Sudden yet Seamless: the enduring charm of tennis

Novak Djokovic's recent Wimbledon triumph is yet another addition to the long list of surprises that make tennis a marvellous game to follow. One could ask, what is unique about surprises in tennis? The appeal of the game lies in the fact that these unexpected results are just so logical and predictable that anything other than these periodic shocks may be construed as uncharacteristic. The talented Serbian is no stranger to Grand Slam finals having won the Australian Open in 2008 and making the US Open final in 2007 and 2010. However, his show in 2011 is nothing short of astounding. After a brilliant display in the Australian Open, he ran up a streak of 41 consecutive wins in 2011 before a defeat to Roger Federer in the semi-final at Roland Garros. Although people cannot be faulted for assuming that the end of the streak would restore the Federer-Nadal domination, there was something different about Djokovic's run. He had defeated Rafael Nadal four times in four ATP finals in a year, a feat even the great Federer could not achieve. Two of these wins came on clay, a surface where Nadal has been near-invincible. To anyone doubting that tennis is just as cerebral a sport as it is physical, the psychological advantage the Serb had over the Mallorcan was perfect evidence. The tennis quality on display in the second set was reminiscent of Pete Sampras' remarkable performance in the Wimbledon 1999 final when Andre Agassi was left high and dry. Nadal, the supreme athlete, was dumbfounded by the angles that Djokovic managed to find with uncanny regularity. It might have come as a shock to many who had seen Nadal hold a 10-2 record in Grand Slam finals till the Wimbledon final, but to me the result was something I was very used to- tennis had always managed to serve these up from time to time.

This was my 20th Wimbledon. Ever since I watched Agassi's heroics in 1992, I had witnessed a remarkable pattern of rise and dominance in men's tennis. Actually, the pattern goes back well into the 1970s. Bjorn Borg's domination of the lawns of Wimbledon was unprecedented in the open era, but after the brilliant display by the brash, yet highly gifted John McEnroe in the 1980 final, it seemed like Borg's time was about to run out. McEnroe defeated Borg in the 1981 final and also in the US open final in the same year, prompting Borg to retire at just 25 with 11 titles. The McEnroe show was not as complete, but the most unbelievable result came in 1985 when an unknown 17-year old German by name Boris Becker burst on the scene defeating Kevin Curren in the Wimbledon final. Becker defended his title in 1986, but was at the receiving end when Stefan Edberg won his first title in 1988 with an exceptional display of serve and volley tennis. Becker and Edberg won the Wimbledon titles in 1989 and 1990, but the signs were clear that their hold on the sport was coming to an end. Sampras, Agassi and Jim Courier were three very different players from the same country. While Sampras boasted an excellent serve and volley game, Agassi and Courier surprisingly possessed a strong baseline game, mostly a feature of clay-court specialists.

The 1993 Wimbledon is fresh in memory as it serves as a perfect example to illustrate the change of guard at the top of tennis. Becker met Sampras in one semi-final and Courier played Edberg in the other. Courier had won the Australian Open and made the finals of the French losing to Sergi Bruguera. Edberg, on the other hand, had a couple of lean years by his standards but was still expected to reach his fourth final. Another Becker-Edberg classic was on the cards, but in what followed, Sampras and Courier dethroned the greats, and ushered in a new era. Sampras went on to win Wimbledon and the US Open in 1993 and added to his Wimbledon count in the next three years. Becker and Edberg quietly faded away although the former won the Australian in 1995 and made the finals of Wimbledon in the same year, losing to Sampras. The giant Dutchman Richard Krajicek stunned the world by defeating Sampras in the quarter-final in Wimbledon 1996 but normal service resumed soon with Agassi also back to winning ways. Sampras won the next four Wimbledon titles, but never quite conquered clay. In Wimbledon 2001, 19-year old Roger Federer from Switzerland eliminated Sampras in a five-set thriller in the fourth round. His sublime groundstrokes and quicksilver footwork were soon to dominate the tour. Infact Federer's 237 consecutive weeks at No.1 is an aberration when the rankings are closely observed. Federer dominated the game between 2004 and 2007 winning 11 out of 16 possible titles. But then, just as people thought he would go on to win everything in sight for the next few years, out came Rafael Nadal, who till then had dominated Federer in clay-court exchanges but never on other surfaces. With his heavy top-spin game and extraordinary physical strength, he destroyed Federer in the French final in 2008, and soon after, triumphed in one of the finest matches in the Wimbledon final. Between 2008 and 2011, the pair won 10 out of 12 titles with Djokovic and Juan Martin Del Potro winning the other two. Djokovic's wins over Federer in the US open in 2010 and the Australian Open in 2011 were shocks, but served notice to the top two that it was no more a two-horse race. The results were sudden but the progress never in doubt. As in many previous cases, the ascent of Djokovic has again reinforced my view that tennis (especially men's tennis) has an everlasting charm that can be attributed as much to the unique pattern of rise and dominance of players as to the skills of those involved..