Djokovic, Nadal, Chess and Pugilism

===
Chess and pugilism were two words that kept coming to mind as I watched Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal trade mammoth blows in yesterday's US Open final. Chess, because each shot in a rally represented  a minuscule step in a sequence that, if played with clairvoyance, would ultimately lead to an opportunity to gain an advantage in the point.

Yesterday the message was clear, as Djokovic and Nadal blanketed the court with alarming ease: This is not your mommy and daddy's tennis anymore.

At the elite level, today's tennis takes more patience, and consequently, more mental and physical prowess than ever before. A,B,C tennis has given way to a more sophisticated endeavor. What starts as chess morphs into boxing -- pure blow-by-blow brawling -- and back again, often several times before any given point can be won.

Yesterday, on Arthur Ashe Stadium, I believe we witnessed the tennis as a hybrid of boxing and chess metaphor more clearly than ever before. It was the writing of David Foster Wallace that first introduced me to the concept that tennis could be viewed as similar to boxing. I'll be honest and admit that I never fully grasped the boxing analogy -- until yesterday.

During Novak Djokovic's 6-2, 6-4. 6-7, 6-1 victory over Rafael Nadal, the tennis was so brutally physical, the points so long and the intensity so high, that it could only be viewed as combat. It was Road Warrior tennis, the tennis of the future, and as I watched these two gladiatorial antagonists look for ways to grind each other to the brink of exhaustion while simultaneously seeking whisker-thin opportunities to gain an upper hand, I couldn't help but be mesmerized.

It wasn't necessarily beautiful. It wasn't necessarily poetic. But man, was it eye-opening; it was limitless and scary, too.



There was a titanic struggle for the 3rd game of the second set that was difficult to watch. Finally, Djokovic won the game on his sixth break point, but not after 6 lung piercing rallies of 14 strokes or more, including back breaking rallies of 27, 21 and 21 strokes.

This was probably the turning point of the match for Djokovic, and not simply because he'd broken to get back on serve in the set. He'd also proved that he was ready, willing and able to beat Nadal at the very game that he has used to beat everybody else on tour for the last few years.

While Djokovic and Nadal are both fantastic at this tennis as a hybrid of boxing and chess thing, it was Djokovic who proved himself to be the true savant, because while Nadal appeared to be playing the same brand of swashbuckling tennis he always plays yesterday (and doing it quite well, mind you), Djokovic was far better at customizing his brand of chess to suit the vulnerabilities of Nadal.

Each shot that Djokovic hit had purpose. Like a true chess champion, Djokovic thinks not just of the next shot; he thinks of the next several, and where those might lead him. But he doesn't only think ahead. In the heat of the moment he executes each step in his multi-pronged movements with precision. He hits to Nadal's backhand not because he wants to get an error from Nadal, but because he knows if he does it enough he will get a slightly shorter ball that he can be more aggressive with. It's amazing to watch, because while a lot of players probably dream of doing what Djokovic does against Nadal (he's won six straight finals, including two Grand Slam finals against the man), they don't possess a) the variety of shots to do it b) the consistency to do it c) the fitness to do it d) the ability to defend Nadal's gonzo ground game to even make it possible or e) the cojones.

I could go on and on, covering the alphabet several times. Djokovic has literally done the impossible in beating Nadal. Unfortunately for Nadal, he hasn't quite grasped the nature of Djokovic's game the way that the Serbian understands his. He tries to hit harder, be more confident, attack more, believe more -- and he does pretty damn well, too -- but in the end, he hasn't found a systemic crack in Djokovic's armor that he can exploit on a regular basis.

Meanwhile, Djokovic seems to know the types of replies his shots will elicit from Nadal. He thinks it through, and exhibits incredible patience all the while. He bides his time, exchanging mighty blows with one of the best of all time, and when he gets a ball that he can open up the court with, he declares himself the dominant one, taking control of the point and calmly rendering Nadal subservient.

I use the word "miracle" too much for things that are in reality quite routine. But anything I say about Djokovic's performance yesterday simply will not do it justice. His effort was miraculously good, and while he may have been lucky against Federer in the semis, in the final he eliminated the need for good fortune by being simply too good.

I know there have been more dominant performances in Grand Slam finals, and there probably have been more perfect matches played too. But given the stature of his opponent (and his desire to end this losing streak vs. Djokovic), and taking into account the incredible stamina that is required to put a plan like Djokovic's into action, I'd say his performance last night was one of the most remarkable I've ever seen.

Djokovic put the gloves on early, and exchanged punches with Nadal, one of the mightiest players that the game has ever seen. Djokovic put his thinking cap even earlier, and managed a sublime level of concentration throughout this bloody battle, even while taking some serious blows to the body all the while.

It was a convincing show of dominance, and it capped a year that could very likely go down as one of the greatest that tennis has ever seen.

Making Sense of a Match Point Miracle

===
Tennis's version of a "The Shot Heard 'Round the World" came late in the 5th set of the US Open semifinal yesterday, with Roger Federer serving for the match at 5-3, 40-15. Novak Djokovic, about to be bounced from the draw, would later say he gambled, and he would say it with a smile.

But Djokovic's face told a different story in the moments leading up to the madness. A glimpse at the tape reveals a Djokovic who is resigned to his fate. He isn't wearing that lucid glare that we expect future miracle makers to wear. He's not calm, steely or focused; he's just plain miffed, and for good reason. Djokovic had just handed a service break to Federer in the previous game; now here he was, facing tennis's version of walking the plank, about to be aced out of the championship while 23,000 screaming fans cheered for his rival.

Then, POW!, Djokovic unleashed the mighty cross court blast that is destined to be referenced in US Open lore from this point on. The shot was a blur. A meteor. It was not a tennis ball hitting the ocean-blue hardcourt just inside the sideline, it was a ball of gas.

30-40. Still, Djokovic remains on the plank; he's got another match point to wiggle out of. Federer is ready to serve, but what's this? Djokovic is pleading to the crowd for support -- and getting it! He is smiling as Federer prepares to blast another serve in his direction...

When it was all said and done, Djokovic would produce another miraculous return, which would send Federer into a tailspin and breathe enough life into Djokovic to get him off the plank and into the finals by winning the last four games of a 6-7, 4-6, 6-3, 6-2, 7-5 instant classic.

Afterwards, we were left to ponder: How could one shot start such an avalanche of momentum? Did Federer choke, or was Djokovic simply too good? Is Djokovic the luckiest man on the planet or was his strategy of throwing caution to the wind the right one for the moment?

Federer didn't think so highly of Djokovic's gunslinging. "Confidence? Are you kidding me?" he said, when asked if Djokovic's match point meteor was a function of his confidence. "I mean please. Look, some players grow up and play like that...I never played that way...so for me, this is hard to understand how you can play a shot like that on match point."

But Djokovic was still smiling, and still feeling lucky. "Yeah, I tend to do that on match points," he said. "It kinda works."

Not only did it work, it also sucked the confidence from Federer. Seven unforced errors would immediately follow Djokovic's heroics and related crowd-rallying, in the haze that was the final four games of the match.

But Djokovic's defining moment might not have been the impossibly good forehand he hit. His insistence on calling for crowd support before Federer served the second match point might have have been the real shape-shifter. The press questioned Djokovic on whether or not he had crossed a line with the gesture, but Djokovic wasn't taking the bait. "I was trying to get the crowd on my side, and you know, I did," said Djokovic. "At this level you need that in order to win."

"As long as it's sportsmanship, I don't care," said Federer. "I don't know what he did, so it's not an issue."

While Djokovic's first match point may have been pure serendipity, his next shot was a skillful defensive return against a nasty Federer body serve. And it was done with a crowd firmly sensing -- and wanting -- something special from the Serb. Still, Federer had a chance to hit a fairly routine winner and quiet the masses, and failed.

His forehand clipped the tape, landed wide, and the dominoes fell after that, one by one.

"It's awkward to explain this loss because I feel like I should be doing the other press conference," said Federer.

"Well, I would lie if I say, you know, I didn't think I'm gonna lose," said Djokovic.

That is where the psychology becomes so interesting to dissect: if Djokovic hadn't been resigned to losing, could he have hit the shot that enabled him to win? If he hadn't taken the time to win over the fans before the second match point, would Federer have been more decisive on the forehand he missed?

This was the perfect moment where courage and hopelessness overlapped to change the entire complexion of a match. Then nerves and momentum got involved to finish the deal.

And, as is always the case in tennis, timing was everything.

Tuesday's Rainout Will Make Repeating Tougher For Nadal

===
I've chosen the obligatory Jimmy Connors washout video to accompany the bad news that is coming from the US Open on Tuesday. With the rain nixing Rafael Nadal's 4th-round match with Gilles Muller (along with three other men's 4th-round tilts), I immediately wondered the following: Can we really expect Nadal to defend his title by winning four best-of-five set matches in five days? The same goes for Andy Murray, and the other six players who were scheduled to battle for spots in the quarterfinals today.

I just don't know how they are going to get through this. There's rain in the forecast for six of the next seven days and there's no roof.

Then I started thinking: Is there any way that we can get Larry Ellison in so that he could fly all players and ticket holders from New York to Indian Wells?

Excuse me if I sound like an anti-USTA ranter at the moment, but really, it's kind of hard to be anything but at this point. There is no roof at the National Tennis Center, nor is one likely for at least 10 years, and to make matters more complicated, the US Open remains as the only Grand Slam that plays the semifinals and finals on back-to-back days.

That double-whammy has made for more headaches than great tennis in recent years. Super Saturday at the US Open supposedly began for the sake of the fans (let's be honest: it's really more about the advertisers), but does anybody really benefit from having a Grand Slam final played less than 24 hours after the semifinals? It makes no sense, especially when you consider the way tennis is played these days. The points are longer, the matches are longer and the physical rigor of the game is exponentially greater.

With Tuesday's play cancelled, it appears as if the players won't even be fresh when Super Saturday begins, and the advantage has swung decidedly in favor of the four players who are already through to the quarters: Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer, Janko Tipsarevic and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. If rain causes no further cancellations, each will still have to play three matches in five days, but that seems a lot more manageable than the herculean task that the other eight players slated to play fourth-rounders tomorrow face.

Of course, I'm operating under the assumption that matches will be played on Wednesday through Saturday, but we all know mother nature might have other designs. So, here we are, at the mercy of factors beyond anybody's control, in a tournament that has already proved that they care more about TV ratings than ensuring that their finalists are rested and ready to go for the final (I'm all for commercialization, but prefer to draw the line a little closer to the player's wishes).

You do the math, if you can stomach the conclusion: advantage, mother nature.

All we can do now is cross our fingers and hope and pray that an equable solution drops out of the sky with all those raindrops.

US Open: The Top 8 Quotes of The First 8 Days

===
If you were expecting anything other than a fantastic first week at the US Open, then you were pleasantly surprised. As for those of us who live for Grand Slam tennis, we got what we wanted—a week so full of buzz and momentous occasions, you'd need several arms to have enough fingers to count them all.

Enjoy the video above to relive some of the glory of the week that was, then drop below to read the top 8 quotes of the first 8 days of the US Open.

1.  "Definitely not." -- Donald Young, with a wry smile, on whether it was possible that his twitter war with the USTA was a good thing.

2.  "I mean, I'm sure a lot of people were surprised because it was him that was cramping. But Rafa's human. I think some people forget that sometimes." -- Andy Murray, nonplussed, on Rafael Nadal's cramping in a press conference.

3.  "You always want to know what it is precisely? I don't even know what it means, so I don't know." -- Tomas Berdych, perturbed, when being grilled by the press after retiring from his 3rd round match against Janko Tipsarevic due to a shoulder injury.

4.  "I have no idea...that's a silly question. I'm sorry." -- Victoria Azarenka, perplexed, when asked how great the distance is between Serena and the rest of the field.

5.  "I just got out of High School. Yeah, obviously when you play on Arthur Ashe at the US Open it feels a lot different than playing at Blue Valley North High School in May at the state championship." -- Jack Sock, appreciative, on the thrill of playing bright lights, big city tennis.

6.  "That hurts watching, at least for me. I'd be out for a year...life." -- John McEnroe, amazed, on Serena Williams doing the splits in her 3rd round match against Victoria Azarenka.

7.  "I'll call you in a few days and let you know." -- Maria Sharapova, smugly, when asked what she was going to do in order to regain her "A" game.

8.  "Even though I lost the match, it was a good feeling." -- Gael Monfils, touchingly naive, on how wonderful it was to receive a standing ovation after his 5-set loss to Juan Carlos Ferrero.

When You Visit the US Open, Don't Do This

===
Hey I'm all about having a responsible good time over Labor Day Weekend in the good 'Ole U S of A. But I'm also about originality. That's why I don't recommend that you try to copy any of this guy's dance moves when you visit the Open this weekend.

By all means, act like a psycho and dance like a fool on meth, but if you are planning to take off your US Open shirt to reveal that you have an "I Heart NY" shirt underneath—don't do it, because that move is taken.

Can Anyone Stop Serena?

Victoria Azarenka drew the short straw and will have to face Serena Williams in the third round tomorrow on Ashe. Does she have a chance?

===

13 Grand Slams and 14 straight wins add up to a really difficult assignment for No. 4 seed Victoria Azarenka tomorrow. Azarenka is at a career-high ranking, and fresh off her first Grand Slam semifinal at Wimbledon, but those are pretty small potatoes when you consider what she'll be up against tomorrow. 

And yet, if there is anybody in the draw capable of putting a scare into Serena, the 22-year-old Belarusian might be the woman for the job. Azarenka has defeated Serena before (it's a start), and she did it in Miami, a place where Serena had won five of the previous six titles. There's more to the story (isn't there always with Serena?): Williams played the match with her left thigh heavily strapped and later said "It was definitely tough...I'm just glad I made it this far."

Maybe Azarenka was fortunate, but she scored the win nonetheless.

And that wasn't the only time she rattled Serena's cage.

Azarenka has put a scare into Serena twice in Australia too. In 2009 she took an early lead against Williams only to be forced to retire due to dizziness in the second set. Then, there was the memorable and infamous "calm storm" episode, in which Serena was getting absolutely blitzed by Azarenka in the '10 Australian Open, then engineered a Houdini impersonation to win in three sets. 

That might have been the turning point in the rivalry that never was. Azarenka had been making headway against Williams until that point, but following that match one is left with the feeling that it's going to be a long time —maybe an eternity—until Azarenka can stand across the net from Serena and expect to win. 

Sure, Azarenka's got the game to put Serena on the run, and even enough punch to hit through her, but in the end, Serena's true advantage has always been about her Invincible aura more than her vast array of shots or awe inspiring power. When she willed herself to victory against Azarenka in Australia (what was remarkable about the match is that Azarenka didn't choke it away, she was just ambushed by a woman possessed) it was an undeniable symbol of a return to order between the two. 

If Azarenka's window against Serena was open once, it appears to have been closed in January of 2010. It's painted shut now, and Azarenka is going to need to play some seriously courageous tennis to even crack it open again tomorrow, let alone win. 

If their last meeting is any indication, tomorrow's tilt could be a one-sided affair. Williams won 93% of her first serve points in a breezy straight-sets win over the Belarusian en route to the Toronto title in August. 

This week, Serena seems even stronger than she was she won titles in Stanford and Toronto back-to-back in August. She's looked utterly explosive in the first two rounds, covering the court with a quickness not seen for several years, while surrendering a mere three games in her first two matches. 

Azarenka is still a player on the rise, and she's overcome a lot of fitness-related issues to emerge a stronger more mentally composed player. But does she have enough to push Serena, a player who is clearly hungry for Grand Slam glory and all the trappings that come with it? 

I sincerely doubt it. 

Rally 'Round the Flag

===
There is cause for optimism (Recommendation: remain cautiously optimistic to avoid future fallout.) for American women's tennis fans. Now I know some of you are predisposed to finding what's bad in American tennis, but with this burgeoning crop of young tennis players, there is something for everyone to get happy about.

The two youngest players left in the US Open women's singles draw, Christina McHale and Sloane Stephens are from the U.S. Additionally, the youngest player to participate in the women's draw, 16-year-old Madison Keys raised a lot of eyebrows with her near upset of No. 27 seed Lucie Safarova in the 2nd round.

All told, five Americans have reached the third round of the US Open for the first time since 2004, and four of the five are younger than 22.

Do any of them have the potential to win Grand Slams? Hard to say. Will there be life in American women's tennis after Serena and Venus? Apparently so.

Here's a bit of info on this burgeoning crop of young Americans:

1. Madison Keys— Keys was the youngest player in the draw, and she grabbed her first Grand Slam win when she defeated the oldest player in the draw, American Jill Craybas. Lindsay Davenport called Keys the most likely to win a Slam of all the young Americans, citing her size, athleticism, and impressive raw power. Lucie Safarova, who barely got by Keys in the second round, also had high praise for her. "She's 16 years old and is already for sure playing at a top 50 level," she said.

2. Christina McHale— McHale has been making noise all season, but her 2nd round performance against No. 8 seed Marion Bartoli was a real coming out party for the Teaneck, N.J. native. For her to win a well-played match at a Grand Slam against a tenacious player like Bartoli speaks volumes about her potential. She may not pack the wallop of a Keys, but McHale is an enterprising young player who is fit, mobile and intense. While other young players impress with their power or athleticism, McHale impresses with her desire and her mental toughness. She may not be world-beater material, but she could be a very solid pro who spends a lot of time in the top 30 someday.

3. Sloane Stephens— Sloane Stephens has been through a lot in her 18 years on the planet. She grew up never knowing her father, only to become close with him after she turned 13, then lose him again when he died in a car accident in 2009. Because of all this, Stephens is wise beyond her years, and her poise is finally showing through on the Grand Slam stage. She's effortless and smooth behind the baseline, with nice mechanics and deceptive power, but she'll have to learn how to take time away from her opponents by stepping inside the baseline and playing more aggressive tennis to become a consistent threat on the WTA tour.

4. Vania King—The doubles phenom is through to the 3rd round in a Grand Slam for the third time in her career. She'll always be challenged due to her diminutive stature (doesn't the WTA's listing for her at 5'5" 128 seem generous?), but Vania is a solid player with a long career still in front of her.

5. Irina Falconi—Who was that wild woman with an American flag draped around her yesterday on Arthur Ashe? Was it the ghost of Melanie Oudin? No, it was Irina Falconi. "I strongly believe in all that is U.S.A," said the Ecuadorian-born 21-year-old, "and I wanted to represent it and show the world that it's coming. It's coming. No need to wait any longer."

Stay tuned to the third round to see if Falconi can back up her words.

Here are the 3rd round match ups for the Americans:

McHale vs. Kirilenko
Falconi vs. Lisicki
King vs. Wozniacki
Williams vs. Azarenka
Stephens vs. Ivanovic. 

Kvitova, Li and The Infinite Sadness

===

The chaos is starting early in the US Open women's singles draw. In 2 days of US Open play we've lost the 2011 French Open and Wimbledon champions. This marks the first time that three Grand Slam champions from the same year have missed the 2nd round of the US Open since 1971.

Li Posted 54 errors in 2 sets against Simona Halep. Kvitova was not much better. Some would argue that she was worse. The Czech put up 52 in her loss to the Romanian, Alexandra Dulgheru.

Just like Li did on Day 2, Kvitova puzzled onlookers with her befuddling capacity for making unforced errors on day 1. Instead of reining in her shots and taking on less risk, Kvitova was unrelentingly aggressive; she was unrelentingly erratic as well.

Li was no better. Her haphazard ground strokes lacked bite, and she routinely floated simple shots several feet beyond the baseline. Watch the YouTube video above to see the carnage: Li plays one solid, unspectacular point (the first), then proceeds to botch the next 4, inluding match point. At her best, Li was tense and timid. At her worst, she was flat-out pitiful.

To be fair: it's only natural that Li and Kvitova encounter some turbulence at this stage of their careers. Each is adjusting to the new set of expectations that have accompanied their success. Currently, both seem overwhelmed. "Someone like Sharapova or Serena, they're used to that, they know how to budget their time," said Lindsay Davenport, while commentating for the Tennis Channel on Tuesday. "For someone like Li Na, who all of the sudden has all these offers coming in, she's probably doing a little bit too much off court."

Unfortunately for fans, neither did much on court.

Seeing Kvitova reel off six consecutive errors to conclude her match with Dulgheru was a pretty clear indication of where the 21-year-old Czech's game is at. It might still be in England, or perhaps it remains sitting unclaimed at the baggage check at JFK.

Li's game might be in China or in the bottom of her racquet bag for all we know.

The 29-year-old Wuhan, China native was despondent in the press room after her loss, when she spoke openly of her maddening inconsistencies of late. She spoke of telling her recently-hired coach (Michael Mortenson) that she felt her timing was off just prior to taking the court against Halep: "He tell me 'everything is perfect, everything is fantastic," said Li. "I say yes 'everything is fantastic, but I always lose first round.' I mean, this is not fantastic."

Li will turn 30 next February, and is the only Asian player to ever win a Grand Slam.

Kvitova won the Paris and Madrid titles this year, in addition to winning Wimbledon. But she's gone from trailblazer to disconcerting flameout in a matter of months. If her Wimbledon title was her crowning achievement, today's loss was her worst nightmare. On Monday, Kvitova became the first player in Open Era history to lose in the first round of the US Open after winning Wimbledon. According to this piece, the winner of the previous Slam is more likely to win the next Slam than they are to lose in the first round.

Should we be surprised?

It's surprising in some ways, but hardcore WTA fans know it can happen. Li and Kvitova are more proof that the women's tennis is a wild kingdom these days. Past results aren't necessarily guarantees of future results.

The road can be rocky, the pressure deleterious.

Li put it best after her match yesterday, when she said half-jokingly, "tennis is too tough for me."

Why Ryan Harrison Should Hang Out With Heather Watson

Ryan Harrison was his own worst enemy at times in his straight-sets loss to Marin Cilic today. This intrepid tennis writer thinks he has a plan for the hot-headed kid.

===

It occurred to me while I was watching Maria Sharapova take out Heather Watson in a fantastic battle on Arthur Ashe Stadium today, long after Ryan Harrison lost in a very disappointing performance against Marin Cilic: Wouldn't it be a good thing if Ryan Harrison went out for ice cream with Heather Watson?

Before you start thinking I've gone whacko on you, hear me out, as I get into match-making mode.

Throughout the ages men have always learned the finer points about how to behave like proper adults from women. Why should Ryan Harrison be any different? Clearly, the promising young Shreveport, La. native has a little too much Tabasco sauce in his bloodstream, and I think we can all agree on that fact. It was the hot topic around the grounds as play began today, and Mats Wilander and Martina Navratilova, who had the call for Tennis Channel were quick to call him on it, saying that having an "attitude" can be a good thing, but in Harrison's case he was simply taking it way too far.

Oh, Harrison took it far alright. So far that he sabotaged his chances of making his first round match with Marin Cilic competitive by doing so. It could have been a thriller. It should have been a tense dramatic affair. But because of Harrison's penchant for getting his knickers in a twist, it was a dud.

Which is why I'm recommending that Harrison have some ice cream with Heather Watson. Perhaps they could walk a while together and discuss the finer points of keeping your cool under pressure during a match, and behaving like a lady or a gentleman, regardless of the final outcome of a tennis match. I think Watson could talk some sense into the young American, and they both might have some fun too.

They have the same agent by the way (just saying).

Watson was in a similar situation to Harrison's today, but her demeanor was a hundred times better. Watson too, was facing a more experienced, more proven player in a hotly contested match, but when things started to fall apart for the 19-year-old, she took a deep breath, looked inward, and calmly went back to her business.

Much like Harrison, who was getting pushed around in almost every rally by the more powerful Cilic today, Watson was up against a powerful shrieking devil of a foe, but not once did she resort to berating herself, kicking tennis balls or throwing her racquet.

What Watson did was keep battling like a player who loves to compete and is willing to put her thinking cap on and try to find solutions when things aren't going her way. What Harrison did was berate himself and fly off the handle during crucial points of his match, and it hurt his chances badly. What Watson showed us is that she's a player worthy of our respect. What Harrison showed us is that he's a player that has yet to grow up.

When Harrison left the court today, it was hard not to wonder if he's headed down the same road as Andy Roddick in terms of his behavior. Will he ever cure himself of the annoying capacity to act out during matches? Will these tantrums still be hounding the 19-year-old 10 years from now, the way that Roddick's angst saps him as he approaches his 29th birthday?

There's no doubt that Harrison is a player on the rise. The sky is the limit in terms of how high he can go in the rankings. He's not blessed with enormous power like some of the giants on tour today, but his tennis IQ is high, and his game is varied, intuitive and crafty. His serve is dynamite too. But that temper, oh, that dreaded temper.

Meanwhile, Watson may not be the most daunting specimen on the WTA tour, but at the age of 19, she was a picture of calm repose today. Even with the constant pressure that Maria Sharapova was putting on her, she never let her mind wander.

She received a huge hearty applause when leaving the court today, and signed a bunch of autographs with a smile for the fans she had won over. When Harrison left the court, there were only crickets.

I know it sounds crazy, but I think ice cream with Heather Watson could be the answer right now for Ryan Harrison. They could even catch a movie or go to a play. They can do whatever they want, just as long as there's time for Heather to do what so many good women have done for so many confused men over the years.

Harrison hears about his temper over and over but it never seems to sink in. Maybe Watson could be the difference. Sometimes all a man needs is a good woman to tell him how to behave.

I speak from experience on that.

Is Del Potro All the Way Back?

Sure, Juan Martin del Potro is back in the top 20. But is he ready to win another Grand Slam?


===
The Tower of Tandil has been through a lot since he surprised the world (not me, I picked him) by winning the 2009 US Open final. Media barrage and resultant emotional roller coaster? Check. Wrist surgery? check. A drop outside of the top 400? Check. More injuries, including a tear in a hip muscle and a Raonic-like tumble on the Wimbledon grass? Check. Horrible draws that pitted him against the two best players in the world before the quarterfinals in the last two slams? Check.

When it comes to trials and tribulations, the 22-year-old Argentine has had his share. Still, it could be worse. He could be Andy Murray, for one, and be forever associated with falling short, of getting painfully close to the holy grail only to fall apart and trip clumsily over the final hurdle.

No offense to Murray whatsoever, but del Potro has already proven that he can be as good as gold when it really matters. Murray may be known as a member of tennis's "big four" but del Potro is one of only of four players to have actually won a Grand Slam since the 2005 Australian Open.

When you think about it, that's the essence of tennis: magnamimity; coming good in crunch time. Tennis is all about the big points, big sets, big matches, and the even bigger tournaments. Win a bunch of less-than-colossal tournaments and implode in the Slams and you'll never hear the end from discerning tennis fans. Lose until the cows come home and over achieve at the Slams, and you've got a loyal fan base for life (and they'll whistle whenever you take your shirt off just to make you feel sexy).

It is what it is -- to coin a horribly overused slogan -- and now, as the hard court season kicks off in the U.S., what we'd like to know is: when will delpo once again be what he is? Is he ready to play larger than life again?

Health is the big question for del Potro to be sure, but lost in all the nail biting over his recent hip problem, which was a major concern heading into the French and lingered through Wimbledon, is the fact that the wrist is passing tests with flying colors these days. That befuddling wrist was a major concern for the first three months of the year, and del Potro was quick to reveal that he was hitting "in fear"at the time. When I saw him in San Jose, just prior to his first title of the year in Delray Beach, del Potro was tentative, and clearly not playing with the same unbridled orneriness that he possessed in '09.

But his trepidations about the wrist appear to have disappeared in the last few months. He's hitting the ball ferociously once again, and he's showing his teeth again too. Probably more important than the score of his 4th round loss to Nadal at Wimbledon was the fact that the Argentine was quick to challenge Nadal when he took an injury time-out just prior to their 1st set tiebreaker. He was angry, and he let it show. The match didn't break his way, but del Potro's attitude said a lot about where he feels his game his headed.

He's ready to let it all hang out again, and that's a good sign for fans of the big man. He's ready for battle. He's ready to stir it up and play his brand of angry, edgy tennis again. And more importantly, he's not afraid.

If del Potro can stay fit below the waist this summer, he should be a terror come late August. It's been a long, hard, disconcerting road, but the Tower of Tandil might soon be all the way back to form.

And if that's the case, there's no reason to believe that he can't win in New York again.

Court 17 (The Pit!) Will Be Ready For This Year's Open

A new 3,000 seat stadium court, simply called "Court 17," will be ready to go when this year's US Open begins.

(USTA Sketch)

===

I had a conversation with Chris Widmaier, who is the Managing Director of Communications for the USTA, about the new show court on the grounds of the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center.

The word is that the court will be ready for action when the Open begins on August 29.

This is huge for many reasons. The addition of a new state-of-the-art show court means that the Open will now have four showcourts to put juicy matches during week one, a time where many enticing tilts end up sequestered on the less spacious sidecourts.

Here are some of the details of the new court, according to Widmaier:

"When we say a show court what we mean by that is a couple of things. It will have full broadcast operations, it will also have electronic line calling," said Widmaier. "By putting it in the area that we're putting it in (see USTA sketch above for location), we're hoping that we can change some of the traffic flow on the site to better utilize the overall space, and sort of reduce some of the crowding that happens through the East gate and in the South Plaza."

I asked Widmaier about the characteristics of the court, particularly about the fact that the court is actually sunken into the ground by several feet.

"Some people are calling it the pit," said Widmaier. "One of the reasons to do that was to alleviate the sight lines of the structure from outside of our footprint. We are a public park and we are in Flushing Meadows Corona Park," he added. "The thinking there was trying to create a more aesthetic sight line for park users."

While the court will be ready for the 2011 US Open, the USTA is leaving room to make further improvements to the court in the years to follow. "It will be operational in 2011," said Widmaier. "There might be some further enhancements that are added on after the 2011 Open -- they are in the process right this moment of constructing it."

Other things to note:

• Court 17 will be first-come first-serve for all grounds pass ticket holders.
• No official word on when Grandstand and Armstrong will be taken out of commission and/or renovated.

So, great news for the Open, as a 3,000 seat show court will be added to the grounds and nothing will be taken away. As I do the math I can't help but think that this will create more space all over the grounds, giving fans more chances to get close to the action and soak up some Grand Slam ambiance.