with a young Monica Seles, who, like Rafa, went into a kind of competitive trance on court. Monica lost her iron will after she was stabbed, but I don’t see Rafa being attacked by a crazed Federer fan any time soon (wait, there are a few people around here who may fit that profile...). In other words, the head shouldn’t be as much of an issue with Nadal as the nicks and bruises he’ll gather over the years.

For now, Nadal has begun to implement preventive measures, like improving his serve, shortening his forehand backswing, and trying to end points a bit sooner. At 21, he’s got at least three more years of top form in him. There’s no reason to pick anyone else in any clay event he plays in the immediate future, and the medium-slow surface in Melbourne should suit him.

4. What’s in store for Maria Sharapova?

Last season was not a pretty one for the pretty one, but I think in 2008 we’ll see her challenging for all the majors other than Roland Garros and competing well all year. That’s always the operative word with Maria: “competing.” While she’s had shoulder problems and continues to engage in her share of extracurricular money seeking, I think Sharapova at her core will stay dedicated to winning. She still puts more of herself into each match than just about anyone else, and that’s enough to send her deep into most events.

The question for 2008 may come down to her draws. The Williams sisters were in her head in a big way last year, and I don’t see that changing. But it didn’t seem to hurt Sharapova’s confidence against the other women. She still came close to walking away with the year-end championship in Madrid. Look for her to reach a major final and at least one other semifinal.

5. What would be the most-welcome development?

The year will begin with all eyes turned in an unusual direction: toward David Nalbandian. His lightning run through Madrid and Paris at the end of 2007, which included two wins over Federer and Nadal each, had fans thinking ahead to his chances at the Aussie Open. We were in the same spot two years ago, when Nalbandian came to Melbourne after beating Federer in the Masters Cup final and went all the way to the semis before caving in the fifth to Marcos Baghdatis. Slow Plexicushion shouldn’t hurt him this time (though he’s never been past the fourth round at the similarly slow courts at Indian Wells). It would a nice story if Nalbandian could finally live up to all of his talent and potential by winning a major. In Madrid and Paris, he offered a different version of tennis dominance from the ones we see from Federer and Nadal—smooth, simple, controlled, easygoing. I’d love to see that again in Melbourne, but the Argentine’s track record at the biggest moments in not a good one. I see him beating Nadal if they play, but losing to Federer or Djokovic.

Speaking of Djokovic, wouldn’t it be nice to see a couple of his fellow whippersnapper colleagues join him at the top of the game in 2008? I’m talking about Andy Murray and Richard Gasquet (two at a time—let’s leave Berdych, Baghdatis, and Monfils alone for the moment).

Murray has started the season on an up note by winning in Doha, which included a three-setter over Nikolay Davydenko and no help from Brad Gilbert. The further rise of Murray would be a double-edged sword for the sport. His brattiness on court is ugly rather than edgy; he’s not going to attract fans by injecting that kind of “personality” into the game. But he does make tennis aficionados happy with the way he plays, which, as he said this week, is more varied and interesting, more complex, than his fellow pros’. The tradeoff is worth it. No one plays like Murray, and tennis needs more guys you can say that about.

Gasquet offers no personality issues, either positive or negative. The attraction is all in his game, which is flowing, flamboyant, but often indifferent—as well as sporadically off-the-charts explosive. Seeing him beat Andy Roddick at Wimbledon last year made me think he would be a tremendous addition to the top ranks of tennis. His unpredictable explosiveness and unassuming flair could make him some kind of cult sports figure in the U.S.—a Federer for hipsters. For that to happen, Gasquet has to begin putting it all together on a regular basis. He did it often enough to sneak into the Masters Cup in 2007. Here’s hoping for—but not betting on—more in ’08.

6. Who’s next among the women?

The future of the WTA is still way up in the air. Jankovic, Ivanovic, Vaidisova, Chakvetadze: Your guess is as good as mine as to who might rise above the rest and start winning Slams. All we can do is go by the past, but that’s not really going to repeat itself exactly, is it? I will say that I don’t think Jankovic and Chakvetadze will ever win a major, but JJ could conceivably finish the year No. 2 on number of victories and tournaments played alone. As for Vaidisova, it’s an open question whether her natural power and athleticism will be enough to overcome her somewhat funky technique and bouts of temper. I think we’ll see the strongest results from Ivanovic, the smoothest of the bunch, in 2008—along with a couple major clunkers. None of these young women is a definite future No. 1.

And what about the forgotten, at least in my mind, Svetlana Kuznetsova, who is somehow No. 2 in the world? She also says she’s taking aim at Henin’s top spot, despite her dismal loss to the Belgian in the U.S. Open final in September. Nice to hear, but Kuzzie should watch her back first; there’s plenty of younger talent just behind her in the rankings.

7. Where will we go from here with the betting scandal?

I think we’ll realize at some point this year that the very top of the sport is not tainted by this problem. Federer, Nadal, and Agassi all had the same reaction when they were asked if they’d heard anything about match-fixing in the past: A definite “no,” and I believe them. Agassi says it never crossed his mind as a player that that kind of thing could go on. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t go on at lower levels of the game, and among certain groups of players, but we should look at the revelations of the last year as a positive development. Tennis will never stamp out gambling or even the occasional match-fixing, but the bad publicity of the Davydenko affair may keep it from spreading further.

Don’t worry, new and unforeseeable scandals await in 2008. Last year we had the Hingis situation to shock us. Raise your hand if you saw that one coming.

8. Who is going to win the Grand Slams?

Granted, making picks months in advance is a random and borderline-pointless exercise. But that’s no reason to keep it out of a blog, right?

Australian Open: Roger Federer, Justine Henin

French Open: Rafael Nadal, Ana Ivanovic

Wimbledon: Andy Murray, Justine Henin

U.S. Open: Novak Djokovic, Serena Williams

Finally, I'd like to thank Our Sartorially Resplendent Sydney Correspondent for his work over the last week. I hope to get him or her back here in the future. I'll have an Aussie Open preview up over the weekend.