Cred Capital

As it turned out, guests in the President's Suite get tickets for a choice box in Louis Armstrong stadium, so  Lisa and I got to watch the Novak Djokovic-Radek Stepanek match from a terrific vantage point: the second row, behind the baseline to the left of the chair umpire. This match will go into the US Open memory bank, but while it was a riveting match, it wasn't a great one.

I had the sense from the third set on that the issue was clear: Stepanek would win that match if he did not choke. He was outplaying Djokovic at both ends of the spectrum - winning the short points (often with excellent volleys) and the long ones. Djokovic was playing without length and not a great deal of pace, and he was looking mopey and unconfident. That is, he was ripe for the taking. But Stepanek choked at the end of the fourth set and in the fifth-set tiebreaker, and all the air that should have been filling his lungs was donated to Djokovic. The Djoker performed the trademark Jet Boy one-two leap and fist pump after breaking Stepanek at 5-5 in the fourth set and the handwriting was on the wall, even though Stepanek stretched it to a fifth-set 'breaker.

So James Blake last night, Djokovic today - what will tomorrow bring? I think you all know: John Isner vs. Roger Federer, a match that CBS is sure to hype into the stratosphere, this being the US Open, Isner being an American, and The Mighty Fed being, well, the human equivalent of a winning Powerball ticket for any aspiring pro. Out of curiosity, I asked a few players of they felt the Isner-Federer match-up would live up to the hype. This is what Andy Murray said:

I find it nothing short of amazing that a player of Murray's status would accord so much respect to Isner, a guy who's played exactly TK matches in main-tour events. But that in itself is a powerful statement on the extent to which Isner has achieved the single most important feat facing any youngster on the tour: He has established credibility as a player.

Isner has put himself in a position to play the top players by winning matches against his peers (that's why winning his second round match here against another qualifier [Rik DeVoest] was his most significant accomplishment to date). Isner's fellow pros noticed that, and kids like Sam Querrey ought to have the importance of doing that drilled into them. Since Isner's big breakout in Washington, he has accumulated Cred Capital, which basically means that a lot of guys with fuller resumes are worried about him. Of course, not matter what happens tomorrow, Isner can burn up that capital with a streak of poor play. But he has that cred now, and that's awfully important.

So is it possible, can Isner beat The Mighty Fed?

Of course it's possible. But it isn't probable. And here are the things I think will determine the match.

1- Isner's first serve: Although the buzz around the locker room is that Isner's second serve - that kicker that leaps shoulder high to the returner - is his best weapon, I think he needs to keep TMF on edge and out of Isner's service games, and no matter how you cut it, the best way to shut out an opponent is with big first serves. The only way Isner can beat Federer is to keep him from being able to play, which means short, fast points. And if Isner gets a good first-serve percentage, it will put that much more pressure on Federer when he does see a second serve. So I think if Isner has any hope of making a serious match of it, he needs to put up at least a 65 per cent first serve conversion.

2 - Isner's return: If Isner can hold with relative ease, Federer will feel a lot of pressure in his own service games. Isner needs to capitalize on that, and apply constant pressure on TMF's serve.  That means smacking some winners, chipping and charging, maybe standing inside the court to take the ball on the rise.

3 - Federer's patience: TMF has to assume that, unless Isner has a bad serving day or is overwhelmed by the occasion, there will be long stretches when he doesn't get anywhere near breaking  (maybe even slowing down) Isner. He has to be ready for that, psychologically. He has to pretend he's Pete Sampras, playing Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon, meaning he has to believe that he will get precious few chances to break, but if he can take advantage of them, they will determine the outcome. That is, the match may boil down to four or six critical points, and if TMF can win most or all of those, it could be over, 3-1-2.

Now here's a nice surprise for y'all. Asad Raza, who posts here frequently under a different name (yes, there is a prize for the first correct guess, although the honor system is in full effect!), is here doing some work for Tennis and TW. I asked Asad to weigh-in on this issue, and this is what he wrote:

Okay, that's our take. Now here's the exchange I had this afternoon with Novak Djokovic:

Q: Novak, speaking of entertaining matches, tomorrow Roger is playing a kind name John Isner, an American, at the US Open -

Djokovic (cutting me off):  I know, the big guy (smiling).

Q. Do you think that match is worth all the hype it has and will generate?

Djokovic:  You know, obviously looking, John's last couple months have been great for him.  He won two matches here.  Crowd supports him.  He likes that energy and entertainment.  I think he doesn't have anything to lose. So it's going to be interesting anyhow.  I mean, he's playing against the best player on the world, defending champion. It will be interesting to see, but it could go either way.

Well, there are a few voices - care to add yours to the discussion?