Slipping, Sliding, Hacking, Winning

This one had to feel pretty good.

For a committed Davis Cup warrior, Andy Roddick has taken his lumps in the team competition. He’s faltered in close, crucial matches against Ivan Ljubicic, Rafael Nadal, and, toughest of all, Dmitry Tursunov in Moscow last September. But it hasn’t been for lack of effort. Against Tursunov, Roddick fought back from two sets down on clay only to lose 17-15 in the fifth, allowing Russia to clinch a trip to the Cup final (which, to make matters worse, they won).

Yesterday had all the makings of one more costly, heartbreaking defeat for the American. There Roddick was, slipping and sliding his way around yet another red-clay court in yet another eastern European hockey cavern, down a set to yet another monster-hitting young giant—this time it was the pasty, powerful Tomas Berdych who was riding the home-crowd buzz.

The tie's score at this point was 2-1 in favor of the U.S. Two days earlier, Roddick had beaten underpowered journeyman Ivo Minar to kick things off. The match was a testament to how big, high-percentage serving can get be just as devastating on clay as anywhere else. Roddick said it might have been the best he’d ever served on the surface. Then James Blake had engaged in an entertaining, hit-or-miss affair with Berdych—you never knew when a rally would be abruptly terminated by a missile from deep behind the baseline. The second set was a display of blistering tennis from Blake—he was wiping away Berdych first serves with his forehand. The performance was enough to make Versus announcer Leif Shiras make this declaration about Blake: “He’s one of the fastest men alive.” This came a couple of hours after his partner in the booth, Barry Mackay, asserted that Roddick “could have played in the NBA.” Who says U.S. announcers are biased?

Anyway, after leveling things at one set apiece, Blake came down to earth—no surprise there. What was disconcerting was the way he eventually lost the last two sets. Both times he was broken at 5-6. The first of those breaks featured two double faults, including one at set point; in the final game of the match he added one more double. At the Australian Open I felt like Blake had folded mentally against Fernando Gonzalez; it seemed like a major step backward for him. This time I just felt bad for James. He’s taken a lot of tough losses in Davis Cup—remember the five-setter to Gonzo last spring in California? On Friday, Blake got a raw deal when the umpire refused to come down from his chair to check an obvious out mark on a break point against Berdych (as Mackay wondered, why didn’t the tie referee, who's in charge of the proceedings, come out and force the umpire to get out of his chair?) This may further cement Blake as a guy who can’t win the big one, but at this point I’d say he deserves a little luck in one of these situations.

Which brings us back to Roddick, who finally broke through where Blake couldn’t. It wasn’t luck, but a sudden surge in confidence that saved Andy. It began with his serve, naturally, but by the middle of the second set it had flowed to both his ground strokes. The key was Roddick’s depth on the forehand and his ability to wrong-foot Berdych with his down-the-line backhand. It looked like the confidence he’d internalized during his months with Jimmy Connors had surfaced at the right moment.

Like an old-fashioned Connors win, this was blue-collar stuff from Roddick. He spun his wheels on the clay, hacked his slice backhand straight down the middle, came to net on bluff approaches, and went for broke on his forehand because that’s all he could do. It was scratch-and-claw tennis, style be damned and with surprise shots pulled out in the nick of time. On the biggest point of the match, serving at 5-6, 30-30 in the fourth, Roddick handcuffed Berdych with his best second serve of the day, then opened the tiebreaker with a backhand pass up the line that we hadn’t seen all match. From there he held on for dear life as Berdych netted a return at match point. It took a lot of work, but the U.S. clay curse has been broken. Now they’ll get some home cooking—the real key to Davis Cup success—in April against Spain. One thing is guaranteed: There won’t be a speck of red dirt in sight.

The women were in action over the weekend at the Tier II Gaz de France in Paris. This was a strong event, with five of the Top 10 representing, including Amelie Mauresmo and Justine Henin. Anyone who thinks today’s courts have been slowed down too much would have enjoyed de Gaz. The Greenset surface was basketball-court slick; first-strike tennis was rewarded, and the only defense was a good offense.

All of which favored the WTA’s newest upset queen, Lucie Safarova of the Czech Republic, who beat Nicole Vaidisova, Svetlana Kuznetsova, and Henin in the semifinals, then was up a set against Nadia Petrova in the final before losing 6-4 in the third. To say Safarova is a hard-hitter is a bit of an understatement. She punishes the ball—hurts it—from every position and in every situation. There’s a Seles-like quality to Safarova—the eager eyes; the compact, thudding two-hander; the way she launches herself into the court for a backhand return; the reckless abandon in her swing; the total lack of variety. Seles always said she wanted the ball. Safarova looks like she wants it too.

Against Henin, the Czech was strong in the clutch (again reminiscent of Seles). She steeled herself at 2-5 down in the first while Henin rushed. Safarova took the initiative throughout and forced Henin to hit big or lose control of the point. The Belgian tried everything, serving and volleying, slicing and scrambling, hitting heavy-topspin backhands, but Safarova had one answer: Drill the ball. Crosscourt, down the line, up the gut—just keep hammering. On match point, Safarova stepped back and nervelessly crushed a forehand return that Henin could only wave at.

It looked like this strategy—not sure what to call it: “Hit ridiculous winners”?—was going to work again in the final against Petrova. Safarova played the important points well at the end of the first set. It helps, I think, that she only knows one speed—breakneck—because it simplifies her decision-making and lets her take a big cut no matter what the score is.

In the second set, Petrova’s experience finally showed. The up-and-down Russian is not know as a heady player, but this time she took a step back (literally) to give herself more time, took a little off her forehand and made sure it floated deep crosscourt, and went to the slice with her backhand, a good play against Safarova, who hits a dead flat ball. The Czech began missing; the errors were sporadic at first, but they began to come in waves, both into the net and yards over the baseline. Safarova plays close to the net and close to the lines; until she learns to add some margin, these wild swings in quality are going to be part of her game. In other words, she’s not quite Seles yet. Still, even lovers of the old women’s finesse game have to marvel at the blazing pace she creates with that skinny, all-arms-and-legs body.

Petrova’s inevitable hiccup didn’t come until 5-1 in the third. That’s when Safarova, predictably, began to find the corners again. Petrova double-faulted to get broken at 5-2, and doubled again to go down 0-30 at 5-4. Then she did something smart. She served and volleyed, took Safarova by surprise, and won the point. Moving forward helped her serve for the rest of the game. She used it to survive a break point and eventually scrape out the game and the championship. Kudos for thinking your way out of that one, Nadia. Let’s see if it gives you a confidence boost as the season rolls on.

Book Club is back tomorrow! We'll let Newk tell you why Laver was so darn good.