Steve Darcis - the Dark Horse at Wimbledon?

Rafael Nadal created history in France two weeks ago, but that didn’t undermine the morale of his 29-year-old Belgian opponent Steve Darcis in any way whatsoever. Darcis, brimming with confidence, sent Nadal back on his way to Majorca following a straight sets victory. In any case, upsets aren’t new to Darcis at all; only last year, he managed to defeat Tomas Berdych in straight sets at the London Olympics. It could very well be said that Darcis has a history of causing upsets at Wimbledon.

Nadal congratulating Darcis after the match

From what I saw yesterday, I wouldn’t hesitate to say that the Belgian has the game play to be a top ten player. He is a 29 years old, and as I watched him put Nadal on the defensive yesterday, I kept wondering where he has been all these years. Coming to the first aspect of the game, his serve, he served thunderbolts yesterday – not at the level of Roddick or Ivanisevic, but still good enough to bail him out of tough situations. Darcis used his serve to his advantage very well against Nadal, comfortably holding his serve and fending off break points against him; in fact, he regularly served aces when he needed them.

Nadal himself has a ferocious forehand which provides him the upper hand against most of his opponents, but Darcis’s forehand yesterday could match up to Nadal’s; just like last year, the King of Clay lost to someone with a forehand that was firing on all cylinders. Darcis has a single-handed backhand – and I feel anybody who can play the single-handed backhand with power and conviction is a potential top 30 player. A two-handed backhand may have the power, but the more traditional single-handed backhand provides the acute angles; the player can hold his own in crosscourt rallies and Darcis used this aspect to his advantage quite well, despite Nadal being left-handed. Darcis’s court coverage was good, not noteworthy for either being too good or too bad. After all this, I would just have to say that I’m surprised why Darcis hasn’t even managed to get into the top 32 all this while.

Darcis, about to play his ferocious single-handed backhand

Darcis’s draw was extremely hostile, considering he had to play Rafael Nadal in the first round, but now that he is into the second round, we can refer to the hostility only in the past tense. His second round opponent is the Polish player Lukasz Kubot, best known for his fourth round appearance at Wimbledon in 2011. Having watched Darcis play yesterday, I think it is distinctly possible that he goes comfortably through to the next round. If he does that, his third round clash would be against either of the Frenchmen, the qualifier Stephane Robert or the seeded Benoit Paire. A battle against Paire would be difficult, but considering how he played against Nadal, it is not completely improbable to think that Darcis has the ability to defeat the highly-touted Frenchman.

The most likely fourth round opponent for Darcis, if he gets that far, would be either John Isner or Lleyton Hewitt. While it would be difficult to face Isner’s serve, the American’s groundstrokes aren’t half as good as those of Darcis. If it happens to be Hewitt, who was a champion here in the previous decade, I wonder whether the Australian can match up to an in-form, hard-hitting player.

So Darcis’s entry into the quarterfinal doesn’t seem all that unlikely. But if he does make it there, he is likely to face seven-time Wimbledon champion Roger Federer, which might mark the end of his fairy tale. Even if he somehow manages to beat the odds against Federer, the subsequent rounds aren’t going to be easy either, and it’d take a miracle for him to win, considering he would likely have to defeat Novak Djokovic and the local lad, Andy Murray.

Of course, history can’t be ignored, and the person who caused the upset last year, Lukas Rosol, lost against Philipp Kohlschreiber in the very next round, and that too in straight sets. So this prognosis would become a joke if Lukasz Kubot manages to replicate Kohlschreiber’s feat. Despite that, I do believe that a person could beat a title favourite, a two-time winner at Wimbledon, he could very well defeat the other favourites and champions.