NEW YORK—Two excellent finals can cover up a lot of sins, can’t they? The U.S. Open should thank Serena, Vika, Andy, and Novak for making our last memories of another often-frustrating edition of the tournament such positive ones.
Those matches also showcased two slow-moving and opposing trends on the tours. The women, in the form of Serena Williams, Victoria Azarenka, and Maria Sharapova, who split this year's Grand Slams between them, really do have a “new order” at the top as they close out 2012. At the same time, the men’s elite got a little bit broader over the course of the year. Andy Murray’s first major win made the Big 4, each of whom took home a slice of the Slam piece this season, a reality at last.
Starting with our finalists, it’s time, after two weeks and a day, for a roll call of the Open’s top performers.
Andy Murray
Murray’s road to the top was longer than most tennis champions'. It took him seven years and five Grand Slam finals to make it, but in retrospect that shouldn’t be too surprising. Murray, even in the way he plays points, thinks long term and goes about his business methodically; he’s learned to live without the quick strike. After years of being told he needed to change his game and his attitude to win the big one, to hit his forehand bigger and stop telling himself off on court, he went out and did it his way. In the Open final, he won the way he has always won, by running, defending, slicing, passing, lobbing, counterpunching, and above all undermining his opponent. And he did it while screaming at his own legs for turning, in his words, to <em>“Jelly!”</em>
Maybe the best thing about Murray’s legitimizing Grand Slam win is that now we can appreciate his game for what it is, rather than criticizing it for what it isn’t—for the moment, at least, what we thought were his liabilities look like strengths. In spite of his many doubters, Murray believed in his game and believed in himself. The fact that it took him a while isn’t a sign that he was doing it wrong in the past; it’s a testament to his dedication to doing it the only way he knew how. Tennis is better, and more interesting, for it. <strong>A+</strong>
Serena Williams
It seems like a very long time ago that Serena first won the Open, in 1999, as a beaded 17-year-old, doesn’t it? She’s had more than her share of ups and downs, as well as hairstyles, since. But 13 years later, at 30, we may have seen the very best Serena of all. A cut above the competition in her first six matches, she played with a mix of aggression and consistency that she could only have dreamed about when she was younger. Then, in the final, she looked human again. A human named Serena Williams, that is; that’s a little different. The rest of us doubt ourselves and fear success enough to tighten up when it stares us in the face. Serena, who said before the final that, “I always think I’m the best, obviously,” goes in the other direction. What makes you believe, deep down, that you should beat every woman on earth at tennis? When you can miss until 3-5 in the final set of the U.S. Open, and then stop missing. And this won't be the last time she'll do that. Serena sounds, after 13 years and 15 majors, as if she’s just getting started. <strong>A+</strong>