'BEYOND BELIEF NOVAK'

Only Novak Djokovic can describe what mental zone he was in tonight as he dismantled Rafael Nadal's game that over the past fortnight actually looked like it was heading for an 18th Slam.
I recall several years ago a Press Conference in Paris where Novak spoke about 'variation' in tennis where he talked of 'loop balls', flat balls, slice balls, ways to keep the opponent guessing, and that was on the dirt.
Playing on clay it seems is an art form where only a tactical mind will prevail or an awful lot of spin, ala Spanish style.
Rafa, despite winning the US Open three times and the Australian Open once hasn't really enjoyed the hard surfaces that have seen him retired early particularly in recent years due to the physicality of it. 
Let's face it, hard courts are not only brutal on the body but also on the mind, no advantage on a hard court in any aspect. 

Novak it seems is a tactical genius, more so than the man who he calls his 'greatest rival'.
Just quietly I find that comment rather interesting as he doesn't mention the 'GOAT' Federer in the same breath. 
Bit going on there ?
So to the Australian Open Mens Singles Final of 2019.
Nothing short of ridiculous that the World's best player can dismantle the second best by a cricket score. A bathroom break, a three course meal, a taxi ride, two beers at a local pub, it was daylight between these two. 
Novak could have done all of the above and still won comfortably.
What I find so 'distressing' is the way in which Rafa's topspin game was completely shot to pieces by a style which cannot possibly be taught by any tennis coach in the World as a 'safe' way of playing.
Flat hitting from on the baseline.
Now in saying that, a fellow by the name of Juan Martin Del Potro commenced a run in New York in 2009 that made the public plus the tennis coaches of the World sit up and take notice of the style which he adopted, particularly against the 'dirt ballers'.
The Argentinian's 6-3, 6-3, 6-3 demolition of 2003 French Open Champion Juan Carlos Ferrero in the fourth round was not only impressive but offered a blue print of sorts to the rest of the tennis World who struggled with the high bounce of the fancy names who were outrageously tough to beat on European clay.
In the quarter finals of the US Open of 2009 Del Potro won the last three sets against Cilic 6-3, 6-2, 6-1. Degree of difficulty there on a hard court ??
Outrageous.
Semi Finals, 6-2, 6-2, 6-2 over the greatest topspinner of our time, Rafa.

At 1.98 metres tall is that the height that can in fact stand on the baseline and thank a 'moon baller' for the generous and hittable height of ball that has most players almost in the front row of seating looking for a reprieve ?
So did Novak in 2019 perhaps go through the intricacies of that match in New York where Del Potro belittled Rafa ? Well the style and score similarities says exactly that, how else do you explain the one sided nature of a final that offered so much and yet delivered barely a whimper of combat ?
I have coached tennis for around 30 years, I know enough to help most players out but I am far from a 'guru', I will leave that to the 'Zen Masters' of the tennis coaching World who can come up with ideas on how to beat a ball that unless taken early will bounce over your head.
Novak did that to Rafa in Melbourne and unless I am a poor judge of ability if I was the Fed I wouldn't be too concerned about Rafa surpassing his 20 Slam haul, I would be more concerned about Novak. 
In fact Fed's record on tonight's performance at the Oz Open is looking decidedly 'modest' with the current mood the Serbian is in.
Wherever Novak was in that 18 months that saw his ranking and form look like a local club player is now a thing of the past not dissimilar to the great Tiger Woods who's brilliant game went missing for years for one reason or another.

Many styles in tennis, many tactics, many ideas, many 'idiot proof' ways of playing however I am now a believer in the mind being the biggest factor in the sport without a doubt.
What Novak dished up to Rafa tonight was a mental belting from one mind to another that defied logic and now puts the sport into even more perspective with the so called 'Next Gen' players apparently knocking on the door of the big guns.
No where near it, not in the same post code.
Never liked Novak.
After tonight I believe he is a genius...…..

'TENNIS SCORING SYSTEM, STILL ROOTED'

TRYING TO TEACH A KID HOW THE TENNIS SCORING SYSTEM WORKS, AFTER ALL THESE YEARS, NOTHING HAS CHANGED....

The following is a detailed conversation between my son and myself regarding tennis, Wimbledon 2014 and how the scoring system works.....

"Dad what are the numbers on the top of the screen "?

"That tells us the score between these two players buddy "

" So what do they need to win "?

"Three sets, and a set is made up of games where you have to win 4 points a game"

"What's 40-30"?

"That's when one player has won 3 points and the other has won 2, the guy on 40 just needs one more point".

(a point later)

"What's deuce Dad"?

"That's when both players have won 3 points each and now they need to get 2 points clear to win the game"

"So what does each set go up to "?

" 6 games buddy"

( a few minutes later)

"Hey Dad that guy is 6 and they are still playing "

"Yeah mate it's confusing, if it gets to 5 games all they have to then get to 7, but if it gets to 6 games all they have to play a tie breaker to 7 points "

( a few minutes later)

Hey Dad the score is 7-6 (in the breaker) why are they still playing"?

" I know mate it's confusing, if they get to 6 points all they have to play to 2 points in front "

( A couple of hours later)

"Hey Dad did you see that ? The total points that have been won , it's close, 112 to 109"

"Yeah mate and the guy that is trailing 3-4 in the last set has won more points"

(big mistake Dad)

"So the player that is losing Dad, he's winning "?

" Not really mate, it's on serve, so it should even out in the end"

(a short time later)

"Hey Dad it's 7-6, why are they still playing"?

"Well buddy when they get to 6 games all if it's two sets all they then play to 2 games in front to decide the winner of the match, so it may end up say 16-14"

(The final stats are shown)

"Hey Dad the total points won , didn't the guy that lost win more points "?

"Yeah mate , that's right"

"So how did he lose "?

"Tennis scoring buddy, doesn't make a lot of sense"

"Footy isn't that hard"

"No mate you stick to footy, it's a bit easier to understand, if you win more points you win the match, pretty simple hey"?

Funny game this tennis........

* Footnote- in 2010 at Wimbledon Mahut won 24 more points than Isner but lost the match....

'THE AUSTRALIAN OPEN EXPERTS AND EGOS'

With the Australian Open currently in full swing it is interesting to note the amount of people who are offering opinions who perhaps don't know quite as much about the sport as they claim.
Now Nick Kyrgios is no saint however I fully agree with his frustration overflowing due to a couple of 'experts' taking aim at his footwork recently on Melbourne radio.
Nick actually tweeted the words 'Zero credibility' as far as what he thought of these two.
Now one of these 'experts' is not in fact an expert at all in regards to the intricacies of World Tennis as his expertise lays in AFL, Gerard Healy. Yet Gerard offered his advice anyhow. 
Nice try Gerard, bit out of your league though Champ.
Now for Roger Rasheed.
Where do we start with this guy ?
Well if you ask John Tomic, he will tell you that he once congratulated Roger R on his coaching performance with Lleyton Hewitt by taking him from World number 1 to number 19 in a short space of time. 
Roger R has spent time with a couple of Frenchmen, Monfils and Tsonga plus a stint with Dimitrov so I suppose in fairness he has what we commonly call 'runs on the board' here in the Land of Oz.
Personally though I am not a fan of RR at all, particularly as a commentator due to an obvious lack of tennis intelligence that he regularly displays.
Last year at the Brisbane International RR took aim at a Canadian player's dress sense which showed a remarkable lack of knowledge to what in fact was the truth behind Peter Polansky's attire.
'Lululemon' is a clothing company who sponsor Polansky, easy to look this information up, yet RR didn't. He did in fact apologise on air after someone apparently from Canada sent him the information he required regarding Peter's beach style tennis gear.
Tennis players who don't own a Bank balance like the Fed may just have to dress a little more conservatively, hence the 'plain' look of the Canadian.
RR really doesn't think before he talks.
Take the French Open of 2016 for another example. After Australia's very own headline grabber Bernard Tomic made it through to the second round RR offered his thoughts on Tomic's opponent Brian Baker.

( COURTESY OF YAHOO NEWS )

Tomic had beaten the returning Brian Baker in the opening round, to go beyond the first hurdle at the year's second grand slam for just the third time.

Rasheed said he "would beat" Baker, who has battled injuries throughout his career and dropped to 635th in the world rankings.Tomic was unimpressed by Rasheed's comments and said it indicated a lack of knowledge.

"That just shows you how much he knows," he said."You don't say that about someone. The guy [Baker] has been to a third or fourth round here, fourth round at Wimbledon [2012], finals of Nice [2012].

"You can't say that about that sort of player. He's beaten Gael [Monfils] on clay and a lot of good players.

"For him to say that comment, just shows you how much education he has."

( Bernard Tomic )

It appears that RR is renowned for saying things before he actually researches them or even thinks about it for that matter.

Enough of RR, let's look at Jim Courier.

Now here is a former World number 1 who simply just loves the sound of his own voice. I have already written in detail my thoughts on Courier after he publicly lashed David Goffin during his match against the Fed at the Oz Open in 2016.

For those who missed it, Jim stated that Goffin's ranking was 'INFLATED' due to points received from playing Davis Cup matches against lower ranked players.

True story.

Personally I don't believe a player ranked in the top 15 ( which Goffin was at the time ) can own an 'inflated' ranking. How is that possible ? Well, Jim thought so.

Now this year I was prepared to give Jim another chance as I tuned in to the Deminaur / Laaksonen match, however it took me less than 5 minutes to in fact turn the sound off completely and watch the match in silence, beautiful silence.

" And there is Alex Deminaur's Coach Lleyton Hewitt " ( Jim Courier ).

So how does this happen ? How do these guys who are 'experts' in their knowledge of tennis get things so wrong ? 

I will offer a theory.

It's called a big ego.

These guys get paid to turn up, offer an opinion, talk about themselves a fair bit , " Well back when I was on the Tour", you know the line, yet their knowledge on the finer points of the sport is lacking big time.

As the public, well we get 'educated' by these ego freaks who make it up as they go along without so much as spending 5 minutes on reading up a player's profile which may just tell them that a guy like Peter Polansky nearly died through a sleep walking incident or Adolfo Gutierrez is in fact the Spanish Coach of Alex Deminaur.

And so to the spat between Tomic and Hewitt.

Hilarious.

It's tennis in a nutshell isn't it ? Whether it's on or off court, a current or former player, it's on in earnest as these guys try to get the upper hand.

I have always stated on my own Blog site that tennis is in fact an 'argument' between two players where only the best answer or answers will win.

In the case of Tomic vs Hewitt ( AND TENNIS AUSTRALIA ) well it's like this.

Bernie is very correct in what he has stated in regards to the Wildcard allocation at Melbourne Park. There is no transparency, no one has a clue who will receive one because as Kokkinakis found out, a higher ranking does not necessarily assure you a spot in the Main Draw.

Whether the players that Tomic has mentioned are in fact part of Hewitt's Management Team is yet to be proven however let's face it, will Tennis Australia really do what Pat Cash suggested and investigate Tomic's claims ?

C'mon ( pardon the pun ) however that's like saying that the Banks should do their own Royal Commission into how much they rip the public off in fees. 

Nope, it will never happen.

Now on Hewitt, it's fair to say I don't like him one little bit due to his over the top arrogance that had me once place $200 on Marat Safin to beat him in 4 sets at the Oz Open in 2005 so I could say that my rent for the fortnight was thanks to Lleyton Hewitt losing ( true story ).

So why does Mr Hewitt take up spots at his home tournaments, namely Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne with Wildcards that should in fact go to the youth of the sport instead ? Well only Hewitt can answer that but I believe the 'ego' word may just come into play once again.

I calculated that the 'retired' Australian Davis Cup Captain pocketed around $20,000 over the past few weeks in Wildcard 'bonus money' allocated by Tennis Australia.

Interesting this Wildcard thing isn't it ? Maybe Bernie onto something as obvious as the sun coming up tomorrow morning.

So I will leave you with a comment from a recently posted Social Media article that even the great Andre Agassi weighed in on which sort of says it all I believe.

“Tomic is hardly the most sympathetic witness, but it is odd for a Davis Cup captain to be hanging onto the dregs of his playing career instead of prioritising his young players,” Giri Nathan wrote. ( COURTESY OF YAHOO SPORT )

Yep some egos just can't let go...…..