CAMELOT FANTASIES

Why are the expectations high?  I think they almost always are for a top player and they are indeed there for several if one follows the players.  Pundits/journalists often love to either bury or put the top ones on a pedestal.  And I think the great ones contribute to those expectations rightly or wrongly largely due to their own success.

We do have recent examples.  Lest people forget,  during 2013, Federer was having a poor season after Indian Wells through to autumn, he was under the microscope as would be expected when one is one of the great players, and half the pundits/journalists were saying he was done and dusted due to his age, back, competition, whatever, and just couldn't see him coming back against the likes of the 1, 2, punch of the younger prime players Nadal and Djokovic.  Many of the other half were wishing his form would return to be competitive at the very top but were hedging mostly due to his age.  Then as we saw in 2014, after completing his racquet change and restoring his health, he indeed did come back to compete well at the top, and despite not winning a slam, was good enough in the other tournaments that he still had a chance to be year end #1 before the last tournament.  Expectations from the pundits/press are somewhat more limited now with him then they were in the past (after his huge success from 2004-2007), mostly due to his age relative to the others, but they are still there to an extent depending on how much success he has.  Expectations will probably continue to be pretty high for him at Wimbledon as long as he continues to produce there.

Oh, and by the way, Federer has earned his exemptions from playing in the required masters like anyone else who has earned them.  The rules came in place for commitment players (top 30) long ago, and they basically are:  The commitment players are required to play in at least 8 of 9 masters (MC is optional). One can earn 1 tournament exemption credit for playing over 12 years on tour.  Another for playing over 600 matches, and  another exemption for being over 31 years old.  If you have all 3, you get complete exemption.  I frankly don't understand anyone's resentment of the commitment exemption rule, as it seems as though any player who has earned these exemptions is entitled to them.  I believe Nadal is entitled to at least two exemptions now (12 years and 600 matches).  And just how often has Federer used his exemptions? Miami this year. He played 8 of 9 masters in 2014.  He played 6 of 9 in 2013 and 2012. Then at least 8 of 9, the years before.   So that's 5 in all years he has played (excepting any injuries), and he is 33 going on 34 this year.  Remember, he hasn't had to play in ANY masters 1000 since 2013, but the cash reward bonuses at the end of the year are lucrative, so as long as it fits in with his plan and health, I think he'll continue to play a high percentage of them.

Also, who can forget Nadal's astounding 2013?  Nadal certainly helped raise the comeback expectations himself, after a 7 month absence from the game from his loss at Wimbledon 2012 to Rosol to after the Australian Open in 2013.  7 months gone. No matches, nothing.  And yet, after a few minor clay matches in South America, he came back like gangbusters at Indian Wells and went on from there to roll on clay, including winning his 8th Roland Garros title.  After the blip that was Wimbledon (Darcis), he swept the North American hard court series,  including the US Open.  He ended up as year end #1.  So, in a manner of speaking, his own rather unusual success following a lengthy layoff set the stage for great expectations in the future even after having little or no play.   His long time, almost legendary warrior success of dealing successfully after injuries, mishaps, setbacks only seems to reinforce the expectations, though as he gets older, I think this is misplaced. It can only be getting more difficult for him as time is an enemy of every sportsman.

Unfortunately for him, it hasn't quite come to pass in the same way as 2012-2013.  Instead, in 2014, he returned from his post Wimbledon wrist injury in the fall, which is traditionally, his worst part of the season.  He did not do well, and then there was the appendicitis issue, and did not do well either.  He was playing some matches, but with no reward, and perhaps losing confidence.  So in a sense, it was almost worse than being totally out of action as in 2012.  After the winter break, he played in Doha and was beaten in his first match, then Australia and after a couple of promising early round matches, got dismantled by Berdych in the QF, who had not beaten him in an age - something like 16 straight since 2006 Madrid, if I recall correctly.  Nadal did go to South America again, and finally won his 1st title since 2014 RG, in the minor Buenos Aires tourney against his good friend Juan Monaco.  And we know the latest.  So, in this case, the expectations that he would return and do well have not come to pass, YET, and rightly or wrongly, he is even under the microscope more, as people speculate about what is wrong.  Well, the clay season is almost here, and most hope and feel that this is what he needs to escalate his game, again, raising expectations due to his past tremendous success on the surface.

Djokovic?  Hmm, certainly since his 3 slam year in 2011, many expected that Novak would begin dominating the tour.   Well, as pointed out, it hasn't really happened at the slams. Of course this isn't only due to his "failure" to meet expectations, but with guys like Murray, Nadal, and Federer still in the mix, along with a couple of new winners, Wawrinka and Cilic, it hasn't happened for him at the Slams.  But he still has been the most consistent player since 2011, ending up at Year End #1 every year except Nadal's 2013, where he finished a strong #2.  So many Djokovic fans might say that he is meeting or exceeding expectations in that sense, even if not winning more slams.  Again, because of his success, he is definitely under the microscope very much this year.  Many pundits are saying it may be his best chance to win at RG and even have begun talk about a Grand Slam (prematurely in my opinion).  Well, if he only takes the Aussie Open this year, many might say he failed.  But if he retains the #1 ranking, others will still say he successful.

I see Murray's fall 2013-2014 has very similar to Nadal's fall 2014-2015, or vice versa.   Murray won Wimbledon in 2013, raising expectations for himself even higher, but then had the back surgery in the fall, and his early 2014 level was in and out at best.  Then he lost Lendl, and his level deteriorated more, despite a fair showing at RG before Nadal dismantled him.  He disappointed many of his followers at Wimbledon who expected him to be back near his best after he said he was physically fine, but it was clear his level against top 10 players was not there yet as he had not beaten a single one since the previous Wimbledon.  He would eventually beat a top ten player in Tsonga, and later Ferrer, but he continued his struggle against the top 3, especially the top 2 in Djokovic and Federer.  Even though he showed some promise in winning some minor fall titles, and again raised expectations for a good showing in the season ender, he only won a single match at the World Tour Finals and got his worst career tour beating by Federer.  He made the Aussie Open final this year, but again was well beaten by Djokovic in the final, and again in Indian Wells, so he is yet to reach top level.  Miami has been good to him, so many expect/hope that he will do well there, as well as Wimbledon again based on his past exploits, which lead to those dreaded expectations again.  After his back surgery, I personally feel there should have been some expectations that he may never reach top level again.  Most undergoing back surgery have not. But hope springs eternal as they say.

Even up and coming players have expectations.  Look at Grigor Dimitrov or Dynamitrov as some affectionately have named him.  He was being called baby Fed for quite awhile.  He had some good results and people have had the expectations he would advance to the fore rapidly.  But, he has not.  Some of it is him and his team, some of it is unrealistic expectations, some of it is other players. Thanks to some success and the ATP hype machine, he is one of the young players under the microscope, like Raonic.  Raonic has established himself as a solid top 10 player, but like some others that have hung out there much longer, has not shown it in a slam yet.  From what I've seen in his case, he seems to have more expectations than many pundits do.  That might change with more success, and then he'll come under the microscope.  It was interesting and telling that in a recent interview, Federer was asked if young Coric plays like Djokovic.  Federer's response was basically: "Don't put that on him, please. It's tough enough."  Expectations and the microscope of public and press have indeed hampered many a career, and I think Federer was saying give the kid a chance to get better without the comparisons, and rightly so.

Respectfully,
masterclass