She Sliced and Diced and Mentally Overpowered A Champion

Novak and Roger may play tonight, but the real story at this year's US Open is Roberta Vinci and her defeat of Serena Williams. Williams lost in the semi-final to Vinci, known more as an Italian doubles player, and fell short of a calendar grand slam.


Roberta Vinci. Unseeded. Ranked outside the top 40 in the world. Vinci may have lost in the final, but she showed how you beat a champion and a bully. She held her hand up and asked the champion to wait. She turned her back to the vocal shouting. She didn't break down when Serena yelled across the net. The Italian doubles specialist was first to her chair on the changeovers covering her head with her towel. And she hits a slice, one-handed backhand with very little pace and proved that slicing and dicing takes no prisoners.

Rarely in her career have we seen Serena hit a slice backhand, or a forehand for that matter, but this world number one doubles player from Italy forced one of the greatest players of all time to change her game. There wasn't much pace coming from Vinci's side of the court. Brad Gilbert calls her "DaVinci" and she lived up to that name as she sliced, diced, angled and artistically stroked her way to a victory ending a Grand Slam run - a feat only completed by three women previously and just one in the Open Era.

But Vinci changed the mental game as well for the first time ever on this American champion. She won over the New York crowd. Vinci stayed the course. As the match hit two hours, Serena tired but grew vocally louder. Every winner with punctuated with a screaming exclamation point. Vinci took no notice. She's 32 years old - no intimidation here. She's seen it all before. Vinci tossed and served and didn't take note of Serena showing her Nike's dress back straps as she tried to hold up Vinci's march to dominance. Vinci held her hand up when the Champion was ready to serve saying: "Just wait a moment - you make me wait on my serve? I'm gonna make you wait on yours." This Italian was not going to cower. She owned the court. She owned the crowd. And, she won.

The tennis was not stellar. Vinci took Williams out of her comfort zone, with drop shots, sliced backhands and approach shots, volleys and dozens upon dozens of lobs. Serena rarely sees a one-handed backhand - there are only 2 one-handed backhands in the top 100 women in the world. But what we forget is that a one-handed backhand hits the ball much earlier than a two-handed backhand. Serena wasn't prepared for the earlier contact of the ball - the Champion was on her back foot continually even on her masterful forehand. Serena hasn't seen slice like this in years. And she hasn't seen an opponent mentally as strong as Vinci was on this day since Sam Stosur defeated her on the same court in 2011.

Roberta Vinci may have ended a Grand Slam run, but she probably brought tennis back to a reality with a win reminiscent of a McEnroe, Edberg or even a Nastase. Let's see if Roger moves up to the service line on Novak's serve and plays more like a doubles player, reminiscent  of a Bob Lutz or a Stan Smith... or even an Italian doubles player named Roberta Vinci.

A Changing of the Guard at the US Open

Mark it down in your history calendar in our wonderful sport of tennis. Saturday, September 6th, 2014. The day the reign of the Big 4 ended.

The Big 4 alludes to men's tennis and to Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, Andy Murray, and lastly, Roger Federer with his 17 Grand Slam single titles. These four players have won 36 of the 38 most recent Grand Slam titles. On Monday, that stat will be 36 of the last 39. None of the above is in the US Open final.

And yesterday, two of the Big 4 were just plain beaten. Djokovic was simply outplayed on a day where he may have not been at his best wilting in the heat of 90 degrees plus on Arthur Ashe stadium court. Kei Nishikori, the first Japanese player to ever reach a Grand Slam final, with an added day of rest wore Djokovic down over four sets.

Federer couldn't deal with Marin Cilic's serve. In fact, the last game provided the epitaph to the grave: Three aces and a backhand winner down the line. Done.We are left wondering how long Roger will stave off the desire to retire.

So we are left with a final in which CBS Sports loses its coverage of the US Open after 40 plus years and in which, I am sure, ratings will falter without one of the Big 4 playing. But, this is the Open Era, and anything can happen. ESPN takes over coverage of both Wimbledon and the US Open in a tumultuous time in Men's Tennis in which are there are no clear rivalries to market to the public or elder statesmen to revere. It could hinder the growth and popularity of the sport.

That being said, it will be great to see new faces in the final and to see how Nishikori deals with Marin Cilic's serve will be interesting. Nishikori has won his last three matches against top 6 rated players in the world. He is the real deal. Coached by one of the greatest returners of all time, Michael Chang, Nishikori will undoubtedly find a way through the Cilic serve.

Cilic, at 25, is coached by the big server Goran Ivanisevic, himself a Wimbledon champion who also won on a Monday in front of a raucous crowd against a confident Patrick Rafter in the final. Cilic, suspended from the tour last year for a positive test to a banned substance, has returned mentally stronger and playing some of his best tennis.

Back to regularly scheduled programming with Serena Williams today in the women's final. And, Monday night should be a wonderful match between two upstarts who have been waiting a few years on the bench.

The Greatest Player Of All Time... In My Book

So, over the past three months since I put this question out there, I have had people stop me, Facebook me, and write to me with their nominations. I list a few below and the validity of these nominations are truly excellent.

Jimmy's matches were always something special!

Jimmy Connors - Did you see the ESPN movie about the 1991 US Open in which Connors at the age of 39 defied the experts and beat Aaron Krickstein in probably the best remembered match ever in US Open history? Someone asked me this just recently. It changed Krickstein's career forever and was perhaps the greatest match of all time. I was outside the stadium in Flushing Meadows and hearing the electricity in the crowd was unreal. But one match and a comeback at 39 does not make Jimmy the greatest player of all time.

Martina Navratilova some of you have said. She's right there. What a player - going for broke and changing the way women played our lovely game by approaching and coming to net. One of the matches I remember most as a young player was the US Open final in which Martina lost - to Hana Mandlikova. Probably the greatest women's match ever played. But Martina's story behind her tennis is simply amazing. Leaving her communist heritage, moving to the States, breaking the homosexuality border in our sport. We have her to thank for a lot in our sport and in our world. Her persona is one of the biggest in sport. All this while winning 59 Grand Slam titles. Are you kidding me? Oh yes, and 18 singles grand slam titles - that's one more than Big Rog folks.

Oh but wait, Chris Evert has 18 Grand Slam titles as well. Can we include her in the conversation. You sure can. But, for me, she's not the greatest to ever pick up a racquet. She was a grinder from the baseline who outlasted opponents rather than beat them. But, she was a fierce competitor and a truly great champion.

Pistol Pete Sampras - Perhaps the most efficient player ever to play tennis and having just been surpassed by Roger Federer regarding Grand Slam singles titles ever, he is up there in my book too. His rivalry with Andre Agassi was one of the greatest in the history of all of sport. I can remember watching Pete win Wimbledon during my college years and just amazed at how he changed his entire game to win that coveted title.

This is a never-ending debate and I have thought long and hard about it as naming the greatest person to ever hit a ball in your sport is actually quite terrifying in a way!

So who's left?

You've probably guessed it. Serena Williams.

Best Player Ever...In My Book.

Serena has, like Martina before her, simply changed the game of women's tennis. Singlehandedly. We had all heard back in 1996 and 1997 that the younger Williams sister was going to be the better player but, rightfully, many questioned her stamina and desire to win at that young age. Would she live up to the hype and the reputation she was assuming? A big assumption.

She did and she continues to do so. Ok, so she's only 7th on the all-time Grand Slam honor roll with 32 titles to her credit. She's tied with "Fed" at 17 singles titles. I do think she has a few more singles wins in her. But, in this era of open tennis with massive qualifying events, the growth of the WTA over the past 20 years, and tennis rising once again to be one of the most popular sports in the USA and the world, Serena has been at the top of her profession since she turned professional at 14. And honestly, I don't see her grip of the "racket" sliding much. In fact, 2013 was probably her best year ever.

But in reality, her grip should be sliding. Let's put it this way. She won her first professional title in 1998, five years before Roger won his first. She's 32, same as Roger. He's spent more time at the number one spot, true. So has Steffi, Martina Navratilova, Evert, and Martina Hingis. But none of them took years off to fight injury or depression after the murder of a sister. In fact, after her break from tennis and restarting in 2011 after a pulmonary scare, she is 158 wins with 11 losses.

But Serena, and partly her sister Venus, have changed the face of tennis. One-third of all new junior players are either African-American or Hispanic. Television ratings for Serena are some of the highest ratings any sport has ever seen, including American football.

Serena, like Navratilova, had her own demons to overcome. Fighting racial hatred among the predominantly white juniors on the USTA junior tour while living in California and Florida, Serena also fought with her emotions. Personally, I am not a big fan of her personality, but how can you deny she's one of the fiercest competitors to ever take the stage on a stadium court - male or female.

But the main reason for Serena being the best that ever played? Well it's just that. When she is at the top of her game, she simply is untouchable and unbeatable. No one comes close. There is no one who can even come close. Her serve is up there with most male players at 125 miles per hour. Sharapova, Clisters, Henin, Capariati - all of her rivals pale in comparison. Sharapova, for all the love we have of her and how we think she is great, has just won one set since 2008 against Serena. Since 2004 Sharapova has this hallowed record against Serena. 1 win, 14 losses. Hello?

For Serena to be this dominant in a sport (even with her loss yesterday at The French Open) and with all that she has gone through... to accomplish her goals and be the highest paid sports woman in history... in all of sport...it just makes her the greatest all round player of all time.

This week in Paris will be interesting in that if both Venus and Serena win another round, they will have to play each other on the red clay of Roland Garros. Well, my pick will be Serena. But, Venus might have something to say. She has the best record against Serena although it's not a winning record. But I think little sis is just too good.

Roger Federer - The Best Player Ever?

One of my colleagues, Mary, said that she has to hand it to the ESPN commentators covering the US Open. "What other sport can last up to 4 hours with just 2 people to talk about? How can they fill all that time?" You're right, Mary. And, of course, while we were watching the Roger Federer's US Open at the hands of Tommy Robredo two nights ago, the issue whether Roger was the best player was discussed for at least 3 of the 32 games.

I love making lists, and on my list Roger is third. You may ask why. Here's why.

Number One, All-Time Primary Reason. Each and every great player in a sport has a rival, someone who brings the best out of his or her game. One thinks of Ali and Frazier, Bird and Johnson, Nicklaus and Watson. These are storied rivalries. In tennis we've had Navratilova and Evert, Sampras and Agassi... for Federer, that rival is Rafael Nadal. Between the two gentlemen, they have held the top two rankings in the world for close to 4 years, roughly 2005 through 2009. And in such great rivalries it is usually the case the two have close head to head records: Navratilova led Evert 43-37 for example.

Nadal 21 Wins, Federer 10 Wins

This is remarkable. Nadal really has Federer's number. And before you say anything: on each surface. Nadal has won 13 of the 15 matches they've played on clay, 7 of the 13 matches on hard courts and one of their three encounters on grass - that one win in the perhaps the greatest final at Wimbledon... ever.

One can argue with me that you can be the greatest player of all time based on number of Grand Prix wins, based on a sport's domination for 9 years, based on his or her game. I take all those into consideration and they are important. But I would also argue that if one were to be the greatest player in the world that we've ever seen, one needs to have a closer record against a rival. To have lost more than half the encounters begs the question: How can Federer be the greatest player of all time if he can't even beat the rival of his own era?

With Roger's career coming to a close I am sure in the not-too-distant future, I think this question is at the heart of the debate and a great debate it is. Keep thinking about it and perhaps it might help you to come up with your own list of the greatest of all time. I'll let you know who my number one and two are soon - and maybe there's a new one coming down the pike. Let's hope so. We're gonna miss The Fed more than we know once he hangs up his racquet.

Hewitt and Longevity and What Could Have Been...

As Lleyton Hewitt wore down Argentine Juan Martin Del Potro who finally double faulted the match away in a fifth set, I heard a statistic that made me think. The statistic was that it was 12 years ago that Hewitt won the US Open! 12 years ago. For 12 years, Hewitt has been running around, grinding, hitting and playing at the top level. And, he did it again last night.

He moved Del Potro from side to side. He took advantage of his speed and showed Del Potro low ball after low ball for which the tall Argentine had to bend and bend again. Once Del Potro's legs got tired, he started bending from the waist in the fifth set and that was that. 

We forget the longevity of this Australian. 12 years ago. Nadal was 15. Federer hadn't even won his first Grand Slam, and following the horrible events of 9/11, President Bush created the Office of Homeland Security.

Part of this is that Hewitt holds the distinction of being the youngest Grand Slam Champion of all time in the Open era as well as being the youngest player to ever be ranked No. 1 in the world. Few players can last 12 years in a sport which perhaps has the longest professional season and grueling schedule. Hats off to this Australian who has maintained, through injuries, a game that is one of the best in an era.

What is scary to think is how many titles Hewitt would have won over this long career had a certain Roger Federer not showed up and won Wimbledon in 2003. Maybe as many as someone who has been around even longer and has more singles, doubles and mixed titles since her 1999 win at US Open 14 years ago: Serena Williams.

30 Years On And We Still Miss Him: John McEnroe & The Complete Player

I was having dinner with my sister last week and she was asking for events that had happened exactly 30 years ago in the tennis and golf sphere as we are both employed in the country club industry. So, where else to start but type into Google: Wimbledon winners, 1983

John McEnroe defeated New Zealander Chris Lewis. Remember Chris? I didn't. He beat one of my favorite players South African Kevin Curren in the semi final. Lewis was only the second New Zealander to ever make a final and was unseeded. McEnroe ended Ivan Lendl's tournament in straight sets in the other semi-final. Tougher match for sure.

It was a good year at Wimbledon. But what I noted was who won the doubles: John McEnroe and Peter Fleming defeated the American brothers Gullikson. Guess what? Big Mac did the same thing in 1984 taking home the singles title after beating Jimmy Connors in the final. McEnroe and Fleming again won the doubles against Australians Pat Cash and Paul McNamee. That's four Wimbledon titles in 2 years. I didn't look at mixed. The story was there. On the men's side McEnroe and Fleming were just complete players. At the same time, Martina Navratilova and Pam Shriver were doing similar things on the women's side. They just don't make tennis players this complete anymore. When was the last time, I asked, that the men's singles player also won the men's doubles title at Wimbledon? You guessed it. John McEnroe.

Perhaps it's me looking back at the history of the game I love with rose-tinted glasses - I actually wear contacts now for those high school friends who read my ramblings. Perhaps I am not giving enough credit to the players of today - Serena and Venus play the singles and doubles at most of the major events. But they just don't play that many events.

Fleming and McEnroe won four doubles titles at Wimbledon and three at the US Open. All the while Fleming maintained a top-ten singles ranking and McEnroe stayed either at the top of the rankings or in the top three. We wonder why McEnroe is such a great commentator - he was not only a fantastic player, but perhaps one of the most complete players we have ever seen.

If you look back at his time on the tour, McEnroe may be remembered for his behavior, but in reality we should remember him for his fabulous, yet unconventional serve, his simple and effective groundstrokes and his amazing hands while volleying at the net.

To look closely at his forehand, it's so simple and relies on his great eye-hand coordination rather than power. He forfeits any type of a loop backswing, taking the racquet directly back to the low position before he comes up to meet the ball rather flatly, using the pace of his opponent in most cases to hit back with speed. Have a look here:
Perhaps you could out finesse the Big Mac and not allow him to use his power? Only one player was able to do this: Guillermo Vilas who won more matches then he lost against the Big Mac.Vilas was another great who is largely overlooked. He won seven, yes seven, consecutive titles, following Wimbledon right through and past the US Open. Most players today don't play seven tournaments in a similar 8 to 9-week period. Oh, Vilas played doubles too. This was the era of the complete player - on any surface and in singles and doubles and at the baseline and at the net.

This match, against Stefan Edberg, perhaps proves the finesse and yet, the power too with picking winners cross court and down the line by both players. Look at how both exploited the weakness of their opponent and used their own strengths to create and build a point.


The legacy of McEnroe is enormous as we think of his serve and volley game combined with fabulously simple ground strokes. McEnroe remains perhaps the leading example of the complete player and perhaps that is why we either love him or despise him as a commentator. He is perhaps the greatest tennis commentator of our time for the BBC in Britain and back here in the USA with insightful tips and great understanding of the minutiae of a match or point.

When asked to perform an impersonation, Novak Djokovic often mimics Johnny Mac and his unorthodox serve. Djokovic's imitation alone proves just what an icon McEnroe was in his time because in 1983, thirty years ago, Djokovic wasn't even around yet.

The Roman Amphitheatre in Queens - Gladiator

Andy Murray holding the US Open Men's Singles Trophy last night in New York.

Watching Novak Djokovic play in solid blue shorts and shirt, matching his demeanor in this fifth set, I am trying to imagine what Andy Murray is experiencing on the blue New York court where true champions, or shall I say gladiators, survive.

Forget that Andy is the first Briton to win a Grand Slam title since 1936. Forget that he won Olympic Gold earlier in the summer. Andy has been at the door beckoning for a Grand Slam title just as golfer Phil Mickelson waited long and hard for his first title. It becomes a gladiatorial battle within one's self to achieve survival and victory.

I doubt Andy is thinking about Fred Perry and the last Briton winning the US Open at Forest Hills over 7 decades ago. Murray is thinking about each and every point and how he can win it. He says, after the match, he was thinking how he "can get through this match" as a victor. 

Fred Perry with the only grip of the day: Continental

Tennis is broken down to the minutiae of each point, each stroke, each tape-touching ball. We look to Chase Review for the slightest one-hundredth of an inch that the naked eye of a lines-person can't discern...for the final say on a Murray serve in the final game that catches the very corner of the ad court's srvice box.

The swords of each gladiator bear the logo of a world-wide brand, Head. And yet, surely,  tennis is really a mental game aimed at the head of your opponent when there is so little to differentiate a forehand, backhand, or serve between these two players.

Murray serves the 6th game with ease, putting the pressure on Djokovic in the crucial 7th game. In the heat of the 5th hour, this truly remarkable sporting achievement must be something worthy of Nero and the Roman Empire. And Djokovic, starting to suffer physically under the watchful eyes of those in the Coliseum in Queens, loses the game easily leaving Murray to close out the match on serve.

It's over and Murray looks as if he doesn't know what to do with no further play necessary. Since childhood Murray has been pretending, creating and replaying this moment and this scenario in his head. His mind's eye has him hitting a winner, but in reality it's an unforced error by Djokovic. However, in his time working toward this sole objective, there has always been another point, another match, another ball to be struck.

But before the crowd's applause, there is that moment of silence after the last bounce. A stillness.

There are no more points to be played. Survival, success, and victory are odd when finally they are achieved. How strange is it that they leave us all, in sport and in life, a bit bewildered and in awe of ourselves and, perhaps, a bit empty inside.

Americans At The Top of Tennis! Oh, That's Just Doubles

Why Doesn't Doubles Get The Coverage It Deserves?

We are in the middle of an era where the media is harping on about the lack of American tennis players. Hold on folks.The Bryan Brothers are the best in the world in tennis and have been for the past few years. Oh yeah, that's just doubles.

I was so happy to see a photo of the Bryan Brothers winning the US Open on the cover of yesterday's Wall Street Journal. It was a testament, finally, to the dominance of this duo in their respective sport: Men's Doubles Tennis. And, given, that the majority of the viewing public (those with the finances that US Open sponsors American Express, JP Morgan and Chase are all vying for) plays doubles, I am surprised that doubles does not get nearly the television or media coverage that singles receives.

When I go and teach a clinic and discuss how the Bryan Brothers play often I-formation or Australian, most of my students look at me with a dazed look and say: "We've never seen them play." We should feature these brothers - they are simply the best the world has to offer.

Just How Good Are The Bryan Brothers At Doubles?

They are the best ever. Full stop. As Roger Federer can be said to be the best ever with the most Grand Slam singles titles, The Bryan Brothers are the best in doubles, matching that feat. Not only did Bob and Mike Bryan win the US Open this year, they are Olympic Gold Medallists as well. It's fortunate for them their sport offers so many opportunities for glory, but for a super duo like this, with 12 major titles under their belts, they have taken many of the opportunities and have owned the doubles landscape internationally over the past 5 or 6 years.

Rachel Cohen, of the Associated Press, writes that the Bryan Brothers were inspired by the "Woodies" - Mark Woodforde and Todd Woodbridge of Australia, who in their time at the top won 11 coveted Grand Slam titles in the Open Era, which began in 1968. This week, the Bryan Brothers broke that record - one which I personally thought would never be broken as the Woodies simply dominated the doubles court at most major events. You can read Rachel's excellent article here: Rachel Cohen on The Bryan Brothers

The Bryan Brothers are now tied with  Bob Lutz and Stan Smith with four US Open titles.

If you don't remember Lutz and Smith - they won over 40 doubles titles between them and in fact Lutz was number 7 in the world in singles and Smith topped the charts at number 1. They were a dynasty. Now they've been surpassed and yet so few tennis fans even realize.

The Bryan brothers have now won a Grand Slam title each year since 2004. The scary thing? They play doubles so their professional shelf life is longer. The expiration date for doubles players - well don't we all still play it on the weekends? These guys are going to be around for The Olympic Games in Brazil in 2016! I wouldn't put it past them if we see them in 2020 either. What's another 8 years?

Grunts, Groans, Gamesmanship and Grandstanding - The Hindrance Rule

I frowned. I cringed. I found ear plugs. I finally turned off the volume. As Maria Sharapova and Victoria Azarenka hit the cover off the ball, the grunts and the exhalations became louder and more vociferous. I know that the powers that be in the television production trailer could turn down the on-court microphones. But that's not the point.

The point is that, in fact, both Maria and Victoria, are in violation of the Rules of Tennis. Both grunts on each stroke they took were long after their point of contact and therefore are a "hindrance" to the opposing player. The opposing player has the right to play the ball as it approaches without any interference from the other side of the net. A hindrance could be a hat falling off, or a doubles partner hitting a short lob and saying "back, back" to her partner... or a moan or grunt as we saw yesterday.

Before I go into the particulars concerning the semi-final, here is last year's final in which Serena Williams was penalized and lost a game due to an intentional hindrance.



This was a clear intentional hindrance with a shout out prior to Sam Stosur hitting (in this case missing) the shot.

Here is a clip from yesterday's match. You will note that both Sharapova's and Azarenka's grunts are heard long after the ball has crossed the net and are in fact tailing off just as the opponent hits the ball - just like in the Williams/Stosur match above.



Clearly, the grunts are a hindrance just as Serena's outburst prior to Sam's touching the ball. However, the interesting point to be made is whether the grunts are an "intentional hindrance". By the rules of tennis, there is no question. They are. And in fact, a point penalty should be awarded for each occurrence. Rule 26 reads:

If a player is hindered in playing the point by a deliberate act of the opponent(s), the

player shall win the point.

However, the point shall be replayed if a player is hindered in playing the point by

either an unintentional act of the opponent(s), or something outside the player’s own

control (not including a permanent fixture).

In fact, I would argue as a former ATP Tour chair umpire, that the grunts and noises are a deliberate act and an intentional hindrance - if not only for the fact that the volume of grunts goes up on winners and is lower on run-of-the-mill shots. We saw clips yesterday during the match of Maria Sharapova practicing - not a grunt to be found throughout the clip. Therefore, the grunts are in fact not something done unconsciously, but done with an intent to prove a point.

But the second half of the rule is what really should force the chair umpire into action and if I were in the chair, I would look at the second part of the rule to make this decision - "something outside the player's own control." Grunting, or the power to abstain from grunting, are clearly within the player's control to allow the opponent to hit without a hindrance. Therefore, these moans, groans and grunts are an intentional hindrance.

Needless to say the tennis was superlative. But, the gamesmanship was not. And it is gamesmanship, which is what the Rules of Tennis, at their core, try to uphold. I believe that the ATP and ITF should enforce Rule 26 as written and penalize the players according to the code. It would allow me, if nothing else, to enjoy the tennis without ear plugs.

A Class Act - Del Potro and Roddick's Retirement

Having seen Juan Martin Del Potro play at numerous tournaments and in Florida practicing several times, I had always thought he was disinterested in terms of his place in history. However, today, with his win over Andy Roddick, Del Po as he is called generally was a class act and I hope that the youngsters of today were watching as he took a back seat, albeit with a win, and allowed Andy his day on Arthur Ashe court.

Put yourself in Del Po's shoes. You can't win. If you win the match, you are "the loser" as you put the leading American player into retirement. If you lose, you're a loser on the biggest stage in tennis, losing to the 20th seed and ending your own tournament run.

Late in the fourth set, Del Po left a Roddick serve that was clearly out unchallenged. He didn't want to put the crowd on the opposite side of the net along with Andy. The Argentine kept a very quiet vigil on his side of the net and played possibly one of the best matches he has ever played at The US Open. He wasn't fazed by the emotions of the night, nor was he allowing Roddick to dictate the points or the time - he came out when the chair umpire called time and he took the full 25 seconds between points on each point. Calm, collected and poised.

What I found truly gracious was how Del Po simply said to Tom Rinaldi of ESPN after the match during the on-court interview that it was Andy's night and that he should take the microphone. Andy, as expected was emotional. And Del Po stood throughout the speech and the crowd's appreciative applause.

It was a great night on Arthur Ashe Stadium Court and it was a fitting end to a great career and a very good opponent proved why he is one of the classiest players on the tour.

The US Open - Entering A New Frontier & Era

The Stadium at Forest Hills

My first memory of the US Open is when it was held at Forest Hills and the prize money was something in the region of $25,000 for the champion. It was a quaint tournament, having moved to New York from its original home in Newport, Rhode Island, where it had started as The National Championship on grass courts.

I remember the move to Flushing Meadows and the USTA National Tennis Center. As a traditionalist, I was sad to see the move to hard courts, but the crowds and attention the tournament was receiving was forcing the move as it was outgrowing the club setting at Forest Hills.

Jimmy Connors had ushered in a new age with his two-handed backhand, his T-2000 metal racquet, and his brash, loud attitude on the court. Too often we remember McEnroe and his temper and tantrums, but Connors was there first. In fact, Connors is the only player to win the US Open on grass, clay and hard courts. I was lucky enough to be at the Open for Connor's win over Aaron Krickstein in 1991. Connor's 39th birthday couldn't have been more special. It put an exclamation point on his era and then allowed the new boys like Agassi and Sampras to move forward into the limelight for good.

But I think we are at a defining moment in tennis for both men and women. With Serena's dominance on the women's side over the past decade moving into its final years and Roger Federer not as dominant as he has been, we are seeing a host of new players and new attitudes and strategies enhancing the US Open. Interest in the sport is gaining and with matches lasting well into the early hours of the morning, the Open has become a prime-time TV event.

But what is different about the US Open having attended last year and going again this year, is the size of the event. Having been the first tournament with lit courts and being the only Grand Slam to have been played every year since its inception, it is again at the forefront of creating a special event. From the sheer size of its stadia and grounds to the live entertainment off the courts and the massive merchandising machine both on the grounds and through television and internet commercials, the US Open is perhaps now the biggest stage in tennis - bigger than Wimbledon Center Court. Even as a traditionalist, I have to say Wimbledon is far behind the Open in terms of grandness.

I am not sure it's good for the game or not. Time will tell. Perhaps we will look back in years to come and think of the US Open in 2012 in Flushing Meadows as quaint. Perhaps the tournament will move to Los Angeles and truly become a celebrity bash and a paparazzi field day. Perhaps it will grow to even bigger extremes. I am sure the players will be fabulous and the tennis superlative. They are the timeless chess pieces within a commercial marketplace.

That said, I wonder what the courts look like at Forest Hills this week. I still miss the sobriety and solitude of a bygone era.

The US Open Serving It Up Nicely

Perhaps I am more in touch with the matches this year as I grow another year older, but it seems to me that the level of tennis being played at The US Open is stellar earlier in the tournament. Yesterday's match with Andy Murray and Feliciano Lopez was truly an amazing shot-making display and I am enjoying watching Leyton Hewitt right now against David Ferrer

Maybe it's the stories behind the tennis that is adding to this year's tournament and I am seeing the play through rose-coloured glasses. Kim Clijsters finishing her career on court in the mixed doubles tournament... Andy Roddick announcing that his next loss will finish his career...Sloane Stephens making a mark on the women's side from the USA.

I followed Sloane last year as she powered up her tennis game. With a team of fitness and strength coaches behind her, she appears to have the discipline and the self-confidence to be a major part of the WTA Tour over the next year. She certainly shows great speed, agility and form while playing.

Perhaps it is that this year appears to be the year of the older male player - Ferrer... Federer... Hewitt... and Fish. Mardy is pushing his way through the draw and now meets Roger Federer, 4 months his senior - both men being born in 1981. Ah... 1981. John McEnroe was champ on the men's side and Tracy Austin beat Martina Navratilova in the final - 3rd set tiebreaker. I remember the match and I wonder if I will remember this year's final as well 21 years from now. I hope so.

Andy Roddick

I was watching on television last night along with the biggest attendance for an early round at the US Open wondering if this would be Andy Roddick's final match of his career. I was hoping it wouldn't be - losing to a newer kid on the block is not really the way one would like to bow out. Fortunately, Andy won.

Over his career, Andy has been tempestuous and resilient off court. Fabulous and lacking on court. His immense serve probably covered up a few weaknesses early in his career, like a backhand volley. But as he progressed through the ATP Tour year after year, he worked on his weaknesses and made perhaps his biggest impression by winning the US Open in 2003.

But for me, the indelible mark left on his career is the epic Wimbledon final against Roger Federer. If you would like a recap of the match, you can find one here at The Daily Telegraph: Telegraph Recap 2009 Wimbledon Final.

Andy is not my favourite American player - that will always be Pete Sampras on the men's side. But he deserves a great sending off. The media has treated him with disdain at times and yet Andy has been a Top 10 player, and ranked Number One back in 2003, for most of his career. Only a few stalwarts have been able to do that in the last 40 years and you can name them on three hands. Only 15 players have ever been ranked longer than Andy at the number one position.  And, to put that in perspective, Number 12 on the list of length being ranked at number one is the media's darling: Novak.

So, I look forward to watching Andy's next match and fingers crossed that he continues his run here at The Open. I think when history is written in years to come, he will always figure as a commanding performer within his sport and certainly at the arena that is the Open.