Verdasco verges on greatness
A truly classic climax
2012 final: Novak Djokovic bt Rafael Nadal 5-7, 6-4, 6-2, 6-7, 7-5
The first set of this epic clash lasted 82 minutes - almost as long as the full duration of Victoria Azarenka's victory over Maria Sharapova in the women's final, which was decided in 88 minutes. Quite simply, some of the rallies were brutal.
Djokovic has, justifiably to a large extent, earned the mantle of somebody who plays his best tennis when he's behind and in this final we saw the best of him and Nadal when they were trailing. I remember a quote that described them both as the 'masters of the anti-choke', which I thought was particularly fitting.
Djokovic stormed into a 2-1 lead after losing the opening set - he found an incredible rhythm off the return, dominating Nadal in an area where most people struggle. Up to about 4-3 in the fourth set, it looked as though this would be Novak's match.
But at 0-40, 4-3 down in the fourth, Nadal showed exactly what he is made of. I remember this game very, very vividly because Nadal came up with some truly exceptional shots to win five straight points when all seemed lost. If you ever wanted a clip to explain what Nadal was all about, it would have to be this game.
He had his back against the wall, he had nowhere to go, but he came up with an incredible game that brought him to his knees and the crowd to their feet. Nadal went on to take the fourth set on the tie-breaker and suddenly you felt, that given how long Djokovic's semi-final had lasted, that this title was going to be Nadal's.
It certainly looked that way in the fifth as Nadal went 4-2 up but somehow he missed a backhand up the line on game point; it was an absolute sitter and in any other match, he would have buried the ball and gone 5-2 ahead but instead he pushed it wide and that error gave Djokovic enough breathing room to get back into the match. The Serb proved just what a great shot-maker he was to go on and win his third Australian Open title in seven minutes shy of six hours!
Nadal's absence from this year's tournament is a big loss - there's no other way to spin it. He's a captivating character and the perfect foil, in many ways, against Djokovic, Murray and Federer because he's such a fantastic defender of the ball, not to mention a great character; other players feed off him in much the same way as Lendl, John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors used to feed off Bjorn Borg.
Borg may have been ice cool on the court but the way in which he played was very similar, if less aggressive, than Nadal; his shot-making was fiery and exotic at times. Nadal's absence should take nothing away from the achievement of whoever wins this year's title, but there's no doubt that tennis loses a little of its sparkle when Nadal is not around.
