Rock, Paper, Scissors

by Pete Bodo

The best adjective to describe the situation at the top of the ATP is "turbulent," or perhaps even "chaotic." One of the many interesting aspects of the present reality in pro tennis is the way the WTA and ATP have engaged in a sudden and dramatic game of role reversal.

Last year at this time, pundits and many fans were bemoaning the fact that the WTA couldn't produce a player capable of stepping up and asserting herself as the dominant champ who sorted out the pecking order and set the bar for would-be rivals. Meanwhile, on the ATP side of the fence, Novak Djokovic was riding a 20-0 winning streak (I'm including the two Davis Cup singles wins with which he closed 2010), and busy putting together a run matched by only a few men in tennis history.

Today, Victoria Azarenka, the WTA No. 1, is 23-0 on the year, with four titles, including the Australian Open. She's the new Djokovic, while the former one is 14-2 with one title, his third Australian Open.

The one thing that Azarenka circa March 2012 and Djokovic circa March 2011 have in common is that as fervently as diehard partistans of either player might have wished for them to produce those results, nobody, but nobody, would have dared to predict them.

Still, Azarenka's meteoric rise, if not her record of excellence, seems less unexpected and more easily explained than Djokovic's utter supremacy in first half of 2011. Djokovic, after all, was the third wheel in the Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal rivalry. Granted, he had a Grand Slam title to his name, one he earned in Australia in 2008. But Petr Korda and Thomas Johansson each had one of those, too, within a decade of 2008. And neither of them ever came close to calling the tune as world No. 1.

The more time passed after 2008, the less likely it seemed Djokovic had the right stuff to challenge the top two men. By the time the 2010 U.S. Open rolled around, Djokovic was in serious danger of becoming more famous for his stand-up comedy routines and impersonations than the quality of his play—or the threat he posed to Federer and/or Nadal. It seemed like he was simply enjoying the good life of a perpetual No. 3.

By contrast, Azarenka had no Grand Slam title before the start of this year, but then neither did the WTA year-end No. 1 player for two years running, Caroline Wozniacki. The WTA, we now know, was in the throes of a transition, and Azarenka would be the one to take advantage of it.

Azarenka finished 2011 a strong No. 3, and truly had hard luck at all the majors. At the Australian Open and French Opens, she lost to the hottest player in the first half of the year in Grand Slam play, Li Na. At Wimbledon, she lost in the semis to the eventual, surprise champ, Petra Kvitova. And at the U.S. Open, she lost in the third round to the best player of her generation, Serena Williams. All of the women who beat her played superb tennis on the day.

You know the Nietzschean expression, "Anything that doesn't kill you only makes you stronger?" It helps explain what Azarenka has accomplished so far in 2012.

And as eagerly as we await the return of the Williams sisters or hope for a Kim Clijsters sighting, I'm can't believe that either of them is eager to get a piece of Azarenka. Serena in particular has made pundits eat their words of doubt in the past, and she may do it again. I wouldn't put it past her.

But this isn't 2011 or 2010, or any other year when the WTA did not have a leading lady. It does now, and whether she's just on a torrid trip through the place known as "the zone," as Djokovic was early last year, or emerging as an all-business, long-haul No. 1, Azarenka has the WTA running scared. How refreshing to once again have a No. 1 who dominates the field, appears fearless, and seems so content to be "just a tennis player" that she doesn't even dress for big finals!

The astonishing thing is that the ATP suddenly seems to be the tour-in-transition, after a long period of outright domination by Roger Federer, a shorter but sensational period of ascendancy by Nadal, and then the improbable explosion of Djokovic—a detonation that seems to have so shaken up the order that nothing is certain and the ensuing silence is downright spooky.

So what is the situation? Has Djokovic settled back into a role as the third leg of a championship tripod? Will Federer still be for real when the major tournaments in Paris and London come around in a few months' time? Is Nadal less certain of his chances against Federer as well as Djokovic these days?

It seems almost like Djokovic and his accomplishments of 2011 served the same role as one of those ice-breaker ships, busting up the bottleneck that keeps the tide from flowing. Whether or not he's the one most able to capitalize on this sudden thaw after the period of domination by Federer and Nadal doesn't really matter. Somebody will, or, more likely, those three men will take turns commanding our attention.

The one thing we know is that all three are capable of undermining each other's ambitions in the finest and most entertaining tradition, the one established in the Open era by Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, John McEnroe, and Ivan Lendl. The three leading ATP men may spend the year playing the children's game, rock, paper, scissors. And we could do worse. . .

But there's another scenario, in which a handful of men outside the triumverate sees the vulnerability of each of those men and asks the most basic question in tennis: Why not me? For as long as the top three keep beating up on each other, people will keep asking, "Is Djokovic afraid of Federer, who seems to be afraid of Nadal, who's definitely scared of Djokovic?"

And that's bound to boost the resolve and hopes of the Andy Murrays, Juan Martin del Potros, Tomas Berdychs, Jo-Wilfried Tsongas, and John Isners of this world. The period when the ATP has a dominant champion, a condition to which we've become accustomed, may be over.