After the grit and grind of the French Open and an intriguing three weeks of grass court lead-up events, the third major of the season is here with many storylines surrounding Wimbledon this year in London.
The most prestigious tennis tournament of the year is here at the All England Lawn Tennis Club as Wimbledon begins with many storylines surrounding the ladies field in London. Following a wide open French Open that saw 20-year-0ld Jelena Ostapenko claim a shock maiden Grand Slam title and an interesting three weeks of grass court lead-up tournaments, the number one ranking is yet again in play on the hallowed grass of Wimbledon, with the third major of the season providing another prime opportunity for many women to step up and take advantage of another open field at SW19.
The top quarter is led by world number one and defending finalist Angelique Kerber, who is fighting to keep her top ranking following a tough 2017 season so far. Joining Kerber in the first quarter is seventh seed of Russia Svetlana Kuznetsova, a struggling ninth seed and 2012 runner-up Agnieszka Radwanska, and fourteenth seed 2016 French Open champion and 2015 finalist here at Wimbledon, Garbine Muguruza.
For Kerber, the German begins her Wimbledon campaign against American qualifier Irina Falconi ahead of a possibly tricky second round against either 2013 semifinalist Kirsten Flipkens of Belgium or Japanese left-hander Misaki Doi. 2014 semifinalist and 32nd seed Lucie Safarova looms as a potential third round opponent for the world number one, with big-hitting Muguruza a possibly very difficult round of 16 for Kerber assuming she gets there. For Muguruza, the Spaniard has a very good draw until the fourth round, where given Kerber’s form of late the 2015 finalist would be favored to beat the defending runner-up for a spot in the quarterfinals against possibly Kuznetsova or Radwanska.
In Kuznetsova’s section of this quarter, the two-time major winner, who has never excelled on grass at Wimbledon, has a pretty comfortable early draw, with dangerous lefty Ekaterina Makarova of Russia looming as a potential roadblock for the seventh seed in the second round. If Kuznetsova could navigate past big-hitting Makarova, she should reach the quarterfinal meeting with Muguruza, given that the next seed below her in this section, Agnieszka Radwanska, who opens against former world number one Jelena Jankovic, has struggled mightily this season,
With Muguruza and Kuznetsova both possessing fairly good draws to the last eight, it would be no surprise to see these two meet in the quarterfinals, and with the Spaniard’s previous success at Wimbledon, expect Muguruza to reach her second semifinal at the All England Club.
The second quarter of the draw is headlined by third seed and recently-crowned Eastbourne champion Karolina Pliskova the woman she beat to hoist the trophy on the grass of the Aegon International, former world number one and fifth seed Caroline Wozniacki. For Pliskova, the Czech has the possibility to become number one following Wimbledon, and she begins her quest for a first Grand Slam title against Evgeniya Rodina of Russia. The world number three could face a tricky second round against Magdalena Rybarikova, who won a title at a grass court lead-up on the ITF circuit earlier this month. If Pliskova can navigate her way past the crafty game of Rybarikova, she could then face big-hitting German Julia Goerges, who reached the final in Mallorca, in the third round, ahead of a possible fourth round with 16th-seeded Russian Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova. Despite some potentially difficult matches against Rybarikova or Goerges, Pliskova does have a decent draw to reach the quarterfinals here at SW19.
In the other section of this quarter is former world number one and Eastbourne finalist Caroline Wozniacki, who has a tough early draw with a possible second round meeting against grass court specialist Tsvetana Pironkova of Bulgaria and a dangerous third round against arguably the best unseeded player at Wimbledon this year, ‘s-Hertogenbosch champion Anett Kontaveit of Estonia. Given Wozniacki’s average results at Wimbledon, having never made it past the fourth round, and big-hitting opponents like Kontaveit or tricky Pironkova in her way, it’s tough to see the Dane reaching the second week.
If Kontaveit can keep up her red-hot form of the last two months, the Estonian would be the favorite to reach the round of 16 where she could face one of the in-form players on the WTA this season, 12th seed Kristina Mladenovic, or big-serving American Coco Vandeweghe, who could meet in what would be a blockbuster third round despite Americans Alison Riske or Sloane Stephens as possible second round opponents for Mladenovic. If the Frenchwoman can keep up what she’s been doing so far in 2017, she should be able to beat Riske or Stephens in the second round and make her way past Vandeweghe in the third to book a place with Kontaveit in the round of 16. With Mladenovic and Kontaveit being two of the best players this season so far, that would be a toss-up fourth round, but expect Kontaveit to book a quarterfinal meeting with Pliskova, where the powerful Czech’s experience and dominant serving would likely send her into a first Wimbledon semifinal.
In the third quarter of this draw is fourth seed Elina Svitolina, 10th seed and five-time champion Venus Williams, and the most recent Grand Slam winner, the 13th seed of Latvia Jelena Ostapenko. For Svitolina, many question marks surround the Ukrainian, given that only a week ago following an early exit in Birmingham, she said she wasn’t even sure if she would play Wimbledon due to a foot injury. Only to add insult to injury, the fourth seed drew one of the toughest unseeded opponents out there, Birmingham runner-up Ashleigh Barty of Australia. It’s tough to see Svitolina making it out of the first round also due to her own grass court struggles, but for either her or Barty, the winner will have a pretty clear road to the fourth round despite big-hitting German Carina Witthoeft a possible third round opponent in this section.
Also in this section are two dangerous seeds, the aforementioned winner at Roland Garros Jelena Ostapenko and 2014 Eastbourne champion, big-serving American 17th seed Madison Keys, who has struggled this season due to two minor wrist surgeries. For Ostapenko, the 20-year-old Latvian has a very clear draw to the third round, where she could meet Keys, who has a dangerous second round matchup against either Camila Giorgi or Alize Cornet. If Barty can keep up her form from the grass of Birmingham earlier this month, she should take advantage of a good draw against possibly Witthoeft in the third round to reach the round of 16, where likely Ostapenko will face her after beating Keys in the third round. Despite previous first-time Grand Slam champions having trouble backing it up, the big-hitting Latvian still possess a pressure-free mindset, one that should help her to reach the quarterfinals here at the scene of her only junior major crown.
In the other section of this draw is the most accomplished player on The Championships lawn in this ladies draw, five-time winner Venus Williams. The 10th-seeded American does have off-court distractions surrounding her though, with news that the 37-year-old was involved in a fatal car crash that killed a 78-year-old man earlier this month in Palm Beach taking up much of Williams’ time ahead of the third major of the season. Despite that, Williams does have a comfortable early draw, with her first big test likely coming against tricky Czech Barbora Strycova, the 22nd seed and two-time Birmingham finalist, looming in the third round. If Williams can navigate past the variety of Strycova, the American would be the favorite in the round of 16 as well, where she could meet returning 2013 finalist and grass court specialist, Sabine Lisicki of Germany in the fourth round.
If Williams can play the powerful tennis that saw her win five Venus Rosewater Dishes and reach the Australian Open final earlier this season, the American should be the favorite to come through matches against Lisicki and Ostapenko to reach a second straight Wimbledon semifinal.
In the bottom quarter of the draw are many big names, second seed and 2014 semifinalist Simona Halep, sixth seed and British hope Johanna Konta, and two-time champion Petra Kvitova. For Halep, the Romanian is still recovering from a heart-breaking defeat to Ostapenko in the final in Paris, but the second seed begins her Wimbledon campaign against qualifier Marina Erakovic of New Zealand. Halep could face a dangerous second round against big-serving Brazilian lefty Beatriz Haddad Maia or another lefty in British wildcard Laura Robson. The draw doesn’t get any easier from there for the former semifinalist, with possibly 2014 runner-up Eugenie Bouchard or another big-hitting lefty, Market Vondrousova of the Czech Republic, awaiting the Romanian in the third round. That will be a difficult task for Halep to reach the fourth round, but given her form from the clay court season, she could definitely grind her way there.
Also in this section is 15th seed and last year’s semifinalist Elena Vesnina, who could face two-time Grand Slam champion and former world number one Victoria Azarenka, who is playing only her second tournament in the last year due to giving birth and opens against American rising star Cici Bellis in a blockbuster first round. Whoever makes it out of there would most likely be an underdog against Vesnina, who has a proven grass court pedigree, and could face potentially Mallorca champion Anastasija Sevastova or Eastbourne semifinalist Heather Watson of Great Britain in the third round, both players Vesnina should beat. This section should come down to Vesnina and Halep in the fourth round, and with Halep’s inconsistent record on grass and Vesnina’s game suited well to the lawns of Wimbledon, the Russian should reach the quarterfinals.
In the other section of this quarter is Kvitova and Konta, with both players having received good draws to the round of 16, where they could meet. The only real question around a Konta and Kvitova fourth round match is the British hopeful’s spine injury sustained in Eastbourne, where she took a hard fall to the ground on her head and back, forcing her to withdraw from the semifinal there to recover in time for Wimbledon.
If Konta and Kvitova do reach the round of 16, the two-time Wimbledon champion and newly crowned winner in Birmingham should be the favorite to reach the quarterfinal, where a meeting against Vesnina would favor the Czech 11th seed to reach the last four yet again at the All England Club.
Semifinals: Pliskova def. Muguruza, Kvitova def. Williams
Final: Kvitova def. Pliskova
A Look at the Numbers: the Second Serve Is the Key to Victory for the Best in the Business
We conducted a comparative analysis of time periods, surfaces and player rankings. It turned out that the serve is becoming more and more important. However, the situation is different when it comes to matches between Top 10 players.
We often muse about the evolution of the style of play over the last few decades. It is relatively simple to identify a turning point in the introduction of new materials, which progressively led to the obsolescence of wooden racquets starting in the 1980s. It can be said that the swan song of the old wooden racquets took place with Miloslav Mecir’s victory at Indian Wells in 1989 (a player as talented as he is unjustly forgotten). From that moment on, all the major tournaments were won by athletes brandishing a more modern racquet with a bigger sweet spot, a much wider point of impact at maximum effectiveness, which now extends to pretty much the whole of the racquet head.
From that moment on, the tennis style, at least at the highest levels and in particular for men (who traditionally hit harder) changed in favour of baseline rallies instead of net play, following in Bjorn Borg’s footsteps (thanks to the greater effectiveness of topspin shots which, because of new technologies, can be successful even from defensive positions). The 90s were mostly characterised by the Sampras-Agassi dualism, i.e. the challenge between an extraordinary server and an exceptional returner. After a short interregnum, Federer, Nadal and then Djokovic appeared on the scene, three players who have broken almost every record, especially in the Slams.
However, these three legends are quite difficult to classify in their playing styles – the same cannot be said for their competition, though. In the same period, we can identify, just behind them, players such as Murray, Roddick, Del Potro, Wawrinka: all equipped with a very solid first serve. And the same can be said for the elusive Next Gen, which has been awaited to take over for a few years, although at the moment it seems that they’ll still have to wait awhile. Likewise, the majority of the new contenders make the serve a cornerstone of their game: think for example of Medvedev, Sascha Zverev, Tsitsipas or Thiem.
Is the serve becoming increasingly important over time? The data made available on the ATP website, which include rather detailed statistics on all the matches held from 1991 to 2017, allow us to test this hypothesis more systematically. For this purpose, we will distinguish three periods within our analysis: 1991-1999, 2000-2009 and 2010-2017. We will compare them in statistical and data-driven terms, with a careful look at the role of the serve.
First of all, we can verify whether, and to what extent, the winner is also the player who hits the most aces: even if there are different degrees, this is the case in all three periods considered. In the 1990s, in fact, the average difference between the winner and the loser in terms of ace is 1.44. It reaches 1.64 in the first ten years of the new millennium (marking a strong growth, +13.8%) and 1.71 in the last period considered, from 2010 to 2017. It would therefore be tempting to conclude that the serve, in its most direct manifestation of effectiveness (the ace), has gained an increasing weight in determining the winner of a high-level match.
But what happens if we narrow the analysis to the Grand Slam tournaments, which represent the most important moments of the season, with all the big players competing (injuries notwithstanding)? In this case, the result is diametrically opposite: the difference measured in the 90s is 2.35 and decreases to 2.29 in the early 2000s. This difference settles, on average, at 2.15 in the last period considered.
At this point, however, we are reminded of the words of Andre Agassi, who often received comments related to the not exceptional effectiveness of his serve compared to the rest of his game. The American acutely observed that very often, and in particular when he was able to hit a first serve, even if he did not get a direct point, he put himself in a position to play an easy shot immediately after the serve. Considering the effectiveness of his groundstrokes, this was more than enough to make it difficult for the opponent to break his serve and to put him under pressure. On this basis, let’s try to delve more deeply by focusing on another stat, which is more indicative of serve performance overall and not just in terms of direct points: the percentage of points won with the first serve.
PERCENTAGE OF POINTS WON WITH THE FIRST SERVE
By repeating the analysis and applying it to this new statistic, we actually obtain a concordant result, both considering the totality of the tournaments or just the Slams. Considering every tournament, in the 1990s the winner of a match gets a percentage of points with the first serve that exceeds that of the losing player by 10.8%. In the early 2000s, the gap rises to 11.1%, reaching 11.5% in the third period considered (2011-2017). Focusing on Grand Slam tournaments, the trend remains similar in relative terms, although starting from a slightly lower base: the initial average difference is 10.4% in the 1990s, which grows to 10.7% and finally to 11.2% in the two subsequent periods considered.
We can conclude that, in average terms, the player who wins the match is the one who manages to get points from his first serve, thus imposing his game on the opponent. Once again, let’s try to re-read the data between the lines, considering another observation made by a great tennis player, former world number three and now Roger Federer’s coach: Ivan Ljubičić. During an interview, he was asked to compare Federer’s serve to that of other players, including Stan Wawrinka. Ljubo highlighted that, even though Wawrinka was able to reach higher speeds on the first ball, Federer was gifted with a more complete and unpredictable serve. But that’s not all.
One of the strengths of Federer’s serve is the second ball. “On Roger’s second ball“, concluded the Croatian coach, “it may be relatively simple to return, but it is still very complicated to attack“. In this sense, we look at another aspect of the serve: not only as a definitive shot (ace) or an aggressive one (first ball), but also as a tool to avoid being a victim of the opponent’s aggressive return: in a certain sense, it is a maneuvering shot, if not an outright defensive one. So, let’s try to ask ourselves if, especially at high levels, the second serve is key to victory, and the weight it takes throughout the years.
PERCENTAGE OF POINTS WON WITH THE SECOND SERVE
Again, we will first examine all the tournaments, and then focus on the Australian Open, the French Open, Wimbledon, and the US Open. Considering the former, we identify a decisive step forward between the 1990s and the early 2000s, with the difference in terms of the percentage of points won on the second serve which goes up, on average, from 10% to 11%. Over the following years, up to 2017, there was still a slight growth, which leads to an average gap of 11.1%.
Focusing on the Grand Slam tournaments, we register a similar dynamic but, in this case, starting from a higher base: we go from an average gap of 11% (90s) to 11.8% (early 2000s), to reach an average difference of 12% on the points won with the second serve in the period 2010-2017.
Thinking back to what we observed in terms of percentage of points won on the first serve, we can assume that, in a best-of-five event, especially in the advanced stages of a match, players lose both brilliance and precision. It is therefore not surprising that the longer rallies, which start from a second and not from a first serve, end up determining the result of a match.
Starting from a first intuitive observation based on the evolution of playing styles, we have collected evidence that seems to support, in different forms, that the pattern suggested by intuition (the growing importance of the serve) is reflected in the data. Now let’s try to take a step back and, buoyed by this, ask ourselves: considering that more and more top players are focusing on their serve, is this shot assuming an increasing importance even in matches between Top 10 players
THE TOP 10
By examining picture 4, it can be noticed how the evolution of the role of the serve seems to be characterised in a different way, at least in the last three decades, in matches between Top 10 players. As for the difference in terms of aces between winners and losers, we witnessed a growth in the early 2000s, followed by a marked decrease in the period 2010-17.
It is also worth noting how the average values associated with Top 10 matches are higher than the average values, considering all the matches in the first two decades. In other words: in the 1990s and in the early 2000s, the difference in terms of aces between winner and loser in a Top 10 match was on average twice as much as the difference between aces in any other match. Between 2011 and 2017, however, the difference for the Top 10 is less than half of that associated with a generic match. The statistics relating to the points won on the first and on the second serve confirm this. The first serve becomes almost a “must have” at a high level and, for this reason, it cannot be the shot that “makes the difference” – because everybody has it.
The percentage of points won with the first serve grew from 8.1% in the 1990s to 9% in the early 2000s, then decreased to 8.5% in the year 2010-2017. On the contrary, the performance with the second serve grew in both decades, with an acceleration in the last analysed timespan. On average, we move from a 9% difference in the 90s to a 9.9% difference between 2000 and 2009. Then we reach an 11.8% difference between 2010 and 2017. We would therefore conclude that the serve has become a sort of business card to be presented at the entrance of the club of the best players in the world: a shot that cannot be ignored but that is not enough to beat the opponents, and thus to conquer Grand Slams et similia.
Let’s now try to verify this hypothesis once again by recalculating the statistics about the effectiveness of the serve, this time making a distinction between surfaces. In other words, let’s try to answer this question: is what we have deduced valid both on grass, on hard, and on clay?
GRASS, HARD AND CLAY
By observing the trend of the difference in aces between winner and loser by surface, we observe how the gap between clay and hard court is roughly constant. This would raise more doubts over the theory according to which surfaces tend to be more and more alike over the last few years. There is a dissonant dynamic with regards to grass, in contrast with the other surfaces and the global average analyzed in section 2. In this regard, it can be observed that there are fewer and fewer serve & volley players, even on grass. In this sense, therefore, we can imagine that even a mediocre server will look to hit an ace when he hits the first serve on that surface. Consequently, he won’t want or need to end the point at the net. Due to the decreasing frequency of net approaches, the service box, especially in the final rounds of the tournaments, tends to return higher speeds than the baseline, an area where the grass is worn out and thus slower. Hitting a very fast first serve and going for an ace can therefore be the way to go for many players. It should also be noted, however, that even during the last period covered the difference in aces, in absolute terms, is greater on grass than on hard and clay, despite a downward trend.
Considering the average difference in terms of percentage of points won with the first serve, and making a distinction not only by period but also by surface, we observe a different trend. On grass and on clay, the gap tends to grow (particularly on clay, from the 1990s to the first years of 2000s), while for hardcourts the statistics are more or less stable, with a slight decline in the early 2000s followed by a small increase starting in 2010. Perhaps it is the statistics about the clay that deserve specific reflection. While trying to analyse this growth, we can reflect on the fact that the early 2000s marked the success of players on clay courts (apart from Nadal) who make the power of their shots a winning card. The dirt aficionado, therefore, is no longer a Sergi Bruguera or a Thomas Muster, who were pure pushers, but rather players who attacks from the baseline: from this point of view, we can just recall the remarkable results of Wawrinka, or even of Federer himself. In this sense, therefore, even if the surface tends to reduce the number of direct points with the serve, it can be understood how these players end up creating a gap between themselves and the opposition in terms of percentage of points won with the first serve.
The difference in terms of points won on the second serve shows similar trends between the three surfaces. In all three periods considered, the greatest difference is on clay, followed by hard and grass. Grass is experiencing a significant growth (from 9.7% to 11.2%) from the early 2000s, perhaps due to the fact that more and more players, even on grass, play from the baseline.
Given all the previous considerations, it could perhaps be observed that, at least starting from the early 2000s, despite the growing importance of the serve, the greatest difference between winner and loser is in terms of percentage of points won on the second serve, and not on the first one. This phenomenon is even more pronounced in Top 10 matches. This is what the data are telling us. However, we should try not to receive them like a verdict, but rather to interpret them like a story. As Dostoevsky recalled in Crime and Punishment, “Facts are not everything – at least half the business lies in how you interpret them.”
Article by Damiano Verda; translated by Luca Rossi; edited by Tommaso Villa
Azarenka Beats Local Favourite Kerber to Reach Quarterfinals in Berlin
The Belarusian advanced in straight sets against the German in hot and humid conditions on Steffi Graff Stadium.
Victoria Azarenka booked her spot in the quarterfinals at the Bett1 Open in Berlin beating the local favourite Angelique Kerber in straight sets 6-3, 7-5 in one hour and 22 minutes.
” I feel like I got broken because I didn’t stick to being disciplined and it turned the momentum but I felt like I came back to what I was doing before which was working which was being aggressive and going for my shots, so it was very good that I was able to turn it around that quickly”.
It was the German who earned the first breakpoint of the match in the first game, but the world N.16 saved both she faced in the opening game and managed to hold serve. It stayed on serve until 4-3 when the Belarusian pushed for the break to serve out the first set and she did just that, taking it 6-3.
The first three games of the second set were on serve and at 2-1 it was the German with the chance to break. She took it and jumped out to a 4-2 lead, looking to push it to a decider.
At 4-2 the Minsk, Belarus native managed to set up two breakpoints with a sublime backhand passing shot and broke the German to go back on serve, but the former Wimbledon champion broke right back the following game. However, she failed to serve out the set and things were back on serve at 5-4.
At 5-5 Azarenka had two more chances to break. She succeeded once more, this time with a stunning forehand winner, and served out the match. After the win, she spoke about playing in 35 degree weather in her post-match press conference.
“It’s been a while since I have been in such hot weather, so for meit was more about preparation and the precaution for being hydrated, but physically it was fine but obviously it was a bit hot”
In the other matches of the day, the Spaniard Garbiñe Muguruza, the number six seed, beat Elena Rybakina in straight sets 6-4, 6-3, while the young Russian qualifier Liudmila Samsonova continued her amazing run, booking a spot in the quaterfinals beating Veronika Kudermetova in an all Russian battle 6-4, 6-3.
In the last match of the day we witnessed another upset, as the American Jessica Pegula beat the number four seed Karolina Pliskova in straight sets 7-5, 6-2.
Uncle Toni Backs Rafael Nadal To Win 21st Grand Slam Title Before Season Ends
Nadal’s former mentor also explains why he was hoping Novak Djokovic would lose in the French Open final.
The former coach of Rafael Nadal says he remains confident that he will win another major title in 2021 despite losing in the semifinals of the French Open.
Toni Nadal, who is Nadal’s uncle that introduced him to the sport at a young age, says he is ‘maintaining confidence’ that the Spaniard can achieve more major glory. The king of clay is currently tied with Roger Federer for the most Grand Slam titles won by a male singles player, which is 20. Although Novak Djokovic is now on 19 and could possibly overtake his two rivals this year should he achieve a calendar Grand Slam.
It was Djokovic who knocked Nadal out of the French Open after prevailling in four sets during their semi-final encounter. The Serbian has become the first player in history to have beaten him at the tournament on multiple occasions.
“We saw a good game and a denouement that brings Novak dangerously close to Federer and Rafael, in their struggle to close their respective careers as the greatest conqueror of Grand Slam titles,” Toni wrote for El Pais. “The next two tournaments, Wimbledon and the US Open, will probably be decisive in unveiling it. I would not dare to venture conclusions, but I do dare to maintain the confidence that it is my nephew who raises one of the two.”
Nadal is a two-time Wimbledon champion but he hasn’t lifted the trophy since 2010 and it has been a decade since he reached the final. At the US Open he has enjoyed more success by winning four titles, including two out of the past four times. He missed the US Open last year due to concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In his column the 60-year-old admitted that he was hoping Djokovic would lose the French Open final to Stefanos Tsitsipas because it ‘would help alleviate’ his nephew’s disappointment. In the title match the world No.1 battled back from two sets down to clinch the title. Becoming the first man in the Open Era to have won every major tournament at least twice.
“The only thing that could have somewhat alleviated the disappointment over Rafael’s defeat in his Roland Garros semi-final match against Novak Djokovic would have been that he was defeated in the final by Stefanos Tsitsipas,” he wrote.
“Throughout these last two weeks of competition I was telling my children. The player that I saw as most capable of beating the Serbian on clay if the opportunity arose, apart from my nephew, of course, was precisely the Greek. And for much of the meeting I held out hope that it would happen.”
Nadal is currently back home in Manacor where he attended the graduation ceremony of his academy on Wednesday. He is not expected to play in any tournament leading up to Wimbledon which will begin a week Monday.
Sebastian Korda sets up quarter final clash against Ugo Humbert in Halle
Updated Entry Lists For Eastbourne, Mallorca
Naomi Osaka Withdraws From Wimbledon
Matteo Berrettini beats Andy Murray to reach the quarter finals in his debut at the Queen’s
A Look at the Numbers: the Second Serve Is the Key to Victory for the Best in the Business
Rafael Nadal Addresses French Open Seeding Criticism
Roger Federer Says Having ‘High Goals’ Motivates Him To Continue Playing
Holger Rune Fined Over Homophobic Remarks
Victoria Azarenka Calls Out French Open Over Gender Equality, Frustration With Organisers
Did Rafa Nadal take his foot off the gas too early?
French Open, Steve Flink: “Nadal is the clear favourite, but Tsitsipas and Djokovic have a shot”
French Open, the women’s draw. Flink: “Osaka’s press conference boycott is a mistake”
French Open, the men’s draw. Steve Flink: “It’s too bad that we won’t have a Nadal-Djokovic final”
Steve Flink: “Jannik Sinner Will Be a Top 10 Player by the US Open”
(VIDEO) Miami Open Final Preview: Jannik Sinner Is The Favourite But Don’t Underestimate Hurkacz
Hot Topics3 days ago
Roger Federer Says Having ‘High Goals’ Motivates Him To Continue Playing
ATP3 days ago
Holger Rune Fined Over Homophobic Remarks
Hot Topics1 day ago
Frustrated Roger Federer Disappointed With Own Attitude Following Halle Loss
ATP16 hours ago
Uncle Toni Backs Rafael Nadal To Win 21st Grand Slam Title Before Season Ends
Hot Topics2 days ago
Novak Djokovic Will Be Recovered And Ready In Time For Wimbledon, Says Coach
Grand Slam2 days ago
Wimbledon Award Wild Cards To Former Champions Andy Murray, Venus Williams
Featured3 days ago
French Open, Steve Flink: “The Third Set of the Semifinal Was the Best in the Djokovic-Nadal Rivalry”
Featured1 day ago
The Other Side of Press Conferences