Novak Djokovic won the Rome ATP 1000 tournament and became the first player to win Indian Wells, Miami, Monte Carlo and Rome in the same season.
Before the tournament began, The Tennis Review asked five questions about the event. Now it is over, we look at the answers to those questions.
Is Djokovic starting to feel the pressure of being, for the first time, the real favorite at Roland Garros?
It certainly looked like it in his first few matches. Djokovic dropped sets to Nicolas Amalgro, Tomaz Bellucci and Kei Nishikori. Djokovic had not played though since Monte Carlo, and that experienced trio on Clay is a tough one to come up against in your first three matches on the slow red stuff after a break.
On the bright side for Djokovic and his fans, he recovered well from losing those sets and won the deciding sets with some conviction, especially against Nishikori.
In fact. Djokovic got better as the week went on, dismissing David Ferrer in two sets in the semis, and then defeating Roger Federer 6-4, 6-3 in the final.
In that championship match, the Serbian saved break points at 4-4 in the first set, ripped a return winner at 5-4 for break point, and then converted to take the set as he got the better of Federer in a long rally, forcing an error to end the point.
Djokovic may be feeling the pressure, but he is wearing it well in 2015. So far, he has been making history with every tournament win, becoming the first man in the Open era to win five Australian Opens, and the first man to win Indian Wells, Miami and Rome in the same season.
In his trophy acceptance speech Djokovic said he did not know what would happen in Paris, but he was enjoying life now. That seems the healthiest approach. No one knows whether Djokovic will be up to the pressure of being the favorite in Paris and completing the Career slam, but one thing we do know is that it will be enjoyable to see him, if he can produce the tennis he has been showing so far this year, do it.
Does Federer have a serious shot at winning in Paris?
Federer’s appearance in the final was his best showing this Clay season. He may have won the ATP 250 Istanbul event, but went out early in the big ones in Monte Carlo and Madrid. His runner up finish in Rome went some way to compensating for those upsets and tells us the 2009 champion has a serious shot in Paris, but he will need, as all players do, various factors to go his way.
Federer, up to the final, was playing to his strengths, and scored impressive wins over Tomas Berdych and Stan Wawrinka, players he matches up well to when his all out aggression is clicking. He should certainly be able to repeat those wins in Paris, and the draw could deliver them in his quarter and semi in Paris.
The big obstacle is going to be Novak Djokovic. The Serbian had too much depth of shot, too good a strategy, too effective a serve, and is too tough mentally for Federer to do much about on slow surfaces, a familiar story for Federer in big finals against Djokovic- the Serbian has beaten him in their biggest finals since 2014.
Federer would need Djokovic to get knocked out early to have a serious shot in Paris. Or play the match of his life. Both are certainly possible.
Just how much has Andy Murray really improved on Clay?
After defeating Jeremy Chardy, Murray withdrew from the tournament, leaving us none the wiser if he had really improved on the clay that counts- the slow red clay of Rome also found in Paris.
Certainly he has improved on ‘clay’ this year- he won his first titles on the stuff. But Munich is a 250 event, with a higher altitude than Paris, and it is a puzzle he has not won one of those smaller clay events, even a 500 one, up until now. As for Madrid, the high altitude makes the conditions more favorable for Murray.
We already know Murray is good on slow clay- he has two Roland Garros semis to prove it and has contested two epic semis in Rome with Nadal and Djokovic. A trip to the final in Rome, however, would have told us for sure he was a better player on the slow dirt than before.
Right now, all we know is he is playing well on the stuff, nothing more, nothing less, and that is exactly how the world No.3 might want it, too.
Is Nadal really done?
After losing to Wawrinka 7-6, 6-2, in a match in which he held four set points in the first set, Nadal said the combination of the night time slot and Wawrinka had done him in. However, once upon a time, Nadal would have found a way round that, would have found a way to win.
This season, for the first time, Nadal goes into the French Open without a European Clay court title to his name, and the four defeats he suffered to Djokovic, Fognini, Murray and Wawrinka all have one thing in common- they were all over in straight sets.
That is a worrying fact, By the time Nadal was ready to go home, he was ready to go quickly. His opponents were able to impose their game, and he was unable to impose his, even when he had big chances.
Just as worryingly, as was the case against Murray in Madrid, his opponents were able to take advantage of Nadal being very much off his game, and Nadal was not able to win ugly, one of the many factors that have made him such a great champion.
We won’t really know if Nadal is done until we see what happens in Paris. This lead up could fuel him to pull of one more, and it would be a record tenth, Roland Garros title, or it could be the final dying splutters of an engine which has, after one of the game’s greatest runs, finally had enough miles on its clock.
Who else is a threat to the Roland Garros title?
No one really put in a last minute bid as a contender. There were a couple of attempts, but they were shut down not long after they started.
Wawrinka looked like a threat as he brushed aside Rafael Nadal in their quarter-final. He is rarely likely to play a better set on clay than he did in the second against the 9 times French Open champion. He is also, hopefully, rarely likely to play as badly as he did in his dismal showing against Federer , a match that perfectly reflected what a streaky player he is.
Wawrinka could go on one of those streaks in Paris, and the disappointment of that Federer loss might push him to do so, but it is hard to see it happening.
Kei Nishikori also looked good as he took a set off Djokovic, but went away tamely in the third, a microcosm of much of his career.
Commentary by Christian Deverille
Follow The French Open with The Tennis Review.
Sign up to our e-mail mailing list and get notifications of the latest posts.
What did you think of Rome? Please share a comment with us.
thetennisreview 
Leave a comment