The expectation from the New York tennis public, who do not tend to keep their opinions to themselves, will now be that Novak Djokovic will win their tournament, too.
Those blades of Centre Court grass had barely reached the back of his throat, and already thoughts in America were turning to the concrete of Flushing Meadows and whether Djokovic, the new world No1 and Wimbledon champion, will win a first US Open title at the back end of summer.
Given that Djokovic is a more accomplished hard-court than grass-court player, that he has previously appeared in two finals in New York City, and that he has lost only once in his 49 appearances on all surfaces this season, few would be surprised if he ended the grand slam year with three of the four majors in his possession.
Djokovic's victory over Rafael Nadal at the All England Club on Sunday legitimised his status as the No 1, as had Nadal been this summer's Wimbledon champion, he would have won five of the last six slams, and would have held three of the four majors, and there would have been quibbles.
The Sebian's victory over Nadal was about winning another major, to add to the Australian Open titles he won in 2008 and again this January, but it was also about continuing his hold over the Spaniard by beating him for the fifth time in five meetings this year.
No one could refute the argument that Djokovic has been a better player than Nadal so far this season, but should the Majorcan retain his title in New York on Sept 11, the pair would finish the year with two slams apiece.
The bad news for Nadal, Andy Murray, Roger Federer and anyone else, is that Djokovic's game is suited to the Arthur Ashe Stadium. Djokovic's first appearance in a grand slam final was in 2007 at the US Open when he finished as the runner-up to Federer, and last summer he saved match points against Federer in the semi-final before finishing runner-up to Nadal.
Nothing changes faster than share prices in the tennis stock market and now everything looks different again after Djokovic held up the Challenge Cup.
It was after Nadal won last year's US Open, which completed his career grand slam, that it was possible to take the view that he was a greater player than Federer, but life is not so easy for him now. And anyone who once considered that Murray's chances at the slams would come as soon as Federer and Nadal had started to fade has had to rethink. Djokovic's form gives you good reason to think that Federer will need to play at his best to win the US Open, which starts on Aug 29, as otherwise the Swiss is going to have his first slam-less year since 2002.
There is also the small, 6ft 6in matter of Juan Martin del Potro, an Argentine who won the US Open in 2009, and who indicated with his ferocious hitting during his fourth-round match against Nadal on Centre Court that he will be a threat in New York. No one wins 'soft' slams these days.
So, thoughts are already on the other side of the Pond. But, as Djokovic left London, thoughts were also rewinding to the other side of the Channel and to his defeat to Federer in the semi-finals of the French Open, and how that match would have played out had the Serb looked a bit more at ease on the slippery clay on a dank Parisian evening. Or if his quarter-final opponent, Italy's Fabio Fognini, had not withdrawn because of injury, so disturbing the rhythms of Djokovic's tournament.
Had Djokovic won that match, he would have been well placed to have beaten Nadal in the final since he had got the better of him at the two warm-up tournaments in Madrid and Rome, and we could now be discussing the possibility of the first calendar-year grand slam since Rod Laver's in 1969.
At the end of the US Open, the obscure Fognini could turn out to be the player who inadvertently stopped Djokovic from landing the calendar Grand Slam.
0 comments:
Post a Comment