KIM'S AMERICAN DREAM - posted September 28

There was no doubting the story of the 2009 US Open.

No, it wasn't the fall of Roger Federer in the men's final to Juan Martin Del Potro. Nor was it 17-year-old Melanie Oudin's spectacular run to the quarter-finals. And it wasn't even Serena Williams' semi-final rant. Did she really threaten to kill a lineswoman?

The story for which the tournament will be best remembered is Kim Clijsters' triumph in just her third tournament back on the tour - and the on-court celebrations with daughter Jada which followed.

Having spent more than two years in what turned out to be premature retirement, during which time she gave birth, was it any wonder that the 26-year-old told the crowd in her trophy presentation speech: "I don't have words for this."

Well, Kim, here are some. Incredible. Remarkable. Extraordinary.

The figures speak for themselves. Before arriving in New York, Clijsters had played seven competitive matches in 27 months. Yes, seven.

Yet a lack of match practice didn't matter one iota to the Belgian, who duly took out both Williams sisters - the two title favourites - en route to the final before dismissing Caroline Wozniacki.

If there's been a greater comeback, in any sport, I don't know about it.

Clijsters admitted after her triumph that title glory "wasn't in the plan" when she "started from zero" having decided to return earlier in the year. Her laugh and smile as she sat in the chair moments after clinching victory expressed her amazement perfectly.

"This is something that I, in my wildest dreams, could never imagine happening," she added.

But with the winners flowing from her awesome inside-out forehand throughout the fortnight, happen it did.

Clijsters will be back in action in Luxembourg next month before heading to Australia at the start of next year, where further glory - and a clash with fellow comeback kid Justine Henin - could await.

While Clijsters is guaranteed the spotlight wherever she goes from now on, her defeated final opponent may just be able to remain in the shadows for a little longer.

Rarely can a Grand Slam finalist have received so little attention. The Dane tip-toed her way through a first week dominated by shocks and Dinara Safina's woes, while the second brought Oudin-mania and the Clijsters comeback gathering pace.

But we haven't heard the last of the Dane, of that you can be sure - and there's more than one reason for that.

Certainly in Britain, I suspect Wozniacki's name will crop up every now and again.

The reason? She was playing her first Grand Slam final in New York, just over three years after winning Junior Wimbledon.

Of course, Briton Laura Robson won the girls' title in SW19 last year, while in New York, Heather Watson joined her as a junior Slam winner.

A product of the famous Nick Bollettieri academy which has produced such stars as Maria Sharapova, Monica Seles and Jennifer Capriati, Watson is about to find out that expectations will only increase from now on.

Grand Slam finalists are few and far between, so while it may not be right to expect Robson and Watson to progress to that level, Wozniacki has shown it can be done.

And that's before considering that Andy Murray went from US Open junior champion to senior finalist in a four-year period from 2004 to 2008.

As well as propelling a well-known name back into the spotlight, the 2009 US Open has potentially introduced us to a new star.

Watch this space.

Let us know your views on Clijsters' achievements. And can the young Britons follow in her and Wozniacki's footsteps? Email your feedback to tennisfeedback@sportinglife.com.

LOOK OUT, BELGIAN ABOUT - posted September 22

Is it any wonder Justine Henin has decided to return to competitive tennis?

As she watches one player after the other throw her number one ranking around like a hot potato, the Belgian has realised that she should still be ruling the roost in the women's game.

Sixteen months after her shock decision to quit, announced with the explanation she no longer had the desire to compete on the global treadmill, Henin sat and watched compatriot Kim Clijsters claim the US Open title just weeks into her own comeback.

And if Clijsters can perform such heroics, surely Henin is capable of winning January's Australian Open even quicker after launching a return.

Why? Well, for one, Henin has not given birth like Clijsters.

Secondly Henin has always taken her tennis very seriously.

Yet while Clijsters' return was lauded by all and sundry, I doubt Henin's will be so widely appreciated.

Clijsters has and remains a media darling, her happy-go-lucky attitude winning her many friends.

It was never quite the same with the steely-eyed Henin. She always felt her job on the tour was to win. Full stop.

While it would be unfair to say Henin often courted controversy, she certainly managed to cause a stir at times.

One memorable incident came at the 2003 French Open when Henin raised a hand to stop Serena Williams serving yet when the umpire failed to spot this and Williams complained, Henin would not allow a let.

She also took plenty of criticism when she retired from final of the 2006 Australian Open, leaving Amelie Mauresmo with an empty feeling of a maiden Grand Slam victory. It was a scenario repeated in that year's Fed Cup final.

But, above all, the one section that won't be glad to see Henin back is her fellow players.

Henin was the undoubted number one when she quit and, while the ranking stats don't show it, in truth she had been for some time. Her 2007 season was among the best in tour history - the pint-sized star lost just four matches during the year and her 63-4 win-loss record gave her a winning percentage of 94, the best since Steffi Graf went 86-2 in 1989.

Her graceful style was coupled with a ruthless determination which rivalled that of renowned street fighter Serena Williams.

That charateristic will ensure her comeback is not taken lightly and you can take it as read that Henin will be firing on all cylinders when she hits the court again in January.

After little more than a year away, her opponents will be worried, make no mistake.

Overall Henin's return will be good a thing, at least for now, with another interesting story sure to be to the fore until January and probably beyond. Yet deep down you have to feel a little disappointed that the women's game does not seem to be moving on.

While the remarkable Clijsters story meant the women's draw got more attention than the men's at Flushing Meadows, is it really in the long-term interests of the WTA that a couple of former champions come back and, in all probability, return as if they've never been away?

Like all sports, tennis thrives on new blood coming through the ranks. That's why in Britain we are so excited by the potential of Laura Robson and Heather Watson. It was also seen for a time in New York where American teenager Melanie Oudin was the headline act for a few days.

The Williams sisters sped up the game's evolution at the start of the decade and they managed to drag the likes of Henin and Clijsters to new heights, so much so that the Belgian duo dominated for a period of their own in the mid-noughties.

Yet the likes of Maria Sharapova, Ana Ivanovic and Dinara Safina have since failed to continue the evolution.

Henin's return is sure to grab headlines come January, but you sense the women's game will really be treading water the longer she and Clijsters continue to shine at the highest level.

Let us know your views on Henin's return. Is it a good thing for the women's game? And how do you rate her chances of success upon her return? Email your feedback to tennisfeedback@sportinglife.com.

YOUR FEEDBACK: END OF AN ERA? - posted September 22

Here are some of your views on my recent column suggesting the end of Federer-Nadal era could be nigh. Free feel to add your opinion by emailing the address at the top of the page.

I disagree with you when you said that Nadal's best days are over. If you want I can jog your memory. Nadal is someone who vows to get better. Not only says he will get better, but he gets better. He will get better and stronger. I don't think the semi-final between Nadal and Delpo was a fair match-up. Nadal was hurt, and Delpo was in form. Still, post match he didn't offer any excuse and he simply congratulated Delpo. A healthier Nadal vs healthy Delpo is a real match-up, in which Rafa wins hands down! I am confident we will be able to see Federer vs Nadal in the US Open final in 2010.
Neha Talwalkar

Back in January 2008, after Djokovic had beaten Federer easily en route to winning the Australian Open, the consensus was that Federer was on the wane and that a new breed would be taking over, including Tsonga who thrashed Nadal in the semis. While Djokovic has hung around in the top five, he has not made another major final; same story for Tsonga. This year we were told Murray was going to win a slam. He didn't and, Wimbledon aside, his 2009 campaign in the majors was lacklustre. The truth is that Nadal won one major and Federer two. Del Potro was clearly in great form this autumn and deserved his US triumph. However, a less exhausted Federer would surely have sealed the match by serving out the second set. Let us not forget that tennis aside, Federer has had a lot going on this year. Nadal has suffered from injury and hopefully will take the rest of the year off to regain full fitness. Before Federer and Nadal are consigned to the 'not real contenders' category, let's see where Del Potro, Murray et al are this time next year. If Federer and Nadal have not figured in any of the majors, then yes, their dominance is at an end. It would be foolish to write either off too soon.
Lewis Grenier

I don't think the dominance of the duo (Federer/Nadal) is over. The duo are class apart from the other player on the ATP Tour. For Nadal, I know he will bounce back very strong if he can overcome his injury worries. For the Master(Federer), I can see him play in the top level up to his mid-30s. The others cannot take the heat when the chips are down, Murray is a typical example. Their dominance will surely continue. Watch out!
Ekene, Nigeria

I watched Andy Murray play at Queens this year and he brought a confidence bordering on disdain to the court. He hit more forehand and backhand winers at this tournament than I have seen him hit in any other. He smashed with his forehand hard and accurately and showed he has the ability to play these winning shots. I would strongly advise him to sit down with the videos of Queens and realise from what he sees that he has the ability to become the best in the world. But you must have a winning shot off your forehand to play the top-ranked players. All the best Andy from a fellow Scot.
George Docherty

NEW ERA DAWNS? - posted September 15

It was probably no surprise that the result of Monday's US Open final was reported just as much as a Roger Federer defeat as it was a Juan Martin Del Potro victory.

Such has been Federer's dominance that virtually any defeat for the Swiss is regarded as a shock.

Yet for how much longer will that be the case?

Clearly it would be crazy to write Federer off as a spent force after a narrow loss such as this, but you have to wonder if a new era is dawning in the men's game.

Prior to Monday, Federer and Rafael Nadal had won 16 of the last 17 Grand Slam titles.

Such statistics seemed to intimidate many of their opponents during that spell; plenty seemed beaten before they even stepped onto court.

That mental edge can surely not be as great now.

The rest of the tour will surely have expressed delight, at least privately, at how Del Potro first battered Nadal and then managed to turn around the final with Federer at Flushing Meadows.

At the very least, the door is now ajar - not just becasue of Del Potro's feat. Whether the chasing pack can push right through remains to be seen.

The fact is Federer is not getting any younger - he's now 28 and it's rare for 30-somethings to be at the very top of the game. Andre Agassi was very much an exception to the rule.

Age may not appear to be taking its toll just yet, although it should be noted that Federer did not impress in the deciding set of either the Australian or US Open this year.

As for Nadal, his crushing defeat in the semi-finals in New York had people talking about his injury problems once more.

His year has been blighted by injuries. It was no surprise to long-term Nadal followers that his knees finally became too painful for him to play earlier this summer. Now you wonder whether the abdominal strain could be related.

I'm no doctor, but it's well known that is trying to compensate for a weak part of the body it's easy to put strain on others.

Certainly Nadal has looked leaner since returning from his knee absence. It could be a factor.

Again, Nadal is too good a player to write off - the tennis he played at Wimbledon 2008 and January's Australian Open is some of the best I've ever seen - but again there are signs that Nadal's best days could be behind him.

mo<

I hope not, but I doubt Del Potro shares my view. Neither will Marin Cilic, another youngster with a power game that looks set to trouble the best in the coming months and years.

His display against Andy Murray was simply superb and while he could only keep it up for a set and a half when he met Del Potro in the next round, Cilic will be there or thereabouts in the future when it comes to thebig prizes.

Of course, Murray himself will be hopeful of getting in on the Grand Slam act, while Novak Djokovic, the same age at 22, seems too good a player not to win another major.

One thing is for sure, it will be interesting to see what unfolds in 2010.

Do you agree with Andy? Is the Federer-Nadal era of domination over? And if so, who can fill their shoes? Email your feedback to tennisfeedback@sportinglife.com.

YOUR FEEDBACK: ANDY MURRAY - posted September 15

You've sent in a mixed repsonse regarding Andy Murray's chances of winning a major following his recent US Open disappointment. Below are some of the views you Net Talkers emailed in. Free feel to add your opinion by emailing the address at the top of the page.

I believe your correspondent has it right, when he mentions the pressure that Andy is under, being the only British player out there. BUT, he has been playing tremendously well and has the results this year to prove it - and the year is not finished yet. Then there is the Oz Open to look forward to and this is the one I reckon Andy can win. This will be his first Grand Slam.
Roland Peach

Andy will win a Grand Slam next year. With Federer on the downhill path and Nadal with his fitness problems, it's only a matter of time for Murray. Murray is a better player than Del Potro, Cilic, Tsonga and co.
Dennis Bradley

Andy Murray will not recover from this last defeat. I honestly believe this time next year he will be around number 10 in the world and will never win a major. He is not mentally tough enough and always plays hoping he can rely on his opponent to make mistakes instead of taking the game to them, his opponents have figured that out.
Martin McCourt

I really struggle with this mentality that someone should win a major. Bottom line is that Andy is an immense talent who has the tactical savvy along with the necessary physical attributes to win matches and tournaments at the very highest level. Can he win a major? Yes he can! Should he win one? Nobody has the right to say anyone should achieve something! One thing I know for sure is that Andy and his team will leave no stone unturned in finding an extra edge that could help improve the probability of him winning that seventh best-of-five-set match in a major.

Let's leave them to it and give the necessary support and confidence that we would all want for ourselves.
Kris Soutar

IS MURRAY FEELING THE PRESSURE? - posted September 10

Andy Murray's style of play is being raked over once more following his latest Grand Slam disappointment at the US Open.

After his crushing defeat at the hands of Marin Cilic in New York, the critics are out to label Murray as a player who is too defensive and one who needs to add more aggression to his play.

Certainly looking at Murray's losses in the majors this season, you can see the point - he's been outhit by Fernando Verdasco, Fernando Gonzalez and Cilic, while Andy Roddick played a more attacking game against him in the Wimbledon semis.

However, what this theory does not explain is how Murray has consistently managed to beat these men - and indeed the vast majority of the leading players - in the regular tour events. Remember no-one has won more ATP titles this season than his five, a figure which includes two Masters 1000 crowns, while his record against the world's best, Roger Federer, remains highlyimpressive.

OK, Murray can certainly improve his game by adding more aggressive tactics but is this really the reason he remans Slam-less?

I feel a simpler more plausible reason could be that he just struggles to handle the pressure of the bigger events.

Clearly I have no way of proving this - and Murray would be a fool to ever admit he struggles with pressure or nerves - but there is some evidence to back it up.

His record against Verdasco, who beat him at the Australian Open, is today won six, lost one. And frankly as well as Verdasco played in Melbourne this year, his tennis was very patchy against Murray.

It's the same story against Cilic - Murray led 3-0 prior to Tuesday but then lost the one that really mattered. He also holds a winning record (6-3) against Roddick.

This week you also had Murray talking of feeling "low on energy" during his clash with Cilic. He had encountered a similar problem in his second-round match.

Perhaps this can be written off as an illness or, as some commentators did in New York, the player misjudging his food and drink intake. Or it could be nerves.

If it was an issue with eating, then surely it's something 'Team Murray' need to address right now. After all, the Scot must be paying his entourage a hefty six-figure sum at the very least. Perhaps he could splash out further and hire a sports psychologist.

Sadly, if you want to put it this way, Murray has been unfortunate enough to come from Great Britain.

Few countries in the world put their sports stars under such pressure to perform - expectations are raised beyond reality by both media and the public at large, while wins are talked up as the greatest things since sliced bread, defeats as a total disaster.

In the tennis arena there's also no-one - literally no-one in the US Open singles draws - to take away any of the British attention. The spotlight falls entirely on Murray.

But that is the reality Murray finds himself in - and it's something he has to deal with.

The fortnight at Flushing Meadows has also shown that Murray must now also cope with the 'next generation' of players on the tour.

Cilic is only 20 and is one of the new breed now chasing down Murray in the rankings. Juan Martin Del Potro, who at time of writing looks a real title threat in New York, is another youngster seemingly destined for great things.

Oh, and that's before you consider that living legends Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal are still very much around.

Finally the good news.

While there are plenty of people out there now saying Murray will never win a Slam, the bookmakers - who tend to get things right more often than not - disagree.

Significant history may be against the 22-year-old - many of the game's modern greats were Grand Slam champions by the time they turned 22, Federer, Nadal, Boris Becker, Pete Sampras and Stefan Edberg to name just a few - but messrs Hill, Coral et al are still convinced it's a matter of when and not if for Murray.

The bookies make Murray odds-on to win a Grand Slam title in 2010 alone.

One email which has landed in my inbox even quotes Murray at 7/1 not to have won a major before 2018, which for all intents and purposes means his whole career.

For those of you not into your betting, that's a long shot.

I hope they are right, but cannot be the only one beginning to fear they are not.

Do you agree with Andy? How do you rate Murray's chances of winning a Slam and what changes does he need to make to succeed? Email your feedback to tennisfeedback@sportinglife.com.

SAFINA: NUMBER ONE ENTERTAINER - posted September 4

There's little doubt that the women's draw has attracted most of the attention at the US Open in its first week.

On Thursday, both Elena Dementieva and Jelena Jankovic, the winners of the two big warm-up events in Toronto and Cincinnati, both fell by the wayside in the first big shocks of the tournament.

But the real media glare has fallen squarely on world number one Dinara Safina, who has twice only narrowly avoided joining her fellow seeds through the exit door.

She's almost certainly feeling the heat generated by the debate over her status as world number one, the fires of which were lit at Wimbledon - not least by closest rival Serena Williams - and are still burning two months on.

Whether she is the rightful number one is an issue I've touched upon previously, but if you've been on the moon of late, Safina has still not won a Grand Slam yet remains top of the WTA rankings.

Certainly something is affecting her game.

As everyone is pointing out in New York right now, Safina looks a million miles from the best player on the planet.

Her problems are perhaps best summed up by her double-fault statistics. In her last three matches, Safina has produced no less than 43 - including three in one tie-break in her second-round match.

Things have been so bad that British Davis Cup captain John Lloyd was even left suggesting Safina end her season early to re-model her serve in time for the 2010 campaign.

I'd put forward another suggestion - consider whether coach Zeljko Krajan is helping rather than hindering.

The Croatian's body language has been even more negative than his client's in New York, Krajan unable to contain his disgust at Safina's diabolical serving.

You don't have to be a sports psychologist to work out it's not the most productive behaviour - especially when your player is the volatile, emotional type Safina is.

I have to admit, there's been something sadistically satisfying about watching Safina's struggles this week.

Like it or not, this is the world number one, yet at times she's looked little better than the players at my local club.

The service problems seems to have unravelled much of the rest of her game and surely better or more experienced players than Olga Rogowska or Kristina Barrois would have made her pay.

However, Safina should be given some credit for her fighting attitude.

In both contests she found herself a set down and in both she was also a break of serve behind in the final set.

Yet the determined Russian still found a way to win and she's certainly provided entertainment for the fans both at Flushing Meadows and on television around the world.

She should also be applauded for her dealings with the media. Having been subjected the same questions over and over again for months now, she's still fronting up - even with her game crumbling around her - with a smile on her face.

I saw one emailer to Sky Sports' coverage label Safina the WTA's "worst ever number one".

That may or may not be true, but there's no doubt she's providing entertainment - I'd rather watch these struggles than the love-and-one wins she was reeling out for much of the French Open earlier this season.

For those wanting that, head to Serena Williams' matches.

Her progress has been smooth and with her title rivals falling or struggling, her position as favourite is hardening - she's now odds on in places.

Everything seems to bein place for another chapter to be written in the Safina/ranking argument in the coming weeks. It will certainly be interesting to hear Williams on the subject should she win a third Slam of the season here.

Even if she does, the Russian will stay at number one regardless of the results in New York.

Let us know your thoughts on Safina's struggles and her position as world number one. Email your feedback to: tennisfeedback@sportinglife.com

Click here for August's Net Talk
Click here for July's Net Talk
Click here for June's Net Talk
Click here for May's Net Talk
Click here for April's Net Talk
Click here for March's Net Talk
Click here for February's Net Talk
Click here for January's Net Talk
Click here for December's Net Talk
Click here for November's Net Talk
Click here for October's Net Talk

E-mail Article Print-Friendly Subscribe to RSS Feed
Post to del.icio.us Facebook

	Latest Tennis Stories
	NADAL SUNK BY SODERLING
	MURRAY TAKING NOTHING FOR GRANTED
	FEDERER FIGHTS BACK TO BEAT VERDASCO
	MURRAY TOO GOOD FOR DEL POTRO
	ANDY MURRAY REFUSES TO CHANGE TACK
	CHAMP DJOKOVIC READY FOR PRESSURE
	FED DISMISSES TALK OF RAFA DEMISE
	MURRAY SET FOR LONDON SHOWCASE
	AGASSI CASE IS CLOSED - ATP
	DEL POTRO HOPES TO REIGN AT QUEEN'S