Rome: What a Pity...

*This week TENNIS.com will be featuring one of our blog regulars, Asad Raza, who is in Rome for the men's Italian Open. He'll be writing back and forth with me here a couple times; reporting on the home page; and blogging over at Pete's as well.

*Hi Steve,

In tennis, when a great opportunity is missed, be it an unexpectedly favorable draw, a good look at a passing shot, or a well-planned dropshot that floats just wide, Italians tend to exclaim, "ché peccato!"--"what a pity!"  That would appear to to be the phrase here in Rome, where there has been ample opportunity to use it.

The Internazionale BNL d'Italia went from unexpected to unexpectedly disappointing today.  Spectators only saw ten full games, as Andy Roddick and Radek Stepanek both retired from their semifinal matches, Roddick with back spasms and Stepanek with stomach problems.  For Roddick, the injury put a sudden end to his best run on European clay since 2002.  The Roman fans had definitely gotten behind him, and there was palpable sadness in the arena after he conceded the match.  Ché peccato.

Stepanek had become, if not a villain, an irritant to the crowd, who (correctly) held him responsible for ridding the tournament of its top seed--but now that he'd done it,the feeling seemed to be, couldn't he have at least stuck around to trouble the next guy?  As the always cosmopolitan Bud Collins exclaimed from seat behind me, "Doppio disastro!"  ("Double disaster!")

Yesterday (quarterfinal day), however, was a much better day of tennis.  For me, however, it started with mild, Italianate frustration: I was delayed on the way to the Foro Italico by another doppio disastro: a transit strike that got started late and ran into the afternoon.  Ah, Italia.  The late strike kept me waiting at the Pyramide station for an hour (I could have walked, but I was well aware that the instant I chose to walk away, the station would immediately re-open).  Anyway, by the time I reached the arena, James Blake was in his third-set tailspin.

On came Stepanek and Federer. As you mentioned, Stepanek is a pleasure to see live, when you can appreciate the subtlety of his rhythm-upsetting, junkballing, net-rushing tactics.  In fact, I think it may be time to admit Stepanek into the ranks of lovably unique players like Miloslav Mecir, Karol Kucera, and Fabrice Santoro.  On this particular day, in addition to his full repetoire of slices, middle approach shots, and surprisingly firm volleys, he had two things going for him: firstly, his first serve consistently kept Federer at bay, especially in the first set.  Secondly, he had a convincing look of hunger and belief--emotions that the sport of tennis reveals to be fully readable on human faces.  Actually, you might count this as one thing: confident self-belief and having a good day with one's first serve are strongly correlated.

For Federer's part, I thought he became somewhat passive, seeming to conclude that Stepanek would crumble at some point or another if he (Federer) only lurked ominously for long enough.  It was as though he wanted the threat of his game rather than his game itself to beat Stepanek.  Less risky, for sure, but in a strange way it seemed to put more pressure on him to remain consistent, while awaiting Stepanek's breakdown.  It didn't happen, as Stepanek played a brilliant set of tennis, even thrusting an index finger in the air after one inspired dropshot.  If Radek's showboating got on Federer's nerves, he didn't show it.  I sort of wish he would show it: get down in the trenches and fight these opponents.  I suppose it's not in his personality.

In the process of waiting for Stepanek to come down to earth, it was Federer's own game that came unhinged--particularly his topspin backhand, several shanks of which caused him to be broken early in the second set.  (Heresy alert: who am I to advise Federer, but sometimes I wonder if the shanks might be partly the result of his "classic," ultra-small racquet head.)  In the second set tiebreaker, Federer won a long, superb point, in which he forced Stepanek back from the net with a good lob and weathered a full deejay set of spins and velocities from the Czech mixmaster.  My instincts told me Federer would cruise from there, but perhaps his confidence has been affected by the events of 2008.  A couple of errors and three huge Stepanek serves, two down 5-2 and one at match point, and it was over.

Afterwards, I wondered if Roger has noticed how effective a patient but unpredictable attack such as Stepanek's could be, and whether he'd thought about doing more of it himself, so I posed the question to him.  He began by irritably telling me that perhaps all of a sudden he'd start coming in on both serves on clay, but he doubted it.  Then he softened, considering the idea before rejecting it: "But of course when a guy serves well, you know, and backs it up with a good volley behind, you he's tough to play...  But I don't think that's the way to win the French Open, to be honest."

Fair enough.  But the interesting thing is that Stepanek didn't come in on first and second serves, or even on every first serve.  And he did come in unexpectedly, several times, in Federer's serve.  These are some of the reasons that he won the match despite being not close to in Federer's league from the ground and only winning 82 points to Federer's 88.  I'd describe Stepanek's tactics as attacking, but patient attacking, not a desperate mission.  In the end, it's more about an aggressive mentality as it is about coming to net on every point--and it was Stepanek, not Federer, who had that mentality yesterday.

Later that night, Andy Roddick used a somewhat similar approach against Tommy Robredo.  I noticed that Andy came in on Robredo's serve on big points, and it seemed to swing the pendulum in his favor.  Traditional clay-courters are not used to being rushed--chip and charge, and you change the dynamic of the match.  Roddick also showed the patient side of the patient attack: I noticed he seems to have added a very intelligent high forehand, which he uses to "reset" points in which he is in positional trouble, and to upset the rhythm of points that are becoming too clay-metronomic.

Roddick's backhand is often criticized (notably by Matt Cronin a couple of years back), but on clay he can stay out of major trouble by looping it deep.  Clay is somewhat more forgiving of his volley technique, as well, giving him more time to get closer to the net and swipe or bunt shots away.  Roddick's patience in rallies, and his evolving sense of when to attack, is not a programmatic thing ("Hit crosscourt, then down the line, then come in.  Rinse and repeat.")--it's more like a developing feel.  I mentioned to him that selectively attacking was working well and should give him new confidence on clay , to which he responded, "Yeah, I probably feel better going into the French this year than any time recently.  You know, I don't know, I just played well and I was -- I wasn't forcing my shots...  I had a good mix going, so we'll see if I can keep that up."   A good mix, indeed.

And one more thing about that match: Roddick's backhand and Robredo's entire game are often considered to be without heft.  This may be true compared to, say Almagro's backhand or Gonzalez's forehand, and as I watched the start of the Robredo-Roddick match from the press room TV, the ball seemed a bit leisurely.  But then I got to my seat and remembered: would that I or anyone I've ever played tennis with have such "lack of heft."  These guys are pros, and trust me, they hit the ball real hard.

Finally, to finish this discussion of patient attacking, I want to return to Federer's ambivalence on the topic: remember that, in arguably his best clay match ever, the Rome final in 2006, he showed excellent, selective judgment in coming to net, won 64 of 84 points when he did, and lost serve only three times in five sets.  After that match, he said, "For me just to hit and move backwards again, that's not the way I learned the game.  My way of thinking is to come to the net and finish it at the net.  [Nadal] hardly passed me today, which was a good feeling.  So I have to keep that up."  Perhaps it's a pity he didn't try it yesterday.

I've really enjoyed doing this, Steve.  Thanks for sharing your space with me!

ciao,

Asad