Will Roger Federer’s Arthroscopic Surgery be the End or the Revival of him?

After Roger Federer shockingly announced he underwent surgery on his right knee, the world of tennis woke up. Many suggested the end was nigh for Roger whilst others highlighted his ability to pull off a 2017 Australian Open miracle. Which is the more likely scenario?

1. Age

At 38 years old, nearing 39 when he returns to the Tour, time is running out for Roger. His movement remains exceptional but lapses in concentration and mental strength are plaguing Federer. After under-going another surgery, will his movement also suffer? The tour evolves all the time therefore, at Roger’s age, it could be too late for him to adapt once again to the Tour after numerous months away from competing.

2. Upper-body

Whilst Roger Federer is having another leg surgery, nothing stops him from strengthening his upper body. After his surgery in 2016, it was evident that Federer’s upper body physique had improved and at the Australian Open, he had a tremendous level of power and strength. Therefore, Roger once again has a number of months to improve his physicality for Wimbledon.

3. The Tour

Roger’s extraordinary game of taking the ball early coupled with a few months away from the tour may heighten his advantage at Wimbledon because players will struggle to get used to how he plays again. Being on the Tour and playing many players repeatedly allows players to get used to someone’s game but with a few months out, this can actually be advantageous for Roger.

4. Wimbledon

Roger’s favourite grand-slam is arguably Wimbledon and after being so close last year, we cannot rule out Roger, even after his surgery. The faster surface allows him to close out matches faster although, without much competition under his belt this year, will he able to hit the ground running from round 1? Or will he continuously struggle to find his rhythm like the Australian Open this year? Last year, he had plenty of practise through playing at the French Open and consequently, this improved his Wimbledon 2019 performances. Therefore, we will know from the first three rounds if Roger can win the tournament.

5. Djokovic

Federer’s bogey player appears to be Novak Djokovic. Even if he outplays his opponent, he often loses the mental battle. He can win this year’s Wimbledon, but he has to overcome the opponent he mentally fears most.

6. The Surgery

The key-hole surgery is minor and helping to relieve inflammation of joints and ligaments is nothing too serious. With the procedure being successful, it will most certainly help Roger return to his 2019 form. Without the inflammation in his leg, he may come out with fresh legs for Wimbledon and perform better.

7. Seeding

Roger will be seeded much lower, with many points being lost such as from the Miami title, Indian Wells final and French Open semi-final. Therefore, Roger is going to have a hard draw. Simultaneously, he may go into Wimbledon with very little expectation and we saw how that helped him play freely at the Aus Open 2017. Therefore, the surgery may lower his expectations and help him swing freely at Wimbledon.

8. Ivan Lubjicic

Ivan has proven to be the perfect coach for Roger’s revival in the closing stages of his career. We saw how he transformed Roger’s backhand at the 2017 Aus Open therefore, he can certainly help Roger play excellent tactical tennis. Even though Roger lost the Wimbledon final last year, he outplayed Djokovic for the large majority of the final, something that any player can rarely do. Therefore, Roger has the coaching resources to get himself into the swing of things.

2019 has been a wonderful year for tennis but, lets not forget the darker side of the sport

Five-setters in exhilarating atmospheres, crowds during practise sessions and winning thousands of pounds for first-round appearances. A professional tennis player appears to be the dream job on everyone’s television, right?

What if you were told the below image is an entrance to a lower-tier professional tournament?

Playing tennis at the lower end of the professional tour is far from the glamorous lifestyle that is widely associated with the sport. There are no spectators, linesman or umpires for the majority of lower-tier events. Despite an exciting 2019 for the top ranked players, the sport is still failing to move in a positive direction. 

To become a professional tennis player, an athlete has to break through two barriers. Firstly, the Futures tournaments for players ranked below the top 300, followed by the Challenger Tournaments for players ranked between 100-300. 

The below picture highlights the prize money for the lower-tier Future tournaments. 

For the qualifying rounds, there are a total of 32 to 48 people that compete for 8-12 places in the main draw, leaving 24 to 36 people without any prize money in the tournament. Therefore, nearly half of the players in lower-tier tournaments leave with no prize money. 

What are the costs of playing lower-tier tennis? 

The International Tennis Federation predicted in 2013 that the average costs including stringing, new gear, accommodation and flights came varied from $16,653 to $20,745. Additionally, the ITF predicted that a ranking of 336 was needed just to break even. Therefore, only the top 100 are able to live comfortably. 

It could help transform the lives of lower-tier tennis players and attract more youngsters to take up the sport, knowing they could financially live off the sport. When assessing the level between Challenger and Tour-level players, there isn’t a huge difference at all which raises the question why the majority of Challenger-tour players can hardly live off their earnings. For Future-tour players, their level is lower but still very impressive and some will possess the potential to reach the top ranks of the sport. However, again, without finance, these players will struggle to improve. 

Tennis needs to drastically change in order to help evolve and grow the game in generations to come. Revenue must be spread more equally around the tour otherwise, all the investment, funding and effort in promoting and expanding this popular racquet sport over the last 20 years will be undone. 

Dan Evans- The Working Class Champion that Britain Needs

Dan Evans has had a memorable career so far- a few lows followed by many extraordinary highs. After becoming Britain’s new World Number One, this moment might be his best yet.

Dan’s extraordinary racket-hand skills make up for his smaller stature, an ability that was honed from his days as a squash player at West Warwickshire Sports Club. He developed one of the world’s best slice shots under a superb technical coach at the club and till this day, his slice continues to upset the rhythm of most of his opponents. From playing doubles with Dan at West Warwickshire when I was just 12 years old, I was astonished by how far he has come.

Following Dan’s return on the Tour last year, he played numerous challengers, week after week. It was exhausting just thinking about the number of matches he was playing in such a short amount of time. He had this determination inside of him, everyone could see it. Month by month, his ranking rose and by January this year, he was playing Roger Federer again. He lost in a very close match 7-6 7-6 6-3, but Roger praised Dan, admitting it was like playing in a mirror at times and consequently invited him to train in Switzerland. After a heart-breaking loss in his first ATP Final, Dan returned inside the top 100. From there, he has consistently won matches throughout all of his tournaments and now stands at 43 in the world. It is remarkable to think that he had no professional ranking in April 2018. 

Where does Dan go from here? He has the ability to reach the top 30. His serve reaches 120-mph, his slice neutralises opponent’s power whilst his forehand takes time away from opponents. Dan also has a superb net-game and within the top 100, there are very few with his level of confidence to approach the net and pressurise opponents. 

Why is Dan Evans far more special than most players? He is from a working-class background, something you don’t hear very often in the world of tennis. I am a player from the West Midlands too and cannot fathom how hard it is to become professional without wealthy parents. Dan is a working-class champion in Britain. For many players in the same position as me, he remains more inspirational than the likes of Federer & Nadal because he defied the odds of becoming a successful professional tennis player from a working-class background. Furthermore, most of the current and future world class players in Britain trained abroad. Dan Evans trained in the UK for the majority of his career, making his feat even more impressive. The Birmingham-born athlete is a phenomenon in the world of tennis and his latest achievement should inspire the working class of Britain to pick up a racquet. 

Federer’s Roland Garros 2020 Decision Sends the Tennis World into a Frenzy

Roger Federer gave the tennis world quite a shock in the last few days by declaring his motivation to play at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. However, what comes as an even bigger shock is his announcement to play at Roland Garros 2020! It was a pleasure to see Roger return to the red dirt and reach the semi-finals, highlighting his work ethic at 38 years old. However, despite his return to the clay, most fans were concerned with whether he was over-doing his schedule in 2019. With Federer’s semi-final run at Roland Garros this year, we take a look at the pros and cons of Federer playing at the French Open in 2020.

Let’s talk about the negatives of Roger playing in the event next year. Firstly, he has become even more valuable in the tennis world, particularly because of his age. At 38 years old, closer to 39 when he’s playing on the red dirt next year, his health is such a concern for tennis fans around the world. As timeless as he often appears, the day when Federer retires is looming. After reaching the semi-finals of the French Open, Roger had shown that he was far from a weak clay-court player. He could have won 4/5 French Open’s without a Young Rafa Nadal in his way. Nevertheless, with a long-term back injury, playing at the 2019 French (first time in 4 years) was a major risk to his longevity. At the US Open, it appeared that Federer’s more hectic 2019 schedule took its toll as his back began to give way against Grigor Dimitrov. Given that he has committed himself to the 2020 Olympics, I do feel this is a very risky decision for Federer. He will have to heavily reduce his hard-court schedule throughout the whole year to stay injury free. Given the concerns over his health during a somewhat busy 2020 schedule for Roger, what can the positives be?

During Wimbledon 2018 and for the remainder of the season, Federer appeared to lack match fitness and more importantly, a heavily reduced schedule led to him lacking sharpness in crucial moments. However, after the French Open, a different Roger Federer played at Wimbledon this year; dismantling big server Matteo Berrettini and his long-time rival Nadal. In the final, Federer was a better player for the full five hours against Novak Djokovic even if he lost. His match fitness and confidence had built up over the clay season. His display against Djokovic had he was confident from the start of the match, not to mention believing that he can come back from a set down. He also did not physically tire, even after five hours of play.

In 2020, it’s hard to assess if Roger should play at the French Open. On the one hand, Roger played magnificently at Wimbledon this year because of improved match fitness and confidence. On the other hand, as Federer grows older, he becomes more susceptible to injury and with a full grand slam schedule and the olympics for 2020, he is at risk of a major injury. Tennis fans around the world can only hope that he physically holds on for another year because with his exceptional talent and sportsmanship, the tennis world need a healthy Roger Federer.

Roger Federer Declares his Return to the 2020 Tokyo Olympics to Complete a Perfect Career.

Roger Federer played a charity match against John Isner in Tokyo. If that didn’t satisfy fans enough, Federer claimed in his post-match interview that he will be playing in the 2020 Olympics and returning to the city. He stated ‘‘I carried the flag twice for Switzerland in Athens and Beijing as well, I got a gold and a silver so I’d love to play again, I’m very excited’‘. This was a surprise given his reluctance to commit himself to the event a couple of weeks ago. If he is to return to the Olympics, the chances of Federer playing on clay in 2020 are very small.

Federer has had a near-perfect career. However, despite winning a gold in doubles, a gold medal in singles is missing from one of his hundreds of trophy cabinets. After missing the 2016 Olympics due to injury, Federer’s last attempt was the London 2012 Olympics where he lost in three straight sets to Andy Murray. He was struck with bad luck due to his four-hour encounter with Juan Martin Del Potro in the semi-final. It is strange to see one of the greatest players ever miss out on a gold medal in singles.

Danil Medvedev and Novak Djokovic may be Federer’s biggest threat to achieving the final feat of his career. Danil has been playing superb for the last few months, reaching 6 finals in 6 tournaments and winning 3 of them. He has the athleticism, big serve and even the intelligence to beat Federer. Meanwhile, Novak Djokovic has also never won a gold medal in singles and will be motivated to achieve this feat ahead of Federer. His emotions after a tough loss to Del Potro in 2016 suggest he has the passion & desire to win medals for his country. In 2020, Djokovic will be equally as hungry as ever to win one of the few feats that eludes him.

Given Federer’s dominance on grass, his chances will be even slimmer on hard courts next year at the Olympics. Additionally, he will put all of his energy into Wimbledon and be just 2 weeks away from being 39 years old. It will be his final attempt at winning the singles gold medal in the Olympics, can he pull a Houdini at the 2020 Olympics?

‘I do not think the Big Three took tennis to a new level’- Michael Stich

Those were the words of the former world number 2 who won 18 ATP Singles titles on the tour. Stich believed the Big Three did not have tough opponents hence their domination at the Grand Slams since 2003. He also commented on the variety of the game nowadays, suggesting the current era does not have the Borg’s, McEnroe’s or Laver’s and lastly commented on his hopes to see more variety of players coming through.

Were Roddick, Ferrer, Moya, Ferrero, Safin, Hewitt, Haas, Agassi, Berdych, Tsonga, Cilic, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Davydenko and Murray weak opponents? During the 1990s, the era that Stich referred to as a tougher, included players such as; Courier, Edberg, Muster, Bruguera, Ivanesvic, Kafelnikov, Chang, Rafter, Enqvist and Becker. Agassi and Sampras were arguably the most dominant players of this period. Were the 90s opponents tougher than the competition that the Big three have faced? I do not think so and I am sure most of the tennis world disagrees too.

The top 30 players in the current era are far more competitive than in the 70s, 80s and 90s. The tennis world will always remember players such as Monfils, Tsonga, Fognini, Bautista Agut, Simon, Kohlschreiber, Verdasco, Lopez, Almagro, Robredo and Youzhny among many others. Aside the top 5 players of other eras, which players are remembered for being talented, having flair and competitive against the top players? Very few, if any. Most people can only remember players ranked in the top 5 such as McEnroe, Borg, Lendl, Becker and Edberg. Therefore, not only have the Big Three been challenged by top 10 players, but they have continuously proven themselves against dangerous players in the top 30 in tournament after tournament.

The Big Three have also managed to fight through three generations to stay on top, something that has never been achieved before. One could argue that they have the nutritionists, fitness trainers and physiotherapists monitoring them all the time, something that never happened back in the 1980’s and 1970’s. However, the game was less physical in the past so it does balance itself out. Unlike McEnroe, Sampras, Becker etc, the Big Three continue to adapt and evolve in their careers which is far from easy. If the Big Three weren’t special, why haven’t the new generation of tennis players replaced them? The 70’s, 80’s and 90’s players have all failed to compete against younger generations. For example, Sampras’s decline came through the arrival of baseline tennis. If Sampras was as great as the Big Three, why couldn’t he adapt his game? The Big Three have tamed the likes of Raonic, Goffin and Dimitrov’s generation and even more impressively, particularly from Federer’s angle, tamed the next-gen players. When the Big Three play big serve and volleyers, they keep the rallies going. If they face young baseliners who have quicker court coverage, they keep the points shorter and use more net-play. All three players have different styles of play and yet are able to adapt to any opponent they play.

Their ability to change their game between matches and evolve on the Tour will never be matched again. For Stich to suggest that their competition was easy is an untrue statement. They have faced such a variety of players and have come through every-time and unlike previous champions, the Big Three appear to evolve and adapt their game to stay at the top. Lastly, most of the greatest matches ever involve the Big Three highlighting their extraterrestrial level at times. With tough players looming inside the top 30 in the current tennis era, the Big Three’s achievements become even more impressive.

After Andy Murray’s latest defeat, he must adopt Roger Federer’s game-plan

Andy is one of the best defensive players of all time; he sprints, scrambles and anticipates attacking shots, often frustrating his opponents. His transition from defence to attack was down to his superb physicality but, he doesn’t have that physicality anymore. As we saw with Hewitt, a counter-attacking player who had a similar operation, he no longer possessed the strength he once had.

If Hewitt couldn’t return to the top, why do I believe Andy can? Andy has a 6’3 frame and therefore covers the court pretty well regardless of how quick he’s moving. For Hewitt’s size, he often had to use every ounce of himself around the court. Secondly, the sky is the limit for Andy whose natural ability is often under-rated compared to the Big Three. He has the game to beat them but mentally, he can let himself go. After his latest defeat to Thiem, he has to evolve his game if he wants to return back to the top.

All of Andy’s matches have been gruelling so far and whilst his recent wins are encouraging, he cannot afford to play this style of tennis if he wishes to extend his career. He has done far more running than his opponents and against the new upcoming players, they will simply keep the ball moving side to side. How has Roger Federer, at the age of 38, managed to keep one step ahead of the older and younger generation of players? After Federer’s knee surgery, one game-plan became apparent; attack, attack and attack. He flattened his backhand, came to the net on any given opportunity and attacked from the first ball off his sublime serve. He’s moved away from the baseline game because he no longer has the speed at the back of the court. However, he makes up for this with intelligent play such as serving out-wide and moving to the net to cut off the return and varying the spin on his shots to increase the probability of his opponents making errors.

What can Andy learn from his game? Firstly, Murray was fantastic in doubles. For a singles player, his volleying is very good and is forehand volley is actually technically better than Federer’s. Roger just has immense balance which makes up for it. Murray must start using more net-play to finish points off quicker. However, net-play can only be built around aggressive groundstrokes that allow him to move into such court positions which brings me onto my next point. Murray loves the conservative, baseline play however, the game is becoming more physical hence, with a metal hip, he needs to keep rallies short. He has to take risks and use his fantastic return to dominate rallies. Under Lendl, we saw a very attacking Murray and guess what? He obtained his greatest accomplishments and was a real thorn in Djokovic’s side. We all know Andy’s talent and IQ is a notch above all players and is on par with those of the Big Three. With a metal hip in place, Andy has to be bold and evolve his game like never before if he wants to reach the top again.

The Unexpected Yet, Inevitable Return of Andy Murray

With 45 singles titles to his name, including two olympic gold medals and three grand slams, the sky was the limit for Andy. However, after limping out of Wimbledon 2017 and undergoing a hip operation, many believed his illustrious career was drawing to a close. After watching an emotional interview in January that foreshadowed an end to his career in 2019, sadness reigned over the tennis world as the Big Four now became the Big Three. However, miraculously, Murray’s five-set marathon match against Roberto Bautista-Agut at the Australian Open had revived his desire to continue playing- ‘I don’t know if I’ll see you guys again but, I’ll do everything possible’.

From that moment, tennis fans around the world knew Andy wasn’t going to go down without a fight, as he so often demonstrated throughout his career. After his triumph at Queens in doubles, Murray still appeared to be lacking the movement he once had. Following this, he began his return to singles by playing a challenger tournament, losing to the world number 240. His movement had improved but, he lacked match fitness. A month later, Andy finally wins his first tour-level match in an over a year against Sandgren before going down to De Minaur in three physical sets. Andy was on his way to playing at a top 100 standard, he just needed to sharpen his game slightly.

For Murray, the China Open proved to be the big break through and removed any certainty that he may never come back. Andy had a tough first round opponent against the in-form World Number 13, Matteo Berrettini, who reached the semi-finals of the US Open last month. Very few would have picked Andy as the winner but as the match wore on, Matteo struggled to break through Murray, whose consistency was superb. In two tie-breaks, Murray pulled through. When Andy attacked, he did far more damage to his opponent than scrambling around at the back of the court. His next match against Britain’s Cameron Norrie was also a physically tough encounter and whilst Andy prevailed 7-6, 6-7, 6-1, he cannot afford to have such physical matches.

In both matches, he has done a substantial amount of defending from the back of the court in the hope of getting a mistake out of his opponents. However, in the third set against Norrie, Murray kept the points much shorter and began attacking more because of his fatigued condition. He won that set 6-1. When Andy was coached by Ivan Lendl, he began hitting the ball flatter, harder and also, took the initiative in most points. Who does this sound similar to? Roger Federer. Federer had surgery in 2016 and throughout 2017, we saw that he could no longer waste energy on earlier rounds; coming to the net much more, going for the winner on the first shot after his serve and hitting his backhand with little spin. He now plays very aggressively with very few rallies going beyond 10 shots. Murray must observe Federer’s new game-style and adopt elements from it because he cannot play the defensive, counter-attacking style he once did. Moreover, his volleying technique is superb, as seen through doubles, so maybe he now needs to vary his game with more net-play to finish points off quicker. Defending at the back of the court and putting his all out there will certainly get him into the top 100. But, if he wants to become top 10-20, he has to take more risks, add net-play and win cheap points on his serve. This style of play will also reduce the risk of the hip problem coming back.

Overall, to see a healthy Andy playing on the tour again is more than a blessing for the tennis world. If he wants to play 5/6 more years, he must start shortening points and dominating his opponents quickly. As Murray said in his match v Norrie- ‘I’m absolutely f*****’, summing up how he needs to change his game and prevent every match from becoming extremely physical.

Why Britain Needs More Futures Tournaments to Produce World Class Players

Futures Tournaments are the lowest pro-circuit tournaments that enable players to obtain an ITF or ATP ranking. Between 2006-2015, Futures tournaments ranged from 15-23 per year in Britain. However, from 2016 to 2019, they have rapidly decreased from 11 to just 6 per year. This article will argue why the LTA must start holding more Futures Tournaments in the UK once again.

With just six Futures events in Britain this year, British players have less opportunities to progress onto the professional circuit, particularly those from poorer backgrounds who cannot afford to play abroad. Dan Evans, a current top 50 player with remarkable talent, was playing at the lower end of the circuit when there was an abundance of Futures in Britain. He predominately played in the UK for financial reasons and despite becoming a world-class player now, it took Dan 18 attempts to record just one win in the main draw of a Futures. With over 15 Futures every year in Britain from 2006-2010, Dan had plenty of opportunities to succeed without incurring great financial costs.

Dan was fortunate enough to have some LTA support but for other working-class players, they now have more pressure trying to gain an ATP ranking from less than six events per year in Britain. In contrast, players from elite/middle class backgrounds have plenty of chances to play abroad and thus, the probability of them gaining more ATP points is higher. Consequently, they receive LTA funding over lower-ranked working-class players. Ultimately, more wealth means more chances to play Futures abroad and thus secure LTA funding. With the case of Dan Evans, had there only been 6 British Futures per year in the UK during the start of his career, he may have struggled to rise up the rankings. Therefore, there needs to be more Futures events in Britain to nurture talented working-class players.

For James Ward, one of Britain’s best players in the last decade, he had only two main draw wins (given wildcards in Main Draw) out of his first 46 Future events. Although these were abroad, it does highlight that even some of Britain’s best talent can take longer to adapt to professional tennis hence, more Futures leads to more homegrown talent coming through. Furthermore, Joshua Goodall reached a career high ranking of 184. Despite his parents re-mortgaging their house five times to help support his career, he could no longer earn a living out of the sport, retiring at just 27 years of age. Josh was one of Britain’s best players for years and played in the Davis Cup but, his rise in the rankings came through playing many Futures events every year in Britain. Therefore, the importance in having regular Futures events is that it allows more British players to become comfortable with the standard of professional tennis. Consequently, semi-professional British tennis players will find it easier to transition to the pro tour.

So what has replaced the Futures tournaments in the UK? British Tours. These are national events that include qualifying. There around 20-30 in the U.K. every year but very few of them give prize money. If there is prize money, its often less than £200 for the winners. Therefore, there is a greater financial burden on semi-professional/professional tennis players in the UK with less Futures and more British Tour events. They are often scattered around the country, such as in Felixstowe and Frinton-on-Sea, where Futures were once located. Therefore, very good players with high LTA Ratings often incur travelling costs without any benefits. Have these British Tours led to more players successfully moving to the professional circuit? No, in fact, it has led to many high rated players being stuck in a void; strong national players that lack the opportunities/finance to reach the international level. These British Tour players have the potential to earn a professional ranking but, have little chances in the UK.

The two highest ranked upcoming players in Britain are Jack Draper and Aidan McHugh. Jack’s father was former CEO of the LTA hence, Jack has the financial support and the contacts to succeed, reaching the top 400 at just 17 years of age. Aidan McHugh, a player whose parents are a GP and a Geriatrician, also has the financial support to cope with the demands of tennis and has Andy Murray as his mentor. However, Jay Clarke is working-class and has done tremendously well, ranked consistently inside the top 200. But, his siblings held professional rankings hence, he has a great team around him. Nevertheless, I cannot see any other working-class British players coming through the ATP rankings unless they are heavily supported by the LTA or their families are involved in tennis. Annually, if there are only six Futures events in Britain in years to come, I cannot see many home-grown players breaking into the sport professionally.

A Round-up of Day Two’s Spectacular Matches at the Laver Cup 2019

Just when you thought Day One provided the most exciting matches, Day Two exceeds them! Let’s take a look at each match in detail.

1- A Typical Zverev v A Typical Isner

Before coming into the match, most fans would have anticipated that Zverev’s level would fluctuate at some point against Isner given his performances in 2019. Contrastingly, Isner’s serve provides such a strong foundation that regardless of how well he plays off his groundstrokes, he remains a consistent threat. In today’s match, both Zverev and Isner served extremely well in the first set leading to a tiebreak. Sascha’s surprisingly consistent game paid off as he took the first set 7-6. In the second set, Isner had to dig deep into Zverev’s service games to make him nervous. Once Sascha is nervous, he collapses. John began hitting heavy groundstrokes to Zverev’s forehand and eventually found the break, taking the second set 6-4. In the championship tie-break, Isner won the first 6 points with attacking high-risk tennis coupled with Zverev’s nerves and floppy, weak forehands. Isner stole the match with a 10-1 tiebreak win. This match sums up Zverev; mentally fragile during the crucial moments. Isner played well, adapted his game and took risks.

2- The Blockbuster Match- Mr Angry v Mr Cool

If there’s one player Kyrgios has always struggled to reach the finish line against, its Roger Federer. Heading into the match, Kyrgios had found form and composure over the last few months whilst Federer significantly declined since his heartbreaking Wimbledon exit. It appeared that Kyrgios could finally win a singles match against Roger at the Laver Cup. Despite Federer being the better player throughout the first set, apart from a poor service game that gave Kyrgios the break-back, a tie-breaker was looming over both players. Federer lost all three of his tie-breaks to Djokovic at Wimbledon whilst Kyrgios has his reliant serve to back himself. However, Federer stormed to a 4-0 lead before losing 5 points in a row. After losing the first set 7-6 (5), it almost felt normal for Federer to lose such a lead after his terrible break-point conversion and inability to win close sets/matches over the past year.

Under scoreboard pressure through the second set, Kyrgios appeared to have the match in his hands and was waiting for a poor Federer service game to arrive; it never arrived. Federer found a burst of energy and somehow broke Kyrgios at 5-5. He then served to take it to a championship tie-break.

Could Federer lose five tie-breaks in a row? After being 2-0 down, Federer began utilising his inside out, down-the-line forehand because Kyrgios was far slower at moving on the stretch to the forehand side. After establishing a 9-4 lead, Kyrgios reduced the deficit to 9-7. Federer then closed it out. Kyrgios was devastated because he played a great match yet, Federer somehow stuck in there physically and mentally to pull off the win. For Federer, this was a monumental win that could help raise his confidence for 2020. He showed that he was physically and mentally tough enough to beat a motivated Kyrgios. Remember, not many players can beat Kyrgios when he is hungry to win. Therefore, Federer still has it within himself to stay at the top of the game.

3- The Forgotten Milos Raonic v The Best Fighter In Our Sport

Milos has become a quiet player in the tennis world. At his peak, he challenged the Big Four far more than any other player did but unfortunately, he’s had physical woes. Meanwhile, Rafa’s confidence would be through the roof after his US Open victory, but was he physically 100%? After saving 8 break points in the opening 5 games, Rafa was clearly hungover from his US Open title. Raonic failed to seize the opportunity and was punished; dropping his own serve and losing the first set 6-3.

The second set finally saw Raonic obtain what he deserved, breaking Rafa’s service game. However, uncharacteristically, he was broken back straight away (Rafa is in the top 5 for breaking opponents straight back in 2019). It headed towards a tie-break after both players held their service games convincingly. In the tie-break, the difference between winning many matches and losing many matches became apparent. Rafa ruthlessly moved Raonic everywhere with a large margin for error and it paid off, winning 7-1 in the tie-break. Would the scoreline have been completely different if Raonic managed to convert at least half of his break-points? Quite possibly. 1/9 break points converted is simply not good enough for Raonic but, he did have the right game-plan. I suspect Kyrgios will pull off this game-plan tomorrow. Overall, Rafa fought as hard as he could and pulled off the win!

4- Nadal/Tsitsipas v Sock/Kyrgios

Afer finishing his singles, Nadal had to return for doubles, giving Team World the advantage. That advantage was consolidated as Team Europe lost their serve early on. Tsitsipas and Rafa kept crouching right up to the net in the middle of the court. However, this strategy should only be played by doubles pairs who have played together for a while. Neither player were very good at committing to a side off the return when adopting this strategy and thus, Nadal and Tsitsipas lost the first set 6-4.

In the second set, Tsitsipas found his rhythm on the returns, making Sock and Kyrgios play every point and eventually, that pressure seeped through as Team Europe took a commanding 5-1 lead but closed out the set at 6-3. In the championship tie-break, Team Europe looked as though they’d edge Team World yet, a few bad points by Tsitsipas, including a smash that wasn’t hit hard enough, cost Team Europe. One could tell Nadal was no longer able to lift up his team-mate and consequently, Team World took the tie-break 10-6, keeping them within touching distance of Team Europe heading into Day 3. Stefanos appeared to lack confidence at times and although he grew into the match, he was prone to occasional lapses. His strokes also fail to penetrate the court like they used to and also, his serve is barely reaching 200 kmh (he doesn’t have the placement of Federer on the serve). Rafa was the better player but, Kyrgios/Sock were the favourites given Sock’s grand slam expertise, Kyrgios’s soft hands at the net and his ability to read the game.