A SMALL STEP FOR HINGIS, A GIANT LEAP FOR SANIA MIRZA

First Indian to win a ladies Grand slam doubles title. 

There is an air of history and nostalgia when you talk about Wimbledon. More than any other sporting place, this venue values tradition; remembers its past champions and one way or the other welcomes them back into its serene surroundings. Martina Hingis is a name for the tennis historians and irrespective of her retirement at a young age, she was welcomed back to a place where she started winning Grand slam titles. For Hingis, these seventeen years has been a lifetime's wait.

Life has come a full circle for Hingis after the victory in women's doubles. From being the youngest grand slam winner (Wimbledon doubles 1996),  in which she flourished under the guidance of the more experienced Helena Sukova; this time around she was the one who called the shots, guided Sania Mirza and together they played their best tennis in recent times.

Sania Mirza and Martina Hingis have been undoubtedly the best lady players to represent their respective countries, India and Switzerland. They reached the peak very early in their lives, then hit a plateau............ - and now together they are on an adventure to climb yet another peak. There is a lot that's in common between these two; though they have different playing styles. They complete each other's weakness on the court and in tandem, they have been refreshing on the doubles circuit.

In Martina Hingis, Sania Mirza has finally found a doubles partner with whom she can complement her partner's finesse and thought process. When they got together to play doubles, I felt there was something right about this combination and I am more so convinced now after looking at the way they fought back in those final two sets. They are enjoying their tennis.  

A pair destined for many more victories 

INDIA'S LONG WAIT FOR FAME

Twelve years ago, Sania, a child prodigy won the girls doubles event at Wimbledon. Since the time she turned professional, she has been living a life burdened with expectations. India is a country where people have a lot of hopes, where expectations come from all corners of the land and we all saw a dream, the dream of Sania lifting a Grand slam title.

Playing singles proved to be a tough battle ground; her power play and return was good to finish off few opponents - but her lack of pace to move around the court and her inability to pick the right spots to place the ball did not help her cause when she faced the top ranked players.

In spite of these weaknesses, she did progress consistently beyond first round and her best singles display at a major slam came a decade ago in New York. A fourth round appearance at the US Open facing Maria Sharapova. At that point, she had achieved enough (including a WTA singles title) to rest on her laurels as no other Indian female tennis player had come this far.

In fact, in the open era, there has never been a lady from Indian tennis who has won this consistently in singles - barring Nirupama Sanjeev (previously Vaidyanathan) who was the first Indian woman to win a round in a grand slam event (1998 Australian Open) and Shikha Uberoi who emulated that feat later at the 2004 US Open. The days of celebrating 'round' wins were long gone ever since Sania Mirza turned professional. Within a short span of time, she took the nation's expectations to another level - a place never seen before among Indian women tennis.

SINGLES TO DOUBLES

Being among the top 30 ranked women happens to be the highlight of Sania's singles career (with highest ranking of  27). However, her success was not just limited to singles; steadily she took part in many of the doubles tournament with some success. After 2007, her play was more consistent on the doubles circuit than on the singles. An athlete is never far away from getting injured and Sania's tryst with injuries started to dictate her choices and since 2008 she withdrew from many tournaments owing to discomfort in her back and right wrist.

Playing singles became more challenging, exasperating and after a string of poor performances, focussing solely on the doubles game seemed practical. Having a partner in a game was less stressful physically and with only half-a-court to cover, it suited her style of play. Since 2011, her success rate in many of the WTA competitions was on the upward trend. In these four years, she took part in 29 finals and won 18 of them - all of this contributed in her being ranked number one doubles player earlier this year.

INDIANS PLAY DOUBLES BETTER

Why do Indians play better doubles game than singles? Looking at the history of Indian tennis, there has been a strong 'tennis doubles' culture barring few sporadic, spirited individual displays. In the last sixty years, there has been junior players winning the Grand Slam title, but no one went a step further and win the seniors. The best singles performance in the recent past happens to be the bronze medal win of Paes at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics.

Bronze Medal in singles at 1996 Atlanta Olympics 

The first Grand slam title of any kind for India came in 1997 and it was Mahesh Bhupathi-Rika Hiraki pair who won the mixed doubles at the French Open. Since then, there has been a series of Grand Slam titles in doubles category - men's and mixed. Now, with the recent Wimbledon victory, Sania Mirza completed this 'doubles set' by winning the ladies doubles.

Mahesh Bhupathi started the trend of winning Grand Slam titles for India in doubles - French Open 1997 

THE TRENDSETTER

In a country which is obsessed with end results, Sania Mirza has had to endure a lot of unwanted attention at times to get to a position she is right now. Forget the facilities, forget the funding and forget the support for a moment, what Sania has achieved speaks volumes about her innate qualities; her determination; her grit; motivation and the will of a world-class athlete. To these, add family support, facilities, funding and opportunities; results will definitely follow. This is how winning is done.

First Indian woman to achieve number one ranking in doubles 

What does this victory mean to Sania Mirza and to Indian tennis? Firstly, she is the top-ranked doubles player in the world and if you ain't winning, then you can forget being at the top. Sania, quite rightly expects to win every tournament she takes part in and sadly it isn't the same for other ladies in Indian tennis. While there are talented girls who sweat it out each day, it would help a great deal if they asked a question each day -  why am I sweating it out? In this era of intense connectivity, one can always find a way to secure sponsors, train at better facilities - but why? If that 'why' and 'what' is clear, then 'how' will become clear. Sania Mirza's ascent to the top in spite of the adversities she faced with injuries and personal scrutiny is an example, a template for an Indian female athlete who wishes to achieve big and not just stop at dreaming.

In 1998, the top seeded pair of Martina Hingis and Jana Novotna won the ladies doubles title and seventeen years later, the top seeded pair of Hingis and Mirza won the honours on the same court. In between, Martina Hingis has had a roller coaster ride when it comes to her tennis career and personal life. While it can be said, it is just another step forward in what has been an illustrious career for the Swiss Miss, this Wimbledon victory with Sania Mirza (first for an Indian woman in ladies doubles) is a giant leap for Indian tennis. 

MARTINA HINGIS AND THE AUSTRALIAN OPEN: MEMORIES FROM THE HAPPY SLAM

There were not many who could stop Martina Hingis at the Australian Open from 1997-2002

Twenty years ago in 1995, a circumspect teenager entered the courts of the Australian Open with lots of confidence and a talent in plenty. It was the debut year at the Grand Slams for Martina Hingis and little was expected from a player who had turned fourteen barely few months ago.  She lost at the first hurdle in doubles and went one step further in singles. In the next seven years, Hingis would enter the quarter-finals each time - and from 1997 till 2002  she never missed a finals appearance in both singles and doubles.

She once said on Australian Open - "Even though I hated the preparation in December, I was always ready afterwards. The Australian Open was a real welcome tournament; everyone is happy to see everyone. This series of six consecutive finals is one of my greatest achievements. The surface helped me; you could win with any kind of game. I also loved playing in front of that audience".

EARLY DAYS

Hingis's first set in her maiden appearance in Australian Open was a statement in itself. She won 6-0 against the Austrian and five years her senior, Barbara Schett. That confidence and momentum was sufficient to win the next set and with it the match. She made the headlines and was termed as 'a future champion' by many experts as long as she would turn up consistently on globetrotting tournaments. Her fairytale start was cut short by the Japanese Kyoko Nagatsuka in straight sets in the next round. However, Martina Hingis had arrived on the big circuit and her first round win ensured she would be the youngest player to win a Grand slam match.

A year later, she was more experienced by playing on the mean courts with more seasoned professionals. She won four consecutive matches which took her to the quarter-finals without dropping a set and there she lost to the South African Amanda Coetzer, nine years her senior.

THREE WONDER YEARS

Ranked fourth coming into the Australian Open 1997, Martina had already tasted many successes on the WTA circuit and had a Grand Slam title to her name (Wimbledon doubles in 1996). The 16-year old sensation from Switzerland steadily made her way to the second week with a dominant display of smart play and placement of strokes.

Like the previous year, she did not drop a set and overcame the final three hurdles to claim her first singles Grand Slam title. I had a laminated poster of hers posing on a Melbourne tram with the Daphne Akhurst trophy. At 16 years and 3 months, she was the youngest Grand Slam winner in the Open era. (Lottie Dod won the Wimbledon as a 15-year old - however it was way back in 19th century before the Open era). She paired with Natasha Zvereva to win the doubles title as well.

With two more titles at Wimbledon and US Open - and a narrow miss at the French Open (lost to Iva Majoli in the finals), she was undoubtedly the favourite to defend her title. And defend she did, in a dominant fashion winning her second consecutive Australian Open defeating Conchita Martinez in straight sets. It was a twin delight as the duo of Hingis and Mirjana Lučić won the doubles second year running.

Having been displaced to number two by Lindsay Davenport, Martina Hingis was faced with a sizeable opponent who had outplayed her in many of their contests in 1998. The odds of Hingis-Davenport was the talk of the town in 1999 and it looked good going into the last two rounds of the tournament. While Hingis breezed through Monica Seles in the semi-finals, Davenport was stunned by the French sensation Amélie Mauresmo. Mauresmo was the dark horse of the finals - but Hingis had a better day on the court and won her 3rd consecutive Australian Open in straight sets. She teamed with Anna Kournikova for the first time in a Grand Slam and the 'spice girls' of tennis had their hands on the winner's trophy at the end of it all.

Martina Hingis with her winning doubles partners at the Australian Open 

SO CLOSE AND YET SO FAR!

Things started to go downhill after the victorious start in 1999. It was evident Hingis lacked power in her repertoire and was found wanting when she played the likes of Davenport and the William sisters. French Open 1999 was a disaster when she lost the plot completely after having Steffi Graf's number for two-thirds of the match. She wept in presence of her mother and wished she had not exhausted mentally over a controversial line call during the match. She had not moved on from that disastrous evening at Roland Garros. The scars of French Open was evident as she exited in the first round at the Wimbledon two weeks later; and the loss at the hands of Serena Williams at the US Open made her vulnerable to the game of power tennis. Move over chess-tennis.

BEATEN AT THE LAST HURDLE THRICE

At the start of 2000, Hingis returned to what she calls 'happy slam' and it certainly was a paradise. A defending champion for the past 3 years, she breezed into her fourth consecutive Australian Open finals. The two top ranked players faced each other and Davenport prevailed to dethrone Hingis in straight sets. This was a jolt to Hingis. She once said "If an opponent could blow me off the court, things got dangerous for me" and precisely this was the case whenever she played against Davenport and the William sisters. Very soon, another American would join the list. Hingis lost the doubles finals and for the first time in four years, she left without a title from Australia.

Next year, a resolved Hingis approached her play better. If there was one surface she felt at home, it was the hard courts of the Melbourne Park. En-route to her fifth consecutive finals, she won a marathon battle against Serena Williams and followed by a walk in the park victory over her elder sister, Venus. The finale was Swiss vs. America and this time against the revived Jennifer Capriati. Capriati in search of her first title made a great come back to tennis after having lost her way in the wilderness in the late 90's. She had it easy against Hingis in the finals. 6-4, 6-3 in favour of the American who had to wait a good 11 years for her first Grand Slam title. The year 2001 was the time when Hingis called off her coaching relationship with her mother for a brief time, lost her number one ranking to Capriati and a surgery to her right ankle. She would have another first round exit at the Wimbledon the same year.

After having recovered from the injury, Australian Open 2002 was the right place Hingis hoped to revive her career. She made her sixth consecutive Australian Open finals and it was a re-match from the previous year. Hingis started off well and took the first set and at one stage led 5-1 in the second set. Capriati saved three championship points and forced a tie-breaker. Capriati would save one more championship point before taking the second set. How would Hingis come back from this?

Hingis breaks Capriati's serve and goes 2-1 up in the third set. And that was that for Hingis as Capriati took control of the game there onwards winning five games in a row to win the championship. I remember watching the game with disbelief. Well, that's tennis!

Her sixth consecutive doubles finals at the Australian Open ended on a happy note as she took her fourth Australian Open doubles title. However, this victory was shadowed by the missed chances in the singles finals. Would have we lost Hingis at the age of 22 if she had won that title?  If she had won, would it have kept her in good spirits when she soon underwent a surgery to her left ankle? Tennis was no longer fun for Hingis as she was constantly in pain physically - and mentally with those 'missed opportunities'. The two aspects of her life were out of sync and Hingis, the girl that she was (22) did not want to give up the 'fun' aspect. She chose horse riding, her passion and decided to complete her studies when she announced her first retirement in 2003.

RETURN AS A SHADOW

Martina Hingis winning the mixed doubles title in 2006 with Mahesh Bhupathi 

She was not the same when the audience saw her return to her favourite hunting ground, Melbourne. It was in 2006 and Hingis was just 25! Although she was beaten at the quarterfinals in singles, she did go on to claim her maiden mixed doubles title partnering with Mahesh Bhupathi. For Hingis, it was good to be back, winning just like she did so many times in the past in Australia. In 2007, she lost to Kim Clijsters once again in the round of eight. She retired once again that year and this time she was under the investigation for testing positive for a metabolite substance of cocaine. ITF suspended her for two years later that year.

AND NOW SHE IS BACK AGAIN

As it stands, Martina Hingis in 2015 is focusing on doubles and mixed doubles. After winning the Brisbane Open partnering Sabine Lisicki. A third-round exit in doubles (with Flavia Pennetta) and still in the race with Leander Paes (in semi-finals) for the mixed doubles title. 

NOW AND THEN

How I wish to see her win this trophy one last time!

And memories they are, my time as a teenager when I used to wake up to watch those matches of Hingis at the Australian Open. Call me a victim of the past, I just cannot stop the fact of recollecting Hingis and her many a victories at the Australian Open. For six years from 1997 to 2002 - I watched women's tennis for Hingis and Hingis alone - and if I look at it now, I feel I have lost the 'attachment' which binds a fan crazily, living the emotions of the stars, constantly enthralled by  their play and presence on the court. What happens when it all ends, all of a sudden without any notice? you drag yourself forward and that's all we fans can do. It happened to me when Hingis retired in 2003 and I moved on slowly recollecting those wonder years once in a while. 

GET SHORTY - EXPERIMENTS WITH TENNIS

                Roger Federer and Lleyton Hewitt face each other in 2015 for an experimental match       Photo Courtesy: News.au

The trend to get smarter, slimmer and compact keeping in view of the times and the time is catching up with tennis as well. While there have been changes implemented steadily, tennis fans worldwide would now soon be served with the fast food version of 'tennis'.

Starting this November, there will be two premier international tournaments held in different cities across Asia. The format is compact and the organisers have taken a certain degree of liberty to make it interesting and equally exciting.

In 2015, Roger Federer and Lleyton Hewitt will face each other (January 12) in Sydney for an exhibition match. This is no ordinary match and will certainly be different than the previous 27 games they played against each other.

THE INGREDIENTS

Forget the long hours waiting with baited breath, heart rate pumping as the final set goes on and on. Every point became agonisingly painful if you happen to support a player and is losing. In this experimental match, there is no slow death for a player; instead it is quick, precise and to an extent time bound. The format of the game will have four modifications to the conventional tennis rules.

a. No advantage scoring - Its 'deuce' and one error on either player's part, the game is gone. The pressure is intense on the player to hold the serve at deuce. This rule is a time saver.

b. No service lets - Let, first service. Now, how many times in a game does one hear this call? Without service lets, a lot of time can be saved.

c. Tie breakers at three games all - Match is poised at 3-3 and spectators have just warmed up. It's time for a tie breaker. To me, I believe just having six games before having to decide the set by a tie-breaker is too quick for my liking. Instead, I would go for a tie-breaker at 6-6 with first to reach 4 points taking the set. For now, I choose to be open-minded and participate as a spectator in this experiment.

d. Sets to first-four games - Whoever breaks the serve has the momentum as long as he holds the serve in the set. This is too quick for my liking and like I mentioned in the above point - I will wait, watch and then give my opinion.

IS THERE A NEED?

Though I belong to a group of traditional tennis lovers, I do see a point as to why there is an emphasis to have a shorter format of tennis. Cricket too underwent this change in the past decade and since, the shorter format has been commercially successful. The point which will be debated - Will we miss out on watching epic battles which test the skills, stamina and a lot more from the players before a winner is decided while there are 'quickie' tournaments where everything is clockwork and the game can be wrapped up under two hours.Which will appeal in the longer run?

In an era where people are content with mere headlines than the content that follows it, the shorter version of tennis, if approved by the International Tennis Federation will have commercial advantages and make a fantastic product for TV audiences. The question remains as to how will you integrate this format in today's tennis world. Will you have age-restrictions? or do you create a parallel tournament with a possibility of having shorter formats of the four major Grand Slam tournaments? Will there be a separate Davis Cup for shorter and longer formats? or will the tennis as a whole be truncated for the sake of time saving practices and taking the excess load out of tennis players? 

The ATP and WTA tour operators will be monitoring this closely as they would be quick to jump to the shorter format if there is more money to be made. Or will the idea remain rooted only at the club and social events?

ON A FINAL NOTE

Shorter format of tennis will reduce the time while basics of playing tennis would remain the same. The International leagues namely International Premier Tennis League (by Mahesh Bhupathi) and Champions Tennis League by Vijay Amrtitaj have big names on their rooster and have rules amended to suit the nature of this business-cum-sport venture. How will this and the exhibition match in January would impact the rule changes needs to be seen. It is too early to make an definitive opinion - however going by the trend in world of sports, shorter format of tennis is here to stay - whether one likes it or not.