Calvin Hemery and the Grind of Lower-Level Tennis

Calvin Hemery collapsed into the green dirt, limbs spread wide. It was partially in elation and partially in exhaustion, as evidenced by how hard it was for him to get up afterwards.

The Frenchman had just finished a ridiculous, come-from-behind 6-7(8), 7-6(4), 7-6(4) victory over Alexis Galarneau on the green clay of Savannah. At four hours and 21 minutes, it was the second-longest Challenger match since 2010.

Hemery had to come back from a set down. He was a break down twice in the second set. He was down a break in the third set. He let a *5-3 lead in the third turn into 5-5 *0-40 on his own serve.

Yet, Hemery persevered and ultimately triumphed, all for a measly seven ranking points and $1300 USD that likely was near-nothing after expenses.

The 28 year-old Hemery was once a promising talent. He seemed like he was set to make a later (by tennis standards) rise into the top 100 when, in 2018, his ranking peaked at World No. 116 in April of 2018.

Shortly thereafter, Hemery even got to compete in the main draw of the French Open, one of the four pinnacles of the sport. While Hemery lost his first-round match to Diego Schwartzman, he seemed as if he were on a path to success.

Yet, Hemery never made it to the promised land. By the end of the 2018 season, he was outside of the top 200 in the world. Throughout much of the rest of the 2018 and 2019 seasons, although there's a lack of clear information online, it's clear that the Frenchman was injured and playing less often than you would expect for what seemed like a fast-rising player.

In fact, in 2019, Hemery played just 35 matches all season.

Then, in 2020, any sort of momentum Hemery had was officially put to rest, as the coronavirus pandemic knocked out all professional playing opportunities for much of the year.

Perhaps, you could argue, that the pandemic hiatus came at the perfect time for Hemery. The lack of matchplay in 2019 had hit hard, as he had fallen solidly outside of the top 400 in the world. To start 2020, Hemery was just 1-1 at the Challenger level and 4-4 at the ITF level, losing to players such as David Perez Sanz and Baptiste Crepatte.

And, after returning from the pandemic, it took Hemery nine ITF events before he made a final and 11 ITF events to win a title, the $25k event in Caslano.

That August 2021 title in Caslano was the last professional tennis event that Hemery has won.

Hemery's ranking has waffled in the past couple of years. Even with the trophy in Caslano, he has been stuck between 295 and 500 in the world from June 2021 until the present, a far cry from being on the cusp of four guaranteed Slam paychecks a year back in 2018.

I bring up Hemery's history to put into context where his game, and quite possibly, his mind was at during the physical showdown with Galarneau. Savannah, like all tournaments at this point for the Frenchman, was very important for the future of his career.

Just last week, on the green clay of Tallahassee, Hemery had a disappointing 4-6, 2-6 defeat to Rio Noguchi. Hemery won just 51% of his service points and 33% of his return points, lacking the patience that clay-court tennis required. Noguchi ground him into the dirt.

And, to be frank, it seemed as if, by the time Noguchi went up 6-4, 2-0* in the second set, that Hemery had mentally given up on the match.

It seemed as if history was repeating itself in Savannah, as Galarneau survived a tough first set and surged ahead in the second.

Yet, this time, Hemery fought back.

It would have been easy for Hemery to succumb to mental demons in that second set or after blowing his lead in the third. But, this time, he showcased a steely determination. 

Hemery demonstrated a will to win that can only come from the desperation of knowing that there's a ticking time bomb, waiting to explode, on the careers of players who attempt outlast the inevitable in ITF's and on the Challenger Tour.

After playing such a physically-exhausting grind of a match against Galarneau, it would have been very easy for Hemery to feel as if he'd done his "job" for the week and give a haphazard effort in his second-round match with Bjorn Fratangelo.

Yet, Hemery put together another superhuman effort, showing very few signs of fatigue in a 7-6(1), 6-3 victory over Fratangelo. Even as the first set passed the one-hour mark, Hemery never seemed to slow. He kept pounding big serves and forehands, winning 81% of his first serves and not getting broken all match.

And that's been the key to success throughout Hemery's career. Regardless of the surface, the Frenchman has always wanted to take the racquet out of his opponents' hands with his huge first serve and powerful, punishing forehand.

Where Hemery has often gone awry is with his rally tolerance, as watching one of his matches often feels like going on a water slide, with ups, downs, twists, and turns. And, just when you're at the finish of the slide, you get dunked into a big, disorienting pool of water.

In other words, watching Hemery play is a topsy-turvey experience.

Yet, at least in Savannah, it was an experience worth having.

Hemery's Savannah quarterfinal match was against top-seed Zizou Bergs. Bergs had won the Tallahassee final the previous week and was coming into this match on a seven-match winning streak, having won 14 of his last 15 sets.

Yet, perhaps due to some fatigue, but certainly due to Hemery's controlled aggression, Bergs' winning streak stopped there.

Hemery put together another stunning performance, shocking Bergs 6-4, 2-6, 6-2. The Frenchman punished Bergs' big serve, winning 50% of his second-serve return points and breaking four times.

Hemery, once again, was crushing his forehand, controlling the baseline from this wing. Bergs' forehand has been so excellent on the green clay this season, yet it was Hemery's forehand making the bigger impact in this matchup.

In the semifinals, Hemery took on a relatively unknown player in Tristan Boyer, who came into Savannah at World No. 863. This was a different ball game for Hemery. Suddenly, the Frenchman was the favorite, expected to beat the unheralded American.

Hemery had established himself, by beating Fratangelo and Bergs, as a major contender for the title and, with a seemingly-overmatched player waiting in the semifinals, a second-career Challenger title was coming into view.

But, it wouldn't be easy. After playing just one game on Saturday, severe weather delayed the rest of the semifinal until Sunday. This means that both players, if they were to win the championship, would need to essentially play two matches in one day to do so.

Suddenly, that light at the end of the tunnel for Hemery started to cloud up.

But, on Sunday, the Frenchman started well, taking the opening set 6-2. He won 86% of his first serves in the set and wasn't broken.

Hemery wouldn't win even 65% of his first serves in either of the last two sets and was broken a combined four times. Hemery had become passive from the baseline, the spring in his step was gone. The wind, the crowd, and the windy conditions had combined to create a cinder block weight upon Hemery's tired legs.

Boyer completed the comeback victory, defeating Hemery 2-6, 6-4, 6-3. Even when Hemery went up a break early in the third, he never seemed to regain his form from prior days' matches, or even just from the first set.

Hemery was truly exhausted.

So, where does he go from here? Hemery's live ranking is currently at World No. 344, improving 31 spots after Hemery's semifinal appearance in Savannah.

I'm sure that it's far from where Hemery would like to be ranked, but it's a start. And, now, the Frenchman has regained the confidence in himself. He can be sure of his fitness, his serve, his forehand.

The ending of the Boyer match didn't define Hemery's entire week of tennis. The road to get there was much more important.

It's not easy in the lower ranks of tennis, playing for tiny prize pots that go directly into travel and equipment costs, and for minuscule ranking-point opportunities. Often, it can break a player down physically and, even scarier, mentally (check out Akira Santillan's meltdown).

But, through the grind, every once in a while, there's a moment that can propel a player forward. Hemery already responded to the physical victory over Galarneau well with his wins over Fratangelo and Bergs.

We will now have to wait and see where Hemery goes from here. Will this be the catalyst that helps find Hemery back within the top 200? Or merely a good story for the week, just another story Hemery can tell about a career that hasn't gone as planned?

We'll find out in the coming months. But this is certainly a step in the right direction.

Three Storylines Emerging from Release of US Open Men's Singles Draw

 The wait is over! The US Open men's singles draw are out! While there are so many different angles that one could take looking at the draw, I think there are three points that stand out amongst the crowd. 

In this article, I will detail three storylines for tennis fans to keep in mind when reviewing the US Open men's singles draw.

1. Alexander Zverev is in Novak Djokovic's Side of the Draw

By far the biggest story going into the draw release was where No. 4 seed Alexander Zverev would fall in the draw. Would he be on No. 1 seed Novak Djokovic's side, or No. 2 seed Daniil Medvedev's side?

Zverev has had the best results out of any player in men's tennis since the end of Wimbledon. The German won the Olympic gold medal, beating Djokovic in the semifinals, and then won Cincinnati, taking down  Stefanos Tsitsipas from two-breaks down in the third set of their semifinal match, and then taking down Andrey Rublev with ease in the final.

Zverev won at least 85% of his first-serve points in four of his five matches in Cincinnati and only dropped one set all tournament (to Tsitsipas). In the Olympics he also dropped a singular set, to Djokovic.

While Zverev's success in Cincinnati might have been due to Djokovic's absence, he's full of confidence with two titles since the end of Wimbledon and an 11-match winning streak. Zverev is certainly tougher to face than Tsitsipas, whose return is a major question mark right now.

The fact that Djokovic is scheduled to face Zverev in the semifinals in his quest for the Calendar Slam, instead of Zverev facing Medvedev, is a huge story for the draw. Instead, Medvedev will most likely get either Stefanos Tsitsipas or Andrey Rublev in the semifinals. Medvedev is 6-2 against Tsitsipas and 5-1 against Rublev, with both players at a tactical disadvantage against Medvedev.

So, while Djokovic might have to fight it out in a war against red-hot Zverev in the semifinals, Medvedev would play one of two players that he's comfortable against. Yes, Medvedev lost to Rublev in the semifinals of Cincinnati, but the hand-injury certainly played a role in that loss. There's not much Rublev can do  to hurt Medvedev.

In addition, it's very possible that, if Djokovic makes it through Zverev, that he will be more fatigued than Medvedev will be due to what should be a great semifinal against the German.

Of course, it's also important to keep in mind that Zverev probably would have wanted to avoid Djokovic's half as much as Djokovic would have wanted to avoid him.

2. Djokovic's Draw is Very Smooth Until the Semifinals

While I have just ranted about Djokovic getting a tough semifinal assignment, his road getting there is quite straightforward. He starts out the tournament with a qualifier, and while we don't know which qualifier it will be yet, there are no qualifiers in the draw that can seriously challenge Djokovic.

From there, he will play either Tallon Griekspoor or Jan-Lennard Struff. Griekspoor doesn't have the rally tolerance to get close to Djokovic and has nothing to really hurt the Serb with. Struff has a huge serve and a heavy forehand, but Djokovic has won 15 of 16 sets against Struff and the German was very poor in a 2-6, 1-6 loss to Ivashka in Winston-Salem.

In the third round, Djokovic would face off against No. 27 seed David Goffin, Mackenzie McDonald, or Kei Nishikori in the third round. Goffin is completely out-of-form, and McDonald, along with Nishikori, don't do anything that can hurt Djokovic. McDonald's game is tailor-made for Djokovic to neutralize him, and there's a reason Djokovic is 17-2 against Nishikori. In backhand-to-backhand rallies (the backhand being Nishikori's strength), Djokovic will still have the upper hand. Plus, Djokovic can take advantage of the Nishikori second serve.

In Nishikori's last matchup with Djokovic in the quarterfinals of the Olympics, Djokovic won 6-0, 6-2, with Djokovic winning 82% of the points on his serve versus 43% for Nishikori.

In the round of 16, Djokovic would most likely play either Aslan Karatsev, Taylor Fritz, or Alex De Minaur. Aslan Karatsev has cooled down significantly since he beat Djokovic in Belgrade in April and made the semifinals of the Australian Open. Taylor Fritz only got close to Djokovic in the third round of the Australian Open due to Djokovic's abdominal injury. Alex De Minaur makes the most of his talent, but he won't be able to out-grind Djokovic, especially in the best-of-five format.

In the quarterfinals, Djokovic could face off against Hubert Hurkacz or Matteo Berrettini. Djokovic is 2-0 against Hurkacz, having won six of the seven sets they've played, although never on a hard court. Djokovic is 3-0 against Berrettini, having just won the Wimbledon final against him in four sets.

In that Wimbledon final, Djokovic won 79% of his first serves and held Berrettini to 38% second serves won. Berrettini faced 15 break points in that match and was broken six times.

Hurkacz and Berrettini might be able to serve their way into close sets, but Djokovic just has better precision and rally tolerance than both of them. In addition, for Berrettini specifically, Djokovic can target his backhand, especially in the backhand-to-backhand exchanges.

Look for Djokovic to make the semifinals (and most likely play Zverev) without too many issues.

3. Can Stefanos Tsitsipas Survive Andy Murray?

I feel stupid even writing this, but on social media, this matchup between No. 3 seed Stefanos Tsitsipas and former US Open champion Andy Murray is gaining a lot of traction.

The truth is: there won't need to much surviving here, as Tsitsipas should trounce Murray and easily advance to the second round.

While Tsitsipas and Murray have never played each other before, does anything, in the best-of-five format, does anyone expect someone with Murray's injury history to be too competitive against a young rising star with the pedigree of Tsitsipas.

In Winston-Salem this past week, Murray won less than 50% of his second-serve points in both of his matches and, against Frances Tiafoe in the second round, he only put 47% of his first serves in play.

For Murray to even be competitive with Tsitsipas, he needs to be making a high percentage of his first serves and needs to be very aggressive with his second serves so that Tsitsipas can't tee off.

With Tsitsipas struggling against big servers, playing someone who doesn't serve huge like Murray seems to be a dream first round opponent.

And even if he does that, at this stage in Murray's career, he doesn't possess the game to force a powerful player like Tsitsipas off of the baseline and make him uncomfortable.

Expect Tsitsipas to beat Murray with ease, losing one set at the absolute most.

***

So, what do you think about the storylines mentioned here? Let me know what you think in the comments!

Enjoy the US Open, folks!

Taylor Fritz vs Brandon Nakashima: An All-American Showdown at Wimbledon

The Wimbledon draws have come out and they're full of exciting matchups that will have tennis fans glued to the action. However, the first-round matchup that excited me the most has to be a battle of Americans: Taylor Fritz vs Brandon Nakashima.

Seed vs qualifier. One of the players who used to be considered the future of American tennis vs someone who is currently seen as part of the future of American tennis. A battle of players who can impose themselves from the baseline and hit their spots on-serve.

How will this matchup play out? Who will come out on top? Read on for my thoughts!

No. 31 seed Taylor Fritz is certainly grateful that this match is happening at all. The 23 year-old American suffered a massive injury during Roland Garros, tearing his meniscus during his second round Roland Garros match against Dominik Koepfer. The injury was so severe that he had to have a wheelchair take him off the court. Fritz even needed surgery, but somehow has found the strength and willpower to find a way to get ready for the meeting.

Fritz's health is certainly no guarantee. But, if he's in the draw, I'm going to assume he's healthy enough to at least compete at a good level. And if that's the case, then he certainly will present a massive challenge to Nakashima.

Fritz has won 1 ATP Tour title in his career and he lifted that winner's trophy on the grass of Eastbourne. In 2019, Fritz beat fellow American Sam Querrey in the final 6-3, 6-4.

After the match, Fritz told the ATP, "It's so amazing. I almost can't even believe it. I'm still trying to take it in...I really hope that I can continue on and progress the way Andy (Roddick) did and follow in his footsteps."

Fritz clearly saw the last Eastbourne champion from the United States, Andy Roddick, as a role model for his grass-court career.

In that Eastbourne event, Fritz served really well. He won at least 75% of his first-serve points in all 5 matches he played in the event. From the quarterfinals onwards, Fritz was only broken once. In the final against Querrey, Fritz won 89% of his first-serve points, facing only 1 break point, and he didn't get broken in that final.

However, at Wimbledon, Fritz has only made the 2nd round a couple times in his 4 appearances in the main draw. So, why has this been the case?

On the positive side, as mentioned before, Fritz's first serve is a huge weapon on faster surfaces, and is an area of his game where he's rapidly improved. Fritz's groundstrokes also are flatter and can really cut through the court on grass.

On the other hand, at times, it feels like the Fritz's backswings are little too far back for the quicker grass surface and he doesn't have an effective, low-skidding backhand slice that can do so much damage on the grass. In addition, Fritz isn't totally comfortable at the net.

So, there are aspects of Fritz's game that work supremely well on the grass, while there are other aspects that cause some concern. I guess that partially explains why, at times when he's able to play to his strengths on grass he can be dominant, while at other times, his weaknesses get exposed.

Perhaps some more time on grass last season and in the lead-up to Wimbledon this season would have been good for Fritz to continue to develop his grass-court game and try to continue to live up to the standard that Andy Roddick has set for American men, but a global pandemic and a fluke injury blew those chances.

On the other side of the net will be qualifier Brandon Nakashima. The 19 year-old American hadn't played a professional match on grass, having only competed in the juniors on grass.

And, in the Challengers leading up to Wimbledon qualifying, Nakashima showed some growing pains. Nakashima went 1-2 in the Challengers preceding Wimbledon qualifying, beat Mario Vilella Martinez and losing to Evgeny Donskoy and Thomas Fabbiano.

While Donskoy and Fabbiano are not the easiest matchups on grass, given the progression that Nakashima has shown, it was a bit disappointing that he lost those matches.

However, Nakashima seemed to put it all together during his time at qualifying in Roehampton.

The American doesn't have the biggest serve, but he hits his spots very well. He won 75% of his first-serve points in all three of his qualifying wins over Aleksander Vukic, Viktor Troicki, and Ernests Gulbis.

Nakashima also took advantage of second-serve returns. In every match Nakashima played in Roehampton, his opponents won 35% or fewer of his second-serve returns and broke 15 times over the course of the tournament.

In addition to his solid serving and returning, there are other aspects of Nakashima's game that work well on grass. Nakashima's groundstrokes are very flat and he hits his targets. Finally, Nakashima has really made it a point to improve his net-game, an aspect of tennis that is particularly important on grass. Nakashima attacks the net with authority and hits razor-sharp volleys.

Nakashima, however, doesn't have the power that would let him hit opponents off the court at times his forehand can get a little bit shaky, and like Fritz, his backhand slice could also use some work.

But, ultimately, Nakashima's qualifying campaign was a massive achievement. It was the first time in his career that he had qualified for a Major and Nakashima was clearly happy with his level of play.

Having had success at Roehampton as a junior, Nakashima explained to the ATP during his qualifying campaign, "It definitely feels pretty good coming back here. I feel comfortable with the courts..."

And, given how he performed, his comfort on the grass was very evident.

***

So, how will this matchup play out?

They've never played in a non-exhibition event, although Fritz leads 2-1 in exhibitions. However, all 3 of those matches were on hard courts and there's really not much to take away from them.

Fritz will have the power advantage from the baseline, but Nakashima is more comfortable at the net and will look to impose himself on Fritz when he can.

In terms of the serve, Fritz's first serve has evolved into one of the best in the game. He won't give Nakashima many opportunities on return and Nakashima will have to be clutch in converting the opportunities given to him.

Fritz's health is certainly the biggest question mark. Will he be ready physically for best-of-five? Will he have enough time on the practice courts to hone his game? How will he respond to not playing a grass-court match in 2 years?

Given Fritz's health concerns and lack of matchplay, it's hard to expect too much from him in this one. And an in-form Nakashima who has already played 6 matches on the grass this season.

For Nakashima, he's inexperienced at the Grand Slam level. He's only played in one Major before and never outside of the United States.

Ultimately, I trust Nakashima to pull through in this match. His improved net game and aggressive attitude will come through for him here and will be the steadier player from the baseline, as a rusty Fritz will spray unforced errors.

It won't be entirely straightforward, but expect Brandon Nakashima to win in 4 sets and set up a 2nd round showdown with fellow American Steve Johnson or Dennis Novak!

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.

Reviewing the Mutua Madrid Open Virtual Pro

COVID-19 has created massive problems throughout the world, including the cancellation of tennis through July 13th (currently). The Mutua Madrid Open decided that, instead of cancelling the tournament altogether, they would hold a virtual tournament instead of the regular in-person clay court event.

While not ideal by any means, with the surge in popularity of esports, this seemed like a good way for tennis to enter into the gaming sphere. The tournament decided that Tennis World Tour would be the video game of choice and playstation to be the game console used.

With 150,000 euros at stake (with at least some of that total expected to go to a donation) and 50,000 additional euros set aside exclusively for donations, the stakes were high for the 32 players participating.

The tournament was still gender-separated with 16 ATP players and 16 WTA players parsed into groups of 4 for dueling round robin tournaments. In the round robin stage, the players played to 3, with at tiebreak at 3-3. There was also a charity tournament occurring simultaneously.

For the main tournaments, after the round robin, there would be a traditional quarterfinal, knock out-style setup. In the knock out stages of the tournament, a full set of virtual tennis was played to determine a winner. Kiki Bertens and Andy Murray ended up winning the WTA and ATP virtual titles, respectively.

So, how successful was the tournament? Could we see a wave of similar tournaments, even when the regular tours return? Let's dive in.

Mutua Madrid Open Virtual Pro Review

The tournament started off on the wrong foot with the withdrawal of Gael Monfils (whose spot was taken by Benoit Paire) due to an issue with the rights to stream his virtual matches.

Tennis journalist Matthew Willis made the point that the virtual tournament was exclusive to Facebook and Monfils was affiliated with Twitch, another streaming platform. The streaming on Facebook part is weird to Willis, who has showcased how much more popular Twitch is for streaming.

There were more withdrawals during the tournament too. The game itself was a laggy disaster (more on that later), and during the round robin stage of the men's tournament, Dominic Thiem and Karen Khachanov withdrew because of technical issues, giving opponents 3-0 wins.

Even in the charity tournament taking place alongside the main tournament, technical issues for Rafael Nadal and Donna Vekic forced the cancellation of that match.

If Tennis World Tour is the best video game that tennis has, then the future of video game play in the sport is in huge trouble. Willis showcased the glitchy, terrible graphics that almost certainly turned viewers off from the game.

Then, in the men's semifinals, when Andy Murray took on Diego Schwartzman, it was as tennis journalist Stuart Fraser reported Murray saying, "...a disaster." Technical difficulties marred the match and the players ultimately decided that Murray should advance to the final.

It was almost comical how poorly the tournament was working out. In the semifinals of a virtual tournament, the players can barely even play due to technical issues. If I'm being frank, it was a total embarrassment for the tournament and reflected poorly on the sport's ability to put together a solid virtual tournament.

Personally, when I was watching the quarterfinal matchup between Bianca Andreescu and Sorana Cirstea, a match which Cirstea eventually won in a tiebreak, there was at least one occasion that I can remember where a player served a let, but was inexplicably given the point. With as seriously as the virtual tournament was taking itself, even such a seemingly minor problem during play de-legitimizes the competition.

That's not to say that the organizers weren't trying their hardest. It was clear that Madrid tournament director Feliciano Lopez and the rest of the team at Madrid were trying their best to put on the best event possible.

The problem for the Mutua Madrid Open Virtual Pro was that the the game itself felt deficient in someway. The graphics felt like they were from 10 or 15 years ago, as opposed to the modern day video games we are used to.

Tennis as sport might also just not be very well-suited to video games in general, at least serious video games trying to realistically replicate the action on the court. Watching the Virtual Pro, it felt like so much was missing. The cool angles and spins that players put on the ball, the trick shots, even the interaction between players and their boxes. All gone.

Instead, we got a glitchy, laggy, bland version of tennis that was a massive disappointment. The fun of NHL, FIFA, NBA2K, and Madden was replaced with this lame game.

A charity tournament featuring the Serena Williams Naomi Osaka, and Maria Sharapova (along with other tennis players and celebrities) is using Mario Tennis Aces as their game of choice. While that tournament, officially named the "Stay at Home Slam", is also using Facebook to stream,  there is a key difference. The video game of choice is much better suited for a virtual tennis event meant to draw in fans.

Mario games are more about having fun than having serious, realistic competition. And perhaps that was the Virtual Pro's problem, they were so intent on having pros in the game itself that they forgot that a less serious video game like Mario Tennis Aces would actually be more fun to play and watch.

Let's be honest, no video game is going to realistically mimic the Nadal topspin forehand on clay.

However, a word of caution for the "Stay at Home Slam": the tournament is using John McEnroe along with Justine Ezarik for commentary. I believe that having official commentary was a very poor choice for the Virtual Pro. The commentary was unnecessary and took away from the players' own commentary. Yet another way the tournament was taking itself too seriously.

I don't mean for this to be a post where I just crap all over the virtual tournament. However, if we are to have video game tennis tournaments in the future, it's important to learn from past mistakes and try to provide the best viewer experience possible.

I appreciate the Mutua Madrid Open stepping up to the plate and essentially being the guinea pig for quarantine virtual content. Future tournaments can take what happened at the Virtual Pro and hopefully put together a better product.

Ball Kid Reform in the Aftermath of COVID-19

As COVID-19 wreaks havoc across the world, I thought about what good, if any, could possibly come out of this terrible pandemic. Coronavirus has brought much of the world to a halt, so there's plenty of time to think about tennis reform.

Before Indian Wells was cancelled, the plan was for ball kids to not handle the towels (towels would be on chairs) and to wear gloves while performing their duties on court. The question, then, that I have is: Why has it taken a global pandemic for this type of reform to be fully brought to the forefront of those in charge of tennis?

Even if we didn't have highly contagious, dangerous disease out there, what has stopped the tennis authorities from implementing such a change earlier?

At the Next Gen Finals event for the ATP, towel racks were placed on court so that ball kids would not have to touch the players' sweaty towels. Sure, it might take an extra second or two for the player to walk to the towel rack, but it is certainly worth it.

Besides sweat, almost certainly the players' hair and skin cells were smeared across those towels. And if a player was sick, the ball kids were at especially high risk.

The reception of the towel rack wasn't outstanding. According to The Telegraph's Charlie Eccleshare, Stefanos Tsitsipas stated, "it's the ball kids' job to provide them." This was when Tsitsipas was in the Next Gen Finals in 2018, so he might have evolved his view since then. But regardless, it shouldn't be the ball kids' job to hand players' a dirty towel. Pandemic or not.

Something interesting in Indian Wells' plans was the introduction of gloves. And it makes sense, right? Even if not touching the towels, the ball kids still have to touch the balls themselves. The same balls that the sweaty players hold before they serve and that smash into the asphalt/clay/grass many, many times throughout the match.

Not to mention that if a ball goes into the stands and a fan throws the ball back, that fan might also not be feeling well. So, it makes sense, at least to me, that ball kids should be heavily encouraged to wear gloves, no matter the state of public health around the world.

Perhaps I sound like I'm being hypersensitive given the state of the pandemic, but momentum has been building for ball kid reform for quite some time, with Fernando Verdasco's October 2018 treatment of a ball kid providing momentum for positive change. It should never be forgotten that ball kids are worthy of the same respect given to others in the tennis universe.

Due to coronavirus, July 13th is the soonest we will see tennis, as of now. And so many of us are eager to get back to the court as quickly as possible. But, when we do get back, let's not forget about the innovations that Indian Wells showed us just prior to its cancellation.

Ball kids are very important in the game of tennis in the sense that they keep the flow of the game working really well. Instead of tennis being a start-stop process, as players collect balls from around the court, ball kids keep the pace of play high.

So, let's start showing these invaluable members of the tennis community the respect they deserve, even if we have to delay the match a couple seconds so a player can towel himself/herself off.

Because without the ball kids, matches would be going a lot slower.

So, I'm imploring the ATP, WTA, and ITF: the COVID-19 pandemic is bad enough, let's see if we can get a little bit of good out of a terrible situation.

And ball kid reform as described in this post would be a good thing for the game.

Thoughts Regarding Tennis and COVID-19

So, this blog post is just as much as about myself working through issues related to tennis and coronavirus as much as it is about trying to provide clarity for others. Quite frankly, coronavirus has wrecked havoc to the tennis season. But, at this point, tennis is the very least of the vast, vast majority of the world's concerns.

COVID-19

I'm not an infectious disease, so I won't pretend to be an expert, but this is a good link for learning the very basics about coronavirus (specifically COVID-19) if you don't already know the specifics. Essentially, COVID-19 is a contagious disease that started in Wuhan, China, late last year. The main symptoms of COVID-19 are the patient having a fever, being tired, and having a cough that is dry. The link above answers many of the other questions you have about this strain of coronavirus and, rather than repeat their answers here, it's better to look at the Q&A if you want to learn more.

Impact on ATP, WTA, and ITF

Honestly, the impact on tennis really isn't important at this point, but this is a tennis blog and so I will break it down. The first major domino to fall was the cancellation of the outdoors hard court BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells. Indian Wells is a Masters 1000 for men and Premier Mandatory for women, so it's right below the ATP and WTA Finals events in terms of importance. From the perspective of an American, Indian Wells was one of the first American major events to be postponed (or cancelled), so this came as a shock.

It also came as a shock to the players, where some vented on Twitter for being out of the loop and finding out on the social media platform instead of from their governing body (WTA or ATP) directly. It's understandable that the tours would be scrambling, but it can certainly be frustrating, from the players' point of view, if they aren't getting information about the sport that they rely on for their livelihood in a timely manner.

Indian Wells was technically postponed, so there's a chance that it is played later this year. But, given the French Open's move (which I will discuss later), it seems less likely now. But, in a time like this, who knows.

March 12th was a busy day for tennis postponements/cancellations. The ITF postponed events until April 20th, at the earliest. The ITF is involved in events like Futures tournaments, Fed Cup, and Davis Cup. Therefore, anything within those areas are postponed.

Also on March 12th, the Miami Open was cancelled until 2021. Miami, like Indian Wells, is a Masters 1000 event for the ATP and Premier Mandatory for the WTA, so this was another major cancellation. The sunshine swing was officially over, at least at this point.

On this same date, the ATP announced a six week hiatus from the tour due to COVID-19. There are many tournaments affected by this ruling across the United States and Europe. This ruling also affects the ATP Challenger Tour, which is under the ATP's jurisdiction. The Challenger Tour was suspended, which included the tournaments currently being played in Potchefstroom and Nur-Sultan.

The WTA took a more incremental approach to the postponement/cancellation dilemma. On March 12th, The WTA stated that the Miami Open and the Volvo Car Open (Charleston green clay event) would not be happening. Then, later in the day on March 12th, the WTA cancelled Challenger in Guadalajara during the second week of Indian Wells and the International event set to start on April 6th in Bogota.

Finally, on March 16th, the WTA suspended the entire tour until May 2nd. This means that the indoor clay tournament in Stuttgart, and the outdoor clay events in Istanbul and Prague wouldn't occur. This stoppage was set a little longer than the ATP's, but at least I presume that the extension of the ATP hiatus would have been extended to at least as long as the WTA's.


Update: As reported by Gaspar Ribeiro Lanca, the ATP, WTA, and ITF announced that tennis is called off until June 7th. A freeze in the rankings will occur during this time.

Here is the updated list of tournaments that won't be played due to COVID-19.

French Open

The French Open, one of tennis' four major tournaments, announced on March 17th that the tournament would be moved to the back half of September through the beginning of October, as opposed to its usual late May through early June dates.

 This spins the tennis calendar on its head much more so than before. As tennis journalist Jose Morgado points out, there are many ATP and WTA events that were supposed to be played during the French Open, it seems unilaterally, decided to change their dates. 

There was confusion all around, whether it be the ATP's Player's Council, per Morgado, or even the WTA's head Steve Simon, as tennis journalist Christopher Clarey points out. It seems that the French Open's move was a total shock for many involved.

Morgado also makes the good point that the US Open ends six days before Roland Garros! The logistics of having a slam in such close proximity is, let's be honest, a nightmare. The US Open, given their statement, are clearly not happy with the French Open, either.

But, at the same time, former tennis player Mark Petchey has provided good perspective on the matter, stating that the ability to still have the major and make such massive amounts of money in such a time of crisis and instability in the world. 

It's certainly true that getting to play all four majors this year, even if it's inconvenient and some people in the world would have to make sacrifices. But, in the time of a pandemic, everyone isn't going to be able to get their way completely. It's important to just accept that, even if the French Open is coming off selfishly in this manner.

Overall

However, the economic impact of cancelling so much tennis is huge for players and others who make their money from tennis are suffering greatly right now. Even for players that were planning on playing or qualifying for Indian Wells or Miami, that was a big opportunity to make a lot of money that could fund much of the rest of the year and get an immediate boost in the rankings. For players planning on playing ITF events and Challengers, and tournaments workers who were relying on these tournaments to make a living, this crisis is even more of a disaster.

This certainly feels like a bleak time in the world's history and this feeling is certainly a reality. Kirsten Flipkens' sentiment in this tweet from March 15th is certainly a good way of looking at this world crisis.

Anything Positive?

To bring a small breath of positivity in this time, I want to state that I was very excited to see that Tsvetana Pironokva is coming back to the WTA Tour! She has been gone from the WTA due to having a child and is ready to see if she can reach new heights on the WTA Tour, having gotten as high as No. 31 in the World. Pironkova made the semifinals of Wimbledon in 2010, beating Venus Williams in straight sets in the quarterfinals before a semifinal loss to Vera Zvonareva.

It's going to be great to see Pironkova back out on the tennis court. Hopefully we can all band together and get through this world health crisis and we can see her, and every other professional tennis player, on court soon.

Stay safe, y'all!

About the US Open Final

I wanted to use this space in my blog as a post-mortem of sorts on the US Open final and the US Open more generally. I will then look have a quick look to the rest of the season on the ATP Tour for Nadal and Medvedev. There were lots of different storylines and levels of intrigue that came with both the players involved and the actual play on the court that I want to try to untangle for myself, more than anyone else.

Before this North American hard court season, many tennis fans knew Daniil Medvedev more for a racist incident, throwing coins at a chair umpire, and telling off Stefanos Tsitsipas than for what he could produce on the court. The rapid development of his game was partially obscured by these incidents, but also by other young breakthrough, such as Denis Shapovalov beating Rafael Nadal in Montreal 2017 and Stefanos Tsitsipas defeating at the Australian Open 2019.

Medvedev patiently waited for his turn in the spotlight. He wasn't putting up bad results by any means. He had won his first three ATP Tour titles in 2018, including a 500 event, and won his fourth title in February of this year. Stefanos Tsitsipas still hasn't won above a 250 yet, but because he got that big win over Federer at the Australian Open on his ways to the semifinals, people looked at him differently.

At Wimbledon, Medvedev lost a third round match to David Goffin 7-5 in the fifth. Medvedev was up two sets to one and was up a break in the fifth set. With a round of 16 matchup against the mercurial Fernando Verdasco next, this seemed like a lost opportunity for Medvedev. That elusive slam quarterfinal slipped out of Daniil's grasps. Now, despite having lost 6-4 in the final to Nadal, the story is quite different.

Tennis fans knew from the way he battled Novak Djokovic in a very physical four-set match at the Australian Open this year that Medvedev played a physical style, but I don't suspect many (myself included) realized just what great shape he had gotten himself in. An ESPN graphic last night showed that Medvedev had never won a five-set match in his life. So, it seems almost like an oxymoron to proclaim what great shape he is in, given that he has never summited the hardest physical test in the sport. However, having watched him the past few weeks, I can't help but feel that way.

Since his first match in Washington on July 30th, Medvedev has played 23 matches of tennis.  That's 60 sets of tennis. He's won 20 of those matches and 48 of those sets, taking home a Masters 1000 title and runner-up trophies at another Masters 1000 and a 500 event. The US Open was by far the most demanding of him, only winning two of his seven matches in straight sets, and playing a total of 27 sets. Medvedev was cramping up against Dellien, down a set and a break against Koepfer, and down two sets and a break against one of the greatest fighters in the history of the game, Rafael Nadal.

That's damn impressive.

Speaking of Nadal, of course I want to devote a lot of space to him. I have to admit I am a Federer fan, but it's hard not to respect a player like Nadal. Nadal is sometimes looked at as if he is weak on grass and hard courts. Yet, that could not be further from the case. The guy has two Wimbledon titles and, now, five hard court majors. Take out the French Open and that's still the resume of an all-time great.

Nadal won two of those majors, the 2017 US Open and 2019 US Open, after the age of 30. It's not like he's only winning these titles off of clay when he's young. At the 2017 US Open, Nadal dropped three sets over the course of the entire tournament, and was never pushed to five sets. This year, including a withdrawal, Nadal was pushed to five sets once, accounting for two of his three sets lost. And losing two sets to Medvedev in this form is nothing to be ashamed of.

Despite an extensive injury history, Nadal's major results this year of an Australian Open final (loss to Djokovic), French Open title, Wimbledon semifinal (loss to Federer), and US Open title is unbelievable. Nadal's been injured much more than Federer over the course of his career, so despite the difference in age, it's just as impressive what Nadal is doing at 33 as what Federer is doing at 37/38. But, I'm going to try to refrain from making comparisons with Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic, because it's better to just sit back and watch the incredible things that these three players can do.

Nadal's results aren't confined to majors, either, not by any means. Since turning 31, Nadal has also won five Masters 1000 titles, including two on hard courts. He's won a couple 500 events too, including a hard court win at the China Open. In other words, Nadal has been impressive both at the majors and at regular tour events, and not just on clay.

Everything that's to say about Nadal has already been said, so I'll leave my gushing of his career at that.

So, what about the match specifically yesterday? As Nadal was on his way of going up two sets to love, I thought that it might be in his best interest to do what won him his match against Djokovic in Cincinnati, and red-line. I felt like Nadal was wearing Medvedev down and that Medvedev was partially doing this to himself with his poor court positioning, frequently putting himself well behind the baseline.

Now, this isn't to say that Medvedev can't get depth on the ball from such a position. One of the most remarkable things that continued to surprise me during his summer run, until I came to expect it, was the depth Medvedev was able to hit from tough positions on the court. It was amazing how consistently Medvedev was able to get the ball deep from areas that you would expect him to hit short balls. Of course this type of court positioning did open up Medvedev to do more running, as Nadal was able to pull him around the court, but until the last ball was played, it felt that even if Medvedev's fuel tank was around empty, that he was always right near a gas station.

Nadal looked wearier and wearier as the match went on, but at the age of 33, it is absolutely remarkable what great shape he was in. Playing a 23 year-old didn't phase Nadal, he is still one of the most fit players on tour. The match yesterday lasted nearly five hours, yet Nadal was still chasing balls down, making ridiculous defensive plays when necessary, and covering the court so well that even though you knew Nadal was exhausted, you also knew there was no way his body was going to give out anytime soon. What helped make this match special was that both players were visibly exhausted, yet forged on.

Down two sets and a break against Nadal is usually curtains, but the mental and physical resolve that Medvedev showed to come back and win those two sets is why it's hard to take his five-set record that seriously at this point. No, he hasn't won a five set match, but as crazy as it is to say, that doesn't matter. How he almost came back from two breaks down in the fifth, having a break point to get back to five all, is the cherry on top in terms of seeing him as more fit than almost any other player on tour. Don't forget about how much tennis he's played before this.

The match, besides the physical challenges, featured some awesome tennis. The angles, variety, rally tolerance, and precision that both players showed was world-class and an absolute treat to watch. There's drama because a match is going on for a long time and drama because both players are at an extremely high level and it's exciting to see who's tennis comes out on top. This match was both of those. Again, a showing of how best-of-five should never leave the majors.

So, Nadal won his 19th major, putting him one behind Federer for most of all-time. Given the head-to-head, especially with how Nadal is winning more and more majors off of clay, it would be very hard to put Federer above Nadal in terms of the "Greatest of All Time" rankings if Nadal ends up with equal or more majors. However, Federer I think still has a major or two left in him (he was a point away at Wimbledon this year) and Djokovic might end up passing both. But, again, let's stray away from the "Greatest of all Time" debate and look at this more as the "Era Where The Three Best Ever Players Played."

So, how does the rest of the season play out? I don't see Nadal playing much. He's supposed to play Laver Cup, but let's see what happens. Maybe Shanghai and/or Paris, along with the ATP Tour Finals? Medvedev has a packed schedule, but who knows if he will end up playing all of these. He definitely will want to rest more, maybe only playing mandatory events, so he doesn't wear himself out, a la Dominic Thiem in years past.

The season feels over, but it isn't. There's still tournaments to be played, money and points to be won.

But, if the last big memory of the 2019 season is the US Open final, then I'm glad it will be of Nadal and Medvedev battling it out.

Wimbledon Men's Predictions

Wimbledon is almost here! Check out my predictions for Wimbledon below, along with my reasoning! I think tennis fans will be familiar with a few of my semifinalists.

Quarterfinals
Djokovic over Edmund in 4
Khachanov over Anderson in 5
Nadal over Simon in 3
Federer over Struff in 3

Semifinals
Djokovic over Khachanov in 4
Federer over Nadal in 4

Final
Federer over Djokovic in 5


Reasoning
I almost feel a little guilty picking the "cop out" of the Big 3 taking up three of the four spots in the semifinals, but it feels very scary picking anyone but them. They've taken up 5 of 8 major semifinal spots this season, with Federer's loss to Tsitsipas in the round of 16 of the Australian Open being the only time that one of the three hasn't made the semifinals so far this year. And that was a very tight match. But, let's go through all the quarters of the draw.

I am projecting three of Djokovic's first four matches at Wimbledon to be not too easy for him. Philipp Kohlschreiber is his first round match and he did have a victory against Djokovic in Indian Wells, although Djokovic has won twice since then and is totally in control of the head to head. Kohlschreiber is also not in the best form coming into this tournament, so he shouldn't be too much of an issue for Novak. Kudla is my second round pick to play Djokovic, and while he understands grass court tennis very well, he doesn't have the weapons to challenge Djokovic.

The round of 16 is going to be, perhaps, Djokovic's toughest match until the final. I have him taking on Felix Auger-Aliassime, a player I am very high on. Auger-Aliassime is only 18 years old, but he is clobbering his serve and hitting his groundstrokes with a lot of precision and confidence. I don't think he will be scared of Novak, and he has the weapons to really challenge him. But, at the end of the day, I don't think he is quite good enough to beat Djokovic at a major yet, and so I ave Djokovic advancing to play Kyle Edmund.

I have Edmund reaching the quarterfinals because I think that crowd support is huge for him, and I also really like what I've seen so far from in Eastbourne. In Eastbourne, he has been hitting his forehand huge and dealing with the changes of pace involved with grass court tennis very well. Edmund should beat Munar easily in the first round. I predict that he will then have some very tricky matches in a row with Verdasco, Tsitsipas, and Medvedev, but again, I really love what I've seen from Edmund in Eastbourne. In addition, both Verdasco and Tsitsipas have not looked great on the grass and I can't see either of them advancing too far at Wimbledon. And, with Medvedev, while his game is well-suited for grass, I think his grinding style is too hard to keep up for many rounds in the best-of-five format. I think in a Edmund-Djokovic quarterfinal matchup that it will play out much like their third round last year, with Edmund getting a set, but Djokovic ultimately being too much for him to handle.

This next quarter was the toughest for me to predict, and I honestly have very little idea what's happening. I know Anderson is just coming back from injury, but he obviously did very well last year, and his game is very well-suited for grass. A first round clash with Herbert will be tough, Herbert is great at the net and knows his way around a grass court. However, when push comes to shove, I just trust Anderson more in the big moments of a match like that. His next two rounds I have him facing off with Tipseravic and then Copil. Tipseravic shouldn't trouble Anderson at all, and while Copil has a big serve, the rest of his game isn't up to the standard needed to beat Anderson in a match like this. I have Anderson playing Wawrinka in the fourth round, and Wawrinka is not nearly as good on grass compared to other surfaces. So, I have Anderson advancing there to take on Karen Khachanov.

This was tough selection, but I liked what I saw from Khachanov in Halle, and think that he could bring his good form on grass into Wimbledon. Khachanov plays a very good up-and-comer named Soon Woo Kwon, but I don't think he is quite good enough to challenge Khachanov on grass. My predicted second round for Khachanov would be very tough, as I have him taking on Feiciano Lopez. But, I don't trust Lopez to consistently do well in best-of-five format anymore and have Khachanov winning a tight one. The next two rounds against Bautista Agut and then Zverev wouldn't be easy, but grass is both of their weakest surfaces. I just feel like Khachanov can play at a higher level than Bautista Agut on grass. In terms of Zverev, I also don't trust him at majors and Khachanov will be looking for revenge after Zverev beat him in five sets at the French Open last year.

So, I have Khachanov and Anderson facing off in the quarterfinals. Anderson won their only meeting last year in Miami, taking the match in three sets. However, given that he is still coming back from injury, this match would be a step too far for him, and I think Khachanov would win. Maybe I am just higher on Khachanov than most people?

From the top quarter of the bottom draw, I have Gilles Simon as one of the quarterfinalists. I really loved what I saw from Simon at the Queen's Club, where he was so close to taking the title. His passing shots have been on fire recently, and he's counterpunching so well. I have him easily beating Caruso and Uchiyama in the first two rounds. While Caruso beat Simon at the French Open, Simon is playing significantly better recently. In the next two rounds, I have Simon beating Fognini and Thiem. While both are great players, they are much better on other surfaces compared to grass, and Simon is just much more comfortable on the surface than them.

In the quarterfinals, I have Simon battling Rafael Nadal. I'm not overly confident in Nadal on grass, but it's just really hard to pick against him, especially considering how close he was to the final last year in his epic semifinal against Novak Djokovic. Sugita is a good grass court player, but Nadal just does everything better and with more power, and so Sugita should not present too much of a challenge. A second round match against Nick Kyrgios, however, would be extremely intense and must-see television. At the end of the day, though, Kyrgios' form has been mediocre and Nadal surely still remembers and wants revenge for Kyrgios' win in Acapulco. Nadal wins that one in a tight match.

Nadal would then potentially go up against Denis Shapovalov, who I have beating Jo-Wilfred Tsonga in the second round. Shapovalov has the game for grass, but I just don't think he is consistent enough to get another win over the Spaniard. In the round of 16, I have Nadal beating Dan Evans, a Brit with a nasty backhand slice who is in great form. However, this just comes down to the fact that Nadal is on a different league compared to Evans. Evans slice, while effective against many opponents, shouldn't trouble Nadal too much, he's just at a higher level than most. Against Simon in the quarterfinals, while there should be some long, taxing rallies (even on grass), I just can't see Simon outlasting Nadal here. Nadal advances to the semis.

In the top part of the final quarter, I have Jan-Lennard Struff making it the quarterfinals. I really like how Struff has been playing, as he looked good in Stuttgart before eventually falling to Berrettini. He is serving really well and hitting his groundstrokes with a lot of power. Albot will challenge him in the first round match, but ultimately not be able to hit through the court enough to beat him. And while Fritz (his potential second round opponent) is doing well in Eastbourne, having watched both recently, I like Struff to edge out that match in a close one. The next two rounds would be very tough, with Isner in the third round and Nishikori in the fourth round. However, Isner is just coming back from injury and would not be very sharp, and potentially still getting his fitness back. In terms of a matchup with Nishikori, I think that Nishikori's second serve is a major liability on grass, and I believe that Struff would punish him for his second serve.

I have Struff taking on Roger Federer in the quarterfinals. Federer is so accomplished at this tournament, he played very well on clay, and took his good form to Halle where he won the title. There's not much left to say about Federer on grass, I mean, his serve is magnificent, his backhand slice is extremely effective, and he knows the perfect opportunities to go to net. Federer won't be challenged in either of his first two matches, but a potential third round against the mercurial Alexander Bublik (who I have beating the winner of Gasquet-Pouille) would be interesting, as Bublik has a huge serve, and loves putting different spins on the ball which could be effective on grass. However, Federer would be just too solid for Bublik.

In the round of 16, I have Federer taking on Matteo Berrettini, who won the title in Stuttgart and had a good run in Halle. His huge serve and nasty backhand slice would give Federer some issues. However, I think that Federer's chip return on grass would be effective enough that Berrettini wouldn't be able to hold as easily as he would like, and give Federer enough break opportunities so that the matchup would not be a huge threat to him. The same principles apply to a quarterfinal against Struff because, while I love the German's game, I think Federer's chip return would be effective and Federer would advance to the semifinals. Federer holds so easily on grass that it puts a lot of pressure on opponents.

In a Djokovic-Khachanov semifinal, the high level of the Djokovic return would highlighted. Khachanov would not be able to get a lot of free points on serve against Djokovic, and Djokovic is so solid from the baseline that this could frustrate Karen. Khachanov picked up the biggest win of his career in beating Djokovic in the finals of the Masters 1000 event in Paris, but at Wimbledon last year, Khachanov only won 8 games in the entire match. While I think Khachanov could pick up a set, I would be very confident in Djokovic winning the match.

A Federer-Nadal semifinal would get a lot of press, just as it did at the French Open. However, unlike the French Open, I think Federer would win this match. While it was not the case on clay, Federer's attacking game would be very effective on grass in this matchup. Federer would take the fight to Nadal and make him uncomfortable with the attacking tennis that he would play. Roger's serve would be helped out by the grass, and Rafa would not be as good on defense as he was at Roland Garros. Federer would make the final.

In the final, I think it would be tight. As we've seen in past Wimbledon finals between Djokovic and Federer, Djokovic's consistency has worn Federer down over the course of the match. However, I think it would be different this time. Federer looked good on the clay and in Halle. I think that Federer would be more aggressive than he has in previous Wimbledon finals against Novak, not allowing Djokovic to wear him down from the baseline. I think Federer would really go after the Djokovic serve and try to take over the net as soon as possible. And, most important of all, I think that Federer backhand is better now than it was in years past when he's taken on Djokovic. In backhand-to-backhand rallies, I think that Federer's backhand would breakdown less in the past, and he would win more points in these exchanges. Therefore, I think this tips the scales slightly in Federer's favor.

Roger Federer will be your 2019 men's Wimbledon champion.

French Open Men's Predictions

Quarterfinals:

Djokovic over Fognini in four
Thiem over Khachanov in four
Tsitsipas over Schwartzman in four
Nadal over Paire in three

Semifinals:

Djokovic over Thiem in five
Nadal over Tsitsipas in three

Final:

Nadal over Djokovic in four

Reasoning:

It seems like Twitter is erupting over Djokovic's draw, but given the level he has showed this clay court season, I don't see much reason for concern. Hurkacz is a tough first rounder, but Djokovic will neutralize his serve and force him into a bunch of errors. I have Djokovic beating Martinez, Munar, and Coric, all grinders (in ascending difficulty) who he should be able to get through pretty easily. These type of players don't have the weapons to hurt Novak.

I have Fognini going through because he has played really well this clay court season. He'll take on some tough clay courters along the way, including Delbonis (who played really in Geneva) and Bautista Agut, but Fabio should be too crafty for these players. I have Fognini beating Alexander Zverev in the round of 16, but I think that the only reason why Zverev even makes it to that stage is because of a very kind draw, and Fabio should win that match easily. Djokovic's 8-0 head-to-head of Fognini says a lot about how their games match up, and Djokovic will be too much for the Italian.

Dominic Thiem has a tough draw, and while he lost fairly early by his standards in Rome, that should provide him with the extra rest needed to go far.  I have him taking on Paul, Molleker, Cuevas, and Verdasco (who just beat him in Rome) before even taking on Khachanov, but I think that best-of-five suits Thiem well. He plays so physical, and he is in such great shape, that he should be able to wear down his opponents, and the huge space at the back of Philippe Chatrier should provide him ample room behind the baseline (when he plays there), which is important because he stands so far back on the return of serve, which is hard to do on smaller courts.

I thought that Karen Khachanov turned a corner in Madrid from a tough start to the season, and this carried over in Rome. He got a pretty favorable draw, with the highest seed in his 8th of the draw being del Potro, who played well in Rome, but is still just returning from injury. The seed in his 16th of the draw is Pouille, which is not a scary seed and I have losing in the first round to Bolelli, and he will play Stebe in the first round and either Barrere or Ebden in the second round. Not bad. While Khachanov won their only match at the Paris indoor Masters 1000 event last year, I think that Thiem's heavy spin to the Khachanov backhand on clay will befuddle the Russian, and with one of Khachanov's biggest weapons, his serve, being partially neutralized by the clay, Thiem will win.

You might be shocked that I don't have Federer in the quarterfinals, but given this is his first best-of-five tournament on clay in years, I think that his draw is very tough. His first round opponent, Lorenzo Sonego, has had good results on clay this season. In the third round he will likely play Matteo Berrettini, who has already won a clay court tournament this season and beaten Alexander Zverev in another clay court tournament.

And by the time he reaches, Schwartzman, I think he will be fatigued from all the tennis. Schwartzman has lost 7-5 in the third (best-of-three) to Federer before, and he really found his form last week, beating Berrettini and Nishikori, and then taking Djokovic to three sets. I think he carries over this good form to Roland Garros, a tournament in which he made the quarterfinals last year, getting a set off of Nadal. His draw is tough, Fucsovics in the first round, and either Kohlschreiber or Cecchinato in the third round, but I think Diego makes it to Federer, and beats him in a tough round of 16 match.

Stefanos Tsitsipas has been so impressive this clay court season. He beat Rafael Nadal in Madrid, won Estoril, and beat Fognini in straight sets in a night match on Pietrangeli. His backhand, which is perceived as the weakness in his game, is so solid, and his draw sets him up pretty well. He should force his first round opponent, Maximillian Marterer into too many errors, and my projected second and third round opponents for Tsitsipas, Dellien and Carballes Baena, don't have the weapons to hurt him. His seed in the 16th of his draw, Frances Tiafoe, I have losing in the first round to Filip Krajinovic, and the top seed in his 8th of the draw, Marin Cilic, is struggling this season and is not great on clay. I have Tsitsipas beating Christian Garin in the round of 16, and while Garin is tough, he did win two clay court tournament this season and made the final of another, he is another player who doesn't have the weapons to hurt Tsitsipas. Then in the quarterfinal, I think Schwartzman after beating Federer, is going to be out of gas, and Tsitsipas should have a fairly comfortable match on route to the semifinals.

The bottom quarter of the draw is not going to super interesting, because Nadal will dominate. He's won Roland Garros 11 times, and I don't see anyone in this quarter that could beat him. His first minor test will be in the third round against David Goffin, but Goffin is not playing nearly well enough to challenge Nadal. In the fourth round, I have Rafa taking on Guido Pella, who challenged him for a set in Monte Carlo, but again, in best-of-five against Rafa on clay, you have to play out of your mind for extremely long periods of time, and Pella doesn't have the level to match Rafa for more than a set, as we saw in Monte Carlo.

I have Nadal playing Benoit Paire in the quarterfinals. Paire just won his second clay court tournament today in Lyon, and is playing so well. When his backhand, serve, and drop shot are working, he is extremely difficult to beat and I think he brings that good form to Paris. His draw sets him up well, until the quarterfinals. Copil shouldn't challenge him in the first round, and Medvedev, while he's had good success this clay court season, will be very frustrated by the changes of pace that Paire provides, just as he was frustrated by Krygios in Rome. Sousa and Ramos, my projected opponents for Paire in the third and fourth rounds, while good on clay, also will be puzzled by Paire's unconventional game, at the level it's at right now. Paire's serve is so well-placed, it's a very underrated part of his game. But, it won't be enough to trouble Nadal. Not even close.

In the semifinals, we will get an absolute battle between Djokovic and Thiem. This will be an absolute classic. Djokovic leads the head-to-head 6-2, but it's 3-2 Djokovic on clay. They've split their two matchups at Roland Garros. I'm very 50/50 on this match, it will come down to very fine margins. Will Thiem's heavy, hard-hitting groundstrokes be able to break through against the Djokovic defense? Or will Novak's counterpunching prevail? It's hard to beat Djokovic three-out-five, and as the match wears on, Djokovic's extreme fitness will start to take over. In the tight moments, who do you trust more? Djokovic wins.

The other semifinal is much more straightforward. Yes, Nadal lost to Tsitsipas in Madrid, but that was at altitude in best-of-three, and Nadal played one of the worst matches I've ever seen him play on clay. In Rome, Nadal won comfortably in straight sets. And given how Philippe Chatrier's huge clay surface allows Rafa ample room to defend against Tsitsipas' groundstrokes, the result of this one should be no surprise: Nadal wins.

In the final, it will be the second Djokovic-Nadal matchup in a row. While Djokovic leads the head-to-head 28-26, and easily won the final in Australia, in their match in Rome, Nadal won in three sets, but only gave up one game in the two sets he won. While Djokovic was tired, this should be a confidence booster for Rafa. I think that fatigue could also play a role in this match, as Thiem will push Djokovic a lot harder than Tsitsipas will push Rafa. I think that Djokovic will be a step slow in this match, and that will be all Rafa needs to win fairly comfortably.

Rafael Nadal will be your 2019 French Open champion!

Nick Kyrgios, Sara Errani, and the Underarm Serve

Nick Kyrgios made waves in tennis world weeks ago when he started hitting underarm serves as a way to change up the pace of the match and keep his opponents from standing too far behind the baseline. However, given that Kyrgios has one of the best serves in men's tennis, the underarm serve was seen as more of a novelty act than anything worth paying serious attention to. And while players, like Alejandro Davidovich Fokina started to also occasionally serve underarmed, it seemed more for the shock factor to the opponent than a serious, long-term strategy.

However, what happens when the shock factor turns into a method of fending off retirement and keeping a player's tennis dreams alive? That is what Sara Errani is currently grappling with. As Diego Barbiani states in this tweet, in last night's match in Bogota, Errani served underarm for most of the match, especially in the second set. And not only that, but Errani only lost three games in the match. And as, Barbiani states, she only hit four double faults!

Now, you might be thinking, why is it such a big deal that she only hit four double faults? Well, in her previous match, she hit 18 double faults. To put that in perspective, 18 double faults is around 4.5 games in a match. While that is not a perfect comparison to make, given deuce games, it is still startling to see Errani serving so poorly. Sara's serve was always the weak part of her game, but she never used to serve like this. The serve is the one part of a player's game that the player has full control over, and is considered by many to be the most important shot in tennis, so to see Errani struggling to this extent is shocking.

But, it seems like switching to the underarm serve, at least in that one match, helped Errani to cut down on her serving woes and allow her to showcase her high-quality clay-court baseline game. This is in contrast to Errani often ending the point before it has really even started, not with an ace, but with a double fault. When one watches Errani, it is clear that her groundstroke prowess, while not on the level she was at when she made the final of the French Open in 2012, is still at a very high level. The problem is, however, when your serve is under pressure so often, by yourself as often as your opponent, how are you able to win consistently?

I don't see this underarm serve to be a long-term strategy for Errani. The WTA Bogota is definitely not the strongest of the WTA tournaments, and having success with the underarm serve against Bibiane Schoofs, currently No. 149 in the live rankings, doesn't mean that Errani is all of a sudden going to go toe-to-toe, for example, with Angelique Kerber, like she has in the past (head to head 2-2). Errani will most likely have to work out how to manage the regular service motion if she is going to advance in tournaments with stronger fields.

It is so interesting how this whole situation has panned out. Although Michael Chang famously used the underarm serve in his match against Ivan Lendl at the French Open, Nick Kyrgios revived it with his occasional underarm serves recently, and because it's Nick Kyrgios, this sparked seemingly endless debates about the underarm serve, with Kyrgios certainly enjoying the even brighter spotlight that serving underarm has brought him.

Yet, we also have a player, Sara Errani, who is using the underarm serve as a way to keep her dream of playing in French Open qualifying alive. It's amazing how far Errani has fallen, going from her peak, battling Maria Sharapova for the French Open, to her doping ban, to now utilizing the underarm serve as a way to keep her tennis career, and chances to even get into French Open qualifying, afloat.

Thus, proving that the underarm serve can be used for very different reasons.