John Isner Is All Bacon

by Deghasio

For the third time in as many years, John Isner lost a close match to Philipp Kohlschreiber at the US Open. Despite having an unblemished record against the German in best-of-three-set tournaments, including a three-set win over his sometime-nemesis in Auckland, Isner has been unable to beat Kohlschreiber when it matters—namely, at best-of-five grand slams. Even besides Isner’s superior head-to-head record, two key factors seemed to point towards Isner winning yesterday. First, Isner is famous / notorious for playing better in the US than overseas. Secondly, Isner is an above-average player in a tiebreak. His devastating serve wins him numerous “free points,” and his large wingspan allows him to put pressure on his opponents by getting a number of their serves back across the net. Before Isner-Kohlschreiber US Open III, Isner was 233-123 (64.9%) in tiebreaks, and Kohlschreiber was 133-128 (51.0 %), including a lowly 8-11 in 2014. In yesterday’s match, this specific factor dramatically switched. Kohlschreiber won all three of his sets in tiebreaks, and in many of them he barely struggled. He won the third ‘breaker 7-2 (courtesy of two Isner double faults), and even when Isner was serving well in the first and especially fourth set tiebreakers, Kohlschreiber was still able to win by a score of 7-4. So why the sudden reversal? Rather than try to break down this intriguing matchup using “numbers” or “facts” or “logic,” I’m going to explain it the only way I know how: using sandwich proxies.

John Isner is basically a BLT sandwich. He has one elite skill: his serve. A BLT’s taste is overwhelmingly dominated by the bacon. A BLT is like The Smashing Pumpkins: yes, Jimmy Chamberlin was important part of the band, but Billy Corgan was by far the heart, soul, brain, and neurosis of the band. (That's right, I just compared John Isner to a sandwich and then compared that sandwich to an alternative rock band.) Similarly, Isner’s game is dominated by his serve. It’s a crisp(y), delicious serve: in yesterday’s match, he pounded in 42 aces in just four sets. He won the NCAA tournament based on that serve. He became the highest-ranking American based on that serve. Hell, he won entire tournaments on the strength of his serve.

The rest of his game, as everyone knows, lags far behind his awe-inspiring serve. His volleys are the mayonnaise of a BLT: necessary, but not exciting. I’d describe Isner’s net play as exactly good. He has functional volleys and occasionally pulls off an impressive half-volley, but he doesn’t have the natural instinct Federer has, or even the instincts that Dimitrov of Gasquet have.

Isner’s forehand, I will say, is lethal if he can tee it off. However, he is not in the position to do so as often as he would like. The rest of his game is filler. Because of his weak backhand (the lettuce of his game), Isner often has to run around his backhand and hit his forehand just a tiny bit off balance. This leads to (right-handed) opponents being able to hit backhands down the line into the open court for winners. Inherently, running around backhands is not a bad strategy—Nadal, for instance, is a frequent practitioner of this strategy. Unfortunately for Isner, he does not have the footspeed or fitness to pull off this strategy against superior opponents. Isner is often caught flatfooted on the aforementioned down-the-line backhands (which Kohlschreiber employed effectively yesterday), and he has often been a victim of cramping in prolonged matches.

The second Isner can’t rely on his serve, his delicious BLT dissolves into mayonnaise, lettuce, and tomato. No thanks! In the second set ‘breaker he hit two double faults, and Kohlschreiber cruised to victory. In the fourth set, Isner looked unstoppable on serve; for a while in the tiebreaker, it seemed as though every serve he hit was an ace. Then, at four all, Isner hit a monster first serve that Kohlschreiber managed to block back. Isner popped a half-volley to Kohlschreiber backhand, and the net three points—and the match—were the German’s.

Isner is the player he is. It’s hard to fault him for relying so heavily on his serve. He has leveraged just about all the wins he can based on his talent and skill set. A lot of times he can squeeze together just one break of serve and win a—this is exactly what happened in the second set of yesterday’s match. However, in order to win multiple best-of-five set matches across a fortnight, Isner needs to be playing just about perfectly. Even the slightest error—say, a first serve body serve instead of a first serve ace—can change the entire complexion of a match. And if, heaven forbid, his serve should fail him, he’s just about doomed. Great returners neutralize Isner, which is the reason why Nadal and Djokovic have a combined 9-2 record against Isner.* Once the bacon’s gone, the sandwich goes as well.

*Actually, the reason is that Isner is one of the greatest NCAA players ever, and Nadal and Djokovic are two of the greatest players ever, but just go with it, okay?