Mr. Unpredictability

Mornin'. Shortly after I rolled out of bed at around 8:30 this morning, I realized it was one of those days when you awake to a changed world, even if it's in a relatively obscure or minor way. Today, people see Andy Murray, the 19-year old Scot who gave Rafael Nadal all he could handle last night, in a different light. It's a cliche, I know, but sometimes the cliche is the most serviceable and accurate form of currency. Andy Murray has arrived.

That was my feeling as I ambled down to the restaurant at Melbourne's Hilton-on-the-Park for breakfast. A few minutes after I sat down with Judith Elian, an old friend and former tennis correspondent for L'Equipe, John Lloyd, the former player who now commentates for the BBC, came in. He cut a good figure, in his immaculate zip-neck, white Nike top and Rodeo Drive-grade suntan. He stopped by to say hi and of course I asked him what he thought about the Murray-Nadal match. He basically said exactly what I had been thinking:

Yep. In fact, deep into last night's live match-call experiment I wrote of Andy's prospects of winning Wimbledon that it wasn't a question of "if" but "when". Of course, there is this little matter of the people who need to get out of his road for that to happen, but its hard to imagine Roger Federer not having a hiccup or two somewhere along his grassy path. BTW, I did stick around for Andy's presser last night, and I also saw that a comment he made about hoping that Federer would be "gone" soon has gotten a few noses here at TW out of joint.  We all know that context counts, and trust me on this: there was nothing disrespectful or trash-talky about Andy's comment. It came in response to the question of whether or not we have a new rivalry (Murray vs. Nadal) on our hands. His answer was in two parts, of which only the second aspect is relevant:

There was nothing dismissive or ill-intentioned about the way Andy said it, and the subtext is obvious: It's not  about me and Rafael; it's about The Mighty Fed and Rafa. Andy could have chosen a better phrasing, for sure, but, hey - it was around 2 AM, the kid has just played the match of a lifetime, and he's got the Scotsman's plain-spoken, direct-bordering-on-brusque manner. As an issue, there is no there there.

What Murray demonstrated last night was that there is a way to bamboozle Nadal, and I think the approach is also true of TMF, if to a lesser degree and in a different way. The key is a keeping Nadal out of his comfort zone - that is, doing things that prevent the match from becoming the tennis version of the Paris-to-Dakar rally: a headlong, pedal-to-the-metal race that raises a storm of dust and leaves the contestants grimy and soaked in perspiration. This involves putting him under pressure to make decisive, accurate placements, preferably from uncomfortable positions, before he can turn a point into a rallying contest.

Easier said than done, for sure. Which brings us to Part 2 of the equation, which is getting enough stick on the ball to put him under pressure, psychologically as well as tactically (a matter of forcing him to make decisions and even execute strokes faster than he would prefer).

You can't do that without having a nuclear option of which he is acutely aware: in Murray's shot vocabulary, that means using a big serve to which Nadal has to pay attention because it keeps him off balance, and having the Wilanders to pull the trigger and smack the winning placement on any shot Nadal delivers that has the beguiling character of a Trojan horse: Oh, Andy, here's a happy, innocuous little topspin backhand to the mid-court. Nothing to worry about, Braveheart, just say "Hi, little ball! and send it right back the way it came . . .

That's how Nadal lures so many of his victims into the abattoir.

Murray was having none of that last night. He played remarkably positive tennis, showing decision-making ability and creative use of the court beyond his years and experience. That he was able to execute at such a high level while treating break points like they were so many useless pennies destined to be left on a desk, unused, was intriguing. It spoke of both Murray's talent and his  inexperience. And in the late stages, fitness and strength became an issue for Murray, especially in contrast with Jet Boy, who appeared to become stronger as the match progressed. That's understandable: Murray is from the north, where people have not been softened and molded by the sun for resilience and endurance; he's more brittle than Nadal, but there is ample toughness - and different kinds of toughness -  to compensate for his smaller reservoir of stamina and strength.

With Nadal, what you see is what you get. But Andy is Mr. Unpredictable.