Attempting to win a tennis match is a cruel, convoluted race. On a micro scale, each player is trying simply to win points. But from a wider view, each game is a battle to get to game point and then convert, each set is a race to set point, each match a chase to match point.
This race is far from linear, though — moving to the finish line isn’t as simple as putting one foot in front of the other. Progress can be halted if a player loses their shots. And forward momentum depends a lot on the opponent. If they go on a hot streak, the player on the receiving end of the great play can find their feet bolted to the ground through little to no fault of their own. While even fading runners maintain some semblance of speed, in tennis it’s possible to not be moving at all, or to be moving backwards.
Pacing is another thing to consider. A match is made up of many small races within the whole; some matter more than others. In a tightly contested set, if a game becomes a multi-deuce duel at 5-all, getting to the 6-5 checkpoint first could prove decisive. But if a brutal game takes place with one player up 5-1, one or both of the competitors might be spending valuable energy in a place of little consequence.
Yet another wrinkle is that players can lose their progress. Take the recent Indian Wells final between Paula Badosa and Victoria Azarenka. The first set was a splendid spectacle of great returning and draining rallies. Break points were seen in several service games, creating a consistently pressured atmosphere. The quality set culminated in a tiebreak: both were running fast at the same time. Badosa grabbed the breaker 7-5, winning an absurd 28-shot exchange with a backhand winner. It was nowhere near either line, but the rally had been so attritional and her setup (a crosscourt forehand on the previous shot) had been so good that Azarenka’s wasted legs didn’t have a prayer of carrying her to the ball for yet another return.
This is where tennis scoring gets brutal. Badosa had won the first set, putting her either a third of the way or halfway to the finish line depending on the results of the following set. And Azarenka had gained nothing. She had barely lost a tight, fast sprint to a major checkpoint in the race, and had been plucked into the air and brought back to the starting line as a reward. For Badosa, the next set was an opportunity to claim the title. For Azarenka, it was a matter of survival.
Two common results after a close first set are the winner pulling away from a despondent opponent and the loser upping their aggression in an effort to come back from the brink. Azarenka chose the latter option and executed it well, racing through the second set 6-2. For the leading player, the second set is usually as low-stakes as a set will get — with the first set in the bank, the worst-case scenario is a tie in the match score at one set all. That said, it can pay to be wary of the trailing player’s speed. If they win the second set lopsidedly, it can be hard to match their speed at the start of the third.
Badosa avoided the trap neatly, going up 2-0 at the start of the third. After Azarenka got the break back, the deciding set settled into a neck-and-neck affair with one player threatening to pull away after an easy hold or a love-30 opening on the return, only for the other to haul them back in. In the best tennis matches, quality will increase as the finish line approaches — the players recognize the incoming respite from the physical demands of the contest and that the points are bigger late in the match and up their effort accordingly. For the most part, this happened in the Badosa-Azarenka match. The best rally of the final took place late in the third set — an unbelievable exchange of depth from defensive positions boiled over with a fierce backhand winner down the line from Azarenka. Exchanges like this don’t happen often on inconsequential points; if a player is to spend a lot of energy on a surge, it’s smart to ensure a crucial point is taking place (this is why few should engage Medvedev or Djokovic in long rallies on points that aren’t must-win. Gassing out on a random 30-love point is a losing strategy, regardless of who wins it).
At first, it seemed that Azarenka had timed her surge to perfection. At 4-all in the third, she began to make incredible defensive stabs out of the corners. Badosa’s shots were so aggressive that it appeared Azarenka’s digs would be futile, but the Belarusian retrieved ball after ball until Badosa started to misfire on her putaways. After multiple errant Badosa forehands from offensive positions, Azarenka claimed the break to go up 5-4.
Azarenka went up 30-love when serving for the match — only needing to win one of the next three points to earn a match point — but four consecutive unforced errors were her undoing. She went from two points from victory to eight points from victory in the space of a minute or so. Limping to the finish line so rarely results in a win on the tennis court. Though Azarenka held to stay in the match at 5-6 (for those asking why she couldn’t do that at 5-4, being close to victory and being close to defeat are different types of pressure that often get different reactions from players), it was Badosa who executed the winning surge, crushing four winners in the deciding tiebreak to claim the title.
A final set tiebreak, in theory, is when both players should be throwing the kitchen sink at their opponents. There’s not much match left; victory and defeat are close simultaneously. But because of pressure and fatigue, they often don’t result in a thrilling battle emblematic of the match that produced the tiebreak. The winner is generally the one in better control of their nerves and shots. And Badosa, putting her nerves aside to release her powerful groundstrokes, was well in control of hers, cleanly breaking the tape of the finish line.
Badosa had already enjoyed a brilliant year highlighted by a great run at Roland Garros ending with a near miss in the quarterfinals. But winning a big title is an aura-increasing accomplishment, and one that has lifted her into eighth place in an even bigger tennis race: the marathon to the year-end championships in Guadalajara. Even if she misses out, her tenacity and shotmaking in the Indian Wells final and tournament are hallmarks of a steady top player. Not to mention that beating an in-form, two-time major champion in a big final will do wonders for her confidence.
As for Azarenka, she will likely feel that she should have done better at 5-4 in the third. Post-match, the race to the finish line appears even crueler. After losing, all the points you’ve won are again moot, only this time, the match is over and there’s no opportunity, no next set for amends.
Not until the next match, at least.