Roland Garros 2020, Men’s 1st Round Match Report: Nishioka Advances as Auger-Aliassime Falters

After about an hour-long rain delay on the outside courts at Roland Garros on Monday, the opening match on Court 9 pitting the 19th-seed Félix Auger-Aliassime of Canada against the Japanese player Yoshihito Nishioka, ranked no.52 in the ATP, began under gray, cloudy skies, and cold temperatures.

It took about 4 games – a blank hold featuring two aces and a subsequent break to go up 3-1 – before Auger-Aliassime’s day at the office turned just as gloomy as la météo à Paris.

Auger-Aliassime tried to play aggressively from the baseline (his usual Plan A), hitting mostly deep down the middle of the court (not necessarily usual), with the occasional inside-out/in forehand mixed in, while Nishioka adopted a park-4-meters-behind-the-baseline outlook, perhaps out of respect for Auger-Aliassime’s ability to generate power off his ground strokes, running balls down and sending them back deep, intermittently stepping forward to accelerate on the backhand side and catch his opponent off-balance. Since neither player was too keen on coming to the net to finish points (more on this later), it resulted in the outcome of the match being dependent on both players’ consistency.

Neither player clicked on all cylinders in terms of keeping the unforced-error count low, except that one’s engine sputtered a lot more frequently than the other’s did. A ton more!

In the first two sets alone, Auger-Aliassime committed a total of 33 unforced errors as opposed to Nishioka’s 18 (my own count). To make matters worse for the Canadian, his errors often came in sequences of a few points in a row at crucial junctures in the match, whereas Nishioka, while also susceptible to erring in this match, was stingier in the timing of his errors, only a couple of them coming on important points. If I sound like I am describing an average-quality match at best, that is indeed my intention, and this is coming from a fan of both players.

I accept that on clay the outcome relies less on winners than errors committed, but this was a match where one player did just enough to steadily advance on third gear (read: not challenged to shift to fourth or fifth) while the other made no adjustments to his sputtering engine.

As noted above, Auger-Aliassime did build a 3-1 lead early in the match, but that was largely due to Nishioka’s mediocre start on his backhand (five unforced errors on that wing up to that point), which is usually his stronger side.

And this brings me to the other point I would like to make from Auger-Aliassime’s perspective with regard to this straight-forward 7-5 6-3 6-3 losst. At 3-1 up, 0-15 on his serve, Félix had a great chance to attack a short return by Nishioka (one among many such opportunities throughout the match). He struck a solid backhand that put Nishioka on the run, but he opted to step back to the baseline. A rally ensued and it ended with Nishioka hitting a sizzling backhand down-the-line winner. Two points later at 15-30, the same scenario repeated with Nishioka hitting a short return, giving a sitter to Félix, one that he chose once again not to follow to the net. He came in later in that rally on a less convenient shot and got passed.

Nishioka eventually broke serve and equalized at 3-3. In that seventh game at 0-15, Auger-Aliassime passed up yet another chance to attack on Nishioka’s short return and decided to come in on the next shot, after Nishioka had recovered to the middle of the court, and got passed again.

In fact, the only four points Félix lost at the net in the first set were all clean passing shots by Nishioka, two of them because Auger-Aliassime picked the wrong spots and left a target open at which Nishioka could aim (and Nishioka loves targets). I compare that to the 10 points that he won on other approaches in this set, seven of them coming as the result of direct winners from approaches or volley put-aways, and I cannot help but wonder what would have happened had he elected to do otherwise on chances he passed up to follow his great shots to the net, especially those he got to hit from way inside the baseline. Plus, many of them came on short returns by Nishioka, setting the stage for a 1-2 punch, an otherwise favorable play for Félix.

This pattern described above took place again and again throughout the first two sets – I will mainly focus on the third set in this piece, because the second set was a rehash of the first and by the time the third began, Auger-Aliassime appeared discouraged and quickly fell behind a break early in the set. Side note: This reluctance to integrate coming forward into one’s game is something that a vast majority of today’s up-and-comers need to reconsider if they intend to reach the elite section of the ATP rankings. For most, it is a facet of the game that is visibly lagging behind in comparison to their other assets.

One reason why I am beating this particular drum is precisely because Félix was having a nightmarish day at the office with regard to unforced errors committed from his ground strokes alone. Every player has these days every now and then, including top-notch ones, where you simply cannot seem to find your timing no matter hard you try.

One way to cut down on those errors, is to resort to basic safety tactics such as bringing an extra layer of security to your shot, in other words, hit higher over the net, play to the middle of the court away from the lines, etc. Another way is to adopt a Plan B that depends less on those badly calibrated shots du-jour in your game. In Auger-Aliassime’s case, on a day like this, this would mean that he’d look to cut the point short instead of engaging in long rallies and taking advantage of his opponent’s short balls and come forward, in order to not only bring the heat to your opponent and collect errors, but also to avoid possible errors resulting from long baseline exchanges.

If any of this were not clear in the first nine games, it certainly became crystal clear in the last 10 minutes of the first set. Auger-Aliassime led 5-4, and 0-30 on Nishioka’s serve, only to make his 11th unforced error of the set (6th on his backhand), and then, win only three out of the next 14 points to lose the set 5-7. He added three more unforced errors (and a double fault) in the 5-5 game and chipped in two more in the next one, for a total of 16 unforced errors in the set.

He would up that count by one for the second set, and made no modifications to his game plan. You don’t want to take my word for it, just watch the second and third points of the very first game and that should tell you all you need based on what I’ve noted previously. I thought that when Félix took the bathroom break at the end of the first set, he would settle down and perhaps shift his tactics, but that first game proved otherwise.

Credit should be given to Nishioka for recognizing his opponent’s struggles and sticking to what works for him although, as I mentioned before, he was not exactly pristine in the unforced-error count himself (10 in the first set, 8 in the second). He did however tidy up in the important points over the last two sets, and his two critical errors in the first were negated thanks to Félix generously returning the favor in the ensuing points.

This is not a devastating loss for Auger-Aliassime by any means. Nishioka presents a rough challenge in the opening round of a Major for most of his colleagues, not to mention a particularly difficult match-up for Félix because he is fast, he can handle pace, and he can consistently keep his ground strokes deep. His forehand carries a considerable spin while his backhand is much flatter, allowing him to give a different look to his opponent shot after shot. I am not sure that Félix enjoys facing opponents who can keep a steady flow of deep strokes coming his way on clay, pinning him to the baseline and beyond (his two losses to Laszlo Djere in 2019 come to mind, among others).

In the second round, Nishioka will take on the wild-card participant Hugo Gaston of France, making the possibility of a first-ever appearance in the third round at Roland Garros a realizable goal.

Nishioka at the Australian Open 2020 (Photo: Getty Images AsiaPac)

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Click here for the links to listen to Tennis with an Accent’s Roland Garros Preview podcast released on Saturday

Roland Garros 2020, Women’s 1st Round Match Report: Sasnovich Gets the Last Word vs. Friedsam

Aliaksandra Sasnovich has been a steady performer on the WTA Tour, and on all surfaces, over the last three years. Two of her best results in her career came in 2018, first when she made the finals of the WTA Tour event in Brisbane, losing to Elina Svitolina, second when she stunned Petra Kvitova, one of the title favorites, in the opening round at Wimbledon and won two more matches to reach the fourth round, her best result in a Major. Sasnovich earned a career-high ranking of no.30 in that same year.

Though she eventually dropped below the top 100 in early 2020, she has had solid results since the tour resumed in August with Palermo Ladies Open, where she won six matches in a row as a qualifier to get to the quarterfinals before losing to top-seeded Petra Martic in two tiebreakers. Following a third-round loss to Yulia Putintseva at the US Open and another quarterfinal showing in Istanbul, Sasnovich arrived at Roland Garros ranked at no.96 in the WTA.

Sasnovich in January 2019, Brisbane International – (Photo: Bradley Kanaris — Getty Images AsiaPac)

Her first-round opponent Anna-Lena Friedsam of Germany, ranked no.104, suffered several early-round losses this year, except in Marseille in March where she played her second career WTA final, losing to Sofia Kenin in three sets. It was back in 2016 that Friedsam reached her career-best ranking of 45, before injuries (particularly her shoulder) sidelined her for extended periods of times. After dropping as low as outside the top 300 in 2018, her career finally took an upturn recently. She finds herself on the verge of entering top 100 again.

Sasnovich and Friedsam, both born in 1994 and only 7 weeks apart, had already faced each other at the start of the 2020 season in Shenzen where the Belarusian defeated Friedsam 6-2 6-3.

Being the second match scheduled on Court 13 – click here to read my analysis of the first match between Benjamin Bonzi and Emil Ruusuvuori –, the two women were spared the steady drizzle that Bonzi and Ruusuvuori had been subjected to during the first two sets of their match. Nonetheless, conditions still remained piss-poor with cold temperatures and winds causing havoc in terms of shot-production by both players.

There is always the case of one player adjusting a bit quicker to weather conditions than the other, which could be due to one player’s fundamentals being more adaptable to different conditions than that of the other player, or to that player’s ability to remain more cool-headed than the other under adverse conditions. In any case, that player in this match was Sasnovich who actually lost her serve to start the match by committing three unforced errors in the first game while slipping and sliding on the court (she smacked the bottom of her shoe in frustration with the racket to get the clay off on the fourth point of the match). She did adjust quickly though, and made only two unforced errors for the rest of the set!

She also began to use her drops shots frequently, probably realizing that testing Friedsam’s first-step quickness forward may be something she could exploit further. Despite a bad drop shot that cost her the 3-1 game on her serve, that tactic worked in her favor for the duration of the set, throwing Friedsam out of balance during rallies and not allowing the German to settle into a rhythm. Friedsam made 10 unforced errors from 1-0 up to 2-6 down and by the time she decided to increase the velocity on her shots in an attempt to regain some control in rallies, it was too late.

Friedsam, determined not to find herself in the same situation as in the first set, made an emphatic statement to her opponent in the first game of the second set, producing two forehand winners and two high-octane returns that forced Sasnovich into errors. It could have been costly had she missed them, but ti was the right choice at that moment. The alternative was to play cautious and avoid errors, only to allow Sasnovich to hold the reins during rallies thanks to her variety, including drop shots (read: a rehash of the first set).

Friedsam held serve to go up 2-0 and continued to pound away, especially with her forehand. While Sasnovich remained within distance when she held serve at 1-3, you could tell that she was beginning to fear her opponents’ accelerations. She was straining to place her shots deeper in order to avoid Friedsam’s winner attempts that were now landing in for the most part — because that is what happens when you commit to a plan and believe in it; you embrace the risk itself instead of fearing its consequences. As Sasnovich’s targets became more and more limited in her increased attempts to keep Friedsam behind the baseline and off balance, she began to commit errors of her own and got broken a second time. Sasnovich’s unforced-error count more than doubled in the second set (11) while Friedsam, despite playing riskier tennis, cut hers down to 5 for the set.

When the third set began, it was Sasnovich’s turn to solve problems and make the pendulum swing back her way. She achieved that goal in the first game already by shifting to higher gear on the pace of her baseline shots and stripping away Friedsam’s ability to take the initiative. In doing so, she made three forehand unforced errors in that first game, but she managed to hold serve by forcing Friedsam into errors of her own. The difference between what she did right there at the beginning of the third set, and what Friedsam had done earlier at the beginning of the second (they both successfully managed to shift the momentum) was that Friedsam aimed for direct winners or sought to squeeze rapid, forced errors out of Sasnovich, whereas Sasnovich, instead of looking to end the point quickly one way or the other, added spin (or slice) as well as pace, but hitting closer to the lines, with the ultimate goal being, I presume, to keep Friedsam on the move and make herself be the one to set the patterns in rallies again.

It worked.

As Friedsam found herself in more and more difficult positions, she could not generate the same pace and reproduce the precision she enjoyed in the second set, and errors began creeping into her game. Once Sasnovich went up a break 2-0, the match had a new outlook. It was now the Belarusian directing traffic again during rallies, using the full range of varieties in her arsenal, from topspin to drive accelerations, to slices on both wings (including that rare and wicked inside-out slice that she can hit on her forehand), mixed in with drops shots for good measure. As an example, I would recommend a rewatch of the 2-1 game if you have access, the breaking point of the final set in my view. It starts and ends with two drop-shot winners by Sasnovich, and then, there is the crucial 30-30 point in the middle, where Friedsam responds to the challenge put forth by Sasnovich by coming into the net on a great approach shot (exactly what she should do at that juncture of the match and on that point) that puts Sasnovich on a full run to her backhand side. Yet, the Belarusian, thanks to her agility, hits a tremendous two-handed down-the-line passing shot on the full run, earning the break point, and probably delivering a devastating blow to Friedsam’s charge to sink her teeth into the final set — the German had just broken serve to get back to 1-2 and was serving to equalize at 2-2.

With her timing derailed and down by a break again after the above sequence, Friedsam’s unforced-error count once again skyrocketed. She tried to counteract the effects by coming to the net more often, and had only limited success with it because Sasnovich simply did not provide the German with enough chances to consistently come forward.

Friedsam finished the final set with 11 unforced errors, whereas Sasnovich made only four more after the initial three in the first game, before she concluded the match with 6-2 2-6 6-3 win. It was not a spectacular performance by any means, but it was extremely efficient considering the dreadful circumstances created by not only the lack of spectators (Ct. 13 looked deserted for most of the match), but also the miserable weather conditions. In short, it was an extremely professional day at the office for Aliaksandra Sasnovich.

Her second-round opponent is Caroline Garcia who took out the 17th-seeded Anett Kontaveit in three sets and I feel certain that Sasnovich will have plenty of additional problem-solving to do against the Frenchwoman.

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Click here for the links to listen to Tennis with an Accent’s Roland Garros Preview podcast released on Saturday

Roland Garros 2020, Men’s 1st Round Match Report: Bonzi outlasts Ruusuvuori

First day of an atypical Roland Garros at an atypical time of the year, coupled with miserable weather conditions to start the day (read: cold, windy, with a steady drizzle), that alone should warn you to lower your expectations in terms of quality of play – understandably – and rather be prepared for the unexpected. It also meant that players who have been on site for a week, getting used to the conditions and surroundings, grinding through qualifying rounds with the new and supposedly heavier Wilson balls (as opposed to the Babolat ones of previous years), would have an advantage over those in the main draw who stepped on the court to play their first match at Roland Garros.

Thus, came victories by lucky loser Astra Sharma over Anna Blinkova, qualifier Kamilla Rakhimova over Shelby Rogers, qualifier Sebastian Korda over Andreas Seppi, and qualifier Jurij Rodionov over Jérémy Chardy, all within the first several hours of play at Roland Garros.

The Frenchman Benjamin Bonzi was yet another beneficiary of that trend on Court 13 when he defeated the 21-year-old Finnish player Emil Ruusuvuori, a promising up-and-comer, 6-2 6-4 4-6 6-4. Bonzi reached his highest ranking of 176 three years ago and has been outside the top 200 since January 2018. After a decent pre-Coronavirus start to 2020, the 24-year-old Bonzi showed up at Roland Garros qualifying rounds ranked 224 in the ATP and made his way to the main draw, getting an assist in his final qualifying round with a walk-over. To even get to that position, however, he had to save five match points in his 3-6 6-4 7-5 first-round victory over Zdeněk Kolář.

Bonzi in action during Roland Garros 2017 (Photo: Clive Brunskill — Getty Images Europe)

The career of Bonzi’s opponent has been on a brighter path than his as of late. Ruusuvuori entered the ATP’s top 200 a little over a year ago, and currently sitting at number 92, one below his career-high from last week.

That mattered little, however, as Ruusuvuori began experiencing all sorts of trouble from the gates, largely due to the conditions. Down a break immediately, he had a routine passing shot that he smashed in the net at 30-30 on Bonzi’s serve at 1-2 and followed it with a maligned drop shot attempt that let Bonzi confirm the break. By the time he got broken again to go down 1-4, Emil had already committed 6 unforced errors on his forehand, accompanying the three on his backhand wing. The fact that Ruusuvuori was unwilling to take his chances on short balls (examples: watch the first two points of the 1-4 game where he hits middle-of-the-court shots from way inside the baseline and backs up) and struggled to calibrate his sputtered timing on his ground strokes, while Bonzi kept putting pressure on him, only served to exacerbate the problem. I counted 6 points in which Emil had Benjamin on the run, with clear chances to attack on short balls, but chose to reset the rally by staying back.

By the time Bonzi, full of confidence at that point, held serve after a blank game (a forehand down-the-line winner to start it, and a cross-court one to end it) to pocket the first set 6-2, the otherwise-solid baseliner Ruusuvuori had committed 12 unforced errors**. Bonzi, for his part, enjoyed great success with his aggressive play, winning 8 out of 10 points on his approaches to the net.

**Side note: As usual for my match analyses, I count unforced errors myself and do not rely on the official stats.

The beginning of the second set saw the same pattern repeat itself. In the second point already, Ruusuvuori was almost at the service line and hit a solid shot, putting Bonzi on the run toward his backhand corner, but backed up to the baseline again, allowing Bonzi to get back in the rally and to produce a forehand winner to win the point. In the very next point, Bonzi approached with a backhand slice on the first chance he got and put the forehand volley away for a 15-40 lead, resulting in the break on the next point. That game was a microcosm of Ruusuvuori’s inability to adjust to the conditions, leading to questionable decision making, because decision-making takes a back seat when you are still preoccupied with cleaning up the mess on the basics.

Ruusuvuori did finally begin steadying the ship, starting with his service game at 1-3, but despite his effort, Bonzi protected his break lead all the way to the end of the set. Although he lost the set, Emil ended with a less “unpleasant” seven unforced-error tally compared to 12 in the first set. He also began to respond to his opponent’s relentless attacking by forcing Bonzi to hit lower volleys and producing clean passing shots. Bonzi’s success rate of 8 out 10 at the net in the first set plummeted to 5 out of 12 in the second and you could tell it was having an impact on him when, leading 4-3 and serving, he missed one approach due to hesitation at 15-0 and passed up a chance at 30-15. He lost both points, but still survived the game when Ruusuvuori committed two of his seven unforced errors after 30-30 to bail the Frenchman out.

Despite the improvement in the second set, Ruusuvuori still remained timid about approaching the net though, even when presented with the opportunity, passing up seven chances to put the heat on his opponent.

Having refilled the confidence tank nonetheless, cut down on errors (read: getting used to the conditions after two sets), and with his opponent now finding himself on the wrong side of the unforced-error race, Ruusuvuori built up a quick two-break lead in the third set. Bonzi put up a late charge that saw him climb back from 1-5 down to 4-5 and serve to equalize at 5-5. Ruusuvuori perhaps played his best return game of the match to break Bonzi back with a blank game and extend the match to a fourth set.

Emil appeared to have grabbed the momentum at the heels of that third set that marked a visible increase in the amount of errors committed by his opponent. Bonzi, to his credit, did not allow the slide to continue and held serve early to kickstart an entertaining fourth set where both players performed adequately – to use a cautionary term, considering the continuing wind and low temperatures – at the same time. This was the set that came down to a few key points.

The first one ended in Ruusuvuori’s favor when he hit a remarkable backhand passing shot at full stretch on the 30-30 point, when serving at 1-1. He followed it up with a backhand winner to go up 2-1. Ruusuvuori came through again when he faced a break point at 3-3, when he scraped through a long rally in which Bonzi was pushing him around, finally winning it when the Frenchman sailed a forehand deep.

Third time proved to be the charm for Bonzi who was progressively getting back to his ways of the first set, increasing the pressure on his opponent. At 4-4 he earned another break point when he attacked the net at deuce and produced a delightful half-volley pick-up. Although he could not capitalize on that break point, his opponent Ruusuvuori cracked in the next two points, erring on two routine approach shots to hand over the break to Bonzi.

Bonzi did not let his chance get away, seemingly knowing exactly what to do. He attacked the net four times in that contested last game alone. After earning his third match point after an overhead winner, he snatched his ticket to the second round when Ruusuvuori’s forehand return landed in the net.

Although this is not Bonzi’s first rodeo in the second round of a Major (as a wild-card entrant in Paris in 2017, he defeated Daniil Medvedev in the first round before losing to Ramos-Vinolas in the second), he couldn’t hide his excitement after the match, saying that he is “very happy” to have won and that it’s a “special” feeling to have the chance to play yet another match at Roland Garros. As for the miserable conditions, he confirmed that it was hard find any rhythm during points due to the wind and underlined that they played a significant portion of the match under the rain. He exclaimed: “We were soaked! The racket, the overgrips, all was wet […] it doesn’t help with the balls either, they become very heavy when they take water.” (Source: TennisActu)

Bonzi will next face Jannik Sinner, another up-and-comer, who eliminated the 11th-seeded David Goffin in three convincing sets, 7-5 6-0 6-3. This is also familiar ground for Sinner who reached the second round of the Australian Open earlier this year. However, it will be a career first in Majors for either man, when the winner of their match reaches the third round later this week.

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Click here for the links to listen to Tennis with an Accent’s Roland Garros Preview podcast released on Saturday

Roland Garros & Wimbledon Retro Podcasts

There has been no tennis since the break of Coronavirus but you can listen to four podcasts on Tennis with an Accent, with me as a guest with hosts Saqib Al and Matt Zemek, in which we took a retro approach to both Majors. Below are the links and synopses.

Roland Garros Podcasts

1) For Roland Garros, we “time-traveled” back to the Monday after the 1991 men’s tournament (meaning we do not know what the future may bring at that point, ha!) that saw Andre Agassi defeat Jim Courier in the final. We examined that final, along with the important events of the two weeks:

Men’s Tournament – Roland Garros 1991 Time-Travel

2) In our second Roland Garros podcast, the conversation focuses on the type of game that is suited to succeed on the clay of Roland Garros. Saqib and I delve into the evolution of classic styles from a pure baseliner to attacking players. Seles vs Graf battles from the 90’s are used as illustrations on how the playing trends kept evolving even from the baseline. Some iconic finals such as Lendl vs. McEnroe, Evert vs. Navratilova, and Courier vs Bruguera, among others, are covered. A lot of details are packed in this one.

Roland Garros Classic – Game trends, iconic matches, and more

Wimbledon Podcasts

1) 2006 Wimbledon – Time-Travel episode. Once again, Saqib and I beam back to the Monday after the 2006 men’s tournament and look back in detail to the first Federer vs. Nadal final on the grass courts of Wimbledon. We weigh in on the turn-around moments of the match and discuss its importance in the launching of the the rivalry (Nadal came in with a 6-1 lead in the head-to-head count). This also happened to be Andre Agassi’s last championships. We discuss his Wimbledon career in depth and where does he rank with some of the modern greats of the game. Plus, we talk about the potential up-and-comers (at the time) who performed well in the tournaments. Some names will be very familiar with today’s tennis fan.

Men’s Tournament – Wimbledon 2006 Time-Travel

2) I join Matt Zemek to chronicle women’s tennis at Wimbledon from the start of the Open Era in 1968 through the 1990s. Playing styles, surface speeds, racquet technology, and other changes over the course of Wimbledon history are weighed and evaluated in this study of women’s tennis at the All-England Club. The Martina Navratilova-Chris Evert rivalry is a natural centerpiece of this discussion, but don’t forget about Margaret Court versus Billie Jean King in the early 1970s, or Steffi Graf versus multiple challengers in the 1990s, and the 2000s with Venus Williams taking the spotlight. Many players mentioned and notes discussed on the tournament’s evolution.

Wimbledon Women’s Open Era Revisited

Note: The above podcasts and all other Tennis with an Accent podcasts are also available on Apple and Google Podcasts.

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Who Will Be No. 1 and 2 in Men and Women in Four Years? – 2nd Edition, 2019-23

At the end of the U.S. Open in 2015, I posted an update in which I asked friends, followers, and people on social media to guess who would be the number 1 and 2 players in men and women in exactly four years. The results are in. Few people correctly guessed the no. 1 player in the ATP – Novak Djokovic – and one person, the no. 2 – Rafael Nadal (the only time Nadal’s name was written in!)

On the women’s side, nobody correctly picked the no. 1 player but a couple of people correctly guessed the no. 2 player – Karolina Pliskova. Many guessed Simona Halep and Madison Keys at either 1 or 2. Simona now stands at no. 6 and Madison at no. 19. Best predictions came from @bestennispicks who picked Djokovic and Federer at 1 and 2 (they are 2 and 3) and Serena Williams and Karolina Pliskova at 1 and 2 (they are 9 and 6).

Most people blew it though, to be blunt, like I did – none of the four players I picked are now in the top two, two of the four are outside the top 20!

In any case, this was fun !!! Let’s do another one. Who are your picks for no. 1 and 2 in men’s and women’s rankings in 2023, at the end of the U.S. Open?

Please share this page on social media so we get a large pool of picks and we can have fun with it four years later. All entries are listed below.

Reply with your picks to my post on Twitter or use the message space below, or send me an email: mertov (at) mertovstennisdesk (dot) com. I will collect all the picks and list them below in the next week or two.

Good luck !!

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Latest list of brave souls and their picks 🙂
(no more entries allowed)

Mert @mertovstdesk
WTA: (1) Halep (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Hurkacz

Enrico @enricomariariva
WTA: (1) Coco Gauff (2) Iga Swiatek
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Tsitsipas

Pablo @pablomosquera_
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (3) Jannik Sinner

Fraser @fraser_caldwell
WTA: (1) Barty (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Berrettini

Jacco @downthelineblog
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Bencic
ATP: (1) Zverev (2) Djokovic

Alp @alpos
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Zverev

Euler @eulerisapimp
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Djokovic

Ramazan @gregorramza
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Svitolina
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Tsitsipas

Deniz @dogruer_deniz
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Bencic
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Tiafoe

Saqib @saqiba
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Tsitsipas (2) Auger-Aliassime

El Zorres @elzorres9
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Swiatek
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Sinner

Can @can_aklinizi
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Auger-Aliassime

Mustafa @MMSevim13
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Zverev (2) Shapovalov

Jess @jesslakei
WTA: (1) Sabalenka (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Zverev

Krishna @krishnafree
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Yastremska
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Auger-Aliassime

Nihad @nicologiic
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Bencic
ATP: (1) Nadal (2) Medvedev

Benjamin @benj_tucker
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Tsitsipas (2) Medvedev

@angel12mruiz
WTA: (1) Wozniacki (2) Vondrousova
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Medvedev

Mikaela @mikaelatennis
WTA: (1) Federer (2) Nadal
ATP: (1) Serena (2) Venus

Hamze @mayuhayu9
WTA: (1) Anisimova (2) Kenin
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Shapovalov

@forehandslice
WTA: (1) Barty (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Tsitsipas

@overdosechimera
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Felix

Brian @BCDWrites
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Medvedev

Maru @AdvFed
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Vekic
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Auger-Aliassime

Alex @hkewell_fan
WTA: (1) Gauff (2) Barty
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Nadal

Kevin (replies below)
WTA: (1) Kenin (2) Sabalenka
ATP: (1) Fritz (2) Opelka

Ryan @RybotCalbearo
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Zverev (2) Thiem

Melissa @sashaysashay
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Barty
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Tsitsipas

Neil @DPUNeil
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Barty
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Auger-Aliassime

Omar @omarcanuck
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Sinner (2) Medvedev

Nadir @Ndr_Nadir_
WTA: (1) Anisimova (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Khachanov

@k1ingkyrgios
WTA: (1) Sabalenka (2) Konjuh
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Nadal

Renato @renato3089
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Munar

@SpreadAstaire
WTA: (1) Ostapenko (2) Kasatkina
ATP: (1) Opelka (2) Auger-Aliassime

@somnolantik
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Medvedev

@namodarling2019
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Tsitsipas (2) Medvedev

@TennisReviewFct
WTA: (1) Q. Wang (2) Townsend
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Djokovic

David @davidihughes
WTA: (1) Anisimova (2) Sabalenka
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Tsitsipas

Jared @JaredPineTennis
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Khachanov (2) Thiem

Bailey (replies below)
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Medvedev

Kibils (replies below)
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Bublik

@IamPammieWammie
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Tsitsipas

DomiNos @ulTHIEMmatefan
WTA: (1) Keys (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Zverev (2) Djokovic

Arif @arifsahin1
WTA: (1) Anisimova (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Medvedev

Susie @pandsreid
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Barty
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Thiem

Ardeal @UnArdeal
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Kenin
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Medvedev

Stefano @carretero77
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Sinner

15lovetennis @15lovetennis
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Tsitsipas

Joan @Joanmassepulcre
WTA: (1) Anisimova (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Thiem

Eda @EdaTalksTennis
WTA: (1) Gauff (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Medvedev

Alper @ayemalperovic
WTA: (1) Potapova (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Shapovalov (2) Auger-Aliassime

Nawal @NawalNadal
WTA: (1) Halep (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Zverev

Kieran @NZKieran
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Nadal

Samir @samirvd
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Pliskova
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Djokovic

Donpova @TennisAddictDon
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Djokovic

Jan @JanDeBakker
WTA: (1) Clijsters (2) Serena
ATP: (1) Federer (2) Nadal

Sagar @Sagarerr
WTA: (1) Bencic (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Tsitsipas (2) Medvedev

Erik @erktennis
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Zverev (2) Thiem

Rob @rawbdesj
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Barty
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Medvedev

@shots_drop
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Muguruza
ATP: (1) Nishikori (2) Medvedev

Diego @DiegoMB27
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Bencic
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Tsitsipas

Jovica @YoungTennisGuns
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Zverev

Krasimir @lobdowntheline
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) McNally
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Medvedev

Mert @mmertyazici
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Medvedev

Anne @brooklynpeach
WTA: (1) Gauff (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Aguer-Aliassime

Tucker @TuckerBlanc
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Barty
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Tsitsipas

Samet @SametOzcalkap
WTA: (1) Vondrousova (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Medvedev

Gencay @Gencayogeturk
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Auger-Aliassime

Kaan @kaansnprlk
WTA: (1) Sakkari (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Nadal

@TurkishMommy
WTA: (1) Serena (2) Venus
ATP: (1) Federer (2) Nadal

Vickesh @Vickesh
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Tsitsipas (2) Auger-Aliassime

Dogukan @dogukandilber
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Medvedev

Muzaffer @MuzafferAcik
WTA: (1) Swiatek (2) Sabalenka
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Thiem

@Wowbad2
WTA: (1) Barty (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Opelka

@5stepsfwd4back
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Sinner

@j8tennis
WTA: (1) Bencic (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Thiem

@cal1tennisR
WTA: (1) Anisimova (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Nadal

@1verkehrsunnfall
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Thiem

Onur @onurakmeric
WTA: (1) Gauff (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Nadal

Ece @echobella
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Nadal

@ecoatanasov
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Yastremska
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Nadal

Gokalp @gokotaskes
WTA: (1) Gauff (2) Kenin
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) Sinner

Mustafa @MustafaYBozkurt
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Khachanov (2) Thiem

Paul @PaulT_Tennis
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Lopatetska
ATP: (1) Auger-Aliassime (2) Medvedev

Alejan @AlejanMilos
WTA: (1) Zverev (2) Medvedev
ATP: (1) Anisimova (2) Andreescu

Ceyda @Ceydasancar
WTA: (1) Halep (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Zverev (2) Auger-Aliassime

Adrian @Adrianeltete
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Bencic
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Auger-Aliassime

Cemil @derecdere
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Kenin
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Auger-Aliassime

@ostaplosion
WTA: (1) Ostapenko (2) Yastremska
ATP: (1) Medvedev (2) Zverev

@Coach4Tennis
WTA: (1) Garcia (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Khachanov (2) Berrettini

Divyanshu @tweetsbydivyu
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Zverev (2) Tsitsipas

Rabia @Rabia91465583
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Nadal (2) Djokovic

Hasan @hasantenis
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Medvedev

Jonathan @jonnyboy613
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Osaka
ATP: (1) Tsitsipas (2) Baez

Stephen @Stephen_Greig
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Zverev (2) Djokovic

@k1ngkkyrgioss
WTA: (1) Sabalenka (2) Kvitova
ATP: (1) Djokovic (2) O’Connell

Tom @ETFroggy
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) Khachanov (2) Medvedev

Andrea @andrea_fede1
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Zverev

Ramesh @zbrain
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Anisimova
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Khachanov

@aussietennistr1
WTA: (1) Sabalenka (2) Andreescu
ATP: (1) De Minaur (2) Kyrgios

Charles-Louis (replies below)
WTA: (1) Osaka (2) Gauff
ATP: (1) Thiem (2) Zverev

@swaroop1232008
WTA: (1) Andreescu (2) Halep
ATP: (1) Tsitsipas (2) Thiem

Dive into History: Don Budge vs Fred Perry, Men’s Final, 1936 US National Championships

One of the best men’s finals in the history of the U.S. Open (then called “US National Championships”) took place in 1936 at West Side Tennis Club in the Forest Hills neighborhood. Interestingly, the two men’s versions of the developments differ quite a bit, as well as that of the media and the match’s umpire.

Click the link to read my piece on Tennis with an Accent about all this and more: 1936 US Nationals Men’s Final – Fred Perry vs. Don Budge

Fred Perry statue at Wimbledon

Click here to follow Mertov’s Tennis Desk on Twitter

Navigation