	products recent interviews FastScripts archive about ASAP Sports

Our Clients:

Browse by Sport

Find us on

Subscribe to RSS

Click to go to
Asaptext.com

View our
e-Brochure

ROGERS MASTERS

August 12, 2006

Daniel Nestor

TORONTO, ONTARIO

THE MODERATOR: Questions for Daniel.

Q. How would you describe it? Frustrating, given the double-faults?
DANIEL NESTOR: Yeah, it was pretty frustrating. I just feel like there were some points that we kind of gave away. They're a tough team because they don't give anything. They get a lot of first serves in. They make a lot of returns. They really don't make any unforced errors, so you have to beat them.
I mean, you can't really afford to beat yourselves. I think we did that on a couple occasions. First set we got up a break, played well, kind of gave it right back, lost momentum. Same thing, two times in a row we didn't play great service games. They got ahead. That was a pretty big letdown.
But we fought hard. We fought hard in the second set. We had some chances. They served well on most of the breakpoints that we had. We saved a couple breakpoints. Then in the tiebreaker, they got ahead, we fought back, played some good points.
The third set tiebreak, I think they just made more returns and more first serves than we did. That's why, you know, they won. They do the basics a little better.

Q. Have to be kind of an emotional rollercoaster for you. You fought so hard in the second set, then you go into the tiebreak, you were getting a lot of support in the stands. I know your family is here.
DANIEL NESTOR: It was a little bit. It was similar to a match we played against them in Hamburg earlier this year. Same thing, we got up on them early, kind of gave it away. We were up in the second, we fought back, we ended up winning a super tiebreak.
They played the bigger points much more consistently. As I said, they do the basics: first serve on the big points, make the returns, make you beat them. I think sometimes for us, we beat ourselves on the big points. You can't do that against the best team.

Q. Do the media make more of it, because it's in Canada, for you? Is it a special thing for you?
DANIEL NESTOR: No, it's definitely special. You know, obviously I want to win playing where I grew up. You know, there's a little added pressure. But at the same time I thought I played pretty well throughout most of the tournament. It was just, you know, a tough way to end 'cause I didn't feel like I played my best on the big points which, you know, wasn't really the case earlier in the week. You want to end on a high always. Unfortunately, that didn't work out here.
You know, obviously you want to play your best at home and win your home tournament. You know, at least I won it in 2000, which is nice. I've always played well here in Toronto. I've actually never really done well in Montréal. I can't really complain.

Q. On that topic, without knowing what your future plans are, but because it's in Montréal next year, do you plan on being back here in 2008?
DANIEL NESTOR: Yeah, I mean, I don't know. I don't have any plans of retiring or anything. I think I told myself as long as I'm competitive and able to be at the top, challenge for the big titles, I'll keep playing. You know, I enjoy playing. I enjoy competing. I don't think we're far off from winning major titles. I think it's a matter of a couple points here and there. Especially in doubles, doubles is a game of inches. There isn't that much room to maneuver, four guys on the court. Always comes down to a couple points. Just a matter of who plays the big points better.

Q. There was one point in particular at the end of the second set tiebreak, sort of back and forth. That must have been a nice emotional boost.
DANIEL NESTOR: Yeah. It was 6-All I think in the breaker. It was just all over the place. I think Mark played most of the shots in that point. I can't even remember how it ended (laughter).

Q. I think it was you ended up hitting the winner.
DANIEL NESTOR: I remember hitting the one to win the tiebreak.

Q. When you went to the tiebreak, you had the hat off, took the hat off, threw it.
DANIEL NESTOR: We got up on them and then I remember playing some good points, then following it up with some not-so-good points. One point was great; one point was not so good. Then they got ahead of us; we fought back. Mark hit a great return at 6-4 to save the match off a pretty good first serve. Then we played a solid point, then that crazy point at 6-All kind of swung the momentum a little bit. We won the next point.
I don't think I really served enough first serves. I've been serving pretty well. I don't think I got in a high percentage of solid first serves. I think I was relying too much on like a kicker to Bob, which is usually effective to the lefty on the deuce side. He got a good return in on that first point, the 1-All point on the breaker. That kind of set the tone for them. They got ahead of us. If we would have held serve, it would have been different.

Q. I wanted to talk with you about a problem that doubles players have been over the years. I want your comments on the new rules. Also, given everything that's happening, do you still feel, as in the past, that doubles players alone could still make a living or is it going to be harder if doubles players don't play singles, they'll be phased out of the game?
DANIEL NESTOR: No, I think we're pretty set right now. We had issues surrounding doubles that we pretty much straightened out. I think both sides are happy, the tournament directors who raised the issues have a lot of singles guys playing. Outside of the top five or 10 guys, outside of the real stars, which is two or three guys, everyone's playing. Nadal played this week, Ljubicic. You have guys in the top 10 and everyone else out of the top 10 playing doubles.
We're hoping that the next step is actually to increase the prize money a little bit in doubles. Not only is that going to attract more singles guys to play doubles, but also we feel like they are already playing doubles. We think we're deserving of a little bit more. I think the cut is 83 to 17% of the total purse as opposed to what it used to be, 75/25. We're hoping to maybe increase that.
As far as the actual game and the sparring, I think we've gotten used to it. It can be exciting. I think for the fans it's exciting. The super tiebreaker, we're not huge fans of it still, but we like the no-ad scoring. I think there's a case to be made for no-ad scoring across the board in singles. No-ad scoring would be more exciting points, more pressure out there. I think that adds to it. You know, super tiebreaker isn't the fairest way to judge a winner. That's what it is right now. Hopefully we can build on it.

Q. Do you think today is an instance where if there was a full set to be played, the momentum you guys were carrying at that point might have worked in your favor more than playing that super tiebreak?
DANIEL NESTOR: I don't know. It's hard to say. Those guys served great. They're tough to break regardless. They're No. 1 in the world for a reason. I think if we had the momentum going in the third set, there's no reason why we shouldn't have carried it through in a super tiebreaker or a set. I don't think that's a huge deal.

Q. This is the first time they've had the replay system in use at this tournament.
DANIEL NESTOR: Yeah, it's fun. I think the crowd's involved. The players obviously enjoy the opportunity to check on some big points, whether the calls with actually right. Any time you get the fans involved, it lie convenience up the atmosphere. I think it's great for the game.

Q. What is your opinion about the doubles on television? Do the doubles players have a charisma of their own that is maybe not marketed well by the ATP?
DANIEL NESTOR: Well, as far as your first question, I think it's important this they play the doubles final before the singles final because if you compare it to like a rock concert, it's kind of a lead-in into the main event. I think if you have it after, you have a great singles final, people are there for two or three hours, you already had the main event, they don't want to stick around any more. It makes sense to have it before.
At the same time, like you said, they're doing a better job of promoting now after the lawsuit and the issues that were raised. Now we have the new scoring, the new promotion, more opportunity to play matches on center court.
The Bryan brothers are great for tennis. One can argue that outside of Federer, Nadal, the big guns, Agassi, whoever you got in the top five, I would probably find them more exciting to watch than some of these singles guys. Davydenko, I don't know if people really know who he is. He's top 10 in the world. He's a great player, but I don't think he's marketed that well, too. I think the Bryans are exciting for the sport.
We played a pretty exciting match today. I think there's a case to be made for putting more doubles on television. 75% of the world's population plays doubles. I'm sure they'd love to see more doubles. If we have matches like today, it can only help.

Q. Off-the-wall question that for years people probably wanted to ask. What do you think of the quality of the transcript? And if the question is asked, will it be transcribed?
DANIEL NESTOR: (Smiling.)

End of FastScripts...

ASAP Sports, Inc. | T: 1.212 385 0297