Nole 2011 and Nole 2013

The current number one in the world, Novak (Nole) Djokovic, has had an incredible ride since Serbia won the Davis Cup in the fall of 2010. It was as if the weight of the world had been lifted from his shoulders. The people of Serbia could now celebrate, and Nole could focus on himself.

And he did. Putting together a team he went about one of the most incredible transformations any athlete could go through. First he was diagnosed with a ‘gluten’ allergy which contributed to his almost ‘asthmatic’ condition on court. Then he hired a mentor, a shaman, who righted his mind to make him believe in himself. Then he got in the best shape of his life.

And 2011 was the Year of Nole, winning three of four Grand Slams; going undefeated from the beginning of the year until the semifinals of the French Open where he played a recharged Roger Federer and lost.

Novak’s shotmaking, confident — toeing the baseline confident — allowed him to take many of his opponent’s shots earlier, off the bounce or on the rise, step in and rip his shots. He was dominant from the baseline, dictating the rally, making all other opponents move further, wider and faster.

Nole controlled the baseline. His shots were consistently landing within the last fifth of the court, challenging the best players in the world — no! daring — to do more with less.

Nole in 2011 was the most dominant player who had emerged in quite some time.

How could anyone repeat such a performance? As Rafael Nadal said, ‘it will be difficult to repeat (2011), no?’ And that’s after losing to Nole six times: Masters 1000 in Indian Wells, Key Biscayne (Hardcourts); Madrid, Rome (claycourts); Wimbledon (grass) and the US Open (hardcourts).

In 2012, Nole repeated in Miami and Toronto (they move it each year from Toronto to Montreal) and logged in one Grand Slam, defending the Australian Open. He lost in the finals of the French Open and the US Open, but then played spectacularly at the end of the year and won the Masters 1000 in Shanghai and the ATP World Championships in London.

But it certainly wasn’t 2011. Nole was different, tentative and unable to find a consistent range on his shots. That’s what happens when a player over thinks, over analyzes a moment in tennis. Nole in 2011 just moved and hit. There was little or no cognizant thought behind the magic. It was just unquestioned and all action.

When a player throws too many ‘what ifs’ into sports, he becomes like a Porsche filled with sand: gears begin to lock, instincts begin to freeze, shots have second guesses behind them.

Well 2013 is a different year. And after surviving a stunning 12-10 in the fifth comeback against, Stanislaw Wawrinka, Novak Djokovic has faced challenges head on, found his footing, his match stride, and fondly tastes the Nole of 2011. He is becoming a dominant player who doesn’t question shots anymore, but quickly and confidently steps up and rips to his spots on the court.

The elusive title he has missed and wants is coming up at the end of this month, the French Open. And if there is any question about what he can do on the very slow European red clay, then you only have to go to his performance in Monte Carlo which was in question from day one because of an ankle injury suffered in the Davis Cup tie against the US, where Nole dominated the eight time champion, Rafael Nadal in straight sets.

The first set he was up 5-0.

Our World’s No 1 is beginning to feel it again. And this French Open will be particularly interesting to see which Nole shows up. Personally I think Novak 2013 is looking a lot like Nole 2011. Even after his loss to Grigor Dimitrov in the second round in this past week at the Mutua Madrid Open, he’s still the one to watch as we enter the 2013 French Open.

Enjoy the show.

$weet Maria

What can you say about Maria Sharapova that already hasn’t been said? All I know is if she were on an episode of ‘Mad Men’ it would represent a major plot twist in their portrayal of women. After all, she’d be the star! And women aren’t stars in the Mad Men world.

Maria Sharapova, though, is magnet for Madison Avenue. She’s an Ad Man’s dream because she’s well Maria: outgoing, vivacious, well spoken, dressed for success and model tall.

$weet Maria

Her latest conquest was signing a deal with Porsche. Terrific! I couldn’t think of two brands that go hand in hand better. Porsche, the German automaker, who produces some of the most powerful cars in the world with $weet Maria Sharapova who hammers a tennis ball with force and fury will produce a powerhouse team in the ad world.

Jokingly I tweeted ‘remember don’t text and drive’ as she announced her new venture. I was serious, you know if you get behind the wheel of one of these turbo madmen machines, you you need two hands on the wheel at all times. These boys can jump out of the starting gate and they demand full attention. Unfortunately when you see who actually purchases them, you realize one thing: they have no idea of the power behind these boys. None. And here in the US nobody can “air them out” since we’re confined by national speed laws. No Autobahn here (but there are those who will still try and break local speed records, trust me, with no success.)

The Ad world loves to possess things: ideas, concepts, illusions and most often delusions.

With this deal, they’ve paired two beauties together in one package for us.

Now, you might think I’m being snarky or a little crass, but in reality that’s what Ads are, they play on your emotion, not your reality.

The reality is Maria is accessible under her guidelines on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, and at Sugarpova events, but really no where else. And rightly so, it’s her life!

Porsche is accessible to a high end buyer who wants to show his/her ‘go getter’ attitude. The reality is you can’t drive the car within legal speed limits the way a Porsche should be driven.

In the Hamptons, you’ll see every ‘A’ list-er want to make an entrance, and during the summer season — prime Hamptons — they’ll dress up in their best ride, top down, and ready to be recognized.

Here’s the problem. Maximum speed limit on the roads is 40mph.

A Porsche idles at 40mph.

I remember one sweltering summer afternoon when the major highway leading into and out of the Hamptons was closed to a serious accident. All traffic was diverted to the back roads. And those of us who were lucky enough to appreciate the irony saw the undertow of high society and the locals play out in full splendor: Range Rover, Mercedes Benz, Maserati, Porsche and Mr. Bentley were swimming upstream against current with Corollas, Fords and Hondas, Landscapers, Gardeners, Truckers.

What a beautiful cross section of Americana. And there we were, stuck in the eddies of the back tributaries, local working class neighborhoods, looking at one another in complete disbelief. Locals smiling as ‘A’ list-ers were desperately searching for another stream to peel off and disappear away from anywhere but here.

After all it was cocktail hour.

Me? I just logged in another wonderful memory of the cross section that swims in the same pond.

I couldn’t be more happy for Maria. She worked hard to get to where she is in the tennis world, and her management team has done wonderfully to capture that success selling her photogenic features to the highest bidder.

Let’$ Go! Maria

But you still have to look at the Ad Men skeptically, as I always do, and wonder just wonder how they will forge this newly aligned partnership.

Time Will Tell

Eight straight Monte Carlo Championships. A record of records of consistency, and more importantly, one of dominance, but you’ll get none of those bold Muhammed Ali taunts. No, Rafa will slip around the bigger questions, in an awkwardly humble way.

What Rafael Nadal shows us that he is one the greatest players in the sport who manages to find the desire where most have retired and entered into another career. He’s just that good. And the reason for it is he has the best mind in the game.

What’s the key to his success?

If you were to understand his mind, the training that goes into the eventual way he ‘thinks’ on court, you have to be part Tibetan monk, fully focused on right now, no distactions.

Be. Here. Now.

Imagine your day. Now imagine your day with multiple hats to juggle, as things are going sideways, and then a major earthquake hits? The comedian Steven Wright describes it as ‘you know how you feel when you’re balancing your chair and you’re almost about to fall? That’s my life.’

It’s sort of the life of a professional tennis player as well. You’re faced with enormous challenges and it’s how you think your way through them as you’re executing your game plan, while someone is doing the same. The only difference between a tennis player and a professional boxer is the distance between you and your opponent. The blows can be as powerful, it’s just played out in your legs. And when your legs go, you mind follows.

What separates Nadal from the rest is his unique ability to focus on the ball through all sorts of extraordinarily harsh conditions, under often difficult pain. Look at his hands, tape swirls around each digit like a candy cane; tape circles his bum knee; and the weight of each point creates that infamous ‘scowl’ where Rafa shows he’s part animal.

You see when YOU are challenged, and you’re struggling, it’s easy for you, as a player to drift into your ‘stuff’ a carload of excess baggage that you’ve towed from the beginning of your journey into competitive tennis until present day: good, bad and difficult all are stowed away tightly. How you manage ‘your baggage’ particularly in sport makes or breaks you.

And you know and I know the top players have a pretty strong track record at managing their stuff, stowing it away up in some distant recess of their grey matter, never to let it fall off the shelves.

The up and coming player who learns how to discard any frivolous, extraneous and unneeded thought can actually Be. Here. Now. But he won’t enter the world of Rafa until he wins an unprecedented number of clay court events, season after season.

It’s the player who blames the equipment, the wind, the sun, the crowd rooting against him, who faces the daunting prospect of fighting three competitors: the elements, his opponent and himself who faces the greatest hike up to Mt. Rafa. And it’s a painful journey, particularly if you’re on the opposing side of the slow, slippery red clay court.

Rafael Nadal enters into another world where he only plays your shot during that one point. Then when the point is over, he readies himself for the next point with eternal optimism: this point is mine. Point to point. Game to game. Set to set and game, set and match.

He plays one point at a time and never enters into the last point, the upcoming point or the points ahead. He is literally all in on each and every point.

Rafa’s Mind

He rarely chides himself for a mistake. Blames the wind for blowing too hard, the ball bouncing irregularly, his opponent’s shot being hit too well, no, he’s in it to win it. Period.

If you’re running a marathon, Rafa is pacing you, drafting you, until that moment when he own you.

How do we get that mind?

Sounds easy to focus only on this point. But in practicality we all have to learn how to deal with ‘our stuff.’

And the stuff we carry is lodged in the sum of our experiences, and a little DNA.

In Rafa’s case, his greatest influence is his Uncle Toni who has built ‘life lessons’ into ‘match lessons.’ Part humble, mostly in deference to other’s accomplishments, Rafa lies somewhere in there, navigating press conferences and matches with equal skill, bobbing and weaving around the question about his place in tennis history, often deferring for ‘other’s to judge, not me.’

Uncle Toni had helped craft this mind whose solitary focus is to stay in the point, in the moment and venture no other place.

Tiger Woods has the ’5 Step Rule.’ Hit a shot: good, bad or ugly and he allows himself five paces before he’s focused on this shot. Now we’ve seen Tiger carry his mistake longer than five steps, but nonetheless, you understand what he’s trying to do: minimize your out of the box first response.

Tiger ‘Five Step Rule’

Control your emotion.

Most great athletes in the midst of a game, tournament or a season never allow themselves the ‘highs and lows’ of normal everyday celebration. Some athletes believe that keeping your emotions in check prepares you for the long haul, the roller coaster ride of a game, the seven days in a tournament against different players, or the ebbs and flows of a season.

The more you ‘delay gratification’ the more focused you become on your long term goals. In tennis, season after season can become a ten month blur, with top players players 17-25 weeks, then add Davis Cup, exhibitions, charity events, and post season qualifying events and that number could run even higher. So most of the top players learn how to manage their expectations; train to peak for bigger events and sustain a career for more than the average number of years by hiring a ‘team.’

A whole economy has spawned of ‘teams’ that support a player’s ambition: agent, management, coach, trainer, physio, mental coach, mentor, stringer, etc.

But to afford all of that you have to win. And the pressure to win can consume most players.

Rafael Nadal isn’t like most players, he’s in a category unto himself. And we are the beneficiaries of it.

So enjoy this season, particularly after Rafa’s seven month absence from the game to take care of his knee. It’s going to be another gem as he’s already showed us, enter five events, lose in the final of the first and then run the table, including the prestigious Masters 1000 in Indian Wells.

Now, he’s back in his element on the deep rich red clay of Europe.

Enjoy the show, and learn from the mind of Rafa. It’s the best in the game.

 

My Two Cents

Hard courts hurt my body.

Think about it. You’re at the top of your profession, make countless millions in prize money and even more in endorsements, and you say, ‘I think the tour should consider using fewer hard courts in their calendar, so I can preserve my body.’

My response is simple: learn how to shorten the points and get off the court.

A hard court is the perfect surface. It has a uniform bounce. It has amazing traction allowing players to move quickly, change directions with little or no sliding.

Hard court players learn to play aggressively on the surface, even when it’s slowed down with added layers of sand in the composite during surfacing. It’s the way you were meant to play on a court that allows such great movement.

You can flatten out your groundstrokes to drive the ball through the court making it difficult for someone to track the ball down, or if they do track it down, to time a well struck shot.

A hard court creates an offensive style of play.

But in today’s game, the top tend to play more of a clay court style of play — lengthening the rallies, outlasting a player, hitting multiple shots while never coming into the net to finish the point.

Why?

I have a theory. Too much respect AND no one knows how to close for a finish volley anymore. I’ve harped on this before. Players who are singles players, specialists, who rarely play doubles, are never taken out of their comfort zone: the baseline. But in doubles, not only are you forced to hit aggressively, but you’re forced to take the net away from your opponents.

It’s the nature of the game. The movement in doubles is quick, aggressive, mainly towards the net. And the team that takes the net can force a player — the deeper player — to think that he is playing singles against a wall of offense coming to attack him, opening up holes in their defense, while giving the deep player little or no time to hit a ball through small gaps in the team that’s taken the net.

Doubles, by nature, has short quick offensive points. Doubles players know how to attack, join their partner up at net, and dominate from their tactically strong position.

Singles players are more like distance runners, waiting for the key moments in the match to find a break of serve or distance themselves from their opponent. There isn’t the urgency in singles that there is in doubles.

As a result singles players, particularly today’s singles player, tends to stay on the baseline a majority of the match.

On all surfaces, we’re seeing the same.

But not all surfaces are created equal. Grass (Wimbledon) is a fast surface, short rallies, poor bounces and often forces players to be more offensive. Grass can be difficult to run on as well. When moist, a grass court can be particularly difficult to stand up on.

Clay, on the other hand, is incredibly slow, difficult to run quickly on (because of the thin layer of sand on top of the court or crushed brick on the red clay) which prevents a player from quick bursts of speed. A player must gain balance, then gradually move and adjust to the ball. And if you have a good deal of speed running toward a shot, it is difficult to stop after hitting it. As a result, you’ll slide. When you slide, slows, then you can pick yourself up and make another burst towards then next shot.

As a player who grew up on hard courts, I had to learn how to play (albeit never could master) the clay court game. It’s a game of patience. Because the ball gets heavier as the match moves on, it becomes even more difficult to hit the ball through the court. With a slower ball, a player can track your shot down and force you to hit many more shots than you want to in order to win a point.

It was a steep learning curve. But one that I had to adjust to in my pro career.

Why can’t clay court players learn to adjust their game to the hard courts?

Both Victoria Azarenka and Rafael Nadal have complained about the hard court surface and how it punishes the body.

My suggestion is simple, learn the game of the surface. On a hard court, learn how to utilize the perfect bounce, the great traction and shorten the points. Learn how to finish at net.

Please don’t allow a couple of players (and a host of journalists, I might add) convince you that the surface is bad for the game. It’s not. It’s the player who must learn how to play on the surface, using the appropriate offensive tactics.

And in the case of hard court tennis, a player must learn how to shorten the point.

Increase Prize Money? The ATP Says ‘No!’

Larry Ellison (Oracle Corporation) gave the green light to Ray Moore, ‘increase the prize money for our event.’ Their event the BNP Paribas Masters 1000 in Indian Wells, California would’ve upped the prize money for all Master 1000 events to follow. They were in uncharted territory.

But to do so Ray Moore had to appeal to the governing body of the sport, the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP), whose Board is comprised of three tournament directors, three players and the Executive Director.

As it would play out the three tournament directors decided NOT to accept the increase; the players voted to increase; and the Executive Director abstained from the vote (health reasons).

Motion declined.

Why?

Simple. The tournament directors were defending their turf. More money means having to go out on a ‘fund raising road show’ in search of new sponsors and additional money for their event to match Indian Wells. The Grand Slams (Australian, French, Wimbledon & US Open) have played this one ups-manship with one another for years. The Australian will increase their prize money, then next in line is the French who has to answer the increase or lose a notch, which means Wimbledon will follow; but Wimbledon is more prestigious so it will try and match then add even more to the pool; and by the end of the Grand Slam season the US Open will have to throw the biggest party of them all with the largest increase. Which means the Australian must open next year’s bid (total purse) even higher than the US Open did the prior year.

And the cycle continues. But it’s the Grand Slams. They have the world’s attention because all of the top players will always play their events. The have to, they are the career building events with the most exposure. So the cycle of success is guaranteed because with more money, all the top players, the best sponsors, television — worldwide television rights — now are added to the pot and the stakes can be raised.

But the tier below, the Master 1000 events are a different animal. They thrive on securing the best players, knowing that the players are obligated to play their events, but they don’t have the worldwide recognizability of the Grand Slams, and thus, less television revenue. It’s more of a region by region economic thing.

Then Larry Ellison steps in secures the rights to the Indian Wells event, builds a massive tournament (a third stadium will be added in 2014) that leads off the Masters 1000 series.

Indian Wells is, in essence, the Australian Open in the bidding pool.

The only difference is Larry Ellison is a billionaire and by adding a third stadium to this desert site, he will have matched what the US Open offers by 2014. In short, he’s surpassing our biggest event in the United States with bravado, or as our South American friends would say, jeuvos grandes.

Naturally the three tournament directors on the ATP Board need to protect their turf. They’ve legislated mandatory participation with their Masters 1000 event, so why should they want to compete on that scale. They can’t. Maybe China. Europe is in an economic crisis. Japan and the rest of Asia is struggling. South America is confronted with their own issues: Olympics & World Cup in Brazil alone will tap them out.

So it’s natural for the tournament directors to want to protect their turf.

But it’s myopic.

Our game must expand. We must create a supply of players, future stars who will slide comfortably into the shoes of those who will be leaving the game. Tennis needs new blood. Without it, it will wilt on the vine.

Invariably from all corners of the world we see players emerge out of the woodwork; some are developed through the patient diligent efforts of elite national training programs while other just appear.

That talent needs a place to develop. It needs a place to learn how to compete.

And that’s why the tournament directors on the ATP Board should’ve countered Larry Ellison’s bold increase (which, by the way was structured, to give the first four rounds more money than increasing the winner’s purse. In short, giving more to the early round losers to help them decrease expenses, and maybe increase a team member).

No, the tournament directors should’ve counter with ‘all right if you want to expand your purse, Larry, then we want you to expand the minor leagues of professional tennis, the Futures events.’

Find a metric. Tweak a formula. Measure it in a petri dish. But don’t lose a golden chance to expand the game. Forget about protecting turf. Think more about getting new blood into the ranks.

Because we all know the dirty little secret in professional tennis: the more money a player makes the more he can invest in his team: coach, physical coach, hitting partner, trainer, dietician, sports psychologist, or shaman (Think Nole). Whoever. While the lesser player must fight his way to the top.

Don’t get me wrong I’m not a redistributionist. Earn it. And when you earn it long enough you’ll surround yourself with the people and things which bring about more success.

What I am for is expanding more places for players to play. More tournaments where a player can hone his skill, gain more experience and eventually earn more points.

The problem for the tournament directors is a simple one: rust never sleeps, and current stars will become old injured warriors. The list is long: Federer at 31. Nadal absent for seven months due to injury at 27 in June.

But the world is full of talent that needs to school it’s talent, harness it, shape it, perfect someplace. And when you don’t qualify for the larger tiered events, and their are no smaller tiered events to play that week, then they idle talent will sit.

After all a players career, no matter when they start in the sport, is, on average, seven years.

Go ahead, bargain with Larry. Do a deal. If he really wants to inflate the game, then make it count.

Aussie Open 2013

If you missed the Djokovic – Wawrinka heavy weight match, then you missed the match of the tournament. It, by far, was the most dramatic, unfiltered spectacular tennis of any of the matches.

Novak, the number one seed and world’s number one player, had by far the easiest draw to the final since Rafael Nadal withdrew from the tournament because of a virus. His absence was not lost of Nole who sprinted through his first three rounds until he met an inspired Stanislas Wawrinka, Roger Federer’s fellow Swiss countryman, and his Gold Medal doubles partner (Beijing 2008).

Off court, in Twitterverse as discussion was put out there by the great coach, Nick Bolletieri, who put a nail in the coffin of the one-handed backhand saying, ‘it’s days are numbered.’ I challenged the assertion because quite a few one-handers have done well: Wawrinka, Gasquet, Almagro, and of course the prolific, Roger Federer. I mentioned that the delineating factor in the success of a one-hander is “great timing.”  Robert Landsdorp, the man responsible for Tracy Austin, Maria Sharapova, Eliot Teltscher to name a few has often cited that one quality alone the contributes to the separation of those at the top and the rest.

But I took the challenge even further saying that strategically a two-hander has to be quicker and closer to the ball to hit with the power that Bolletieri asserts is the real difference now. That a two-hander can be jammed on the return of serve, handcuffing a player and preventing them from a full aggressive swing on the ball. And most importantly, a well-timed one-hander can move a two-hander with drives, topspin or a hard hit chip backhand way outside of their comfort zone, extending their arms outside of their reach. Yes, if a two-hander gets close to a ball he will have more power with the second hand to deliver a harder struck ball, but he must — underscore it — be in a great position to accomplish this.

And that was the set up for this match: Djokovic’s tremendous range, lethal forehand and exceptionally powerful two-handed backhand versus Wawrinka’s solid forehand, spectacular one-handed backhand.

On paper is should’ve been Djokovic. But sometimes in this sport, players can find it and when they do they can bring legions of the greatest shotmakers in the history of the sport into one match.

This was Wawrinka’s day.

And believe me there was plenty of drama (see Thoughts from the Fringe : Cheaterenka) in our first Grand Slam of the new year.

As was the case last year, the same two players came out on top this year as well. Novak Djokovic won his third consecutive Australian Open Men’s Singles title beating the Scot, Andy Murray in the final. That accomplishment of winning three straight goes down as the first man in the Open Era of tennis (starting 1968) to have done so.

And since we’re talking records …

Bob and Mike Bryan, twins who are Americans, and fully vested in playing ‘doubles only’ for a majority of their careers set a record of their own by winning their 13th Grand Slam title together they surpass the great Australians, John Newcombe and Tony Roche who had twelve total.

No new records set for the ladies as Victoria Azarenka repeated as the champion of Li Na the 31 year old Chinese woman who captured the heart of the Australian crowds with her lively, spontaneous on air comments in her post match interviews. What a sense of humor!

And English is her second language. At 31, some feel her days are numbered. But when she decided to change coaches, she committed to better conditioning and a more sound approach to sustaining her career for the long term. And when asked during a post-match presser about the new training regimen, she said with a smile, “I didn’t know if I could finish. Yeah. I thought he might have to send for help.”

More to come about the influence of coaches in the game in future articles. But for now, it’s reasonable to say that Li Na is back on track to physically go deep into the Grand Slams and challenge the best, the younger, in the game.

 

Thoughts from the Fringe: Cheaterenka

‘Cheaterenka.’

Wow. You have to have done something really bad to have someone in the stands of the Australian Open take the time to craft a sign for the Women’s Final where Victoria Azarenka played Li Na. But the one fan wasn’t alone in his disgust of the defending champion, on air, on Twitter and around the globe, people were chiming in on just how Victoria Azarenka, the young Belarusian, ranked one in the world, escaped her semi-final match against the young American, Sloane Stephens. After all, Stephens showed us a round earlier that she certainly can play ball, taking out Serena Williams in her quarter-final.

All right, Serena was injured which one, which we knew of, a self-induced sprained ankle in her third round match, and two we later found out about in her post-match press conference where she laid out her case for the real reason she lost to Sloane Stephens, a lingering back injury for the past two weeks. We saw Serena aggravate it, during the Stephens quarter-final running aggressively toward the net, stopping short, then lurching over to extend for a short, weak shot, which she hit for a winner with her two-handed backhand.

‘I mean you’ve seen me play better matches, haven’t you?’ asked Serena to the press corps, searching, I think for agreement, while playing an underhanded ‘well done’ to Sloane Stephens. As you know, Serena NEVER lauds praise on an opponent who has beaten her, EVER. It’s not in her DNA. Some of us think that she could be the largest marketing bonanza since Bo Jackson, but it’s Serena’s edge that keeps her from attaining Sharapova-like numbers for endorsements. Blame Richard Williams. Then start to ticking down the list of people MIA in helping her forge a long-term invincibility in the market. At the top of the list is Jill Smoller her agent, who is more an enabler, than an agent. Think 2009 US Open Toe-gate I where Serena was called for a foot-fault at a key moment in her semi-final match against Kim Clijsters, and then went on a swearing bender threatening the Chinese lines woman that could easily have come out of a Quentin Tarantino movie.

Serena was defaulted. In her press conference, she said, ‘well you know I’m a competitive person,’ but came no where near to an apology for what she said. Never apologized for any of her actions, two days later went on Good Morning America and was ready to ‘move on.’ Still no apology.

The US Open then fined her a record $96,000 for the incident to which she replied on her website, ‘if a man had done it, no way would he have received anything close to this harsh of a penalty.’

Still no apology. Then in the summer of 2010, during an odd series of events, as she claims that she stepped on some glass at a German nightclub, severely cutting a tendon to her big toe. She had an obligation to play against Kim Clijsters in an exhibition, did, and then for eleven months Serena went underground. She promised a full summer of commitments, and pulled, one-by-one, a week out of all events. I called it ‘Toe-gate’ II.

How in the world could your management ever let any of this slide, while the luster of your brand is day-by-day losing it’s lure?

For some reason, there hasn’t been any urgency to rehash the deets with the press corps. Serena deflects with ‘that’s so far in the past, I’ve moved on.’ Unfortunately, so have potential sponsors.

Bo Knows Bo and Bo wouldn’t approve.

Fast forward to complications of a prolonged recovery to toe surgery, foot in a cast, sedentary high heel training for ‘special events’ like the Oscar’s parties, and you’ve got a recipe for disaster which came in the late-winter of 2011 where Serena suffered a pulmonary embolism due to a blood clot and circulation problems in her lungs.

Who manages this girl? That’s the only thing that went through my head. How can you possibly chuck away a season because of carelessness? Unchecked. Unmonitored and left to her own devices, Serena is Serena’s worst enemy. Just read her Twitter feed: unlucky in love; can’t resist this (food), etc.

In the Summer of 2011, Serena makes a miraculous comeback. Talks about the long road to recovery. The shots she had to take to thin her blood out. The complications of self-doctoring. And the shear joy of realizing how great it is to be back in this game again.

Wow. If I was a shrink, I’d think she was bi-polar. Highs are way too high. And lows are painfully low.

But thankfully I’m not. I have the luxury of sitting on a fence and watching the spectacle. The ‘new’ Serena was in tears, happy, thankful, complimentary and well very un-Serena.

That lasted about a month.

Flash forward to the final of the 2011 US Open and Serena loses to Sam Stosur in straight sets and in typical Serena fashion, is called for ‘hindrance’ during an early celebration of a shot she hit for what she thought was a winner, but Stosur tracked it down, looked up at the umpire who agreed, Violation, Ms. Williams, point penalty. Serena wagging finger to the umpire, scolding her, was classic Serena. The old tarnished brand, feisty, competitive and unforgiving.

Hindrance. Rule number 26 in the ITF Rules of Tennis vaguely defines the causes and the penalties of ‘distracting’ or ‘hindering’ someone from fairly playing a point. And when we talk about it, the most egregious violators: Sharapova and Azarenka with their shrills and shrieks as they strike a ball, and verbally follow the ball into another player’s contact point is a clear violation. It’s a distraction to the player on the other side. Don’t get me wrong, a grunt is one thing: tightening the muscles and exhaling upon impact, but shrieking from the point of impact into your opponent’s shot, is not fair.

Yet, the WTA refuses to take a harsh stance. They did it once with Monica Seles. They can do it again with Azarenka and Sharapova. If they don’t the WTA will continue to lose interest from their fan base. Just listen to both men and women talk about the ‘loud noise’ coming from both players and how it’s a ‘turn off’ or ‘I’ve got to mute the TV if I’m going to watch this.’

And that’s either player. But when they play against one another, it’s a disaster. No commentary. Mute. No sound of the ball striking. Mute. Nada. Zippo. Zilch. Not exactly what a sport wants.

Which brings us back to that fateful semi-final match where Victoria Azarenka is playing Sloane Stephens in the semi-finals and just tearing her to shreds, up 6-1, 5-3, Azarenka has five — count them — FIVE match points and she can’t close out the match. Stephens eventually breaks and is about to serve to get back into the second set.

Azarenka, who has had her share of injuries, fainting spells on court, furiously pounds a ball in anger when she loses the game, then proceeds to walk over to the bench, sits down and signals for the trainers to come out to the court because, ‘I can’t breathe … I can’t breathe.’

The point of a medical timeout or MTO is to deal with ‘real’ medical emergencies. Some of the worst violators, though, use it to gain an advantage, slow someone’s momentum, by making a player cool off as a trainer comes out to assist in a player’s “emergency.”

Novak Djokovic, the Serbian, who is the World’s No. 1 player, was the most effective violator who had ‘multiple’ injuries, miraculously moving around his body from ankle to low back to shoulder to neck which came out at the tightest points in the match. That was before he discovered that he had a ‘gluten’ allergy which affected, well, everything.

The young Belarusian surely had seen the miracle of a well-timed MTO. And she took it.

She took it, and another one for a total of six minutes, but never returned to the court until 10 minutes later.

She elucidated later, that it was ‘my bad’ for not taking a MTO a couple games earlier, when she was completely dominating, for a ‘rib that had moved and made it difficult for me to breathe.’

But why six minutes? ‘Well I didn’t want to take my dress off on court …’ But according to the rules, you’re only allowed 3 minutes per injury.

Meanwhile court side, Sloane Stephens is sitting patiently, towel draped around her shoulders, for Azarenka to come back to the court. She’s 19. And it was a rookie mistake not to have the umpire do her job, call the player back from the locker room or take points. It was a rookie mistake for her to not move around, hit some serves, stay loose on the sidelines stretching or whatever instead of sitting and completely losing all her momentum in that last spectacular five match point save and break of serve.

When asked afterwards, Stephens said, ‘seems to be the thing  going around this tournament, the round before and the round before that everyone had one (MTO) so it really didn’t affect me.’

Azarenka comes back to the court, walking fast-paced and ready to rock, proceeds to break serve back and close out the match, breaking Sloane’s serve on a 30-40 point.

Game, set and match, the World’s No. 1.

During her on court interview, Azarenka says, ‘wow that really would’ve been the choke of the year.’ Post-match ESPN interview with Tom Rinaldi, he asks, ‘so why did you leave the court?’ To which she replies, ‘I couldn’t breathe, you know.’

Later, during her press conference, the Belarusian says somewhat defiantly, ‘I didn’t understand his question, I was having trouble breathing. I should’ve taken a it (MTO) earlier but I didn’t, my bad.’ And then later, defiantly, ‘But if someone takes a MTO I never question for what reason.’

On being asked with some players having issues with her grunting, that it’s considered a hindrance, that players are complaining about it (yet no umpire is taking a stand on implementing it), Azarenka says boldly, ‘well, good luck with that (enforcement).’

As Azarenka played her final against the popular Chinese player, Li Na, she took advantage of two moments in the match, one, where Li Na slipped and twisted her ankle, and the second, where Li Na slipped again, and fell on her head creating a concussion where Li Na needed an MTO. During the wait, Azarenka was jumping around, moving aggressively, not wasting a moment to stay warm, to stay ready for the conclusion.

She did, and closed out Li Na in three sets.

Asked afterwards, what was she expecting from the crowd after her ‘controversial’ MTO, ‘to be quite honest with you, I thought it was going to be a lot worse. But you can’t change what you can’t change. You just have to focus on what you can do. And that’s what I did.’

‘Cheaterenka.’

Wow.