John Lloyd: Henman must beef up his serve for final fulfilment

Despite all the dismal comments flying around after Friday's defeat, I still think Tim Henman has a Wimbledon title in him.

However, for this to become reality, several things will have to happen. The first is that Tim will have to go up another level to stand a chance of beating someone like Lleyton Hewitt, who is by some distance the world's best player right now. But one man like Hewitt doesn't mean Henman can never win Wimbledon. The luck of the draw could keep them apart next time, rather than force Tim to play what he said afterwards he regarded as the final.

Henman is a class grass-court player in terms of technique. He is the best volleyer in the game, his coverage of the net is superb and he can dink or blast. He has every shot but he lacks one thing, the big weapon to overpower someone like Hewitt. You need a big serve if you play Tim's type of game because a classy counter-puncher like the Australian just wears you down. You can't keep hitting volleys off your shoelaces again and again.

In Friday's semi-final the only time Henman stepped up the speed was in his last two service games in the third set, when he hit three big serves in a row, of 119, 122 and 123 miles an hour, and won all three points. That was clearly the moment when he thought "I am going to open my shoulders." It was a last attempt to do something, but it worked. In future he has to serve consistently like that to beat a Hewitt. Give Tim credit, he tried everything but unfortunately, with the courts playing as slowly as they did this year, it was not enough. It seemed to me he was going up against a tank; there were no dents, he had no penetration.

Now Tim is going to have to realise he must beef up his serve. He has had a very good year, no doubt about that. But when you are serving at 112, which is nothing these days, if your placement isn't absolutely spot on – either on the lines or into the body – you get chewed up. On his second serve on Friday, Henman was averaging about 35 per cent success. When they were winning titles here, Pete Sampras and Boris Becker were averaging 55 per cent. And when your game depends on making points at the net, you are going to struggle with such a low percentage against Hewitt.

Fair enough, Tim is never going to be a Mark Philippoussis or Greg Rusedski, banging them in at 135mph. Two years ago he used to serve regularly in the 125 area, but his percentage on target was low, 40-45. Now he is up around 65-70 per cent, which is phenomenal, but he has traded power for cheap points. He can get away with that against almost anybody except Hewitt. Tim went out there with a good game plan, but became shell-shocked when he lost the first set. This was a huge opportunity lost, and he knew it.

Having said that, Henman lost to the world's best, someone who is threatening to pull away from the rest. I didn't think there was going to be a dominant star for a while in men's tennis, if ever again, but Lleyton could be that person. I don't think he is going to win all the Grand Slams and be like Borg, McEnroe or Connors at their best, but he could be the one we are all looking for. I saw his final against Henman at Indian Wells in March. It was one of the all-time demolition jobs, 6-1 6-2. He was deadly that day, and I wondered then whether Tim would ever beat him. Possibly on grass, I thought to myself, with its dead bounces and the way a slice takes more bite. But when you see Hewitt play like that, on grass which is playing like hard courts these days anyway, you have to get rid of such thoughts.

Hewitt was phenomenal and he is going to get better. It is a bit early to be comparing him with the very greatest of the Australians like Rod Laver, Lew Hoad and John Newcombe, but potentially he could be right up there with them. I recall Tim saying after that thrashing he took in Indian Wells that Lleyton was the clear No 1, would win many more Slams and was going to be dominant. After Friday I think that could well be the case. We need a dominant No 1 in the men's game who can win multiple Grand Slams, we need a megastar out there again.

After Friday's match I was talking to Becker, who was comparing Hewitt with Andre Agassi. Basically he has more power than Andre and is quicker but Agassi would hit more winners from the baseline, while Hewitt feeds off pace. I love Lleyton's feistiness. He was clearly trying to curb it because of all the criticism he has been getting about it, but when he broke Tim for the third time in the last set his utter joy was marvellous to see.

With Henmania, you would have to nominate Nalbandian as the story of the tournament. For a bloke who has never played a grass-court event before to get to the Wimbledon final is mind-boggling. Though he hasn't beaten any grass-court players apart from Wayne Arthurs, you have to respect someone with groundstrokes as huge as his. He is a fighter, but I don't see how he is going to wear down Lleyton. You have to feel that Nalbandian is going to wake up this morning and start to realise where he is, which could be a daunting task.

In an interview with Ronald Atkin