Questions aplenty for men at U.S. Open

1. Can Roger Federer beat back father time?

Pete Sampras won his last major at the U.S. Open in 2002 at the age of 30, which would turn out to be his last tournament. Interestingly, the same man who guided Sampras to the crown, Paul Annacone, is now helping Federer.

But there's a big difference between where Sampras was then and where Federer is now — the American hadn't won a tournament in more than two years coming into the event while the 29-year-old Federer has won two this year, capturing his 16th Grand Slam title at the Aussie Open and his fourth crown at the Cincinnati Masters last Sunday on similar hard courts to that of the U.S. Open.

It seems that Federer has broken out of his slump and shouldn't be viewed as an over-the-hill player who is looking to produce one last bit of a magic like Sampras. On the contrary, Federer is right there as a top three favorite with his two primary rivals, Rafa Nadal and Andy Murray. Let's not forget that the Swiss won five U.S. Open titles in more convincing fashion that he did during his reign at Wimbledon, and that last year, he came within a set of beating the red-hot Juan Martin Del Potro in the final.

With that said, Federer is more vulnerable than before if he's not serving great, occasionally returning with aggression, taking risks with his forehand and — to Annacone's liking — adding a few more net rushes per set. There are men who can hit through him on great days like Robin Soderling did at the French Open and Tomas Berdych did at Wimbledon. He can be yanked around by Nadal's lefty forehand, and Andy Murray just counterpunched him into submission in Toronto.

Federer is going to have to play courageously in order to win, and he would love a first-time crack at Nadal on a surface that he believes makes the Spaniard uncomfortable. It's more than probable that when Super Saturday arrives, he'll be locked in again, roaring and inviting challenges from the rest of the final four.

2. Can Rafael Nadal win the elusive Slam?

Nadal has never displayed his best in New York over the long haul of two weeks, partly due to injuries, partly due to exhaustion from long seasons and partly due to his play.

Yes, Nadal did win the 2009 Australian Open over Federer and has won Masters Series hard-court titles at Indian Wells and Toronto before. But those courts are slower than those on the U.S. Open's Ashe Stadium and they allow the Spaniard to play standout defense when necessary. That little bit of extra time can be the differenence between winning and losing matches against formidable foes.

U.S. Open tracker

Who's enjoying their summer in North America? Check out all the top performers with our U.S. Open tracker.

Nadal fans will say that his knees have bothered him in past years in New York. But not every loss there can be attributed to poor health. Four U.S. Open defeats hung on him by James Blake, Mikhail Youzhny, Murray and Del Potro (a blowout defeat in last year's semis) can be attributed to his opponents' decisions and abilities to rip away from inside the baseline before Nadal got a chance to get his legs moving.

It's almost impossible to slide effectively on hard courts, and if you watch Nadal play on clay and grass, you'll see how competent he is at running side to side, going into a slide and nailing winners. Fast hard courts force players to plant and react in a split second and Nadal is still learning how to do so.

Winning his first U.S. Open is his main goal and if he can become comfortable attacking early in the tournament, he'll be super dangerous by the final weekend. Simply put, he's the player that the others fear the most at the majors.

3. Can Andy Murray realize his potential and finally win a major?

This question is getting stale, but it's the only relevant one for the cagey Scot, who has played brilliantly in hard court warm-up tournaments time and time again and has also competed ferociously in New York and in Australia before the finals, only to play scared when he got there.

This time, Murray comes off an outstanding run in Toronto where he knocked off an A-list of players including David Nalbandian, Rafa Nadal and Roger Federer without dropping a set.

Maybe that's exactly what Murray needs at this point, to be out there thinking by himself, with a clear head and all the responsibility of his career on his shoulders, without someone else to blame if he doesn't deliver. He enters New York with essentially the same strengths and weaknesses that he had in Australia: a well-rounded game. Murray knows how to mix it, he fights like hell and is very driven.

The primary reason why Federer was able to take him out in straight sets in the Aussie Open final was because Murray was way too tentative in the first two sets and didn't revel in the occasion. He can't just say he believes in his Slam-winning ability, he has to show it. Another trip to a major final won't be good enough.

4. Are there any real U.S. contenders?

The U.S. has four men in the top 25 for the first time since 2006: No. 9 Andy Roddick, No. 20 John Isner, No. 21 Mardy Fish and No. 22 Sam Querrey. But are any of these men really capable of winning the U.S. Open? Probably not, but at least one portion of a Grand Slam draw tends to break in an odd way, and if Roddick or Fish are placed in No. 3 Novak Djokovic's quarter, they'd certainly have a chance to put down the Serbian, who has been struggling with his conditioning all year.

This should be the Slam where the younger duo of Isner and Querrey make a huge push, but it's extremely doubtful, as Isner tore a ligament in his ankle in Cincinnati and is questionable to play, and Querrey has done very little at the Masters Series events and majors this year.

That essentially leaves it up to long-time friends Roddick and Fish to get it done. Roddick is coming off a minor bout of mono, but showed in toppling Soderling and Djokovic in marathon matches at Cincinnati that his desire and most of his skill level is back. However, in his loss to Fish in the Cincinnati semis, Roddick looked tired in the third set. If he's not fully healthy, how is he going to feel if he has to contest a series of five set matches in a row?

Roddick, who will turn 28 the day the Open starts, knows that the clock is ticking on his chances to win a second Slam. The 2003 U.S. Open champ probably has seven more realistic chances to win a major (he knows he does not have the game to win the French Open), so he'll be motivated to put up a great result in Flushing Meadows.

Fish says he's playing the best ball of his career and it's hard to argue that, as this summer, he's won Newport and Atlanta and reached the final of Cincinnati, where he served and volleyed his way past Andy Murray and Roddick and then played Roger Federer tough in a three-set loss in the final. He's super fit, is serving huge, returning well and covering up his weaker forehand side.

Return game

FOXSports.com serves up the latest from the tennis world:

• Latest results: Who won?
• Official rankings: Who's No. 1?
• Schedule: What's coming up?
• Photos: The best in the game
• Richard Evans: Latest columns

After reaching the final of Queens on grass prior to Wimbledon, Fish was upset by Florian Mayer in the second round of Wimbledon. That's pretty much been the story of his Grand Slam life: coming in with a lot of promise, and either losing early or seeing his level drop later.

5. Who will be the breakout player?

Last year, Del Potro realized his potential and smoked huge serves and forehands on his way to the title. But Del Potro, who is out of this 2010 rehabbing from a wrist injury, was already on the edge of greatness then, having reached the semis of the French Open and owning U.S. hard court titles. This year, no young player has competed consistently well enough to labeled as the definitive player to watch at the U.S. Open.

Rather, there's a mix of veterans and youngsters who have shots, including the explosive Ernests Gulbis, the up-and-down Marin Cilic, as well as four older men who have put up fine results much of the summer: French Open finalist Soderling, Wimbledon finalist Berdych, former Aussie finalist Baghdatis and former Wimbledon finalist Nalbandian.

The 26th-ranked Gulbis is no longer playing as soft as he used to and has pushed a number of excellent players to the brink this season, including Nadal, Federer and Murray. He's got tremendous firepower off the ground, but is on the losing end of too many three-setters. He's overdue to turn that trend around.

Cilic is much the same type of player, but has been extremely disappointing since he reached the Aussie Open semis. The 6-foot-6 inch powerballer has the capability of pounding past anyone and reaching the final, but his fitness and confidence are in question.

That's not the case with Berdych and Soderling, who have really shored up their technical and mental games and become much more consistent players. It's hard to see either of them winning the tournament, but a deep run is possible if they are clicking with their serves and forehands.

The enigmatic Baghdatis has pulled himself up by his bootstraps and scored a nice win over Nadal in Cincinnati. He's a standout hard-court player who could be a huge threat if he can focus early on in the tournament.

The ultra-talented Nalbandian has been a sexy pick to win numerous Slams, but the 28-year-old has always fallen short even when he's been healthy, which hasn't been all that often. He has a backhand to die for and on the outside, appears to be tough enough to win a major. The No. 31 seed is the last player that any of the elite competitors want to see in the third round, but can he actually go two weeks without pulling some type of muscle?

The proof for all these questions will be in the New York pudding.