Andy Murray believes new coach Ivan Lendl has already improved his game.

The 24-year-old appointed eight-time Grand Slam champion Lendl as his full-time coach in December.

And the British No1 reached the semi-finals of the Australian Open before losing in five-sets to eventual champion Novak Djokovic.

But Murray insists that Lendl has already made a positive impact, despite that disappointing defeat in Melbourne.

“I spent five days with him before the Australian Open and I feel like I improved just in those days,” Murray told the BBC.

“I’ll go and spend a lot more time with him and work harder, and that’s really all that you can do.”

Murray has failed to win a set in his three Grand Slam final appearances – he was twice defeated by Roger Federer and lost to Djokovic at the Australian Open in 2011.

And the Scot admitted his Serbian counterpart is a source of inspiration after the world No1 dominated the sport last season, winning three Grand Slam titles.

“The turnaround was incredible and he was struggling at the end of the year before,” he said.

“That’s the thing. It is small margins of one break or one match and it doesn’t have to be in a Slam – it could be any time.

“Sometimes things can just click and you can make big improvements, and I feel like I made a big improvement in Australia.”

Murray is confident he can replicate Djokovic’s stunning form and finally claim an elusive Major this year.

“Everything that’s happened in the past, you would say Federer and Nadal are the greatest players ever and Djokovic, the last year, had probably the greatest year ever,” he added.

“This year’s a new year; it’s irrelevant what’s happened in the past.

“I’m not saying I’m going to win 16 Grand Slams, but if I can get a few then you can be remembered in the same breath as those guys – you had those great matches; you won Slams in the same time as them.”

It was an understandable question, given the record of this particular woman. How does an athlete who has dominated her field for more than a decade remain so motivated?

For Esther Vergeer has held sway over her sport—wheelchair tennis—like few others could imagine.

She is undefeated in singles since January 2003, a current unbroken streak of 444 matches.

She has five Olympic golds—three in singles, two in doubles—and a silver, too.

She has won every singles Grand Slam she has entered since 2002—a total of 20—and all but one of her 21 doubles tournaments: she was a finalist in her one loss.

She has won the women’s Masters title every year since 1998: 14 straight titles.

And she has been world No1 since 1999, hitting the top at 18 and still at the top aged 30.

In short, when she arrived in London, nominated for a sixth time in the Laureus World Sports Awards, Vergeer was the reigning singles wheelchair champion in the Olympics, the Masters and all the Grand Slams—and, for good measure, the reigning doubles champion in all the Slams and the Masters too.

Is it any wonder that the tennis name on everyone’s lips in 2011, Novak Djokovic, fired off an excited Tweet from the Laureus red carpet: “Me and one of the women in tennis I admire the most, Esther Vergeer.”

So how does she remain motivated? The answer had distinct echoes of that other enduring 30-year-old tennis champion, Roger Federer, when asked a similar question after winning his 70th title in London a few months back: “I love this game more than anybody. It’s a lot of sacrifice, it’s a lot of effort, but I do enjoy that.”

Vergeer, currently with 156 singles titles, is just as passionate about tennis.

“My main motivation is the inner game: I just love the sport, I love the training, but then also the way I see that I can improve in so many aspects still.

“Then there’s the motivation of the Olympics: You have to set certain goals, and this year for sure I’ve set my goal—my mind—on the Olympics.”

And just as Federer continues to develop his game in order to stay at the top, so does Vergeer. Her opponents may want to avert their eyes from her next assertion.

“I do feel that I improve each year. I add stuff, I take away stuff. Working with my team, it helps me to see things I wouldn’t be able to see if it was just myself, but having a physical trainer, a nutritionist, a mobility person—it makes me see that changing a small thing can have a big effect on court.

“Of course my main competitive edge is on the court, and I do still get a lot of tactical improvement. But then also there is mental training and improvement, the physical improvement, the equipment improvement, my chair, the materials. I see so many improvements on so many levels that there’s still much to learn.”

It seems impertinent, in the face of her continued dominance and improvement, to raise the question of her age—but the parallels with Federer kept coming so the question was posed: Has she begun to notice the physical impact of so many years on the tour?

“Yes, I do notice the difference from a couple of years ago, but also during matches you feel more tired, feel more little pains. So I do notice getting a little bit older, but I also know that whenever you train hard enough and you work hard enough on your physical abilities, you can still cope with a lot of pressure.”

It was the answer of a woman both confident in her talent and comfortable in her skin. She talked of the cause of her disability—and her reaction to it—with a similar matter-of-fact ease that felt more like a conversation than an interview.

Vergeer was only eight when an operation to repair a birth defect around her spinal cord left her paralysed.

“At the beginning, I didn’t realise I’d be paralysed the rest of my life. I was little and in pain and in hospital and all those things together made me think that when I got home and I didn’t have pain any more, I would be able to walk again. But when I got back home, had to go back to school, play with my friends, it dawned on me it would be the rest of my life.

“In the beginning it’s hard, of course, everything I did I compared with before: It was easier when I could walk, it was more fun when I could walk, so it was difficult. I guess sports, and the people around me, made me realise that the world doesn’t end. Now I can do all the things that other 30-year-olds do so I don’t see myself as a disabled.”

She initially played wheelchair basketball as well as tennis and was a member of the Dutch team that won the European championship in 1997. But she eventually chose to concentrate on tennis and played her first international tournament in 1996. Two years later, at 17, she turned full-time and won her first big tournament, the Masters.

More than 13 years on and Vergeer has just taken her ninth Australian singles title, winning the final 6-0, 6-0 in 47 minutes.

Yet after this imposing victory, she admitted: “I’ve already been telling myself I can lose any minute now because I know that some girls are a better player than me, maybe have better tennis skills than me, maybe have a better disability than me, maybe can put more pressure on the ball, but maybe don’t have the mental toughness or the experience.”

Add to that mental toughness her love of tennis, of competition, of winning—and her continued physical development with coach Sven Groeneveld—and talk of a change of career is clearly premature. She does, though, already have other irons in her fire. She supplements her modest income from prize money with public speaking and she has her own charitable foundation, which she sees as a perfect fit with her Laureus connections.

Talking at the ‘Sport for Good Festival’ at Millwall FC on the morning of the Awards ceremony, she enthused about what she saw.

“I have my own foundation back home to help little kids with disabilities to get involved in sports. So I very much link myself to Laureus. You look at the kids and they have so much fun, they can grow up together, they can learn from each other, they can have a positive atmosphere here, so I do very much link myself with a project like this, something I can be involved in, and more involved maybe when I retire.”

How, then, does she compare her recognition by the Laureus Academy with her multitude of Grand Slams?

“Well it’s totally different. Being nominated for a Laureus is special because it’s picked by the people here, the Academy members, athletes from all disciplines and all generations. People who know what it is and what you have to do for it. It feels like a great honour. And even though I’ve won it twice, I still get goose-bumps thinking about it.”

A few hours later, Vergeer was beaten to what would have been a third Laureus title by sprinter Oscar Pistorius. Djokovic took the big prize and the big plaudits as Sportsman of the Year—a just reward for one of the finest years in men’s tennis. Minutes before, however, it was of the remarkable Esther that he Tweeted the world.

The skies were grey as gunmetal, the air as chill as a razor blade, but the carpet was plush crimson and the star quotient was enough to stop London’s traffic.

This was the night that the world’s sporting elite descended on the capital, and the cameras flashed and the mobiles tweeted.

The 2012 Laureus World Sports Awards are regarded as the Oscars of sport. Not only are the shortlists compiled by the world’s sporting media but the winners are voted for by members of the Laureus Academy, the 47-strong group of Olympic and world champions who own between them 54 Olympic golds, 43 tennis Grand Slams, 32 Major golf championships, 20 world motorcycling championships, 11 Paralympic golds – the list goes on.

So the winners are men and women who cross the boundaries of discipline and nation in their achievements. Nowhere was this range more in evidence than in the Sportsman of the Year category, which boasted the world’s fastest athlete, Usain Bolt, Tour de France winner Cadel Evans, winner of football’s Ballon d’Or, Lionel Messi, and 11-time Formula 1 winner, Sebastian Vettel.

But which of them would walk away with the Oscar-style, Cartier-designed solid silver Laureus statuette?

Well the winning man was making a good job of stealing the show—and not just for his outstanding achievements on a tennis court in 2011. Dressed in Dolce and Gabbana, Novak Djokovic was tweeting like a kid in a sweet shop—from outside No10 ahead of cocktails with the PM and then about meeting his own sporting heroes.

Djokovic took the tennis world by storm in 2011, compiling one of the longest unbroken streaks—41 matches—and taking three Grand Slam and five Masters titles. It was a run that took him to No1 by the middle of the year, and there he has stayed, more than 3,000 points clear of two of the finest men ever to play the game.

Now, in 2012, Djokovic followed those same illustrious rivals down the red carpet to pick up the Laureus trophy. For last year’s winner was Rafael Nadal and the winner from 2005 through to 2008 was Roger Federer.

There is, it seems, something about tennis and the individual nature of its combat that makes it stand out from the crowd. This year’s awards featured three more tennis stars: wheelchair tennis champion Esther Vergeer, together with Na Li and Petra Kvitova. And previous Laureus winners have included Justine Henin, Serena Williams, Kim Clijsters, Martina Hingis, Amelie Mauresmo, Jennifer Capriati and Marat Safin.

Boris Becker, one of the founding members of the Laureus Academy, explained his sport’s popularity: “Tennis is a very international sport. It’s played in all continents, the matches can be long and involving. And players don’t wear masks or helmets, so it’s a very, very good TV sport where you can see the player’s eyes.”

It was fitting, then, for Becker to comment on Djokovic’s success.

“I congratulate Novak on a wonderful year—one of the best seasons I can ever remember from an individual. Just a couple of years ago, men’s tennis was all about Federer and Nadal and then suddenly we have a new kid on the block who seems to have taken over the sport. We should acknowledge what a fantastic achievement it has been from him.”

He added, with a wry smile, referring to Djokovic’s Australian Open performance: “I wonder sometimes how you do it. A five-hour match, then a six-hour match—I’m glad I played in the 80s!”

And what of the man himself? Djokovic’s comments expressed, with pitch-perfect articulacy, much about the journey he has travelled to reach such recognition.

“I dared to dream about becoming the world’s best tennis player and the best athlete, and here I stand before you with this very dear and special award, so I think everything’s possible. I would hope that each kid around the world will dare to dream, and that they will use their sport as the guiding star for the path they choose.”

That is, of course, a hope that chimes perfectly with the Laureus mission. The organisation has raised over €40m for projects which have helped to improve the lives of more than one-and-a-half million young people around the world through sport-related community projects.

But Djokovic was just as keen to express his admiration for the members of the Academy itself.

“What stands out for me in London is the experience of getting to know the legends of the sport, standing shoulder to shoulder with them, and practically absorbing every word they said during these two hours, all their personal stories.”

However, while he admitted that 2011 had been “the best experience of my life”, Djokovic’s hopes and expectations are already sharply focused on the challenge of 2012.

“Is it possible to win all four Grand Slams? Everything is possible. I have to stay optimistic, I have to believe in what I do, believe in my abilities, that I can win on all surfaces.

“And I’ve proven on many occasions, especially in the last few years, that I can really be one of the candidates to win every Grand Slam on every surface. I need to keep that up. Obviously Roland Garros is the one to win this year, and next the other Grand Slams and the Olympics are the top of my priorities.”

Should he achieve even some of his ambitions—and there are few who think he won’t—the best tennis player in the world could well be striding down that Laureus red carpet again next year.

Best of the rest

UK sport enjoyed multiple successes in the shape of two Northern Ireland golf stars. Darren Clarke, who recovered from a slump in form following the loss of his wife, received the World Comeback of the Year Award after winning the Open Championship at his 20th attempt, aged 42.

Rory McIlroy won the World Breakthrough of the Year Award after winning the US Open, his first Major Championship, at the age of 22.

Academy member, Sir Bobby Charlton, was given the special Lifetime Achievement Award though he was unable to receive it in person. He became unwell and returned to Manchester for minor surgery earlier in the day. In collecting the award, Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson said: “Sir Bobby is fine. He is very annoyed not to be here to receive this Award but I’ll be taking the statuette back to Old Trafford for him. He loves the work he does for Laureus and I know how delighted he is to have received this tribute.”

The coveted Laureus Sport for Good Award was given to former Brazilian footballer, now social justice campaigner, Raí Souza Vieira de Oliveira.

Sportswoman of the Year
Vivian Cheruiyot, Kenya, winner of both 5K and 10K gold medals at the World Athletics Championships

Team of the Year
FC Barcelona, Spain, winner of football’s Champions League and the Spanish league.

Action Sportsperson of the Year
Kelly Slater, USA, winner of a record 11th world surfing championship, aged 39, his fourth Laureus award.

Sportsperson with a Disability
Oscar Pistorius, South Africa, the first amputee to win a track medal in the non-disabled world athletics championships, silver in the 4x400m.

It’s a controversy that first made headlines 20 years ago on the lawns of Wimbledon.

The 18-year-old Monica Seles came to London in 1992 as world No1 and bidding for a career Grand Slam. She faced, in the semi-finals, a 35-year-old Martina Navratilova aiming to win her 10th Wimbledon title. It was a contest that proved dramatic in all sorts of ways.

Seles had swept effortlessly through the draw but her progress was accompanied by a growing buzz of discontent. Some opponents began to complain about the noise that accompanied her powerful tennis: a grunt of exertion that grew in proportion to the pace of her shots.

As the three-set semi-final unfolded, Navratilova added her voice to the complaints. Seles tried to tone things down, but the tighter the match became, the more Seles’ grunts crescendoed into roars.

Seles won, but the volume of her win became as much a topic for headlines as her precocious talent. Come the final against Steffi Graf, she all but banished her grunts and won just three games, and despite afterwards saying that her reduced noise had nothing to do with the loss, many did not agree.

Seles went on to win the US Open but her chance of either a career or a calendar Slam were gone, and would never be repeated after a court-side stabbing the following spring wrecked her tennis career.

Fast forward to 2011, and once again that most traditional and hushed of tennis tournaments became the centre for renewed debate about the noise of women players.

The then chief executive of the All England Club, Ian Ritchie, revealed that spectators had started to complain and that: “We have discussed it with the tours and we believe it is helpful to reduce the amount of grunting.” He added: “If one player is grunting too much and the other player doesn’t like it, they can complain to the umpire.”

According to Stacey Allaster, chief executive of the WTA, however, few do: “I’ve not had one player come to me to complain about it. It’s not bothering the athletes. And we have a hindrance rule in place.”

The ‘hindrance’ rule brought about another spike in this high-decibel story. During the US Open women’s final against a silent Sam Stosur, another regular grunter, Serena Williams, was deducted a point for roaring ‘come on’ as she hit a huge forehand onto her opponent’s sideline. The umpire applied the strictest interpretation of the rule: “[When] a player is hindered in playing the point by a deliberate act of the opponent, the player shall win the point.”

The call was controversial for asserting that Williams’ shout was ‘deliberate’ rather than ‘unintentional’, which would only have required the point to be replayed. Is it, in fact, possible for a player brought up to play vocal tennis to turn off their habit?

The latest Grand Slam champion, crowned this week in Australia, is adamant that she cannot and will not.

Victoria Azarenka’s rhythmic, bird-like squeal competed with that of fellow finalist Maria Sharapova, a woman whose anguished scream has been clocked at 101 decibels.

Azarenka, who regularly endures mocking echoed squeals from the crowd, repelled the usual questions: “It’s the way I am, the way I play, the way I used to play when I was a kid.” She added: “I think it’s the way that made me breathe, made me move. It’s part of my movement. As a child I was really weak, so I had to give that little extra power there. It kind of stuck with me, so that’s it.”

Several respected voices nevertheless question the necessity of such a grunt. At an ITF award ceremony ahead of the 2009 Wimbledon, Navratilova said: “I think we can all agree that the grunting/screeching/screaming needs to come to an end – it is annoying, it can be a hindrance and most of all it is completely unnecessary. If it was necessary, everybody would be doing it.”

Chris Evert was reported by the Press Association as saying: “I don’t know how you measure it or what you do but as a player—and I was known for my concentration—it is distracting. They say you’ve got to blow air out before you hit the ball and I’m thinking, well, Steffi Graf hit the ball a ton and she didn’t grunt.”

And the criticism is not just the from the ‘old school’. Caroline Wozniacki, only recently deposed as world No1, added fuel to the debate at the WTA Championships last October: “I think there are some players who do it on purpose. They don’t do it in practice and then they come into the match and they grunt. I think they [officials] could definitely cut it.”

There is, though, evidence to support Azarenka’s assertion, some of it from the Nick Bollettieri’s Tennis Academy in Florida, where both Seles and Sharapova trained.

Bollettieri has quelled suggestions that his charges had been coached to grunt. In The Sunday Times, he said: “My staff and I have never taught grunting. We have always taught the proper way to breathe in and out. Players grunt because it helps them release energy and keep focused.”

It’s a line that was reiterated in a memo from the Academy entitled Breathing vs Grunting in Tennis, which draws a distinction between the benefit of optimal breathing and the hindrance of ‘over exertion’.

Now, research from Brunel University in London has given new scientific backing to the techniques of forceful breathing.

Professor of Applied Physiology Alison McConnell suggests in her book, Breathe Strong, Perform Better, that there is a physiological reason for a tennis player to grunt.

She explains: “Maximising the power of a tennis shot is created by transferring muscular force to the racket head efficiently. A strong core and trunk is vital for this process. The muscles in the trunk also contribute to racket head speed by providing a rotational force between the hips and shoulders.”

So how does this cause a player to grunt as they strike the ball? According to Professor McConnell it all comes down to breathing techniques.

“We all instinctively inhale just before we make a physical effort such as lifting furniture or swinging a racket at a ball. We do this because holding air in the lungs helps to provide the stability required for injury-free and forceful movements of the trunk.

“Efficient breathing is an incredibly important contributor to performance in all sports, but especially in a high-intensity, skill-based game like tennis. Any coach will tell you that the heart of a good stroke is a relaxed rhythm, and part of achieving this rhythm is getting your breathing and stroke in tune.”

Simply exhaling as soon as the player has hit the ball will dissipate the stability in their core and this can throw them off balance and break that all-important rhythm. The solution is controlled, forceful exhalation.

“Narrowing the opening of your lungs will slow down the rate of airflow from them, while maintaining stiffness in the trunk and control over the breathing rhythm. It is in using this technique that some players feel the need to grunt.”

She goes on to suggest that the reason grunting is more common amongst women than men is that their upper bodies are generally weaker and thus require stronger control and stability.

“Of course this doesn’t actually need to result in audible grunting but it is easier to coach the controlled exhalation if you can hear it. As a result some younger players may well be taught to grunt as a means of breath control.”

The question remains, however, whether “audible exhalation” has to be so loud, and here there appears to be room for change. Allaster confirmed that the WTA was beginning the process by visiting the Bollettieri Academy to “meet with coaches and young players – it just comes down to education.”

A WTA statement elaborated: “We are currently in the process of exploring how to reduce excessive grunting, especially for younger players just starting out, without adversely affecting players who have developed their game under the current training, rules and procedures.”

There appears to be growing support amongst some of the players for this action, too—Svetlana Kuznetsova and Jelena Jankovic amongst them. Another, Agnieszka Radwanska, drew Sharapova’s scorn after their match in Melbourne by saying: “Of course everybody can make some noise. This is tennis. It’s really hard work. But I don’t think it’s very necessary to scream that loud.”

In the meantime, she, her fellow players and tennis fans will just have to put up with it—or wear ear plugs—because Sharapova, like Azarenka, has no intention of changing: “You’ve watched me grow up, you’ve watched me play tennis. I’ve been the same over the course of my career. No one important enough has told me to change or do something different.”

Professor Alison McConnell’s book is accompanied by the Breathestrong website about breathing training.

Novak Djokovic has described beating Rafael Nadal in a marathon five-set final at the Australian Open as the greatest win of his life.

The world No1 edged to a 5-7 6-4 6-2 6-7 7-5 victory in an energy-sapping five hours and 53 minutes, with the longest ever Grand Slam final reaching its conclusion at 01:37 local time.

And despite the 24-year-old Serb’s impressive 2011, in which he won three Majors including Wimbledon and the US Open for the first time, he believes his latest success is his greatest triumph.

“Wimbledon is right up there next to this one because it’s just the tournament that I always dreamed of winning,” said the five-time Grand Slam winner.

“But this one I think comes out on the top because just the fact that we played almost six hours is incredible.

“I think it’s probably the longest final in the history of all Grand Slams, and just to hear that fact is making me cry, really.

“I’m very proud just to be part of this history, part of the elite of the players that have won this tournament several times.

“And I was very flattered to be playing in front of Rod Laver, in front of the all-time greats, and in front of 15,000 people that stayed until 01:30am. It’s incredible, really.”

Djokovic fought back from a break down in the deciding set to retain his crown and dash Nadal’s hopes of a second Australian Open title.

But Djokovic, while admitting it was a shame one of them had to lose such a great final, does not feel sorry for his Spanish rival.

“I was in that position a couple years ago, losing most of the semi-finals and finals against him and Roger Federer in Grand Slams – so I know how it feels.

“Unfortunately there had to only be one winner because we both gave it all. We both put 100 per cent of our abilities on the court and played to the last moment.

“Unfortunately there couldn’t be two winners, but he definitely deserved to be a winner as well tonight. I would be saying same thing if I’m sitting here as a loser.”

As the catchphrase of the famous professional wrestler Ric Flair went, “To be the man, you’ve gotta beat the man,” a feeling Andy Murray can certainly relate to.

The dedicated and low-key Scot might not share the “limousine-riding, jet-flying, wheeling-dealing, kiss-stealing” persona of Flair’s character, but he would certainly admire the 16-times world champion’s winning mentality.

Having seen Murray’s career unfold and the tennis he’s capable of playing, it has been fairly easy to back him in his quest to attain the holy grail of a Grand Slam title.

The naysayers will have you believe that every time he comes up in a Major against Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic that he’s already beaten before he walks on court.

The Scot has won neither of his two clashes with both Federer and Djokovic, and though he’s conquered Nadal twice, the feat is overshadowed by his four defeats by the Spaniard.

The figures make for grim reading but Murray’s commendable record against his three nemeses on the rest of the tour have always been a source of hope.

However, as Murray prepared to do battle with Djokovic this week, for the first time one felt he simply had no chance.

With a Grand Slam final and three semi-finals in 2011 Murray enjoyed a great year, but the Serb had an unbelievable one, conquering Melbourne, Wimbledon and Flushing Meadows.

And for the first set-and-a-half of their encounter, Murray seemed to be succumbing to the same script: power his way through the tournament, then crumble as soon as he ran into one of these three amazing competitors.

But Murray proved those who doubted his mental fortitude wrong with an astounding effort in defeat, drawing on previously unseen depths of character, stamina and sheer will.

After his annihilation at the hands of Djokovic in last year’s Australian Open final, Murray suffered an alarming dip in form which didn’t see him recover until the clay-court season.

Many observers believe this time Murray can take a lot of positives despite the same outcome and use the experience to drive himself to the summit.

That he took the world No1 to his absolute limit will surely steel the Scot with the belief he can finally compete with the very best, they say.

But though Murray showed he can compete with Djokovic, he didn’t show he could beat him.

It’s unfair to criticise Murray given the bravery of his performance, but the cold, hard truth is he didn’t win the Australian Open and the Grand Slam monkey remains on his back.

The primate clinging to his muscular shoulders is fast growing into a ten-tonne gorilla, a psychological King Kong that refuses to relinquish its hold.

What if the result has the opposite affect on Murray’s mindset? Instead of taking heart from his performance, the idea his very best might never be good enough could solidify in his mind.

He may have nagging thoughts that he’s up against an immovable force, a paralysing and poisonous debilitation Murray’s new coach Ivan Lendl must ensure doesn’t take hold.

It could still go either way for Murray’s Grand Slam hopes, but if he’s to finally achieve his dream he’ll have to not just compete with Federer, Nadal and Djokovic but beat them.

This was a big year for the Australian Open: its 100th year, its 25th at Melbourne Park—the 25th since switching from grass to hard courts—and 50 years since the man whose name graces this tournament’s centre court, Rod Laver, won the calendar Grand Slam.

No-one except Laver himself has managed the feat since—the only man to do so in both the pre- and post-Open eras. He was a near-Royal presence at many of the key matches this year, including what may turn out to be the first steps of the man who could repeat his Grand Slam feat this year.

Champions top the rankings

The week ended in a climax worthy of such celebratory event, with world No1 Novak Djokovic retaining the men’s title in the longest men’s Grand Slam final on record, a dramatic 5-7 6-4 6-2 6-7 7-5 victory over Rafael Nadal in five hours and 53 minutes.

It was Djokovic’s third Australian title and his third straight Major. He will now, with some confidence, target his first French Open title to bag a non-calendar Slam, but there are many who believe he could also emulate the great Laver’s achievement of a 2012 clean sweep.

The women’s champion, Victoria Azarenka, heralded what may be a significant transition from the old school—especially with the imminent retirement of Kim Clijsters—to a new generation of exciting, strong young women. She took apart former champion Maria Sharapova, 6-3, 6-0, to win her first Major, and with it came the No1 ranking.

Right behind her at No2 is the equally formidable Petra Kvitova, winner of Wimbledon and the WTA championships in the last six months. The two look certain to spearhead the women’s tour in 2012.

Not forgetting…

The remarkable Esther Vergeer extended her unbroken run of wins in the women’s wheelchair event to 444, to take her fifth Australian title.

Leander Paes celebrated his 49th doubles title and his first career Grand Slam when he joined forces with Radek Stepanek to win the men’s title. He reached the mixed finals with Elena Vesnina, too.

Brits Andrew Lapthorne and Peter Norfolk won the quad wheelchair doubles title, and Norfolk also won the quad singles.

More British junior success followed Oliver Golding’s US Open singles win last September: Liam Broady and Joshua Ward-Hibbert won Australia’s boys doubles.

Quotes of the championships

Lleyton Hewitt, on reaching a fourth-round match against Djokovic: “I was hoping my body would hold up for one match. I didn’t look past Andy (Roddick), I didn’t look past Milos (Raonic). Now I’ve got Novak.”

Bernard Tomic on playing his tennis hero, Roger Federer: “The harder I hit it, the ball comes back and ends up always being a winner…It’s good to watch, even for me, playing, I enjoy watching it.”

Sharapova on Agnieszka Radwanska’s comment about her opponent’s grunting: “Isn’t she back in Poland already?”

Federer on reaching his 1000th match: “Well, 1000 matches, not 1000 wins. Big difference…Either I have been around a long time or I’m extremely fit: You decide.”

Bob Bryan, finalist in the men’s doubles, about wife Michelle’s imminent delivery of a baby: “It’s crunch time, yeah. She turned [the TV] off in the third set because she was starting to feel a couple small contractions. I’ve been telling her: ‘Don’t watch the matches…you might spit that baby out’.”

Andy Murray, about himself, after his five-hour, five-set semi-final loss to Djokovic: “A different player, a different attitude to this time last year. Yeah, I’m proud of the way I fought.”

Djokovic, on Nadal’s comment that he enjoyed the suffering of extreme contests: “You’re going through so much suffering your toes are bleeding. Everything is just outrageous, you know, but you’re still enjoying that pain.”

Rankings

Juan Martin del Potro re-entered the top 10 for the first time since September 2010, the year he underwent wrist surgery.

Caroline Wozniacki slipped to No4 after ending the last two years as No1 despite failing to win a Grand Slam title.

Feliciano Lopez reached a new career high of No15, one of three 30-year-olds and four Spaniards in top 15.

Radwanska climbed two places to a career-high No6, after falling in the Melbourne quarters in three sets to eventual champion Azarenka.

Kei Nishikori broke into the top 20, moving up six places to No20, after reaching his first Grand Slam quarter-final at the Australian Open, the first Japanese man to do so in the Open era.

Marion Bartoli rose to a career-high No7 after exactly 12 years on the pro tour.

And finally…

The Australian Open ran a Social Leaderboard throughout the tournament to measure the most popular players via tweets and Facebook likes. And the winners are:

1. Rafael Nadal
2. Roger Federer
3. Novak Djokovic
4. Andy Murray
5. Maria Sharapova

In a mammoth semi-final between Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, this extraordinary catch from a ball boy rivalled the two great tennis players for the best moment of the night.

Hothead Marcos Baghdatis destroys four racquets

With emotions running wild, Marcos Baghdatis decided to take out his frustration on his racquets after losing the second set against Stanislas Wawrinka in the second round. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the world No44 went on to suffer a 7-6, 6-4, 5-7, 6-1 defeat.

Ana Ivanovic loses her bearings

Ana Ivanovic looked rather bewildered after world No2 Petra Kvitova raced to a first set lead – and it was highlighted when the Serb served an ace and walked to her seat, confident the game was hers. But to her shock, it was only 40-15.

Ball girl gives David Attenborough run for his money

One poor, unfortunate ball girl had to go beyond the call of duty during Lleyton Hewitt’s four-set victory over Cedrik-Marcel Stebe in the first round and pick up a creepy crawly that was disrupting play.

And finally: Mansour Bahrami

No compilation of Grand Slam clips would be complete without tennis’ biggest comic Mansour Bahrami – so here’s a particularly funny rally in a legends match between Pat Cash and Goran Ivanisevic and Barhami and Cedric Pioline.

There are times when sporting mantras can take on the triteness of platitude, and none more so than “It’s a pity anyone has to lose.”

It’s a comment wheeled out at the end of many a close match—perhaps a Masters final of three, maybe more, hours. Sometimes it may even be appropriate: Such a one came at the 2009 Madrid Masters, a semi-final of four hours won by Rafael Nadal.

More appropriately, though, these are words attached to a Grand Slam, the ultimate challenge because the prize is so great and the route so long. These are the best-of-five-set marathons with no final tie-break that may be the sixth or even the seventh match in a fortnight.

In recent years, such contests have often also involved Nadal: four hours against Juan Martin del Potro at Wimbledon and against John Isner at Roland Garros in 2011, or four and three-quarter hours against Roger Federer in the 2008 Wimbledon final.

The longest match ever played at the Australian Open was his semi-final against Fernando Verdasco in 2009, all five hours and 10 minutes of it.

Every one of those matches ended in victory for Nadal, but in the match that concluded the 100th playing of the Australian Open in 2012, that most pugnacious and persistent of all tennis athletes endured the longest match ever played at Melbourne Park and lost. If ever there was a match where no-one deserved to lose, it was surely this one.

It brought together No2 seed Nadal against the man he beat in that Madrid final almost three years ago, world No1 Novak Djokovic. In what has become one of the great tennis rivalries of the decade, this was to be their 30th meeting but it came at a highly significant moment in their careers. For although Nadal began 2011 as No1 with a 16-7 head-to-head advantage over Djokovic, he came into 2012 having lost all six intervening matches, all finals, two of them Grand Slams.

Nadal asserted that he would spend the winter searching for a solution to his ‘Djokovic problem’, added some weight to his racket and his serve, and promised it would be a more aggressive Nadal who took on the Serb in their latest final.

What also worked in Nadal’s favour this time was an extra day’s rest between beating Federer in his own semi and watching Djokovic take five sets and little short of five hours to beat Andy Murray in his.

It certainly looked as though the Nadal plan was working, too. Where Djokovic had run away with a two-sets lead in both their Grand Slam finals last year, this time it was Nadal who made the early strike, stepping onto the baseline to receive, and powering down-the-line forehands to force an error on break point. Nadal took a 3-2 lead and a livid Djokovic ripped off his shirt and smashed down his racket.

Now dressed in black rather than white, Djokovic regained his focus and pressured the Nadal serve to break back and consolidate a 5-4 lead. Nadal, though, broke again and took the set with a big body-serve, 7-5.

Already they were 80 minutes down, but an hour later they were level again, thanks to an aggressive early break from Djokovic to lead 3-1. Indeed it looked, at 5-2, as though he would break again, firing returns of the Nadal serve like missiles to the baseline. Instead, Djokovic served his first double fault to hand a break to Nadal but quickly recovered when Nadal did the same. Djokovic levelled the match, 6-4.

They returned to court, drenched in sweat in the sweltering 30+ degree heat and with their ears ringing to a warning about the time taken between points. And although the speed of play did not increase, the speed of the games did. Djokovic retained a tight grip with a crisp and clean opening service game and continued to zip his returns at the feet of Nadal.

The Spaniard seemed forever on the back foot, pounding his left arm like a jackhammer but unable to achieve the penetration of his opponent. Rarely has Nadal shown such frustrated body language as now: He seemed out of ideas, and managed just two winners to Djokovic’s 11, 16 points to the Serb’s 32. Djokovic broke twice to take the set, 6-2.

Nadal was looking into the abyss despite summoning every ounce of muscle power to almost break Djokovic early in the set, but the Serb looked the calmest man in the place. Then came a turn. Down three break points, Nadal responded, fist-pumping, to the challenge: three aces and two winners in his best sequence of points since the opening set. He had denied Djokovic the chance to serve out the match, and a sudden rain shower came like a breath of fresh air to his cause.

Fifteen minutes later, the roof shut and the court mopped by dozens of ball-kids, Djokovic looked completely unaffected by the break and took a clean service game with a running forehand winner on the stretch from behind the baseline and beyond the sideline. Nadal, though, appeared invigorated by the stoppage. His strut was back, his fist clenched and he took the contest beyond midnight to a tie-break.

Buoyed up perhaps by his weary-looking opponent, Nadal served, smashed and sliced winners to counter a 5-3 deficit and levelled the match, 7-6. With 42 points and 11 winners each in the set, the match would come down to one last shoot-out.

Surely now those five semi-final hours would hit the Djokovic legs. Back into black for the denouement, he certainly looked a shadow of the vibrant green torso at the other end of the court. The inevitable break came in the sixth game as Nadal retrieved everything Djokovic could summon and he took what looked like a decisive lead on serve, 30-15. But Nadal hit a fatal loose backhand wide of the sideline and, in the blink of an eye, Djokovic made the break and then won the longest rally of the match to level at 4-4.

Next it was Nadal’s turn to win a 31-stroke rally and survive break points. It was enough to have Djokovic on his back with exhaustion but not enough to prevent the Serb from earning and winning a break point in the 11th game. He had only to summon the energy to serve out the match, but yet again Nadal forced a break back chance.

This time, though, there was no denying the near super-human effort of the world No1. He had just the energy left to hit a huge serve, sink to his knees and then rip off his shirt in slender imitation of the Incredible Hulk.

And so ended 5hrs 53mins of bruising tennis between two of the fittest, grittiest men in this most gladiatorial of sports. Such was the endeavour that they needed chairs to relieve their sinking knees during the presentation ceremony.

Yet for all their physical prowess, it may be their mental resolve and seemingly limitless desire for victory that marks this match down as one the Australian Open’s greatest.

It also promises much for the coming season of three more such Slams and, of course, the Olympics. It will take an Olympian achievement, though, to outclass this one.

Under clear skies and 30-degree heat on the sweeping blue arena at the heart of Melbourne Park, two of the most aggressive players in women’s tennis prepared for battle in the 100th Australian Open.

Maria Sharapova glided into view, 6ft 2ins of cool, calm elegance; Victoria Azarenka, barely any shorter, plugged in and with the loose, rolling gait of a boxer.

Looking on were the two greatest Australian champions: Rod Laver, a three-time champion in his homeland and celebrating the 50th anniversary of the first of his two calendar Grand Slam; and Margaret Court, holder of a record 24 singles Slam titles, 11 of them in Australia.

The presence of such tennis royalty lent an extra frisson to what already felt like a special final: a former champion—Sharapova won in 2008—versus a champion-in-the-making—Azarenka won the junior Australian title in 2005, reached the quarters here in 2010 and the semis in Wimbledon last year.

Tall and willowy, feisty and strong, the women’s head-to-head suggested it would be close. They had three wins apiece, two each on hard courts, and last year Sharapova won in straights in Rome, Azarenka in straights in Miami. They arrived at this final via near-identical three-set, two-hour-plus wins over Grand Slam champions: Sharapova over Petra Kvitova and Azarenka over Kim Clijsters.

There was one more element. They started the match ranked 3 and 4 but, by the end, one of them would be the new No1.

It was Sharapova who burst from the gates to pounce on a nervy Azarenka serve. The young woman from Belarus needed time to acclimatise to her first Grand Slam final but Sharapova appeared in no mood to give it to her. Two double faults and a couple of wide backhands later, Azarenka conceded an immediate break of serve.

She may have hoped to break back what can be one of the more inconsistent serves in the women’s game—Sharapova underwent shoulder surgery in 2008 and can produce multiple double faults of her own—but there was no sign of weakness: Sharapova held.

When Azarenka went 0-30 down on serve again, the murmur around the Rod Laver Arena suggested that many people shared the same concern: If Sharapova broke again, she may very quickly beat her opponent into submission.

But although Azarenka has struggled to manage her nerves on big occasions in the past, 2011 saw her mental game mature alongside her practical game. In Sydney, just a fortnight before Melbourne, she beat three top-10 players to win her ninth career title.

Now she clenched her jaw and her fist to force her own power shots into play, won the next four points and held with a roaring ‘come on’. Her nerves were gone, her strut was in place, and she won the next four points, too, to break back.

Azarenka’s is an urgent, busy style around the court that commands attention from herself, from the ball kids and from the ball itself. In contrast, Sharapova channels her intensity inward during a carefully controlled service preparation. The sudden injection of pace and depth from Azarenka broke her rhythm and, now level at 3-3, it finally felt like the start of the match.

Both women upped the pace and the volume to rip into each other’s ground strokes, finding the baselines, sidelines and service Ts in their attempt to out-power their opponent. Tellingly, though, it was Azarenka who first broke the pattern, playing a neat drop-shot and lob combo to hold serve.

It was a tactic she quickly used again in the eighth game, a nine-minute test of the Sharapova serve. Azarenka twice attacked the net and then forced the less-than-perfect forward movement of Sharapova into the limelight. With another break, Azarenka strode to the baseline and served out the set, 6-3. She looked flooded with confidence.

As the sky darkened to indigo, Azarenka began to read and absorb the Sharapova serve with growing ease, and she broke the Russian to 15. But her real test came in the next game: Would her concentration survive a mixed bag of line calls—one serve challenged and out, another not challenged but in?

A couple of second serves came under fire from the Sharapova return and Azarenka went a break point down, but the glint in her eye showed she was neither intimidated nor uncertain. She hit to the lines and held serve with a reactive forehand winner for a 2-0 lead.

The situation demanded desperate measures from Sharapova who, despite serving at 70 percent, found her biggest deliveries returned with interest. Azarenka took the initiative again, stepping into court for an overhead winner, and all Sharapova could offer in return was to hit the ball yet harder. It merely brought more errors, two more break points and a 3-0 lead for her opponent.

Unless Azarenka either backed away from her game plan or was seized by nerves, she began to look unbeatable. Her return game was sharp, her tactics in swinging Sharapova from side to side were astute, and her ball-striking was deep, accurate and powerful. In short, she defused the Sharapova game.

Azarenka nullified a final onslaught from the former champion to complete her exhibition of near-flawless hitting with, for Sharapova, a gut-wrenching 6-0 set.

There are many qualities that make Azarenka such a wonderful prospect for women’s tennis. At 22, she is still evolving as a player. She is intelligent in her tactics and can execute those tactics, whether it is from the baseline or by taking the initiative at the net. She is tall and rangy but has good movement. She is outspoken and determined but also brings a natural, youthful joy to the game—embracing life off-court as well as on.

With the imminent retirement of Clijsters and the seeming ambivalence about her tennis career of Serena Williams, the arrival of Azarenka and Kvitova at the Grand Slam table in the last six months—and from Monday at No1 and two in the rankings—feels like the transition to a new generation of exciting, strong and formidable young women.