TENNIS.com gear editor Justin diFeliciantonio and his technical advisers answer your equipment questions every Monday and Wednesday in the Mailbag. Click here to send in a question of your own.

*****

My question is about string savers. Is it a good idea to place string savers in a full co-poly bed? I’ve been playing with Signum Pro Hyperion, a round monofilament string, for about a year now, and I couldn’t be happier with it. It has tremendous power, control, feel, and pretty decent spin potential, plus I find it’s really comfortable. The only drawback is its durability. The string lasts me about eight hours of playing time. So I’m wondering: Is it a good idea to insert string savers into the Signum? (Or are string savers useful only for natural gut?) More specifically, would the string savers make the string play stiffer and less arm friendly? Would they have an effect on the co-poly’s spin potential, as much spin is produced when the strings move and snap back upon impact? I string my own racquets at 52/50 lbs, and I play with the Wilson BLX Six.One Team, which has an 18 x 20 pattern.—Tom

Thanks for your question, Tom. String savers—small pieces of material, plastic or otherwise, placed in between the strings to reduce friction and breakage—would definitely extend the durability of your Pro Hyperion, though it’s hard to say by how much; much of it depends on your playing style and ability level. The short answer, though, to your question is: No, it’s not a good idea to combine string savers with polyester. Not only would it make a string like Pro Hyperion play less comfortably and arm-friendly, it might even reduce the stringbed’s power and spin potential.

As professional stringer Roman Prokes, of RPNY Tennis, explains, “We generally don't recommend string savers, because they really deaden and stiffen up the feel of the stringbed. The one exception is with natural gut, because it's such a lively string. To be honest, in the last four years I can’t remember once installing string savers into polyester. And I don’t think it’s a very good idea, as it’ll make the poly play even stiffer than it already does.”

“And anyways,” Prokes says, “Eight hours of playing time for any string these days really isn't that bad. In my opinion, it's almost perfect timing when it comes to polyester. Recently, I attended a string seminar hosted by Babolat. The topic of the seminar was polyester and tension loss. What they did, in their labs, was to test many different high-quality strings on the market, and what they found was that, on average, good polyester strings lose about 50 percent of their tension after 20 hours of play. And that’s the good poly. Bad quality will drop even quicker. So if it’s working for you, keep playing with the string, keep restringing after eight hours, and don’t use those string savers.”

But for the sake of discussion: What would the effects be of placing string savers in a co-poly stringbed? How exactly would string savers affect playability and performance? As a hypothetical, I posed your question, Tom, to one of the field’s most knowledgeable and experienced stringers: Ron Rocchi, Wilson’s Global Tour Equipment Manager.

“String savers,” Rocchi replied, “noticeably affect overall durability by protecting the string from notching itself at the intersections, wearing away the coating, or, in the case of your reader’s question, the poly itself. Since string savers move and separate strings apart from one another, the actual result tension will be slightly higher tension than without these installed, and power will decrease slightly. But again, the benefit is increased durability.”

“As for snap back [and spin potential],” Rocchi continued, “this will depend greatly on the coefficient of friction of both the string itself, and the material used to manufacture the string savers. Without knowing the exact composition of all the components, I would guess that the snap back would reduce slightly to marginally, as the string is not free to move as much, more contact area exists to distribute the shearing, and frictional forces would be greater. Thus, spin potential would be reduced. However, since the strings are now farther apart, a more coarse string grid is present, and could (on more open string patterns) provide a slight increase in spin. And of course, these factors tend to cancel each other out in some cases. Overall, I’d say string savers increase durability and slightly reduce snap back and spin potential.”

*****

I am having no luck finding a shoe that fits the width of my feet. The only manufacturer that seems to offer E widths is New Balance, but their sizing is limited to D, 2E, and 4E in tennis shoes. What should I do to find a shoe that fits?—Jim K.

It’s true, Jim, that the majority of manufacturers do not make tennis shoes in extended widths, let alone E widths. (New Balance's tennis shoes do, as you noted, come in extra widths: 2E and 4E.) To be quite frank, I have never heard of a tennis shoe coming in an E width, and do not believe they exist—at least, not on the U.S. market.

In order to best answer your concerns, I put your question to Dr. David Sharnoff, Tennis Magazine’s consulting podiatrist, who recommended a few options. “First,” Dr. Sharnoff said, “try wearing 2E-sized shoes with tennis-specific socks. Socks like Thor-Los provide greater cushioning and are bulkier in the heel and toebox, as well as the sole of the shoe. You could also, of course, try wearing D-sized shoes with thinner socks.”

But if changing the thickness of your socks doesn’t improve your fit, try on—in a D width—the Babolat SFX, Yonex Power Cushion 308, and/or Prince T-22s. According to our weartesters, these shoes provided relatively generous D-width sizing and fit rather comfortably with a wider toebox.

*****

I’d like to put a question to you about stenciling. Does the ink affect stringbed performance? Do you advise players to stencil their racquets?—John Q.

Thanks for your question, John. For all practical purposes, stenciling your strings with ink, in order to, say, display a particular racquet or string brand, should not change your stringbed’s performance. If you’re committed to (or sponsored by) a particular brand or symbol, stencil away.

Now that you mention it, I think I'm going to start inking my stringbed with ∞.

One thing you can say for Ion Tiriac, he helped heat things up early this clay season. There’s agitation all around as we leave Madrid, and the divide between, in this case, the Federer and Nadal/Djokovic fan camps seems about as wide as its ever been after the players’ very different reactions to Tiriac’s experimental surface. Meanwhile, the dust-up has inspired women’s champ Serena Williams to brand men “weenies” in general. Perhaps Rome can be the calm after the storm this week, and everyone can get their nerves settled before Roland Garros. Then again, the city isn’t exactly known for its cooler heads.

Play is well underway on the traditional red dirt at the Foro Italico. It’s been known to play quickly in the past—Pete Sampras was a winner here—but otherwise the surface should get us back in the familiar clay swing. Below, with much of round one already completed, is a men's preview (see the draw here). Women's comes tomorrow.

*****

First Quarter
Novak Djokovic says that the clay in Rome is “paradise” after Madrid. The question now is whether he can get himself settled on it, and his mind settled back down, after last week’s fireworks. Djokovic likes these courts, where he is a two-time champ, and he played what may have been his best match of 2011 in beating Nadal in the final here. He’ll open with the always hard to read Bernard Tomic, who took a set from Djokovic at Wimbledon last year. There’s urgency for Novak at the moment. He wants to get things right before Paris.

But it won’t get easier for him. Djokovic is in Roger Federer’s half, and Tsonga and del Potro are both in his quarter, though he would only have to face one of them. Of those two, del Potro, who reached the semis in Madrid and faces Llodra in the first round here, is the more dangerous player on clay. The question is: Dangerous to his opponent, or to himself? Del Potro played very well and very patiently last week, until he let two (correct) calls get to him against Berdych, one in each of their tiebreakers. This came on the heels of his total meltdown after a bad call against Federer in Indian Wells.

Returning: Juan Monaco

Semifinals: Djokovic

*****

Second Quarter
Roger Federer, who says his body’s hurting after his first week back in Madrid, may yet announce that he won’t play here. If he does play—the No. 2 seeding in Paris is on the line, after all—his draw is manageable, with a couple of wild cards thrown in. Federer would open with Carlos Berloq, then get the winner of Ferrero and Monfils. The latter could—maybe, possibly, somewhat implausibly—be a threat, though he was run out of Madrid by Berdych last week, 1 and 1.

Federer, while he may struggle to find his feet of red clay at first, should be happy to find out that the second seed in his section is Janko Tipsarevic, the man he just dispatched so routinely in the semis in Madrid. But he'll be a little leery of the third seed here, John Isner, who came back from a deeply lackluster start to beat Philipp Kohlschreiber today, and who has beaten Federer on red clay this season. Isner looked ready to roll out of Rome for most of two sets this evening, but the German gave him new life when he tightened up while trying to serve out the match. Now the big man, so close to going 0-2 in Europe, could turn into a tough out.

Does Federer need more work, or is he properly prepared after a couple of tough wins last week? Getting out on a surface that's a little closer to what he’ll play on at Roland Garros couldn’t hurt. Or, if he’s as sore as he implies, maybe it could.

Second-round match to watch: Tipsarevic vs. Wawrinka

Semifinalist: Isner

*****

Third Quarter
Andy Murray, who skipped Madrid and has been practicing in Rome, may be in the best position of all, at least to start the week. He has no blue clay to get out of his clothes or his game. Murray opens with David Nalbandian, always a formidable early-round opponent, but one whom Murray has beaten in their last four matches. Still, Murray has had a disappointing clay season so far, looking no more aggressive or positive than usual. Can a week with Lendl change that? Will we ever not be asking this question of Murray?

The second seed in this section is David Ferrer. He made the quarters in Madrid and the final in Barcelona, but opens with a potentially difficult opponent in Fernando Verdasco. Both guys will have to make quick surface adjustments, though Ferrer has won their last three matches easily.

Also here: Simon and Gasquet.

Already out: Davydenko and Dolgopolov, who was ill.

First-round matches of modest renown: Garcia-Lopez vs. Andujar; Simon vs. Donald Young

Semifinalist: Ferrer

*****

Fourth Quarter
Rafael Nadal now sees that he could be out of the Top 2 for Roland Garros, which means potentially having to face down both Federer and Djokovic for the title there. I’m thinking this will be a spur to him, as will the chance to immediately put the bad vibes from Madrid in the past. Plus, Rafa has won this title five times, so adjusting back to the surface shouldn’t be a problem, and he was playing good tennis on the red stuff in Monte Carlo and Barcelona.

But there are obstacles. Nadal opens with quirky shot-maker Florian Mayer, who just beat Milos Raonic, and who beat Rafa in Shanghai last fall. On the other side of his quarter is Tomas Berdych, who gave Federer everything he could handle in Madrid yesterday, and who may be playing the best tennis of his career at the moment. We’ve talked about Murray and del Potro and Tsonga and even Isner as potential debut Slam winners at various times over the last year. Is it time to add Berdych to the list? He’s close to passing Ferrer for No. 6 in the world. The Czech has lost 11 straight times to Rafa, and Rome clay won’t be as friendly to him as Madrid’s. But he pushed Nadal in Melbourne in January.

Also here: Almagro, Lopez, Querrey, and Italy’s own Fabio Fognini and Potito Starace

Already out: Raonic and Cilic. The ATP is hard.

Semifinalist: Nadal

*****

Semifinals: Djokovic d. Isner; Nadal d. Ferrer

Final: Nadal d. Djokovic

by Pete Bodo

Roger Federer: All he does is win. The guy is already the most successful Grand Slam champion in history. Last week, while his main rivals were kvetching and whining about having to play on blue clay, Federer—no great fan of the change himself—did what champions do, and what those two other studs were in no particular mood to do: Dealt with it.

Federer's reward for tackling the assignment was a date in the final with Tomas Berdych, one of the great beneficiaries of the harder, more slippery (than red clay) surface. Berdych blasted Federer off the court in the first set, but the Mighty Fed rebounded and swept the last two, 7-5, 7-5, to take the title. It seemed almost like an act of poetic justice that the win also enabled Federer to leapfrog over Nadal for the No. 2 ranking. Like I said, all he does is win. 

Serena Williams: She won Charleston just a few weeks ago on Har-Tru, but before that she hadn't won a title on clay since 2008. Not coincidentally, she bagged that win in Charleston as well. There's a pattern here (I'll have more to say about that tomorrow, in my next The Racquet Scientist post), but that isn't the main point.

The most impressive aspect of Serena's win in Madrid was that it required her to play the two women who have utterly dominated the WTA this year, Victoria Azarenka and Maria Sharapova (their combined record going into Madrid: 51-6). Serena beat both of them like government mules, winning by the fittingly symmetrical—and cringe-worthy—score of 6-1, 6-3. Too bad Federer is already married; can you imagine the tennis potential of the offspring from Roger and Serena? 

Ricardo Sanchez: He's a good coach, and I'm a fan of anyone who is willing to say what he or she really thinks when so many others are either too timid or too obsessed with their own fortunes to speak freely. And Sanchez certainly has had a rough ride this year, dumped as unceremoniously as he was by Caroline Wozniacki after a very short period as her coach.

Come to think of it, perhaps that's why he's been so outspoken lately, albeit not in a good way. His claim that Venus and Serena have "lost interest" in tennis is partially true—after all, Venus is rapidly closing on age 32, and Serena herself is 30. But while both women have other interests, because of the upcoming Olympic Games they have made a great effort to be competitive this year. Venus has been fighting a serious physical debility (Sjogren's Syndrome) and Serena—well, you just read about what she did last week.

In voicing his criticisms a few days ago, Sanchez also took a shot at Sharapova, saying she "hasn't improved anything in five years." You'd think he was unaware of the shoulder problems and surgery that knocked Maria on her backside in that period. And it's not like things are that awful for Sanchezvhe's still gainfully employed (by Nadia Petrova). So the undercurrent of bitterness is unseemly. He needs to be a little more discreet and thoughtful.

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga: A third-round casualty in Madrid, Tsonga has nothing to do cartwheels about, given that the faster blue clay ought to have helped him in roughly the same way it aided runner-up Berdych. But he rendered a magnanimous gesture of sportsmanship in his second-round match with young American Ryan Harrison. It occurred during a tense second-set tiebreaker, when Tsonga sprinted for a drop shot, made the get, and was awarded the point for a 4-1 lead. Problem was, he did so illegally.

In the best "I cannot tell a lie" fashion, Tsonga informed the umpire that he hit the ball on the second bounce, and thus forfeited the point. He lost the next point, too, which knotted the 'breaker at 3-all. But Tsonga responded with a pair of big forehand winners and ultimately took the tiebreaker—and match—7-4.

Carlos Moya: He's always had a special relationship with Nadal, one that transcends the historical oddity that both are from the Spanish island of Mallorca. Over the years, Moya—a former No. 1 and Roland Garros champion—has been something like a big brother to Rafa, or at least filled what room has existed for such a role, given the dominant role Toni Nadal has played in his nephew's life and career.

But Moya, now the assistant tournament director for the Madrid Open and the man in charge of its player relations, has resolutely stood by Ion Tiriac and the rest of the administration when it comes to the blue clay that Nadal so vociferously criticized. I don't think it was a craven desire to please his employers on Moya's part, either. The man is a massively popular celebrity and should have no trouble earning truckloads of dough. Regarding the blue clay, Moya told Puntodebreak: 

"The objective has been achieved. We've managed to increase visibility for the viewer on television. The look of the court is nice, almost everyone likes it, but there are differences in movement because it seems more slippery. We must find out if it's the court's fault, or the fault of the blue clay. . . When one or two (players) may complain then nothing happens, but when most do we need to listen. The team is working day and night to improve the court. We as a tournament want to learn from our mistakes. We cannot cover our eyes and think that it was perfect because it has not been the case. We promise to work as hard as possible."

European fans and television programmers: They once again demonstrated that when it comes to women's tennis, they just aren't that into it. And that's a pity, given that the Madrid combined event is on par with the tournaments in, say, Indian Wells and Miami. Did you notice that when we actually did get a glimpse of WTA action, how few of the Spanish fans showed up at the Caja Magica to watch? 

Many of you complained about our lack of coverage of the WTA event here at TENNIS.com, but our relative neglect was partly due to how poorly the women were showcased in Madrid. It's a sad day when the only way to track the women's event is via streaming video—especially when the men are right there, almost as large as life, in HD on the large flat-screen TVs that most of us now own. And on many days last week, even online coverage wasn't available.

I'm not sure why Tennis Channel was unable to provide more WTA tennis to our domestic audience, which is considerably more women-friendly. I assume it was because the network was forced to broadcast the international feed—which was pre-occupied with the men. That nonwithstanding, the lack of fan enthusiasm for the WTA game falls into the "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" category of frustrations.

Varvara Lepchenko: The 5'11" Uzbek southpaw who now lives in Allentown, Pa., trains with the USTA Player Development program, and hopes to represent the U.S. in the upcoming Olympic games qualified for Madrid and made it all the way to the quarterfinals. She had solid wins over Francesca Schiavone and Anabel Medina Garrigues before falling to fourth-seeded Agneiszka Radwanska. As a result, Lepchenko's ranking shot up to No. 59—a great advance for a woman who began the year ranked No. 127.

The other day, Patrick McEnroe (general manager of the USTA program) told me that his coaches are very, very high on Lepchenko and they love her work ethic and enthusiasm. The problem, for the somewhat-stressed U.S. establishment? Lepchenko has leaped ahead of Venus Williams (presently No. 63) in the race for the coveted fourth singles spot on the team the U.S. will take to the Olympics. And Williams is the defending gold medalist in doubles (partnered with her sister, Serena). Thus, there's a real chance that Venus will not be going to London, but that particular situation is so complicated I'm saving some thoughts on it for later this week.

The Mutua Madrid Open, after a downer of a week, closed on a couple of up notes on Sunday. Roger Federer and Serena Williams, the active Grand Slam leaders on each tour, came to Ion Tiriac’s rescue with two memorable final-round wins. Williams’s quick victory over Victoria Azarenka was a clarifying moment for the WTA. The message was: Vika may be No. 1, but—and this is the more important fact—Serena is still Serena. The Swiss’s three-setter over Tomas Berdych, on the other hand, was a complicating moment for the ATP. Just when the clay season seemed destined to come down to a two-man battle between Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic, Federer, after an entertaining victory with surprises and fine shot-making throughout, walked away from Madrid the new world No. 2. Perhaps with a bullet.

Now that the most divisive event of the season is past us and the blue dust has settled, I’ll take a look back at three ways of understanding what happened in Madrid.

*****

As a low point, but a possible turning point, for the tournament
It would be easy to draw a moral contrast between Federer’s win and the angry early exits of Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal, but I’m not going to do that. Federer’s approach to the blue clay, which was to do his best to adjust to it, was certainly more productive than those of Rafa and Nole, who refused to accept it. But theirs was a legitimate response as well. It’s fine to make the clay blue (though I prefer red), and it’s fine to make it faster (though I like classic dirtball at this time of year); Madrid has always been pretty quick, even when it was red. But it isn’t fine to have a substandard, too slippery surface, which, as Tiriac himself admitted, is what this was. Champions do adjust, but this wasn’t a court that they should have been forced to adjust to in the first place.

By the end of the week, once the high-profile malcontents had disappeared and Federer had given the court his tacit blessing (mostly with his play), opinion had begun to shift. Tiriac was an “innovator” again, rather than an egomaniac, and the blue clay’s increased visibility had made it a success after all. Still, it should be remembered that when the idea of blue was broached in 2009, it was because that was the color of one of the tournament’s main sponsors, not because it made the ball easier to see. Tiriac’s most honest and telling (and funny) line of last week came when he defended the surface and the tournament by mentioning the amount of prize money—10 million dollars—it was offering. “That kind of money does not come from Mother Theresa,” he said in what I can only imagine was a low-pitched growl. Tiriac is an innovator in the sense that he’s created a rich and forward-looking new event for tennis; that’s no small thing. But this year he did it with an untested gimmick rather than a vision, and at the expense of the tournament’s quality.

This could change by next year. A chastened Tiriac has said that he wants to hold a Challenger event on the surface to show that it can be improved. More important, the clay will be left intact all year this time. In the past the courts at the Caja Magica, which was designed to be a mixed use facility, were dug up after the tournament and laid down again in the spring, which didn’t give them much time to “settle.” Now the clay, as it does in Rome and Paris and Barcelona, will settle all year.

(Of course, this change comes in part because the other sports teams that were supposed to use the facility the rest of the year have left, and the concerts that were supposed to bring in revenue were never booked. As Kamakshi Tandon pointed out in this soberingly informative piece for ESPN.com last week, the city, which helped fund Tiriac’s move from Stuttgart as well as the construction of the Caja Magica, “was left to manage a huge facility that faced a string of financial challenges.” It had been projected to cost 150 million euros, but ended up costing 300 million, “because of miscalculations about the soil.” Sound familiar?)

Tiriac and tournament director Manolo Santana say that they pounded the clay too much, in an effort to avoid bad bounces like the one that caused Federer to whiff on match point in the 2010 final. In the process, they made it too slippery. It sounds like the problem can fixed, but they also guaranteed there would be no problems in 2012. A test run later involving Nadal and Djokovic, if possible, might put the issue to rest and let Tiriac’s experiment in blue survive.

*****

As a reason for concern for one runner-up, and hope for another
You wouldn’t think that Tomas Berdych, chilly and nervy and sometimes less than sporting, would inspire an obsessive fan club, would you? But he has one in Australia, the vocal and funny Berdych Army. I’ve never understood their passion, but by the end of yesterday’s final, I found myself liking the Big Berd more than I ever have. He seemed like a tragic character this time, a player who pulled the rug out from under his own growing confidence at the end of the second set. And then did it again at the end of the third.

Berdych played well, which wasn’t a shock—he’s had success recently against Federer, the surface suited him, and he’d been killing people all week. His backhand down the line, in particular, was a thing of beauty in the final. What was a shock was that Berdych also fought so well. Down 2-5 in the second set and 3-5 in the third, counted out by everyone in both cases, Berdych didn’t go away. In the end, though, he may have made it worse on himself. He got back to 5-5 in both sets, only to lose his serve at 5-6 each time. He double faulted twice to throw away the second set, and he came back from 0-40 down in the final game of the the third, only to net a forehand on Federer's fourth match point. Afterward Berdych sat down and rubbed his sweaty hair with a look of pained disbelief. So close, how had he let it slip away again? Shouldn’t his success have given him more confidence in the clutch than this?

In the past, Berdych has seemed so close, yet so far. Now he just seems so close, which is a step forward. He should be primed for a big win this year, if only he can convince himself, when the big moment comes, that it's possible.

On the women’s side, is the jig up for Victoria Azarenka? First Maria Sharapova blows a hole in her No. 1 confidence in Stuttgart, then Serena drives a truck through it in Madrid. Each of those women did it by exposing a weakness that Azarenka has done a decent job of covering up this year: her serve. Serena took her returns inside the baseline and, when she wasn’t hitting them for winners, set up second shots that she could take at the service line. The pressure got to Vika quickly: She double faulted three times in the third game alone.

Azarenka has been able to pick her spots this year, to be patient, get balls back, and wait for one that she can attack. Against Serena, she doesn’t have that luxury. She was completely taken out of her game yesterday. Even smashing her racquet to the ground in the second set didn’t help. Serena just blasted a forehand past her on the next point to break. You can't let your anger work for you if you don't get a chance to hit the ball.

Against Serena, the main problem for Azarenka may be her ranking. If she were 2 or 4 or 10, Williams might not be so dialed in against her. Unfortunately for her, Vika is No. 1.

*****

As yet one more forum for the two best players of their era
Roger Federer and Serena Williams own 29 Grand Slam singles titles between them, but now they can claim a new title: the world’s only masters of blue clay. Serena in particular was at her finest virtually all week. When she needed it, her defense on dirt was excellent; the shanks and misfires that can accompany her winners were virtually nonexistent; and her serve, as it usually is, was the shot of the tournament. It was about as clean as I can remember Serena playing over an extended period. Clean and mean—her backhand return winners had the demoralizing power of a slap to the face. Yet along with being focused, Serena also appeared to be enjoying herself, and she reveled in her 41st title as if it were her first.

The final was a foregone conclusion by the end of the first game, when Williams slapped one of those backhand return winners to break Azarenka. But I was struck by how hard Serena fought in the second set not to let her opponent back in. She almost seemed . . . nervous? Serving at 4-2, 30-0, in total control, she tensed up on a forehand, yet still hit it for a winner. Afterward, Serena let out a scream and a fist-pump. Sometimes she does this as a message to her opponent, but this one was a message to herself: Fight through the tightness, you’re almost there. Now Serena, with back to back clay titles, is there. Can anyone else be the favorite for the French Open right now? You might as well throw in Wimbledon and the Olympics as well.

“Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss”: That was the headline of a story I did for Tennis Magazine about Serena Williams and Roger Federer way back in 2008, when they each ended disappointing seasons with titles at the U.S. Open. Four years later, the words still apply to both of them. As I said at the top here, we don’t need to crush Nadal and Djokovic because they didn’t react to the blue clay the same way Federer did. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t credit Federer for the way he approached this event from start to finish.

Federer adjusted, and then re-adjusted. New to the slippery surface, he served and volleyed consistently in his opener against Milos Raonic and ended up at the net 34 times. In the final, he came to the net just nine times. Different opponents, different tactics, same result.

Federer expressed sympathy for Nadal’s and Djokovic’s positions, without forgetting what his job was. He was rewarded in the end with the No. 2 ranking, an inside track to the second seed spot at Roland Garros, and a net gain of nearly 1500 ranking points on Djokovic. He was also forced to survive two highly pressurized matches against Raonic and Berdych.

Federer served well in the clutch, as always—if there’s going to be sign of his decline, it will come when he no longer comes up with big serves just when he needs them. Most important against Berdych, Federer stopped the rot at 5-5 in each set by dictating with his serve and halting his opponent's momentum.

Federer, at 3-4 in the third, 0-15, thought about chipping and charging on his return, then thought better of it. Instead, as Robbie Koenig put it, he decided, “I’m just going to hit the clean winner.” Federer’s backhand clipped the sideline. Smart tactics and a good attitude help, but they wouldn't mean much without plain old otherworldly talent.

Federer, at 0-30 in the final game, went to a shot that he hadn't used much all day, his trademark short slice backhand crosscourt. It earned him three match points. Who else can play 32 games and still have something left in the bag?

Federer, in his speech at the end, remembered the home-country hero, Nadal, said he loved coming to Madrid, and assured everyone he would back next year, whatever color is beneath his feet.

No wonder Federer didn’t have a problem with the slippery surface. He didn’t put a foot wrong all week.

Hi everyone, here's your place to discuss today's play in Rome. For the latest The Racquet Scientist post, on the glut of Masters events around this time of year, click here. And be on the lookout for the newest Around the World, a recap of the week that was in tennis, later today.

Thanks,

Ed McGrogan
Online Editor

by Pete Bodo

Tennis went from zero to 60 M.P.H. in the middle of April in the blink of an eye, and the pedal will remain pressed to the metal until the end of Wimbledon. In a span of roughly five weeks, three of the all-important Masters tournaments will have been played. It's the most intense concentration of elite tennis on the annual calendar.

Maybe I'm just a little exhausted and cranky after the long (and still unsettled) debate about blue clay. But I'm starting to think that this glut of spring tennis—something I like to call "the Roland Garros Series"—is too much of a good thing. That we are locked into these Masters events is telling, and as time goes on, this lopsided calendar may even be a drag on the game. As tennis continues to evolve all around the world, the Euroclay portion may start to look very much like an outdated and perhaps even oppressive model. Tradition is a great thing, but does a certain group really own it, and what happens when it prevents progress?

And the biggest problem of all may be that there may be no way to effectively change the situation.

The tennis tour is like a condominium, but instead of apartments the owners possess tournaments. They abide by some basic rules that the governing body of this condo draws up (usually in a more-or-less democratic process), but outsiders have no real influence short of the long arm of actual law.

I raise this issue now because, as you know, the Memphis tournament is moving to Brazil, where it will become an ATP 500 event (just below Masters-level), and San Jose is folding up its tents and relocating in Memphis. Can it be that dream of Butch Buchholz will yet come true?

Buchholz, a former pro and a major political and entrepreneurial figure in the Open era (as the founder and promoter of various events, including the Miami Masters), has long dreamed of a viable South American circuit, and even a South American Grand Slam. He made a few false starts in that direction, trying to get something off the ground, but eventually gave up. The problem, he told me, was that South American economies were simply too unreliable to make the risk worth it. 

Perhaps the climate is changing: U.S. sports marketing powerhouse IMG has joined forces with Brazilian holding company EBX to buy out Memphis and mount the new Brazilian 500 event (Brazil also has the futbol World Cup in 2014 and the Olympic Games in 2016). The joint venture is a yet another three-letter entity, IMX. All this is a sign that the economic climate may be more favorable in South America, which has a history of producing great players but not great tournaments.

So what happens if the demand for elite tennis continues to grow? It seems that the Masters are maxed out; there were already significant contortions to turn Madrid—previously a fall indoor tournament—into a spring clay-court event, which was necessary because the ATP wanted to shoehorn Beijing—which is in another growth area—into the calendar. And we saw how the demotion of the Hamburg Masters came within a whisker of bankrupting the ATP.

I can't imagine the players embracing a larger number of mandatory Masters events, so is this endgame? If you create more of them, but reduce the penalty for missing Masters events, you've basically scotched the entire Masters concept—and tradition. And who would want to buy—or sell—a franchise with as high a value as Rome, or Cincinnati, absent an absolute and unimaginable decline in the viability of those events? 

That raises the key question: Are we stuck with these Masters events, in these calendar slots, forever? If the game continues to grow, this question is bound to attain critical mass. Nations may rise and fall as tennis powers, but it seems that elite class of Masters tournaments may not be subject to the same natural fluctuations.

***
 
The Racquet Scientist posts will be oriented toward hard news and hot-button issues and stress brevity, clarity, and making the best use of my contacts in the game. We will be following up these posts with video and/or podcasts to share your reactions with our listeners and viewers, so please keep your comments on-topic.

Streaking across the blue clay in pursuit of a Tomas Berdych blast, Roger Federer could see the white Mercedes parked on its perch above the corner of the court as he stabbed back a stretch forehand for a fourth championship point.  The dynamic shotmaker's ability to downshift from defense to offense on pivotal points helped him find the finish line with a final flourish.

Navigating a thrill ride of a final set that featured three bumpy breaks in the last five games, Federer fended off Berdych, 3-6, 7-5, 7-5, to capture his third career Madrid championship and become the first three-time winner in the event's 11-year history. It is Federer's seventh title in his last 10 tournaments and his 74th career championship. The Swiss stylist collected his 20th Masters crown to equal arch rival Rafael Nadal's all-time record and will replace Rafa as world No. 2 when the new ATP rankings are released on Monday.

It began as a blues cruise for Berdych, who exploited a Federer brain cramp when the third seed tried faked a drop shot on a sitter, but his slice forehand found the middle of the net.  Berdych blasted a backhand return winner and broke for 2-0.  The sixth-seeded Czech won 12 of the next 14 points on his serve to stretch the lead to 5-2 and sealed the 36-minute set on his third set point, whipping a biting serve into the body to conclude a confident opener in which Berdych crunched 14 winners against two errors.

Federer found a remedy to blunt a sharp Berdych by playing with a bit more topspin and sharper angles on his forehand. A Federer forehand return skimmed the top of the tape, he hit an off-pace, inside-out forehand winner to break for 2-0.  Federer erased a break point with an ace in holding for 4-1, but Berdych denied a break point with an ace of his own holding for 2-4. The 6-foot-5 Czech showed fine defensive skills, digging a lunging forehand out of the dirt then zapping a forehand winner down the line to break back for 4-5. A Federer forehand return skidded off the sideline scooting beneath Berdych's racquet as Federer earned two set points, levelling when a visibly tight Berdych dumped a double fault into net.

Bidding for his first Masters crown in six-and-half years, Berdych's strength is his ability to strike a series of flat shots in repetition. Federer's brilliance is he seldom plays the same spin or speeds on successive shots. Berdych outplayed Federer in the early stages of the third set, earning two break points in the first game — his dropped to a squat and squeezed his eyes in angst after narrowling missing a backhand down the line on the second break point — and another break point in the third game. The big-hitting Czech led 0-30 in each of Federer's first three service games of the decider, but Federer held firm. 

The drama ratcheted up as Berdych banged three straight aces to dig out of a 0-40 hole only to gag in dumping two double faults to hand his opponent the break and a 5-3 lead. One of the game's best closers could not bring the curtain down yet as two rousing returns from Berdych helped him break back for 4-5. Serving to force the tie breaker, the big man could not control a slithering short slice from Federer and missed a backhand up the line to fall into a 0-40 hole. Berdych gamely fought off three championship points before Federer finally found closure coaxing an error with another short slice and thrusting his arms in the air, a Madrid master again.

—Richard Pagliaro

It may not be remembered as the greatest win of Serena Williams’ career; after all, it wasn't even recorded at a Grand Slam event. But if you had to pick a "legacy" match with which to honor Williams, today's 6-1, 6-3 blowout of Victoria Azarenka in the Madrid final might do the trick. Because:

—Williams was ranked No. 9 going into Madrid. Azaranka wasn't only the world No. 1, it wasn't all that many weeks ago that pundits and fans were—with some justification—wondering whether or not she was going to go all Djokovic on the WTA (that is, duplicate the extraordinary run Novak had through the first half of 2011). After all, Azarenka was 29-2 on the year at the outset of Madrid. But Williams herself was 17-2—a detail easily forgotten in the (justified) hype surrounding Azarenka's spectacular start. The win also improved Williams’ career record over Azarenka to 7-1.

—Williams also defeated, with comparable ease (6-1, 6-3), the other dominant WTA player of the year thus far, fomer No. 1 Maria Sharapova. Presently No. 2, Sharapova had a 22-4 record going into Madrid and had battled Azarenka in two of the last three major WTA events (Indian Wells and Stuttgart).

—The back-to- back wins (if not knockouts) over the present and former No. 1s (and both Grand Slam champions) were on clay, not on grass or hard courts, where Williams’ game is most deadly. And it was on the innovative—and controversial—blue clay that almost caused such manly men as Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal (both of whom lost in the men’s event) to throw hissy fits.

Granted, Madrid's blue clay was harder and more slippery than traditional European red clay, and thus more favorable to a shotmaker and aggressive server like Serena. But like everyone else, Serena had to navigate the potential physical and mental challenges of the never-before-tried surface.

At the start of the tournament, Serena described the blue clay as “ridiculous.” But she came up with a novel strategy that seemed to have escaped the illustrious male warriors: She accepted and embraced the mission. Call hers the “just deal with it” approach.

This latter aspect of Serena’s win tempts us to once again talk about her in terms of “character,” but never forget that nobody wins on guts and aggression alone. And the final only confirmed what the statistics for the tournament had already suggested: From match-to-match, Serena was just plain more effective and dangerous than Azarenka.

Going into the final, the only category in which Azarenka led Serena was first-serve conversion percentage. That was ironic, because you can tell the story of this match simply through serve and return proficiency—statistics that are intertwined because each of them is dependent on the quality of the serve.

Going into the final, Azarenka was serving close to 65 percent, but Serena was just a few percentage points behind. When you take into account that Williams' serve is simply better—much better (among other things, she had twice as many aces in previous matches as Azarenka)—that slight in conversion percentage is meaningless.

There was one great statistical warning sign for Azarenka going into the final: In both first- and second-serve return proficiency, Williams led Vika by a hefty margin. At 42 percent, Serena enjoyed a great 12 percent superiority against first serves; her 67 percent success rate against second serves was seven points better than Azarenka's. In tennis, those are huge numbers. Given this clear advantage in returning ability, and the difference in the two finalist’s serves, it was clear that control of the match was entirely in Serena’s hands.

In the end, Azarenka served a respectable 60 percent, and Serena a mediocre but still deadly 49 percent. I say “deadly” because Serena won a whopping 91 percent of her first-serve points, while Azarenka won just 63 percent of her own. And Williams won 63 percent of the second-serve points she faced. Therein lay the story of the match.

Once again, the lesson is that the only thing that may be better than superior firepower at the service notch is returning expertise. And when you’re better at both, as seems to be the case with Serena, there’s not much that anyone, including the No. 1-ranked player in the world, can do.

—Pete Bodo

A set of eye-popping play from Roger Federer sometimes left Janko Tipsarevic's head spinning like a weather vane whirling in the wind, but for a moment the seventh seed seemed to have Federer right where he wanted him — lunging for the ball while displaced in the doubles alley. 

On the full stretch, Federer flicked a forehand reflex return crosscourt that rattled Tipsarevic's racquet and ricocheted into the crowd for the lone break of the second set. That shot typified today's semifinal: even when Federer was out of position, he was still in command.

A sometime swirling wind heightened the degree of difficulty, but the third-seeded Swiss played with unwavering calm to storm into his fourth final in his last five tournaments with a 6-2, 6-3 semifinal sweep of Tipsarevic today. The two-time Madrid champion advanced to his 104th ATP final and will be playing for more than the stack of mini gold racquets decorated with diamonds that serve as the Ion Tiriac title trophy  — should Federer beat Tomas Berdych in Sunday's final he will surpass archrival Rafael Nadal and regain the world No. 2 ranking for the first time since March, 2011.

The tattooed Tipsarevic made his mark on Madrid yesterday, fending off seven break points to surprise world No. 1 Novak Djokovic for the second time in six months. With his arm ink and tinted Oakley sunglasses, Tipsarevic could pass for surfer, but couldn't combat the serving tsunami Federer unleashed in the opening set. The 16-time Grand Slam champion isn't the fastest serve in the sport, but he's one of the most accurate. Federer won 16 of 18 points played on his serve in the first set, suffocating the Serbian in winning three of his four service games at love.  Tipsarevic weathered an early break-point storm against Djokovic yesterday and saved two break points today before a series of sharp slices from Federer, made more devious by the windy conditions, coaxed a forehand into net to break for 3-1 after a near nine-minute game.

Mixing his spins and speeds brilliantly, Federer won 16 of the final 20 points to seize the opening set in 32 minutes on the strength of 13 winners compared to 6 for his opponent. Tipsarevic serves bigger than his 5-foot-11 size suggests and the Belgrade baseliner is entertaining to watch because of his willingness to stand toe-to-toe with bigger hitters and drive daggers down the line off both wings. But Federer's ability to time the ball on the rise and step into the court repeatedly rushed Tipsarevic and the Swiss varied the height and spin of his shots to deny his opponent any rhythm. Federer's rousing forehand return, which evoked gasps of surprise from some in the crowd, gave him a 3-1 lead. He saved the only break point he faced when Tipsarevic's backhand down the line strayed wide as Federer eventually held for 5-2, sealing the 66-minute win with a stinging body serve.  Federer is 44-3 since falling to Djokovic in the 2011 U.S. Open semifinals.

 Federer has beaten Berdych in 10 of their 14 meetings, but the big-hitting Czech has prevailed in three of their last five meetings. Continuing his quest to regain the No. 1 ranking, Federer can surpass Nadal for No. 2 and tie the Spaniard's record of 20 Masters crowns with a win in the final.

—Richard Pagliaro

Tomas Berdych proved himself the better competitor on the day as he won a tight match over Juan Martin del Potro to move into the Madrid final, beating the Argentine 7-6 (5), 7-6 (6).

Berdych is one of the few players who hasn’t been unremittingly negative about the controversial court surface this week, looking right at home in crushing Kevin Anderson, Gael Monfils and Fernando Verdasco before stopping del Potro’s 10-match winning streak cold today. Del Potro made the better start to this entertaining display of power tennis, breaking Berdych to take a 2-1 lead, but he never quite recovered the full-out aggression that paid off so well in those opening games. With del Potro serving for the set at 5-4, it was Berdych who stepped up to the attack, breaking the Argentine to love as he increasingly struggled to find his footing at the back of the court. An error in the first point of the tie break gave Berdych the mini-break as del Potro lost his focus, disputing the correct mark in the clay with umpire Mohamed El Jennati. After a four-minute pause during which a spectator required medical attention, it was Berdych’s turn to lose focus, pegged back from 5-1 to 5-5 after del Potro pulled off a delicate chip at the feet of the Czech as he charged the net, but a tame backhand error left del Potro smacking a ball into the court in frustration and Berdych sealed the set with the one-two punch of big serve and forehand winner he excels at.

Berdych was again the more aggressive player as a still-frustrated del Potro served to open the second set, pouncing on the short ball to earn break point then taking it when he finally pulled off a backhand return down the line on del Potro’s second serve. Del Potro recovered enough to break back for 3-3 and started going for his shots again, playing some of his best tennis since the start, but once again it was Berdych who was the more steely competitor. When pressed hard on his serve at 5-6, he served three aces to force a tiebreak, taking a 3-2 lead as del Potro lost his footing again. Berdych’s fourth double fault of the match — the unfortunate trade-off of going after his second serves, which paid off well — levelled the score, but with del Potro looking for his first set point, the Argentine’s serve, which he thought was an ace, was over-ruled and called wide by El Jennati. A furious del Potro (who neglected to shake El Jennati’s hand) lost concentration and put a backhand into the net to give up match point and Berdych sealed it with his forty-first winner of the match.

With two players whose games are so similar, both playing at or near their best, it becomes less about tactics and more about who can execute better. In the end, Berdych’s sublime serving – he hit 15 aces — and his greater confidence and courage put him in a winning position, and he was nerveless enough to convert that advantage into a victory to be proud of. Now all he needs to do is repeat that in the final, where he is likely to face Roger Federer.

—Hannah Wilks