Men's French Open Draw Thoughts

 It's weird to be near the end of September, yet we still have a major to go. And it's even weirder that this major is the French Open, typically played in May and June. But that's the 2020 tennis season in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. So, let's see where the French Open takes us! Will Rafael Nadal win his 13th French Open? Read on to find out!

Get ready for some (surely incorrect) predictions.

Note: the full men's draw can be found here

Don't Be Surprised If:

1. Rafael Nadal Wins the French Open Again

I had to get this one out of the way and I won't spend too much time on it, don't want to waste y'alls time saying stuff y'all already know. Nadal has quintessential clay court game. There's very few people in the draw that can beat him, so it's pointless to go through match-by-match. 

For Rafa, it's important that he conserves his energy ahead of what could be a brutal final two matches of the tournament if he faces Thiem in the semifinals and Djokovic in the final. And there's no one in Rafa's quarter that could challenge him too much at this point. 

Fognini in the round of 16 could be tricky, but he hasn't been close to his old self since his surgery during the pandemic. And Zverev in the quarterfinals could theoretically be tough, but does anyone really think that Nadal isn't going to take full advantage of Zverev's serving issues?

While the heavier conditions of the fall do not suit Nadal's game, it is very hard to pick against him in this tournament.

2. Denis Shapovalov Makes his First Grand Slam Semifinal

No, I didn't think a few months ago I would be predicting this either. But, I was really impressed by how Shapovalov played both at the US Open and then on the clay in Rome. Shapovalov's rally tolerance is at the best I've ever seen it, which is a really good thing on clay. Will he be able to sustain that over multiple best-of-five matches? That remains to be seen.

The draw sets up well for Shapovalov, however. Simon, his first round opponent, has been completely out-of-form since the pandemic. Even on clay, in Simon's current form, expect Shapovalov to be able to hit through him. His second round opponent will probably be Roberto Carballes Baena. Very solid clay court, but he has nothing to really hurt Shapovalov with from either his serve or his baseline game.

Shapovalov just beat Dimitrov, the other seeded opponent in his mini-section, in Rome and I would expect a similar result in this one. In the round of 16, he would potentially play Stefanos Tsitsipas. However, Tsitsipas was very weak in his Rome loss to Sinner, and even today in Hamburg against Cuevas, he was not convincing in his victory. 

Tsitsipas just doesn't have the depth and placement that he had last season during the clay court swing. And Tsitsipas has a very tough potential third round match against Filip Krajinovic. Shapovalov has won his only meeting with Krajinovic and whoever wins that battle between Tsitsipas and Krajinovic should be very tired. (My pick for a Tsitsipas vs Krajinovic match will be revealed later in this article!)

In the quarterfinals, Shapovalov might play Daniil Medvedev. However, clay is Medvedev's worst surface and he struggled in a straight-sets loss to Ugo Humbert in Hamburg this past week. Medvedev's flat ball-striking makes his life a little harder on the clay. Shapovalov also might play Andrey Rublev. However, Shapovalov leads the head to head 2-1 and has won each of the past two meetings against Rublev in straight sets.

Denis Shapovalov certainly has a path to a Grand Slam semifinal against, likely, Novak Djokovic.

3. Stefanos Tsitispas Goes Out in the First Week

Related to my previous point about Shapovalov, I am not convinced at all about Tsitsipas and think that the draw sets up quite poorly for him. I believe he loses before even getting the 

Tsitsipas lost 1-6, 7-6(9), 2-6 to Sinner last week and could not find his game at all. He won only 53% of his first serve points and 49% of his second serve points, hitting 7 double faults. Beating Dan Evans on clay and an older Pablo, Cuevas who really should have won the first set does not change my opinion that he is in trouble in Paris.

Tsitsipas plays Jaume Munar in the first round, who doesn't have the weapons to beat him, but his consistency from the baseline could tire Tsitsipas out. He will most likely get Pablo Cuevas in the second round,  and maybe this time Tsitsipas won't be able to get away with saving five break points that would have allowed Cuevas to serve for the first set.

Then, in the third round, it would be a war with (likely) Filip Krajinovic. Krajinovic is a very competent player and just beat Marco Cecchinato and Felix Auger-Aliassime in Rome before losing a close straight-setter to Novak Djokovic. 

Tsitsipas beat Krajinovic in a very tight four-set match at the French Open last year and it feels like Tsitsipas is playing worse tennis and Krajinovic is playing better tennis.

I think there's a very good shot that Tsitsipas is out in the first week.

4. Dominic Thiem Loses Early (For His Standards)

I know this is a popular opinion, but I really don't like Thiem's draw. Cilic's serving in Rome was at a high-level, but he certainly isn't a clay courter and Thiem just beat him in four sets at the US Open. Still, playing a grand slam champion with a serve like Cilic's in the first round is not ideal.

In the second round, Thiem might play Reilly Opelka. Opelka is a nightmare opponent, regardless of the surface, as he can take the racquet out of opponents' hands with his huge serve. In the third round, Thiem (if he gets to this point) will likely face Casper Ruud, who just made the semifinals of Rome and is in the quarterfinals of Hamburg currently. Ruud's heavy forehand is extremely dangerous on clay and Ruud is extremely fit. Thiem will have to work hard to win that one.

In the fourth round, Thiem might play former champion Stan Wawrinka, Felix Auger-Aliassime, or maybe even Andy Murray. None of these players are an easy out. Wawrinka, despite losing to Lorenzo Musetti in Rome, could easily serve well get hot from the baseline and punish Thiem with his huge forehand and one-handed backhand. Auger-Aliassime also has the ability to start serving huge and making sets tight with Thiem (although I'm more bullish on that possibility). And then Andy Murray I'm just mentioning out of respect, but he could make a match with Thiem very physical.

In the quarterfinals, it could be Diego Schwartzman for Thiem. Schwartzman has beaten Thiem a couple times in the past and was playing excellent tennis in Rome, making the final. This included a massive straight-sets victory over Rafael Nadal in the quarterfinals. That would not be easy, as Schwartzman's ability to take over the baseline, even though he is only 5 foot, 7 inches, is superb.

Thiem has made the final of Roland Garros the past two seasons (losing to Nadal both times), so it feels that any loss before the semifinals would be early. However, given how physical the end of the US Open was for Thiem combined with the mental fatigue of winning his first grand slam final, Thiem could be ripe for an upset in this tournament.

My Favorite First Round Matchup

Stan Wawrinka vs Andy Murray

Yes, this is a very cliche choice, but I feel it would be disingenuous for me to put anything else. Wawrinka did not look great in Rome, but he's gotten a lot of matches on the clay and is a former French Open champion. Andy Murray, while he hasn't won Roland Garros, has won multiple other majors and is so hard to beat regardless of surface. Rally tolerance is so huge against Murray, who can get so many balls back and is one of the best counterpunchers in the game.

I really am unsure of how this match will go. A lot of it will come down to Wawrinka's first serve percentage. If he can control his service games with a big first serve, it would be very hard for Murray to win this match. Wawrinka also has been a little wild from the baseline since the pandemic, which would be a disaster against a consistent player like Murray. 

Another factor is whether or not Murray is physically ready for best-of-five on the most physical surface of them all: red clay.

If I had to choose, I would say Wawrinka wins in four sets. I'm not convinced Murray has what it takes to win a clay court Grand Slam match against a player of the caliber of Wawrinka. Wawrinka has a bit too much firepower for Murray at this stage of Murray's career.

Walking "Byes"

1. Cameron Norrie

Yes, this is a bigger name than you might have been expecting, and yes, I know Norrie is playing a qualifier. But, I just can't see Norrie winning given his current clay form. He's, quite frankly, been a disaster on clay since the restart.

Norrie lost to current World No. 320 Giulio Zeppieri in Rome qualifications, only winning four games. Then, in at the Forli Challenger, Norrie won a tight three-setter over current World No. 1052 Christian Harrison, who had to qualify to make the main draw. After his tight win over Harrison, he then lost to current World No. 346 Andrea Pellegrino in straight sets.

I just can't see Norrie winning a round in his current clay-form, regardless of which qualifier he plays.

2. Nikoloz Basilashvili

I know it's weird to have a seeded player as a walking bye, but this is the case with Basilashvili. Since the restart, Basilashvili has went 0-5, without even winning a set. This is understandable due to the domestic violence charge against him, which I will not get into, but that you can read about for yourself. 

Basilashvili has been very erratic from the baseline since tennis has come back and there's no reason for that to change with his upcoming first round match against Thiago Monteiro. 

Expect Basilashvili to lose again in the first round of the French Open.

Predictions

Quarterfinals

Djokovic over Bautista Agut in 4

Shapovalov over Rublev in 5

Schwartzman over Ruud in 5

Nadal over Zverev in 3

Semifinals

Djokovic over Shapovalov in 4

Nadal over Schwartzman in 4

Final

Nadal over Djokovic in 4

Brandon Nakashima Not Letting Pandemic Slow Him Down

Brandon Nakashima was having the season of his young career. The 18 year-old American started the year at World No. 367 and was already up to World No. 220. Nakashima's 147-spot rise in less than three months was already approaching how far he climbed up the rankings during the 2019 season. In 2019, Nakashima went from World No. 527 to World No. 367.

Nakashima had beaten some very good competition during this time. In 2020 alone, Nakashima has taken down players such as Ryan Harrison, Bernard Tomic, Jiri Vesely, and Cameron Norrie.

Then, the coronavirus pandemic shut down the world. It would certainly be understandable if Nakashima got down on himself due to the timing of the pandemic. Here he was in the midst of his breakthrough and a nearly unprecedented viral outbreak brought his momentum to a halt. Would the American be able to sustain his high quality of play when tennis resumed?

Well, based on how he has played during exhibition events that he has competed in during the pandemic, the answer to that question is yes. Combining his matches during the Matchplay 120 and U.S. Men's Pro Tennis Series exhibitions, Nakashima is currently 7-0. He has a 14-1 record in sets played.

Nakashima has played and taken down two top 65 players during this time in Steve Johnson and Sam Querrey. Last night, Querrey took the first set against Nakashima and had three break points on the Nakashima serve in his first service game of the second set. Yet, Nakashima did not panic, held, and then eventually took the match 4-6, 6-3, 6-3.

So, what makes Nakashima's game so tough to beat? The American has good power on both his serve and groundstrokes. Yet, it rarely feels like he is overhitting, as Nakashima has a high level of control over his game. Nakashima's backhand especially cuts through the court so well, making it very tough for opponents to handle.

Nakashima's return game is also very solid. He has not been phased by big servers such as Querrey, Vesely, or Martin Redlicki. Nakashima truly does not have many weaknesses in his game.

Yet, that doesn't mean that Nakashima is a perfect tennis player. For starters, I would love to see the American move to the net behind his powerful groundstrokes. Perhaps he isn't totally comfortable at the net yet, but it would be great to see him move forward more.

In addition, it would be great to see Nakashima diversify what surfaces he is playing on. If I am reading this right, it looks like the American has never played a professional match off of a hard court in his career, so far.

As so much of professional tennis takes places off of hard courts, it is very important that Nakashima gets more experience on clay courts especially. While I'm confident he would have at least played the United States green clay court Challengers and Roland Garros qualifying if this was a normal season, it is still a noticeable gap on his resume. 

Point construction on clay, and grass for that matter, is much different than on a hard court and he will have to get used to different styles of play at the professional level. In addition, clay is a more physical surface than hard, so that will also be an adjustment for Nakashima at the professional level.

Yet, I can't help but be excited about Nakashima's future on the ATP Tour and the recent exhibition events have only added to my enthusiasm. The fact that Nakashima was able to easily pick up where he left off and dismantle opponents is a testament to both his talent and the work he put in during the early portion of the pandemic where exhibitions weren't possible for most of the world.

This smooth transition is especially prominent when one sees other pros struggle with consistency in their return to tennis.

But, the future isn't certain. Both in terms of where Nakashima will go from here and in terms of pro tennis as a sport. Will Nakashima be able to play qualifying or receive a wild card into the US Open? Will the US Open even happen at all? Who knows.

Yet, out of every young prospect outside of the top 100, I truly believe none have as high of a ceiling as Brandon Nakashima.

It's up to Nakashima whether or not he lives up to his potential.

The Decision to Play a Challenger Instead of US Open Qualifying

As the singles qualifying tournament started last week, players from around the world battled for the incredible chance to play at one of the four biggest tennis tournaments in the world: the US Open. The US Open, with it's total purse of $36,324,000 for the men's and women's singles tournament and a $1,938,400 purse for the qualifying tournament alone in women's and men's singles tournament, not to mention the many ranking points to be gained at the US Open, would seem like an opportunity too good to pass up. However, many male players in the clay court Manerbio Challenger did pass up the opportunity to play in the US Open and opted for a Challenger instead. This article will look at the ramifications of male players playing in the Manerbio Challenger as opposed to US Open qualifying.

From a points perspective, I can, perhaps, understand the decision to play a Challenger instead of trying to qualify for a Grand Slam. A realistic goal at a clay court Challenger where many of the top clay court players are in New York City trying to qualify for the US Open would be the Semifinals. And, the Semifinals of the Manebrio Challenger does give out 29 ranking points. However, a quick First Round loss doesn't give a player any ranking points, and a Second Round loss isn't much better, only handing out six ranking points. A Quarterfinalist would get 15 ranking points. A Finalist in Manerbio would receive 48 ranking points, while the winner receives 80 ranking points.

Qualifying and then losing in the First Round of the US Open, however, would give you more points than even a Semifinals at this Challenger event, giving qualifiers 35 points. Qualifiers get 25 points for qualifying and then 10 more points for losing in the First Round. So, essentially, by winning the same number of matches (3), you would get 6 more points by playing qualifying at the US Open.

Now, the rankings of the players playing US Open qualifying are generally, on the whole, higher than the rankings of players playing in Manerbio, so an argument could be made that it makes more sense to try to play in Manerbio as compared to New York City. However, you never know with the draws, and even if a player doesn't think he can qualify, he could still get a favorable draw and have a good shot at qualifying and a good draw in the main draw could even give a player a chance of winning even more (where the potential monetary and ranking possibilities sky rocket).

From a monetary perspective, it just makes much more sense for players who can play in US Open qualifying to do so. A lot of these qualifiers for the US Open are in a financial battle to stay on the tour, and even a First Round loss in qualifying can do a lot of good for players struggling financially. The differences in prize money in Manerbio compared to US Open qualifying are substantial.

A First Round loss in Manerbio will give a player 450 Euros, which is the equivalent of $483.36. Now, I'm sure a lot of players will say that they don't expect to lose in the First Round, but upsets happen. In contrast, a First Round loss in US Open qualifying will hand a player $5,606 dollars. That's over a $5000 dollar difference! A Second Round loss in Manerbio gives player 730 Euros, or $871.25. A Second Round loss in US Open qualifying $10,900 for over a $9000 difference. Again, sure there are generally higher ranked players in US Open qualifying as compared to Manerbio, but these differences in prize money for winning the same number of matches are incredible to think about.

A player would have to win Manerbio in order to get more money than they would have won losing in the First Round of US Open qualifying. Players winning all five matches in Manerbio would receive less money than winning one match in US Open qualifying. From a purely monetary perspective, it just seems to make a lot more sense to at least head to New York and hope to qualify. While I don't totally understand how this works, qualifiers for the US Open women's and men's singles tournament make $16,350, while women's and men's players losing in the First Round of the main draw make $43,313. Those are staggering cash amounts which are just much greater than what a player could make in Manerbio. And if a player goes further than the First Round of the main draw of the US Open, the numbers for money earned (in addition to ranking points earned) really sky rocket.

This post is not meant to shame anyone who decided to play in Manerbio instead of the US Open. I understand that a lot of players would much rather play on a clay court as opposed to a hard court, and would, thus, prefer to play on the clay courts of Manerbio as opposed to the hard courts of Flushing Meadows. I also understand that travel is expensive, and going to New York City could be much more expensive than going to Manerbio.

However, in my opinion, the potential for financial and ranking gain is very high for US Open qualifying and the draw could always be very favorable to a player! In any case, with US Open qualifying over, it is time for the US Open to begin later this morning. Enjoy the last major of the season!

For Taylor Fritz and Frances Tiafoe, 2016 Will Be A Telling Year

Taylor Fritz and Frances Tiafoe are both young Americans, a part of the future landscape of tennis, and fast-rising in the ATP World Tour Rankings.  In fact, Fritz and Tiafoe are right next to each other in these rankings, with Taylor at 175 and Frances at 176 (with only four points separating the teens).  It certainly seems as if these two have the chance to shoot up the rankings together.  The real question is, will they deliver on their promise?

Fritz got his name into the mainstream tennis media by having an amazing run in the fall, US Challenger hard court season.  He won two Challenger tournaments in a row, in Sacramento and Fairfield before making the Final of a Challenger in Champaign later in the season, coming one set from the title.  What made his titles most impressive was the manner in which he won them.  He only dropped two sets in Sacramento, to Dustin Brown and Jared Donaldson, neither a player to disregard, before winning the championship in Fairfield without dropping a set.  In fact, in Fairfield, he never lost more than four games!  That's very impressive for someone who turned 18 towards the end of October.

Tiafoe's resume this year has been less impressive, but he has shown a greater variety in his game, with successes coming on both hard courts and clay courts.  Tiafoe burst onto the scene during the US Challenger clay court season, where he reached the Quarterfinals or better in all three tournaments he played, including reaching the Final in Tallahassee.  He was a few holds away from winning that title against Facundo Arguello, a tough cookie on clay.  But, despite winning his first ATP Tour match in Winston-Salem, his results were quite disappointing for the rest of the summer, but with consistent hard work, he was able to turn his results around during the fall, US Challenger hard court season, making the Semifinals in Fairfield, before going on to make the Finals of the indoor event in Knoxville (and coming a set away from winning the title).  It seems like just a matter of time before the 17 year old wins a Challenger title.

So, while that's a glance at the past, I am more interested in the future for these two young Americans.  Will they continue to rise in the rankings, or will the good results slow as players continue to figure out how to beat these two players?

I would caution against setting expectations too high for either player.  While both players had very impressive 2015s, as Tiafoe started to learn over the summer, it isn't easy to sustain those results over a prolonged period of time.  Players do, in fact, figure out players' games and form new strategies to win, so while an initial run of good results is a good sign, keeping those results, or getting those results back during setbacks, over a long period of time is vital to prolonging a successful tennis career.

This is why I actually think Tiafoe is in a better spot than Fritz, despite not having the Challenger titles that he has (although Tiafoe did win an ATP Futures Tour title in 2015).  You have to remember that, just a few months ago, Taylor was ranked hundreds of spots lower than he is now.   I suspect that during the beginning portions of 2016, Taylor will find that a lot of the challenger players he has battled against at the tail end of 2015 will have adapted their games to bring a different challenge to Fritz than he has previously dealt with, and might not be prepared for.  And Fritz will find, as Tiafoe has during 2015, that forays onto the main tour are a completely different animal than on the challenger tour.  How Fritz deals with this in 2016 will determine the trajectory of his career.

Tiafoe has already dealt with the initial setbacks.  After that run on the US clay courts, Tiafoe learned that life wouldn't always be that easy.  He lost four of his next five matches, then he couldn't make it out of qualifying for a Challenger, and proceeded to struggle for the rest of the summer clay court and hard court season until Fairfield (sans Winston-Salem).  Frances was finding it hard to even win matches on the Challenger circuit.  But, Tiafoe didn't let the stream of losses define his season.  Starting in Fairfield, he started finding his game.  His serve was on point, his groundstrokes were finally finding the corners, and he finally seemed to have matured a bit, as shown by his apology to Eric Quigley following a series of outbursts.  That was a great step for him and bodes well for his reputation on tour.

This is not to say that I think Frances will be top 50 next year and Taylor will fall out of the top 300.  In fact, I think that Fritz will handle the challenges that will be presented perfectly fine.  I think Top 100 is very achievable for both he and Tiafoe, to be honest.  And this isn't to say that the bumps in Tiafoe's career are over, as there will be many more hurdles that Frances has to navigate.  I am merely saying that I think that Tiafoe is further down the road to being a professional tennis player than Fritz, despite being younger and not having a Challenger title to his name.

However, for both players, 2016 will be a telling year.