The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

Special Report

The Last Square

This year's stealth player cruised through the French Open's oddly named quarter-finals. Can he continue, now that his tactics are apparent to everyone?

PARIS -- Who but the French would refer to the quarters in a tournament as the last square? What is this, the Waterloo complex? "La Garde meurt mais ne se rend pas" ("The Guard dies but does not surrender") were the immortal words spoken by the last standing officer of Napoleon's Imperial Guard in the plain outside Brussels, as the Duke of Wellington pursued the assault against an army most of whose regiments were by then retreating in disorder.

And why the quarters, not the semis? Perhaps from the French pronunciation of the two words, les quarts, le carré. Maybe this way they have a better chance of having someone to write about who is showing the flag. They have Gael Monfils on the gentlemen's side, Marion Bartoli on the ladies'. An error in the last edition had her losing in the sweet sixteen; in truth she made it past Svetlana Kuznetsova yesterday in a hard-hitting match to reach the semis, as did Francesca Schiavone, defending ladies' champion, who came back from a 1-6 humiliation by a big Russian girl, Anastasia Pavuchenkova, to take the next two sets, 7-5, 7-5, with a marvelous combination of grit, power, and shrewdness. Miss Schiavone is supposed to be, at 30, "old," and she indeed is a few years older than most of these long-limbed Russian and Dutch girls, as well as Miss Bartoli, but she certainly looked the less worn out at the end.

The issue did not even arise in the Roger Federer-Gael Monfils quarter final match yesterday, though the same age spread obtains. Moreover, Monfils is lighter, taller, and probably could beat Federer in a hundred-yard dash. Against David Ferrer in a thrilling five-setter the other day, he showed what he can do when he wants to catch difficult shots, racing to the net to retrieve drops a couple inches away from their second bounce and zooming from side to side with perfectly timed slides to retrieve Ferrer's killer cross-courts.

But not this time. Federer is the stealth bomber in this tournament, having moved almost un-noticed into showdown time while the herd of independent minds was focusing on Nadal and Djokovic. He seems more fit, more at ease, more eager to be on the court than he was last year, or at the beginning of this year. He has yet to lose a set here, and he continued his record of being unbeatable by Frenchmen.

Doing so, he showed why it is frivolous to imagine that you can shake him with aces. Monfils relied on aces at a few crucial moments in the match against Ferrer, but this is vain tactic against a player who you know is going to get the ball in play much more often than not, no matter how hard you serve it. Federer's own serves are the most accurate in this tournament, maybe in history, and no one seems able to "read" them, to know where they are going until they go there. He uses aces with frightful efficiency, reminding an opponent who got a point or two ahead who is in charge.

Moreover, Federer, who is playing better than at any time since losing his total dominance of men's tennis two years ago, has all but laid bare the strategy he developed for this tournament. Not that he was hiding it, but he might have preferred to be less blatant until meeting Djokovic or Nadal.

It is a strategy of refusing the clay-court staple, the long exchange. Federer can hold an exchange as long as anyone else, but so can anyone else at this stage hold it against him, Murray rather less, perhaps, than the other tops. He therefore has to attack as quickly as possible, getting the ball in play with fast shots, drawing his opponent to mid-court or the net and then passing him. He wants to take away from Djokovic and Nadal the advantage they have in classic clay court tennis. This was effective against Monfils to an almost embarrassing degree, but will it work against Djokovic?

Meanwhile, Rafael Nadal has a tough match coming up against Robin Soderling, who is always strong at Roland-Garros and is itching for a Slam here and showed he is in good form by the ease with which he disposed of Gilles Simon. One or the other goes against Murray or the unseeded Juan Ignacio Chela. The last square, if we think of it as semis, will be full of foreigners. There is no cause to gloat. It is a sad story. The French players are charming, funny, and well-mannered. They put on good shows until their last matches, when they crumbled against a group of players roughly the same age who are simply in another class.

About the Author

Roger Kaplan is a writer in Washington, D.C.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (10) | Leave a comment

Ken (Old Texican)| 6.1.11 @ 10:32AM

Roger,
who gives a sheit?
Our whole way of life is being killed... internally and internationally...
and you keep on twirping about a tennis match.

I'm sorry. I am too busy loading clips.

...Yeah, I take time to take in a baseball game from time to time...with my rifle across my knees.

FOOL!

Myshkin| 6.1.11 @ 6:39PM

As a daily reader and fan of AS I've come to learn Ken that you have an opinion on everything and are pretty positive that you're also right about everything, and while that's a bit annoying, in the end, who am I? But I guess today just galls the hell out of me because there's no real reason for your ridicule. In the end you are like the forces of destruction you decry. No, you aren't nearly as destructive as the culture of death merchants and the tort lawyers, but your mindset is destructive nonetheless. You see, if you don't like something, it's stupid, and as such, I apparently don't have the liberty to just enjoy an article about the French Open. I don't have this liberty because "our whole way of life is being killed", but Ken, enjoying the French Open is part of my way of life. Should I sacrifice this joy because you don't have the spiritual dexterity to acknowledge the terrible danger that surrounds us while at the same time clinging fast to the outrageous optimism inherent in the Faith? You see this is an optimism that allows us the joy of simple things like a fantastic clay court match, while remaining alert to the danger all around. I know the darkness exists; I am alarmed and vigilent against its rapacious need to devour those I love. But the darkness cannot extinguish the Light, so excuse me and the admittedly very few dolts like me who enjoy Nadal's game. In the end your comment is obtuse, lacking in humility, perspective, and ultimately Faith. Your comment betrays a practical atheism that says the outcome is dependent solely on our actions. But Ken, while our actions matter, in fact they matter a great deal, our willingness to believe and because of that belief to experience joy is also of vital importance.

Todd S| 6.1.11 @ 10:09PM

I am with you and I am taken aback by Ken's attitude towards this. Maybe it is time for Ken to take a step back and get a bit of perspective, plenty of other articles to read if you have no interest in tennis. Take time to enjoy life instead of just complaining about everything that is wrong with the world. Mr. Kaplan is a fine writer and is far better than anything on espn to do with tennis and I enjoy reading his recaps. The athletic ability displayed by the likes of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic is astounding not too mention the willpower and total dedication to their craft rarely seen in other sports. I think any real sports fan can enjoy a good tennis match, I dare anyone to watch Djokovic and Federer play on the red clay on a nice HD screen and not be impressed. Tennis like hockey is really enhanced by HD as you can really pick up the ball much better. Look forward to reading Mr. Kaplan's recap of the upcoming men's semifinals and kudos to the Spectator for making it available here whatever obsessed politico's like Ken and RCV think.

replica handbags&wallet;| 6.1.11 @ 11:31PM

www.shop-bag.net

SpiralArchitect| 6.1.11 @ 11:37AM

LOL - Thanks Ken. I was comming here for the exact same reason.

RCV| 6.1.11 @ 7:26PM

Would someone please tell TAS that its readers aren't interested in this incessant tennis chatter. Who gives a flyin'....

replica handbags&wallet;| 6.1.11 @ 11:31PM

Heya..thanks for the post and great tips..even I also think that hard work is the most important aspect of getting success.www.shop-bag.net

weddingdress| 7.5.11 @ 4:23AM

Take time to enjoy life instead of just complaining about everything that is wrong with the world. Mr. Kaplan is a fine writer and is far better than anything on espn to do with tennis and I enjoy reading his recaps.

nike shox| 8.9.11 @ 2:59AM

is good

Scarpe Nike Italia| 8.9.11 @ 11:06PM

is good

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Articles by Roger Kaplan

More Articles From Special Report

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/06/01/the-last-square

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

Greg Sowards Battles Queen RINO

Jeffrey Lord | 5.24.12

We Have To Do Something

Ben Stein | 5.24.12

The Problem With High-Mileage Cars

Eric Peters | 5.24.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

ADVERTISEMENT